Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, November 1, 2022 (part 1 of 3)

For individuals with hearing or speaking limitations, dial 711 or (800) 7352922 (English). For Spanish, Tagalog or other language, please dial (800) 8553000 and provide the communication assistant with the following City telephone number: (707) 3994010.

Pursuant to AB 361 regarding public meetings held during the COVID19 emergency, councilmembers may attend via teleconference. Members of the public can observe the meeting on Comcast Cable Channel 26, ATT UVerse 99, and webstreamed live at www.youtube.com/user/FFCATV/live . The public may join the meeting via Zoom at https://fairfieldca.zoom.us/j/88383357276?pwd=SmVmbGZBR0FkT2RUSlRKSnd0N0FOUT09 or via phone (408) 6380968, Webinar ID: 883 8335 7276, Passcode: 7074287400 CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
ROLL CALL
Councilmember Pam Bertani
Councilmember Cat Moy
Councilmember Doriss Panduro
Councilmember Chuck Timm
Councilmember Scott Tonnesen
ViceMayor Rick Vaccaro
Mayor Harry Price
INVOCATION Worship Pastor Alex Ledoux, Samoan Christian Fellowship Assembly of God PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COUNCIL REPORTS
CITY MANAGER REPORT
Packet Page 1 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELDFAIRFIELD CITY COUNCILREGULAR MEETINGTUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2022; 6:00 PMCOUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, FAIRFIELD,CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOMAGENDANotice to PublicThe City of Fairfield is committed to providing meeting facilities that areaccessible to persons with disabilities and/or have language barriers. To requestmeeting materials in alternative formats, or to request a sign languageinterpreter, realtime captioning, or other accommodation, please contact theCity Clerk's Office, at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting at (707) 4287400.For individuals with hearing or speaking limitations, dial 711 or (800) 7352922(English). For Spanish, Tagalog or other language, please dial (800) 8553000and provide the communication assistant with the following City telephonenumber: (707) 3994010.Pursuant to AB 361 regarding public meetings held during the COVID19 emergency,councilmembers may attend via teleconference. Members of the public can observe the meeting onComcast Cable Channel 26, ATT UVerse 99, and webstreamed live at www.youtube.com/user/FFCATV/live . The public may join the meeting via Zoom at https://fairfieldca.zoom.us/j/88383357276?pwd=SmVmbGZBR0FkT2RUSlRKSnd0N0FOUT09 or viaphone (408) 6380968, Webinar ID: 883 8335 7276, Passcode: 7074287400CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PMROLL CALLCouncilmember Pam Bertani Councilmember Cat MoyCouncilmember Doriss PanduroCouncilmemberChuck TimmCouncilmember Scott Tonnesen ViceMayor Rick VaccaroMayor Harry PriceINVOCATION Worship Pastor Alex Ledoux, Samoan Christian Fellowship Assembly of GodPLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCECOUNCIL REPORTS CITY MANAGER REPORT
CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
CITY CLERK REPORT

PRESENTATIONS

1.Proclamation Declaring Extra Mile Day Presented by Councilmember Doriss Panduro Contact:Karen Rees, (707) 428 7767
a
PUBLIC COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons wishing to address the City Council on subjects not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the council may do so at this time. The council cannot discuss or take action on matters not on the agenda for this meeting, but councilmembers may briefly respond to statements made or questions raised by the public, ask for clarification from staff, refer the matter to staff, request staff to report back to the council at a subsequent meeting, or place the matter on a future agenda. To speak on an agenda item please use the “raise your hand” feature or press *9 on your phone. Speakers are limited to three minutes per item.

CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are to be approved with one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests that separate action be taken on a specific item.

2.Approval of Meeting Minutes from July, September, and October 2022 Recommended Action
Approve the meeting minutes.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Esther Beavers, (707) 4287402
a

3.Resolution 2022288 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering and Authorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the Same Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
N/A
Contact:Karen Rees, (707) 4287767
a

4.Resolution 2022289 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield to Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Willdan Energy Solutions for the Modeling and Financial Planning Services for the Municipal Fleet Electric Vehicles and Facility Analysis
Recommended Action
Adopt resolution.

Funding Source
Packet Page 2 of 288

Agenda Item No: 2.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 1, 2022
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Approval of Meeting Minutes from July, September, and October 2022 RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the meeting minutes.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Minutes need approval by the City Council.

DISCUSSION
The City Council Minutes for July, September, and October 2022 have been approved by the city attorney and need council approval.

Amended City Council Minutes July 19, 2022
City Council Closed Session Minutes September 6, 2022
City Council Minutes September 6, 2022
City Council Minutes September 20, 2022
City Council Closed Session Minutes October 4, 2022
City Council Minutes October 4, 2022
City Council Closed Session Minutes October 18, 2022
FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to modify the minutes which will result in bringing this item back at a future date.

STAFF CONTACT
Packet Page 5 of 288

Agenda Item No: 2.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 1, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Approval of Meeting Minutes from July, September, and October 2022RECOMMENDED ACTIONApprove the meeting minutes.STATEMENT OF ISSUEMinutes need approval by the City Council.DISCUSSIONThe City Council Minutes for July, September, and October 2022 have been approved by the city attorney andneed council approval.Amended City Council Minutes July 19, 2022City Council Closed Session Minutes September 6, 2022City Council Minutes September 6, 2022City Council Minutes September 20, 2022City Council Closed Session Minutes October 4, 2022City Council Minutes October 4, 2022City Council Closed Session Minutes October 18, 2022FINANCIAL IMPACTN/APUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONN/AALTERNATIVE ACTIONThe council may choose to modify the minutes which will result in bringing this item back at a futuredate.

STAFF CONTACT
Esther Beavers, Deputy City Clerk
(707) 4287402
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Amended Council Minutes 7192022
Closed Session Minutes 962022
City Council Minutes 962022
City Council Minutes 9202022
Closed Session Minutes 1042022
City Council Minutes 1042022
Closed Session Minutes 10182022
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/20/2022 11:03 AM
Packet Page 6 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELD FAIRFIELD

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR CONCURRENT MEETING
TUESDAY, JULY 19, 2022; 6:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA
94533

AMENDED MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL

On roll call were Councilmembers Pam Bertani, Cat Moy, Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, and Scott Tonnesen; and Mayor Price. Vice Mayor Rick Vaccaro was absent.

INVOCATION

Worship Pastor Karen Stetins of St. Mark's Lutheran Church gave an invocation.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Councilmember Bertani led the Pledge of Allegiance.

COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Bertani remarked that it was nice to see a full chamber. She thanked Pastor Stetins for her assistance with the Juneteenth event. She reported that there would be a movie night on the county lawn in September and that more details would follow.

Councilmember Moy reported that she visited Park Ranger Teri Luchini in Rockville Hills Regional Park to survey the trees due to drought conditions. She stated that many trees are dying and that they have disease. She asked that hikers please stay on the trails and not wander off due to the very dry conditions.

Next, she spoke about the grand jury report on homelessness and recommended that a fore nsic audit is done. She asked for the matter to be placed on a future agenda and Councilmember Bertani concurred.

Councilmember Timm remarked that the report indicated that Solano County would pay for a forensic audit, not the City of Fairfield. Interim City Manager David Gassaway stated that was correct. He also asked for the air conditioner to be turned up!

Councilmember Tonnesen reported that he and Councilmember Panduro were leaving City Hall at lunch time and saw smoke. There was a fire on Garfield Street, so they observed the Fire Department extinguishing the fire quickly. He thanked Fire Chief Matt Luckenbach and Deputy Chief Robb Herrick and staff for their efficient work. Next, he reported that lots of changes are happening downtown and that the City is trying to bring more businesses to the area. One change is that the stoplights have been removed and replaced with stop signs. He also reported that the tennis and pickleball courts resurfacing project is moving along nicely.

Packet Page 7 of 288Attachment 1 Page 1 of 4

Councilmember Panduro reported she attended the summer concert in Dover Park on July 15 and that it was great to see so many families enjoying the park and music. She thanked Jeff Trager for his efforts in recruiting live bands to perform in Fairfield during the Summer Concert Series. Next, she reported that she, and Councilmembers Timm and Tonnesen met with the CEO and CFO of Food 4 Less, who will be moving into the space vacated by FoodMaxx on North Texas Street. She stated that Food 4 Less plans to do $8 million in tenant improvements and will hire many new employees in 2023.

Mayor Price reported that American Legion baseball is back in Fairfield at Laurel Creek Park representing N. California baseball. Lastly, he reported that he and other councilmembers would attend the change of command ceremony at Travis Air Force Base next week. He thanked Colonel Corey Simmons for his past two-year command.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

Interim City Manager David Gassaway reported that the City of Fairfield is updating the Enterprise Resource Program (ERP) for financial systems and backing. Staff has been working on the ERP for two years and it was finally released July 1. He stated that it brings the City into the 21 st century in terms of streamlining workflow and processes. He thanked the Finance and IT staff, who have worked tirelessly on this project, especially in the last few months and over July 4 weekend. Next, he introduced new Finance Director John Furtado and welcomed him to the City of Fairfield. He stated there were no changes to the agenda.

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT

City Assistant Attorney Lori Liu stated she had nothing to report from closed session.

CITY CLERK REPORT

City Clerk Karen Rees stated the filing process for those running for Mayor or City Council opened July

18. She stated there were three Council seats open (Districts 1, 3 & 5) and the Mayor al seat. The filing period will close on August 12, 2022, (unless an incumbent does not run – then candidates are given five extra days – August 17, 2022).

PRESENTATIONS

1. Director of Parks & Recreation Kristina Chamberlin and Program Coordinator for Special Events Andrea Azurdia presented the 4th of July Parade Awards.

2. Esther Beavers of the City Manager’s Office presented the Fairfield 101 Civic Academy Graduation certificates to employee participants.

3. MCE Program Implementation follow-up presented by Community Development Manager Sebastian Conn of MCE. Public Works Management Analyst Corey Beavers also spoke.

Councilmember Bertani had questions regarding billing and opting out of MCE that she said were raised by her constituents. Mr. Conn and Mr. Beavers stated they would look into the issue and respond as soon as possible.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Jeff Trager spoke about upcoming events at the Downtown Theatre and thanked Councilmember Panduro for attending the Zebop concert in Dover Park.

Packet Page 8 of 288Attachment 1 Page 2 of 4

John Eckstrom spoke about Shelter Solano and provided a “Report Card” to Council.

George Kennedy spoke about pickleball courts at Allan Witt Park.

June Johnsen thanked Public Works’ staff for providing trash cans in Rolling Hills Park.

Convened meeting of the Paradise Valley Maintenance and Monitoring District at 7:14 p.m.

Reconvened meeting of the City Council at 7:23 p.m.

CONSENT CALENDAR

6. Minute Action Approving the Response to the 20212022 Grand Jury Report Entitled “Solano County is Not Prepared for Future Emergencies”

7. Minute Action Approving Response to the 2021-2022 Grand Jury Report Entitled “An Operational Review of Solano County Library Services (SCLS)”

8. Minute Action Approving Response to the 2021-2022 Grand Jury Report Entitled “Effective Emergency Response Needs City and County Support”

9. Minute Action Approving the Reappointment to the Two-by-Two Homeless Subcommittee and the Formation of a Travis Unified School District Subcommittee

10. Approval of Meeting Minutes from March to June 2022

11. Resolution 2022-174 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering and Authorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the Same

12. Resolution 2022-175 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Communications Facility Ground Lease Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and DISH Wireless LLC for a New Cellular Site Located at 4921 Vanden Road, More Commonly Known as APN 0166-102- 100

13. Resolution 2022-176 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Replacement Purchase of Computer Server Hardware from Dell Marketing LP

14. Resolution 2022-177 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Setting a Hearing for August 16, 2022, Re: Appeal of Revocation of Business License #21001161 for Auto Service and Towing Pursuant to Chapter 10 of the Fairfield Municipal Code

Councilmember Bertani asked that Item 15 be pulled for discussion.

15. Resolutions 2022-178 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Consultant Services Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for Assessment Engineering Services for Six Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts; and

Resolution 2022-179 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the First Amendment to the Consultant Services Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for Special District Community Engagement Services

Rick Johnson spoke on Item 15.

Packet Page 9 of 288Attachment 1 Page 3 of 4

Councilmember Timm made a motion to approve Resolutions 2022-178 and 2022-179. Councilmember Moy seconded the motion. The motion carried 5 -1, with Councilmember Bertani voting no.

16. Resolution 2022-180 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizin g the City Manager to Purchase Three Replacement Vehicles for Fixed-Route Transit Operations

17. Resolution 2022-181 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring the Implementation of Stage II Drought Measures of the City of Fairfield Water Shortage Contingency Plan as Required by the State Water Resources Control Board

Councilmember Moy made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented , excluding Item 15.

Councilmember Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

18. Public Works Management Analyst Chris Lewis recommended to Council that it open the public hearing; and approve Resolutions 2022-182 to 2022-197 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Fiscal Year 20222023 Engineer’s Reports, Confirming the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Diagrams and Assessments, and Ordering the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Improvements for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance Districts No. 1 – Gateway, No. 3 – Waterman Highlands, No. 5 – Smith Ranch, No. 6 – Peppertree, No. 7 – Rolling Hills, No. 8 – Kolob Estates, No. 10 – Southbrook, No. 11 – Paradise Valley North, No. 12 – Downtown Business District, No. 13 – North Cordelia, No. 14 – Woodlake, No. 15 – Gold Ridge, No. 16 – Creekside at Cordelia, No. 17 – Chadbourne-Beck-Cordelia, No. 18 – Gold Ridge Park, and No. 19 – Corporate Commons.

Mayor Price opened the public hearing.

Barbara Pascone, June Johnsen, Les Johnsen, David Renaud, David Thacker, Roxanne Bradley, Rick Johnson, and Shekhar Misra spoke specifically on Resolution 2022-186 regarding LLMD No. 7, Rolling Hills.

After a lengthy discussion, Mayor Price closed the public hearing.

City Attorney David Lim called into the meeting and advised Council , due to a threat of potential litigation from a speaker, that it would be prudent to meet in closed session with legal advisers before moving forward, and he advised that expert Attorney Robin Harris, who specializes in assessments and special districts, be included in the closed session.

After further discussion, Councilmember Timm made a motion to continue the entire public hearing of Item 18 at a later date. Councilmember Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

ADJOURNED MEETING AT 8:28 P.M. TO TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 2022, 6:00 P.M., COUNCIL CHAMBER.

Packet Page 10 of 288Attachment 1 Page 4 of 4

City Council Special Meeting September 6, 2022

Page 1 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

FAIRFIELD CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING

CLOSED SESSION
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2022; 5:00 PM
CITY HALL, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, 4TH FLOOR, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533

CLOSED SESSION AGENDA

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

Present were Councilmembers Pam Bertani, Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, and Scott Tonnesen; Vice Mayor Rick Vaccaro, and Mayor Price. Councilmember Cat Moy was absent.

Carol Hummel was present via Zoom but declined to make a public comment prior to closed session.

No other members of the public wished to speak. The City Council went into closed session with City Attorney David Lim, RWG Attorney Peter Pierce, and City Manager David Gassaway in the room, and private attorneys Adam Ambrozy and Richard Osman via Zoom.

CLOSED SESSION

PRESENTATIONS

1. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: East of Eden North Bay, LLC v. City of Fairfield, et al.

Solano County Superior Court docket # FCS057389
Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484
a

2. Conference With Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)-(4)
Re: Claim of defamation by Councilmember Cat Moy and City Council against Showcase LLC
Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484
a

The City came out of closed session. The City Attorney made no announcements out of closed session.

(more)
Packet Page 11 of 288Attachment 2 Page 1 of 2

City Council Special Meeting September 6, 2022

Page 2 ends

The meeting was adjourned at 5:38 p.m.

______________________________
City Attorney

________________________________
Mayor
Packet Page 12 of 288Attachment 2 Page 2 of 2

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

FAIRFIELD CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR CONCURRENT MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2022; 6:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET,
FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOM

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL

On roll call were Councilmembers Pam Bertani, Cat Moy, Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, and Scott Tonnesen; Vice Mayor Rick Vaccaro and Mayor Price.

INVOCATION

Worship Pastor Karen Freeman of Grace Episcopal Church gave an invocation.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Timm.

COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Panduro congratulated Touro University on its 25th anniversary. She thanked the dance group: Folklorico Juvenil Dazantes Unidos de Vacaville, for performing at City Hall before the council meeting in honor of National Hispanic Heritage Month.

Councilmember Tonnesen stated he was informed by a union member that Councilmember Moy had disparaged City Council and he made a motion asking that she be censured. City Attorney David Lim explained the censure procedure. After a lengthy conversation, Councilmember Timm said he seconded the motion to censure Councilmember Moy. Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a report on the censure process and report back to the City Council.

Councilmember Timm stated he did not have a report but would like the matter of censure looked into.

Councilmember Moy stated that she did not make a statement disparaging the City Council and said she will defend herself. Later, she reported that she was honored to attend a fundraiser event for a 17- year-old Fairfield student, who will be representing the US in Italy at the World Games in the sport of Karate. Next, she reported that the Ball Metal 9 th Annual School Supply Drive, Car & Bike Show is happening on Saturday, September 10, and that the gates open at 8 a.m. She reported that the Solano County Council of Women’s Realtors is holding their 8th Annual Grape Escape fundraiser event at Wooden Valley Winery on September 16. The funds raised will go to Solano Advocates for Victims of Violence. (SAVV).

Councilmember Bertani stated she would like the matter of censure to be investig ated. Later she reported that Clergy Action Network (CAN) is planning events for the upcoming holidays, Thanksgiving and Christmas. She will provide more information once the details are confirmed. They are also planning a family movie night at dusk on the County lawn on October 15. Lastly, she stated she hoped to see Packet Page 13 of 288Attachment 3 Page 1 of 5

everyone at the Tomato & Vine Festival this upcoming weekend.

Vice Mayor Vaccaro thanked Brandon Wirth from Shelter, Inc. for providing a cooling center for homeless individuals due to the recent record-breaking heat wave. He reported that he attended the 12th Annual Labor Day Breakfast hosted by the Ironworkers Union #378. He said the event was held outside in the heat and that he appreciate d how hard everyone worked to make it happen.

Mayor Price reported that he and Interim City Manager, David Gassaway, and other representatives from the Travis Community Consortium attended the California Defense Leaders ’ Summit in Sacramento on August 30, 2022.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

Interim City Manager David Gassaway invited the community to attend the Tomato & Vine Festival on September 10-11 in downtown Fairfield. He reported that eviction assistance is available to residents through September 30. Residents can visit www.Fairfield.ca.gov/cdbg to see if they qualify. Lastly, he stated there were no changes to the agenda.

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT

City Attorney David Lim had nothing to report.

CITY CLERK REPORT

City Clerk Karen Rees thanked several Adopt-A-Street groups for their ongoing cleanups: Beth Self, Steve Edmundson and Gold Ridge Neighbors, Randy Kunes, Michael and Peggy Richerson, Frank Aguon and Fairfield High School’s Jr. ROTC, and Our Lady of Mt. Carmel Knights of Columbus. Lastly, she thanked Ana Petero, Ruth Clawson, and crew.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Proclamation Declaring Hispanic Heritage Month presented by Councilmember Doriss Panduro.

Accepting the proclamation was Dr. Fatima Hernandez of Touro University, who has worked tirelessly in Solano County on vaccinating the population against COVID-19.

Before the meeting, Council, staff, and the community were treated to a dance performance in City Hall lobby by dance group Folklorico Juvenil - Danzantes Unidos de Vacaville in honor of National Hispanic Heritage Month.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

George Kennedy thanked staff and the community for participating in the recent ribbon cutting at Allan Witt Park for the new pickleball and tennis courts, and futsal court.

Bryan Lynch spoke about cleaning up Fairfield.

Carol Himmel spoke about Public Records Act (PRA) requests to the City of Fairfield.

K. Patrice Williams thanked Councilmember Panduro for recognizing Dr. Fatima Hernandez of Touro.

Josh Patton spoke about cooling centers.

Convened meeting of the Housing Authority at 6:51 p.m. Packet Page 14 of 288Attachment 3 Page 2 of 5

City Clerk Rees read the following statement: The holding of a joint meeting of the City Council and Housing Authority entitles the councilmembers to receive additional compensation of $35 for attending this joint meeting.

ROLL CALL

On roll call were Commissioners Bertani, Moy, Panduro, Timm, and Tonnesen; Vice Chair Vac caro, and Chairman Price.

HOUSING AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR

2. Resolution HA2022-08 of the Fairfield Housing Authority Approving an increase in Tenant Improvement Funding from $650,000 to $950,000 in Low Mod Income Housing Assets Funds for Office Space at 1525 Webster Street, Suites A & B

Vice Chair Vaccaro made a motion to approve Resolution HA2022-08. Councilmember Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

Reconvened meeting of the City Council at 6:52 p.m.

CONSENT CALENDAR

3. Approval of Meeting Minutes from August 16, 2022

4. Resolution 2022-233 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering and Authorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the Same

5. Minute Action Approving Commemorative Dedication and Name Application for Yarbrough Drive

6. Resolution 2022-234 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Ordering the Vacation of Portions of Atlantic Avenue, East Atlantic Avenue, and Cement Hill Road, and Authorizing the City Manager to Convey Said Vacated Areas as Set Out in the Agreement for Exchange of Real Property and Joint Recording Instructions Between the City of Fairfield and the Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District

7. Resolution 2022-235 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Shah Kawasaki Architects for Professional Architectural and Engineering Services fo r the Fire Station 39 Project

8. Resolution 2022-236 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Submission of the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Any Agreements or Documents Requested By HUD

9. Resolution 2022-237 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Revising the City-Sponsored Special Events List for Calendar Year 2022

10. Resolution 2022-238 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring Its Intention to Annex Territory (Fairfield Industrial Center) to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 and to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 59 Packet Page 15 of 288Attachment 3 Page 3 of 5

11. Resolution 2022-239 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring Its Intention to Annex Territory (Valley Strong Credit Union) to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 and to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 60

12. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 2022-09 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Amending Chapter 27, Article X, Section 27.1104 of the Fairfield Municipal Code, Also Known as the City of Fairfield Community Preservation, to Establish the Regulations of Vacant Window Storefronts in the Downtown

Councilmember Timm made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Councilmember Moy seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

NEW BUSINESS

13. Assistant to the City Manager Anna Guiles recommended to Council that it approve Resolution 2022-240 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting State Funds from Assembly Bill 178 AB- 178), Budget Act of 2022, and Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Budget.

Brandon Wirth of Shelter Solano and Assemblymember Wilson spoke on Item 13. Ms. Guiles commended Ms. Wilson for her efforts in spearheading the passage of AB-178.

Councilmember Bertani made a motion to approve Resolution 2022-240. Councilmember Timm seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

14. Homeless Services Manager Dawn La Bar recommended to Council that it approve Resolution 2022-241 of the City Council of the City Of Fairf ield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for the Community Action Partnership of Solano Joint Powers Agency, Authorizing the Appointment of City Councilmembers as the Primary Voting Member and Alternate, and Authorizing the Appointment of Staff Members as a Primary Member and Alternate to the Newly Constituted Technical Advisory Committee to the Community Action Partnership of Solano Joint Powers Agency.

Joe Joyce (online) spoke on Item 14.

Vice Mayor Vaccaro made a motion to approve Resolution 2022-241. Councilmember Moy seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

15. Public Works Management Analyst Corey Beavers recommended to Council that it approve the first reading and introduction of Ordinance 2022-10 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Adding Article X (Single-Use Foodware Accessories and Standard Condiments) to Chapter 9 of the Fairfield Municipal Code.

John Takeuchi spoke on Item 15.

Vice Mayor Vaccaro made a motion to waive the full reading of Ordinance 2022-10, read by title only, and introduce the ordinance for first reading. Councilmember Timm seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-1, with Councilmember Moy voting no.

16. Interim City Manager David Gassaway approved Resolution 2022-242 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving a Funding Agreement for Archways Recovery Services, Inc. for Funding Up to $525,000 as Local Matching Funds for a California Department of Health Care Services Behavioral Health Packet Page 16 of 288Attachment 3 Page 4 of 5

Continuum Infrastructure Program Grant .

Mayor Price left the dais.

Councilmember Panduro stated that although she lives within 500 feet of this project, per the law and her conversation with City Attorney Lim, she is still able to comment and vote on this item.

K. Patrice Williams spoke on Item 16.

Councilmember Bertani made a motion to approve Resolution 2022-242. Councilmember Tonnesen seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0.

Mayor Price returned to the dais.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

17. Public Works Transportation Manager Diane Feinstein recommended to Council that it open the public hearing; and approve Resolution 2022-243 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing Approval of Fairfield and Suisun Transit’s Comprehensive Operational Analysis.

Mayor Price opened the public hearing.

Terrence Strong and Anna (online) spoke on Item 17.

Mayor Price closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Panduro made a motion to approve Resolution 2022 -243. Vice Mayor Vaccaro seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

ADJOURNED MEETING AT 8:15 P.M. TO TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2022, 6:00 P.M., COUNCIL CHAMBER.

____________________________
City Clerk

_____________________________
Mayor
Packet Page 17 of 288Attachment 3 Page 5 of 5

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

FAIRFIELD CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY,
SEPTEMBER 20, 2022; 6:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, FAIRFIELD,
CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOM

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL

On roll call were Councilmembers Pam Bertani, Cat Moy, Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, Scott Tonnesen , Vice Mayor Rick Vaccaro, and Mayor Price.

INVOCATION

Councilmember Bertani gave an invocation.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Councilmember Timm led the Pledge of Allegiance.

COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Panduro reported she attended the League of California Cities in Long Beach September 7-9, 2022, along with many of her colleagues. She participated in the Tomato & Vine Festival as part of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. The money raised will help provide student scholarships.

She attended an event at the new BMW building, where they allowed students to tour the construction site and learn about the various trade jobs.

Councilmember Tonnesen thanked staff for coordinating the Tomato & Vine Festival. He said it was great to see so many people enjoying the event and the perfect weather.

Councilmember Timm had nothing to report.

Councilmember Moy reported that she, Police Captain Dan Marshall, and the Mayor attended a surprise birthday party for the “First Lady” of Lambs of God in Christ (LOGIC). She stated she would like the City to participate in the Toys for Tots program that L OGIC provides at Christmas time. She also reported playing mini golf as a fundraiser for Alzheimer’s Association.

Councilmember Bertani reported that Colonel Richardson of Travis Air Force Base was a host panelist in Council Chamber and spoke about how the City and TAFB can work together to assist our service men and women. The Clergy Action Network (CAN) is planning a Thanksgiving meal for the community on November 22 at Willow Hall. They need volunteers -- to register, call (707) 628-6974.

Mayor Price thanked Travis AFB for hosting the 75th anniversary gala of the United States Air Force in Vacaville on September 17. According to the theme this year, airmen were called to “Innovate, Accelerate and Thrive” as the U.S. Air Force and Department of the Air Force approach their 75th anniversaries on Sept. 18, 2022. The event was sold out, and all had a great time.

Packet Page 18 of 288Attachment 4 Page 1 of 4

CITY MANAGER REPORT

Acting City Manager and Chief of Police Deanna Cantrell had nothing to report. There were no changes to the agenda.

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT

City Attorney David Lim reported that Assistant City Attorney Ethan Pawson would be staffing Item 13.

CITY CLERK REPORT

City Clerk Karen Rees announced that volunteers are needed for the Housing Services Touch Up the Town community cleanup event on October 7 from 8 am to 12 noon.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Councilmember Panduro read a proclamation declaring Constitution Week as September 16-22, 2022, and presented it to Nanette McKnight Shamieh and Patricia McKnight of the Chief Solano Chapter of the Daughters of the American Revolution.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Jeff Trager spoke about events at the Downtown Theatre.

Bryan Lynch spoke about snakes.

Alex Lunine spoke about Sustainable Solano.

CONSENT CALENDAR

2. Resolution 2022-244 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering and Authorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the Same

3. Resolution 2022-245 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving and Authorizing the Execution of the First Amendment to the Disposition and Development Agreement between the City of Fairfield and Lionext, Inc.

4. Resolution 2022-246 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Software License and Professional Services Agreement with Cyclomedia Technology, Inc. and Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Budget

5. Resolution 2022-247 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving a Hosting and Upgrade Agreement with MaintStar, Inc.

6. Resolution 2022-248 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving Acceptance of the California Office of Traffic Safety 2022-23 Selective Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP) Grant and Approval of Activities to Reduce Traffic Collisions and Fatalities Due to Unsafe Driving

7. Resolution 2022-249 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield to Suspend Competitive Bidding and Authorize the City Manager to Purchase a Specialized Television Production Van

8. Resolution 2022-250 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Police Training Facility Roof Restoration Project as Complete

Packet Page 19 of 288Attachment 4 Page 2 of 4

9. Resolution 2022-251 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Initiating Proceedings for the Annexation of Territory, Annexation No. 8, (LogistiCenter at Fairfield) to the City of Fairfield Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 17 ChadbourneBeckCordelia; and the Levy and Collection of Annual Assessments Related Thereto Commencing with Fiscal Year 20232024; and

Resolution 2022-252 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Granting Preliminary Approval of the Engineer’s Report for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 17 - Chadbourne- Beck-Cordelia, Annexation No. 8 (LogistiCenter at Fairfield); and the Levy and Collection of Annual Assessments Related Thereto Commencing Fiscal Year 20232024; and

Resolution 2022-253 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring Its Intention to Annex Territory to the City of Fairfield Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 17 - ChadbourneBeckCordelia; and to Levy and Collect Annual Assessments Related Thereto Commencing Fiscal Year 20232024; and Calling for a Property Owner Protest Proceeding , to Submit to the Qualified Property Owners the Question of Levying Such Assessments and Establishing an Assessment Range Formula for Annexation No. 8 (LogistiCenter at Fairfield)

10. Resolution 2022-254 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Fairfield and Community Action Partnership of Solano, Joint Powers Authority to Receive Emergency Solutions Grant Coronavirus Round Two Program Grant Funds to Support the Pallet Shelter Project

11. Resolution 2022-255 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Declaring Its Intention to Annex Territory (LogistiCenter at Fairfield) to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 and Authorizing the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 61

Vice Mayor Vaccaro made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Councilmember Timm seconded the motion. By a roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously.

NEW BUSINESS

12. Homeless Services Manager Dawn La Bar gave a presentation on the Minute Action Approving Response to the 20212022 Grand Jury Report Entitled “Shelter Solano, Inc.: A Review of its First Three Years Operating an Emergency Shelter in Solano County;” and Discussion on Grand Jury Recommendation of Forensic Audit

Brandon Wirth and John Eckstrom of Shelter, Inc. spoke on Item 12.

After a lengthy discussion, Councilmember Moy made a motion to request that Mayor Price write a letter to the presiding judge of the Grand Jury, Wendy Getty, requesting an extension to the City of Fairfield’s response to the Grand Jury Report entitled “Shelter Solano, Inc.” under Penal Code 933.C which requires the City of Fairfield to respond within 90 days. If Judge Getty does not grant the extension, we authorize staff to agendize and call a special meeting to decide how to respond. We also instruct Interim City Manager David Gassaway to review contracts regarding responses to findings #2, 3, and 4. Councilmember Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

13. Homeless Services Manager Dawn La Bar recommended to Council that it open the public hearing; and approve Urgency Ordinance 2022-11 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Implementing an Emergency Homeless Shelter Program for the Duration of the Shelter Crisis Declaration; and

Resolution 2022-256 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the Implementation of an Packet Page 20 of 288Attachment 4 Page 3 of 4

Emergency Homeless Shelter Program Permit Process and Adopting Emergency Shelter Operational Standards

Mayor Price opened the public hearing. There were no requests to speak. Mayor Price closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Moy made a motion to waive the full reading of the ordinance, read by title only, and adopt Urgency Ordinance 2022-11 and approve Resolution 2022-256. Councilmember Timm seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.

ADJOURNED MEETING AT 7:50 P.M. TO TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2022, 6:00 P.M., COUNCIL CHAMBER.

_________________________________
City Clerk

__________________________________
Mayor
Packet Page 21 of 288Attachment 4 Page 4 of 4

City Council Special Meeting October 4, 2022

Page 1 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

FAIRFIELD CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING

CLOSED SESSION
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2022; 5:00 PM
CITY HALL, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, 4TH FLOOR, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533

CLOSED SESSION AGENDA

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

Present were Councilmembers Pam Bertani, Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, and Scott Tonnesen; Vice Mayor Rick Vaccaro, and Mayor Price. Councilmember Cat Moy was absent.

No members of the public wished to speak. The City Council went into closed session with City Attorney David Lim, City Manager David Gassaway, and attorney Kevin Allen via Zoom (as to Item #2 only).

NEW BUSINESS - CLOSED SESSION

1. Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Government Code 54954.5(e)
Title: Annual Evaluation of City Attorney David Lim

Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484

2. Conference With Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation
(Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: Joseph Schwab, Jr. v. City of Fairfield, Christopher Adam, Frank Piro, Robert Murray, Alexander Aldredge, Sean Timm, Kevin Anderson, and Does 1-20 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:20-cv-01631-JAM-DB

Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484

The City came out of closed session. The City Attorney made no announcements out of closed session.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 p.m.

______________________________
City Attorney
________________________________
Mayor
Packet Page 22 of 288Attachment 5 Page 1 of 1

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

FAIRFIELD CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2022; 6:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, FAIRFIELD,
CA 94533 OR VIA ZOOM

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL

On roll call were Councilmembers Pam Bertani, Cat Moy (online), Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, and Scott Tonnesen; Vice-Mayor Rick Vaccaro, and Mayor Price.

INVOCATION

Worship Pastor Patrick Serna of Highway International Christian Fellowship gave an invocation.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Councilmember Timm.

COUNCIL REPORTS

Vice Mayor Vaccaro welcomed everyone. He announced that it is Restaurant Week from October 1-8 in downtown and encouraged everyone to support the participating restaurants. He thanked the school district for providing mental health support for students, as it’s badly needed.

Councilmember Bertani reported that the Clergy Action Network (CAN) has planned a movie night on the Solano County lawn on Saturday, October 22, at dusk for a fun family night! The group also has planned a Thanksgiving dinner to be served at the Community Center in Willow Hall on Tuesday, November 22. Volunteers are needed. Next, she reported that the CAN meeting on October 25 will have a panel of service men and women from Travis AFB discussing coming home from deployment and the challenges they face. Lastly, she reported that Police Chief Cantrell’s retirement ceremony would be held on November 3.

Councilmember Moy reported she and some of her colleagues attended a grand opening of Math Miracles on North Texas Street, an excellent educational program. Next, she encouraged folks to visit restaurants participating in Restaurant Week. Lastly, she thanked the Homeless Intervention Team (HIT) for the compassion they show to our homeless population and for showing up quickly when called.

Councilmember Timm reported he visited the new PAL Center and thanked Lowe’s Stores for its generous donation of $300,000 to remodel the old roller-skating rink site. He stated Lowe’s arrived with 60 employees to transform the old building. He said that PAL would hold a soft opening later this month.

Packet Page 23 of 288Attachment 6 Page 1 of 5

Councilmember Panduro reported she attended the last summer concert on September 30 to listen to Alvon Johnson’s Jazz Band. She thanked Jeff Trager for creating the successful concert series that is bringing the community together. Next, she reported she attended an event on Mare Island on September 16, where California Governor Newsom signed a package of legislation to cut pollution and accelerate the state’s transition to clean energy. Ms. Panduro was there as a Board member of Marin Clean Energy, representing Fairfield, and said it was exciting to witness. Lastly, she shared that she attended a Youth Commission meeting and invited the community to attend future meetings.

Councilmember Tonnesen reported he enjoyed the Taste of Downtown event. He reported he and other elected officials attended a ribbon cutting of the electronic billboard off Interstate 80 and Red Top Road, which features an amazing replica of a C-5 A Galaxy Transport (“Plane on a Stick”), which celebrates Travis Air Force Base. He reported he visited PAL’s Haunted House (Skreemz!) with the lights on! He encouraged people to visit and support PAL. Lastly, he reported that BIG LOTS has moved into the old Yardbirds’ building on Oliver Road.

Mayor Price read a letter from the Seventh Day Adventist Church of Fairfield thanking the City of Fairfield for the annual National Night Out celebrations throughout Fairfield. It was their first time hosting and they enjoyed it so much, they plan to do it again next year.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

Interim City Manager David Gassaway reported that Police Investigations has moved into the Cordelia Library building at 5050 Business Center Drive. A ribbon-cutting event will be held on October 13 at 10 a.m. to celebrate the opening.

CITY ATTORNEY REPORT

City Attorney David Lim stated there was no reportable action taken in the closed session.

CITY CLERK REPORT

City Clerk Karen Rees had no report.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Proclamation declaring Breast Cancer Awareness Month presented by Police Chief Deanna Cantrell to Director of the Solano Midnight Sun Breast Cancer Foundation, Barbara Rigdon. Fairfield Poet Laureate Suzanne Bruce read a special poem she wrote for the occasion.

2. Proclamation declaring Cyber Security Month presented by Councilmember Chuck Timm to the Director of Information Technology Savita Chaudhary and IT Infrastructure Manager Eudora Fleischman.

3. Proclamation declaring Water Professionals Appreciation Week presented by Councilmember Rick Vaccaro to Assistant Director of Public Works, Utilities, Michael Hether; Water Treatment Managers Stuart Hamilton and Brandan Hiltman; and Water Distribution Manager George Shimboff.

4. Proclamation declaring National Fire Prevention Week presented by Councilmember Scott Tonnesen to Fire Inspector III/Plans Examiner Bryan Just, who is part of the Fire Prevention Bureau.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

John Takeuchi spoke about election signs.

Packet Page 24 of 288Attachment 6 Page 2 of 5

Bryan Lynch spoke about his neighborhood.

K. Patrice Williams spoke about the Point in Time Count for homeless individuals.

Susan Hoffman spoke about the need for lights in Cordelia and Ridgeview Park.

Lisa Strange of N. California Department of Insurance spoke about insurance and wildfire prevention.

CONSENT CALENDAR

5. Resolution 2022-257 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering and Authorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the Same

6. Resolution 2022-258 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the Renewal of the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement Through Crayon Software Experts, LLC, Resellers of the California State Department of Technology Microsoft Agreement

7. Resolution 2022-259 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield to Suspend Competitive Bidding and Authorize the City Manager to Purchase a Replacement Specialized CCTV Sewer Inspection Van

8. Resolution 2022-260 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Suspending Competitive Bidding and Authorizing the City Manager to Purchase a Replacement Water Tender Truck

9. Resolution 2022-261 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Suspending Competitive Bidding and Authorizing Execution of Amendment No. 1 to the Contractor Services Agreement between the City of Fairfield and Pinnacle Petroleum Inc. for the Provision and Delivery of Renewable Diesel and 87 Octane Gasoline at the City of Fairfield Corporation Yard

10. Heart of Fairfield - Resolution 2022-262 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Fairfield and GHD Engineers for the West Texas Complete Streets Project

Heart of Fairfield - Resolution 2022-263 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Fairfield and Coastland Civil Engineering, Inc. for Project Management Services on the West Texas Utility Relocation and Complete Streets Projects

Heart of Fairfield - Resolution 2022-264 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Fairfield and GHD Engineers for the West Texas Utility Relocation Project

11. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 2022-10 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Adding Article X (Single-Use Foodware Accessories and Standard Condiments) to Chapter 9 of the Fairfield Municipal Code

12. Resolution 2022-265 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Allan Witt Community Park Tennis Courts Resurfacing Maintenance Project as Complete

13. Resolution 2022-266 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Accepting the Heart of Fairfield Downtown Striping and Intersection Improvement Project as Complete

14. Resolution 2022-267 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Plans and Specifications and Awarding a Contract to Kerex Engineering for the Waterman Boulevard Sidewalk Packet Page 25 of 288Attachment 6 Page 3 of 5

Project and Rancho Solano Median Extensions Project

Vice Mayor Vaccaro made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Councilmember Bertani seconded the motion. By a roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously.

NEW BUSINESS

15. Fire Chief Matt Luckenbach recommended to Council that it approve Resolution 2022-268 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Fire Department to Apply Through Solano LAFCO for Short-Term and Long-Term Contract for Service Agreements with the Cordelia Fire Protection District.

Councilmember Bertani made a motion to approve Resolution 2022 -268. Councilmember Timm seconded the motion. By a roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously.

16. Interim City Manager Gassaway opened the discussion for continued minute action approving response to the 20212022 Grand Jury Report Entitled “Shelter Solano, Inc.: A Review of its First Three Years Operating an Emergency Shelter in Solano County;” and Discussion on Grand Jury Recommendation of Forensic Audit.

City Attorney David Lim reported that although presiding Superior Court Judge Getty stated she did not have the legal authority to grant an extension to the City for their grand jury response due October 3, 2022, Solano County Counsel Lori Mazzella did grant an extension to October 10, 2022.

After a lengthy discussion, Councilmember Timm made a motion to approve the Grand Jury response.

Vice Mayor Vaccaro seconded the motion. By a roll call vote, the motion passed 6-1, with Councilmember Moy voting no.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

17. Planning Manager Dave Feinstein recommended to Council that it open the public hearing, and approve Resolution 2022-269 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Setting the Amount of Certain Development Impact Fees Established by Ordinance No. 201311; and approve

First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 2022-12 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Amending Chapter 25, Article XI of the Fairfield Municipal Code .

Mayor Price opened the public hearing. There were no requests to speak. Mayor Price closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Timm made a motion to approve Resolution 2022-269 with a corrected fee structure.

Councilmember Tonnesen seconded the motion. By a roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously.

18. Planning Manager Dave Feinstein recommended to Council that it open the public hearing; and approve the First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 2022-13 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield approving the First Amendment to the Restated and Amended Development Agreement By and Between the City of Fairfield and Albert D. Seeno Construction Co., a California Limited Partnership, Seecon Financial and Construction Co, Inc., a California Corporation, an d West Coast Homebuilders Inc., a California Corporation.

Mayor Price opened the public hearing.

Nora Dizon, Susan Hoffman, and George Kennedy spoke on Item 18.

Packet Page 26 of 288Attachment 6 Page 4 of 5

Mayor Price closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Timm made a motion to waive the full reading of Ordinance 2022-13, read by title only and introduce the ordinance for first reading. Councilmember Bertani seconded the motion. By a roll call vote, the motion carried unanimously.

ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 8:14 P.M. TO TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2022, 6:00 P.M., COUNCIL CHAMBER.

______________________
City Clerk

___________________________
Mayor

Packet Page 27 of 288Attachment 6 Page 5 of 5

City Council Special Meeting October 18, 2022

Page 1 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

FAIRFIELD CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING

CLOSED SESSION
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2022; 5:00 PM
CITY HALL, CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, 1000 WEBSTER STREET, 4TH FLOOR, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533

CLOSED SESSION AGENDA

MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Harry T. Price called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

Present in person were Councilmembers, Doriss Panduro, Chuck Timm, and Scott Tonnesen; Vice Mayor Rick Vaccaro, and Mayor Price. Councilmember Pam Bertani appeared via Zoom.

Councilmember Cat Moy was absent.

PUBLIC COMMENT: No members of the public wished to speak.

The City Council went into closed session with City Attorney David Lim, City Manager David Gassaway, Human Resources Director Farbod Pirouzmand (Item #1), Human Resources Manager Angela Broaddus (Item #1), Fairfield Police Captain Dan Marshall (Items #1 and #2), and attorneys Coleman Ramsey (Zoom: Item #1), Richard Osman (Zoom: Item #3), and Adam Ambrozy (Zoom: Item #3).

NEW BUSINESS - CLOSED SESSION

PRESENTATIONS

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION
Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Workers Compensation Claim by Brian Pereira – Claim No.FFL2200009

Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484
a

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL — EXISTING LITIGATION (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9)
Name of case: Joseph Schwab, Jr. v. City of Fairfield, Christopher Adam, Frank Piro, Robert Murray, Alexander Aldredge, Sean Timm, Kevin Anderson, a nd Does 1-20 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:20 -cv-01631-JAM-DB

Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484
a

3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL— ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)-(4)
Re: Claim of defamation by Councilmember Cat Moy and City Council against Showcase LLC

Contact: David Lim, (415) 421-8484

Packet Page 28 of 288Attachment 7 Page 1 of 2

City Council Special Meeting October 18, 2022

Page 2 ends

OPEN SESSION

The City came out of closed session. The City Attorney announced the City Council agreed to resolve the workers compensation claim in Item #1 with Mr. Pereira with a compromise and release in the amount of $80,000.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

______________________________
City Attorney
________________________________
Mayor
Packet Page 29 of 288Attachment 7 Page 2 of 2

Agenda Item No: 3.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 1, 2022
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2022288 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering and Authorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the Same RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Government Code 54953(e) is new legislation that amends the Brown Act to allow local agencies to meet remotely during declared emergencies under certain conditions. The code requires that the City Council reconsider and reauthorize these provisions every 30 days following initial authorization.

DISCUSSION
On October 5, 2021, the council adopted provisions of Assembly Bill (AB) 361, urgency legislation that amends the Brown Act to allow local agencies to meet remotely during declared emergencies under certain conditions. AB 361 authorizes local agencies to continue meeting remotely without following the Brown Act’s standard teleconferencing provisions, including the requirement that meetings be conducted in physical locations if the meeting is held during a state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor and either of the following applies:

1. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or

2. The agency has already determined whether, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of the attendee.

Council has utilized teleconferencing options throughout the pandemic, including remote appearances by Councilmembers and public comments from citizens via Zoom, email, or teleconference.

AB requires the council to reconsider the circumstances of the state of emergency every 30 days following the adoption of the law and make specific findings that either of the following cases exists:

1. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet in person safely; or
Packet Page 30 of 288

Agenda Item No: 3.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 1, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2022288 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Reconsidering andAuthorizing Public Meetings to be Held Via Teleconferencing Pursuant to GovernmentCode Section 54953(e) and Making Findings and Determinations Regarding the SameRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEGovernment Code 54953(e) is new legislation that amends the Brown Act to allow local agencies tomeet remotely during declared emergencies under certain conditions. The code requires that the CityCouncil reconsider and reauthorize these provisions every 30 days following initial authorization.DISCUSSIONOn October 5, 2021, the council adopted provisions of Assembly Bill (AB) 361, urgency legislation thatamends the Brown Act to allow local agencies to meet remotely during declared emergencies undercertain conditions. AB 361 authorizes local agencies to continue meeting remotely without following theBrown Act’s standard teleconferencing provisions, including the requirement that meetings beconducted in physical locations if the meeting is held during a state of emergency proclaimed by theGovernor and either of the following applies:1. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; or2. The agency has already determined whether, as a result of the emergency, meeting in personwould present imminent risks to the health or safety of the attendee.Council has utilized teleconferencing options throughout the pandemic, including remote appearancesby Councilmembers and public comments from citizens via Zoom, email, or teleconference.AB requires the council to reconsider the circumstances of the state of emergency every 30 daysfollowing the adoption of the law and make specific findings that either of the following cases exists:

1. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet in person safely; or

2. State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is little to no fiscal impact by this action. City staff is already utilizing many of the procedures for teleconferencing in recent council meetings and other meetings of the legislative bodies.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
None.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose not to reauthorize these procedures, in which case they would no longer be able to teleconference into council meetings without meeting the notice requirements for teleconferencing that existed before the State of Emergency. Public comment via remote access would also be curtailed at council meetings.

STAFF CONTACT
Karen Rees, City Clerk
(707) 4287767
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Proposed Resolution
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/18/2022 10:22 AM
Packet Page 31 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-288

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD RECONSIDERING AND

AUTHORIZING PUBLIC MEETINGS TO BE HELD VIA TELECONFERENCING PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(E) AND MAKING FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS

REGARDING THE SAME

WHEREAS, the Fairfield City Council (the City Council) is committed to public access and participation in its meetings while balancing the need to conduct public meetings in a manner that reduces the likelihood of exposure to COVID-19; and

WHEREAS, all meetings of the City Council are open and public, as required by the Ralph M.

Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code 54950 – 54963), so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City Council conduct its business; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Assembly Bill 361, signed by Governor Newsom and effective on September 16, 2021, legislative bodies of local agencies may hold public meetings via teleconferencing pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e), without complying with the requirements of Government Code Section 54953(b)(3), if the legislative body complies with certain enumerated requirements in any of the following circumstances:

1. The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency, and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.

2. The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

3. The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and has determined, by majority vote, that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees ; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e)(3), the City Council must reconsider the circumstances of the state of emergency and make specific finding every 30 d ays after enacting the provisions of Government Code Section 54953(e) by making the following findings:

1. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and

2. Either of the following circumstances exists:

A. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to safely meet in person; or
B. State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and
Packet Page 32 of 288Attachment 1 Page 1 of 3

RES. NO. 2022-288

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (the Emergency); and

WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) continue to advise that COVID- 19 spreads more easily indoors than outdoors and that people are more likely to be exposed to COVID-19 when they are closer than 6 feet apart from others for longer periods of time; and

WHEREAS, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) and the CDC caution that the Delta variant of COVID-19, currently the dominant strain of COVID-19 in the country, is more transmissible than prior variants of the virus, may cause more severe illness, and that even fully vaccinated individuals can spread the virus to others resulting in rapid and alarming rates of COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations; and

WHEREAS, the CDC has established a “Community Transmission” metric with 4 tiers designed to reflect a community’s COVID-19 case rate and percent positivity; and

WHEREAS, Solano County currently has a Community Transmission metric of “high” which is the most serious of the tiers; and

WHEREAS, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the need to promote social distancing to reduce the likelihood of exposure to COVID-19, the City Council intends to hold public meetings via teleconferencing pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e); and

WHEREAS, on October 5, 2021, the City Council adopted the provisions of Government Code Section 54953(e) for the first time by resolution and majority vote.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The Recitals provided above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference.

Section 2. The City Council hereby determines that, as a result of the Emergency, meeting in person presents imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.

Section 3. The City Council shall conduct its meetings pursuant to Government Code section 54953(e) and authorizes its boards and commissions to do likewise.

Section 4. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency.

Packet Page 33 of 288Attachment 1 Page 2 of 3

RES. NO. 2022-288

Page 3 ends

Section 5. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the City Council members to meet safely in person.

Section 6. State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.

Section 7. Staff is hereby authorized and directed to continue to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this resolution including, conducting open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e) and other applicable provisi ons of the Brown Act.

Section 8. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and must be reconsidered within 30 days to stay in effect.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 34 of 288Attachment 1 Page 3 of 3

Agenda Item No: 4.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 1, 2022
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2022289 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield to Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement Between the City of Fairfield and Willdan Energy Solutions for the Modeling and Financial Planning Services for the Municipal Fleet Electric Vehicles and Facility Analysis RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has established a statewide goal for transitioning onroad vehicles to 100% zeroemission by 2040. The proposed Amendment No. 1 would allow the City to amend its agreement with Willdan Energy Solutions (Willdan) to add additional tasks necessary to add lightduty and offroad units as the City prepares to meet new CARB regulations.

DISCUSSION
The City operates and maintains a fleet of approximately 640 vehicles. Of the 640 vehicles, approximately 260 of these vehicles are required to meet CARB’s statewide goal of 100% zero emission by 2040. There are approximately 135 lightduty and offroad pieces of equipment that will need to meet CARB’s regulations that were not considered in the original agreement with Willdan.

CARB’s regulation excludes nonpowered vehicles such as trailers and vehicles used in emergency firstresponse that are covered in California Vehicle Code 165.

The initial agreement for reporting, data collection and analysis with Willdan was executed in August 2020. The initial efforts of Willdan were to provide support in drafting the CARB Advanced Clean Truck (ACT) report required by the ACT regulation. WiIldan completed this on March 17, 2021, and continued work on the medium and heavyduty fleet electrification plan in conjunction with the City’s transit electrification plan. With CARB’s new goals of transitioning offroad and lightduty onroad vehicles to zero emissions, substantial work will be needed to complete analysis and planning for these units. This would include the approximate 135 units that will need to be transitioned to zero emissions and the analysis of infrastructure needed to support those units.

The amended scope of work would be completed for a nottoexceed amount of $82,595. Staff Packet Page 35 of 288

Agenda Item No: 4.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 1, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2022289 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield to Authorizing the CityManager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement Between the City of Fairfieldand Willdan Energy Solutions for the Modeling and Financial Planning Services for theMunicipal Fleet Electric Vehicles and Facility AnalysisRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEThe California Air Resources Board (CARB) has established a statewide goal for transitioning onroadvehicles to 100% zeroemission by 2040. The proposed Amendment No. 1 would allow the City toamend its agreement with Willdan Energy Solutions (Willdan) to add additional tasks necessary to addlightduty and offroad units as the City prepares to meet new CARB regulations.DISCUSSIONThe City operates and maintains a fleet of approximately 640 vehicles. Of the 640 vehicles,approximately 260 of these vehicles are required to meet CARB’s statewide goal of 100% zeroemission by 2040. There are approximately 135 lightduty and offroad pieces of equipment that willneed to meet CARB’s regulations that were not considered in the original agreement with Willdan.CARB’s regulation excludes nonpowered vehicles such as trailers and vehicles used in emergencyfirstresponse that are covered in California Vehicle Code 165.The initial agreement for reporting, data collection and analysis with Willdan was executed in August2020. The initial efforts of Willdan were to provide support in drafting the CARB Advanced Clean Truck(ACT) report required by the ACT regulation. WiIldan completed this on March 17, 2021, and continuedwork on the medium and heavyduty fleet electrification plan in conjunction with the City’s transitelectrification plan. With CARB’s new goals of transitioning offroad and lightduty onroad vehicles tozero emissions, substantial work will be needed to complete analysis and planning for these units. Thiswould include the approximate 135 units that will need to be transitioned to zero emissions and theanalysis of infrastructure needed to support those units.

The amended scope of work would be completed for a nottoexceed amount of $82,595. Staff recommends a 20% management ($16,519) to cover unforeseen design scope revisions.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Total authorization for Amendment No. 1 to the agreement is for a nottoexceed amount of $99,114 ($82,595 + $16,519 management reserve). The total agreement would increase to $238,834. Funds are budgeted in the Automotive Services Fund (Fund 511, Organization Code 60111).

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The City Council may choose not to approve this agreement; however, the department does not have sufficient staff resources to complete the recommended analysis without an outside consultant.

STAFF CONTACT
David Renschler, Fleet Division Manager
(707) 4287414
[email protected]
Shaun Vigil, Transportation Planner II
(707) 4343807
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Proposed Resolution
Proposed Agreement
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Kaushal, Paul Approved 10/17/2022 8:36 PM
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/18/2022 10:54 AM
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/18/2022 10:54 AM
Packet Page 36 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-289

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF

FAIRFIELD AND WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS FOR THE MODELING AND FINANCIAL

PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE MUNICIPAL FLEET ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND FACILITY ANALYSIS

WHEREAS, on August 18, 2020, the City of Fairfield entered into an agreement for Professional Services with Willdan Energy Solutions (Willdan), for modeling and financial planning services for the municipal fleet electric vehicles and facility analysis, California Air Resources Board Advanced Clean Truck compliance support project; and

WHEREAS, additional work is needed, beyond the originally envisioned scope of work, to comply with additional light-duty and off-road vehicles; and

WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the proposed scope of work by Willdan and determined that costs are fair and reasonable; and

WHEREAS, Amendment No. 1 to the agreement will increase the total compensation by $82,595 to provide the additional scope of work.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The city manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute, on behalf of the City, Amendment No. 1 to the agreement with Willdan Energy Solutions for an amount not-to- exceed eighty-two thousand five hundred ninety-five dollars ($82,595) for a total contract amount not-to-exceed two hundred twenty-two thousand, three hundred fifteen dollars ($222,315).

Section 2. The public works director is hereby authorized to execute and administer amendments in an amount not-to-exceed sixteen thousand, five hundred nineteen dollars ($16,519).

Packet Page 37 of 288Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-289

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK
Packet Page 38 of 288Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES BETWEEN

CITY OF FAIRFIELD AND WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS

FOR THE MODELING AND FINACIAL PLANNING SERVICES FOR THE MUNICIPAL FLEET

ELECTRIC VEHICLES AND FACILITY ANALYSIS

This AMENDMENT No. 1 (hereinafter “AMENDMENT”) to the Agreement for modeling and financial planning services for the Municipal Fleet Electric Vehicles and Facility Analysis (Hereinafter “AGREEMENT”), dated August 18, 2020, is made and entered this day of , 2022 by and between the CITY OF FAIRFIELD, a municipal corporation (hereinafter “CITY”), and Willdan Energy Solutions. (hereinafter “CONSULTANT”).

WITNESSETH

WHEREAS, on August 18, 2020, the parties entered into an AGREEMENT for Modeling and Financial Planning Services for the Municipal Fleet Electric Vehicles and Facility Analysis (PROJECT);

WHEREAS, the City has requested additional services beyond the original scope of the AGREEMENT in order to complete the necessary work associated with the PROJECT.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements herein set forth, the parties do hereby agree as follows:

1. Section I of the AGREEMENT shall be amended to including the following:

B. Project Scope.

1. The CONSULTANT shall provide additional modeling and financial planning services in accordance with the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit “A”

2. Section IV of the AGREEMENT shall be amended to include the following:

A. Compensation of Consultant.

2. The total contract price for services rendered by CONSULTANT shall be increased by eighty-two thousand five hundred ninety-five dollars ($82,595) with a total contract maximum fee not to exceed two hundred twenty-two thousand three hundred fifteen dollars ($222,315).

Packet Page 39 of 288Attachment 2 Page 1 of 2

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day of , 2022.

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
a municipal corporation (CITY)
By

WILLDAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS (CONSULTANT)
Packet Page 40 of 288Attachment 2 Page 2 of 2

Agenda Item No: 5.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 1, 2022
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2022290 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Plans and Specifications and Awarding a Contract to Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. for the CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project and Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 20222023 Budget
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Approximately 37 light poles and housing pads along the pedestrian path of the Linear Park Trail, from I80 to Travis Boulevard, have reached the end of their useful life and are in need of replacement. The City has received funding from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to replace these light poles and housing pads in this low and moderateincome census tract neighborhood. This resolution approves the plans and specifications for the CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project (Project) and awards the contract in the amount of $529,932 to Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. of Stockton, California.

DISCUSSION
The Public Works Department has been in the process of completing lighting improvements to address community safety, walkability, and promote active lifestyles for residents on route between residential, essential businesses and areas of employment. The department recently replaced the original induction lighting heads installed in the late 80s to LED lighting heads along the Linear Park Trail, from I80 to Travis Boulevard. The proposed Project to replace these 37 light poles and housing pads will complete the lighting improvements along this section of the trail. Replacement of the original light poles and housing pads from the late 80s will make the lighting more reliable, as the new style light pole and housing pad is much more difficult to be broken into and have the wiring tampered with or stolen. Also, the original poles require regular painting to cover any graffiti or damage that has occurred. The proposed Project also supports the lighting improvement goals that are part of the approved fiveyear consolidated CDBG Plan for fiscal year 20172021.

Six bids were received and opened on September 27, 2022. The bids range in price from $767,465.98 to $1,286,678.05; approximately 16% over the engineer’s estimate of $652,424 ($468,701 Base Bid + $183,723 Alternative Bid). The Base bid consisted of replacing the light poles and housing pads from I 80 to 2nd street along the Linear Park Trail. The Alternative Bid consisted of replacing the light poles and housing pads from 2nd Street to Travis BLVD along the Linear Park Trail. The apparent low bidder was Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. (Bockmon & Woody) from Stockton, California in the amount of $767,465.98. Staff has reviewed all bids for compliance with the bid requirements and recommends that the City Council award the contract to Bockmon & Woody. Staff recommends awarding only the base bid in the amount of $529,932 due to budget constraints. The project was allocated $516,438 of CDBG funding for construction. Bockmon & Woody is appropriately licensed by the Contractors State License Board to perform the work.

Staff has analyzed the higher than anticipated pricings and determined it is the result of two primary factors. The first is that the work consists of constructing a relatively smallscale project and construction efficiencies are typically achieved with larger project quantities. Secondly, the higher than anticipated bids can be attributed to the result of increases in commodity prices, which have been experienced in all levels of the construction industry. Ultimately, staff has determined that rejecting all bids and re bidding the project would not result in lower pricing.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Total construction authorization for the Project will be $582,925.20, which includes the Base Bid plus a 10% contingency ($529,932 Base Bid + $52,993.20 contingency). This project will be funded by the Parks Capital Project Fund (Fund 251, Project 10448) and will require a budget adjustment of $66,487 to fund the work. Funds from the Quimby Fund (Fund 273) are to be transferred to the Parks Capital Project Fund (Fund 251, Project 10448). Finance has confirmed that adequate reserves in Fund 273 exist and that no projects will be jeopardized by this additional expenditure.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
A notice inviting bids for this Project was advertised twice in the Daily Republic newspaper on August 29, and September 5, 2022. In addition, the Plans and Specifications were hosted through BPX Printing & Graphics online Planroom. The initial advertisement emailed a notice of the project and complete bid package to a total of 12 builder’s exchanges in the State of California covering the area from Redding to San Jose and Stockton to Santa Rosa.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, this request may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary backup information. This is not recommended as the CDBG milestones are very stringent and a delay in processing could cause the city to become out of compliance with the CDBG.

STAFF CONTACT
Caroline Vedder, Associate Civil Engineer
(707) 4287484
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
Finance Department, Housing Services Department
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Proposed Resolution
Bid Results
REVIEWERS:

Packet Page 42 of 288

Agenda Item No: 5.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 1, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2022290 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Approving the Plans andSpecifications and Awarding a Contract to Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. for theCDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project and Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year20222023 BudgetRECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEApproximately 37 light poles and housing pads along the pedestrian path of the Linear Park Trail, fromI80 to Travis Boulevard, have reached the end of their useful life and are in need of replacement. TheCity has received funding from the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) to replace these lightpoles and housing pads in this low and moderateincome census tract neighborhood. This resolutionapproves the plans and specifications for the CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project (Project) andawards the contract in the amount of $529,932 to Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. of Stockton,California.DISCUSSIONThe Public Works Department has been in the process of completing lighting improvements to addresscommunity safety, walkability, and promote active lifestyles for residents on route between residential,essential businesses and areas of employment. The department recently replaced the original inductionlighting heads installed in the late 80s to LED lighting heads along the Linear Park Trail, from I80 toTravis Boulevard. The proposed Project to replace these 37 light poles and housing pads will completethe lighting improvements along this section of the trail. Replacement of the original light poles andhousing pads from the late 80s will make the lighting more reliable, as the new style light pole andhousing pad is much more difficult to be broken into and have the wiring tampered with or stolen. Also,the original poles require regular painting to cover any graffiti or damage that has occurred. Theproposed Project also supports the lighting improvement goals that are part of the approved fiveyearconsolidated CDBG Plan for fiscal year 20172021.Six bids were received and opened on September 27, 2022. The bids range in price from $767,465.98to $1,286,678.05; approximately 16% over the engineer’s estimate of $652,424 ($468,701 Base Bid +$183,723 Alternative Bid). The Base bid consisted of replacing the light poles and housing pads from I80 to 2nd street along the Linear Park Trail. The Alternative Bid consisted of replacing the light polesand housing pads from 2nd Street to Travis BLVD along the Linear Park Trail. The apparent low bidderwas Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. (Bockmon & Woody) from Stockton, California in the amountof $767,465.98. Staff has reviewed all bids for compliance with the bid requirements and recommendsthat the City Council award the contract to Bockmon & Woody. Staff recommends awarding only thebase bid in the amount of $529,932 due to budget constraints. The project was allocated $516,438 ofCDBG funding for construction. Bockmon & Woody is appropriately licensed by the Contractors StateLicense Board to perform the work. Staff has analyzed the higher than anticipated pricings and determined it is the result of two primaryfactors. The first is that the work consists of constructing a relatively smallscale project and constructionefficiencies are typically achieved with larger project quantities. Secondly, the higher than anticipatedbids can be attributed to the result of increases in commodity prices, which have been experienced inall levels of the construction industry. Ultimately, staff has determined that rejecting all bids and rebidding the project would not result in lower pricing.FINANCIAL IMPACTTotal construction authorization for the Project will be $582,925.20, which includes the Base Bid plus a10% contingency ($529,932 Base Bid + $52,993.20 contingency). This project will be funded by theParks Capital Project Fund (Fund 251, Project 10448) and will require a budget adjustment of $66,487to fund the work. Funds from the Quimby Fund (Fund 273) are to be transferred to the Parks CapitalProject Fund (Fund 251, Project 10448). Finance has confirmed that adequate reserves in Fund 273exist and that no projects will be jeopardized by this additional expenditure.PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONA notice inviting bids for this Project was advertised twice in the Daily Republic newspaper on August29, and September 5, 2022. In addition, the Plans and Specifications were hosted through BPXPrinting & Graphics online Planroom. The initial advertisement emailed a notice of the project andcomplete bid package to a total of 12 builder’s exchanges in the State of California covering the areafrom Redding to San Jose and Stockton to Santa Rosa.ALTERNATIVE ACTIONIf the council has any questions, this request may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessarybackup information. This is not recommended as the CDBG milestones are very stringent and a delayin processing could cause the city to become out of compliance with the CDBG.STAFF CONTACTCaroline Vedder, Associate Civil Engineer(707) 428[email protected] WITHFinance Department, Housing Services DepartmentATTACHMENTS:DescriptionProposed Resolution Bid Results
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Panganiban, Ryan Approved 10/17/2022 8:28 PM
Kaushal, Paul Approved 10/17/2022 8:32 PM
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/18/2022 10:53 AM
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/18/2022 10:53 AM
Packet Page 43 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-290

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARDING A CONTRACT TO BOCKMON & WOODY ELECTRIC CO., INC.

FOR THE CDBG LINEAR PARK TRAIL LIGHTING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING AN UPDATE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 BUDGET

WHEREAS, the bid opening for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Linear Park Trail Lighting Project (Project) took place on September 27, 2022; and

WHEREAS, the apparent low bidder was Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. in the amount of $767,465.98; and

WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the bid documents from Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. and found them to be in order; and

WHEREAS, staff is recommending City Council to award the Base Bid contract to Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for $529,932; and

WHEREAS, staff is recommending the council to exclude the Alternative Bid from the contract award; and

WHEREAS, funding was not allocated in the City’s approved 2021-2022 Budget thus requiring a revision to add $66,487 to cover the remaining costs of the Project; and

WHEREAS, the revised appropriation constitutes an update to the 2021-2022 Budget approved pursuant to Resolution No. 2021-126.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The plans and specifications for the CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project are hereby approved.

Section 2. The city manager is authorized to enter into a contract with Bockmon & Woody Electric Co., Inc. for the CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project in the amount of $529,932.

Section 3. The city manager is authorized to enter into an escrow agreement for security deposits in lieu of retention for said contract, if requested by the contractor.

Packet Page 44 of 288Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-290

Page 2 ends

Section 4. The council hereby approves the appropriation of $66,487 unrestricted fund balance in Fund 273 transferred to Fund 251 Parks Capital Projects for the CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project, Project 10448.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR
ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK
Packet Page 45 of 288Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

City of Fairfield
Public Works Department

CDBG Linear Park Trail Lighting Project

NAME OF PROJECT
September 27, 2022, 2:00 p.m.

DATE OF BID

NO. BIDDER AMOUNT
1 Bockmon & Woody Electric Co. Inc. Stockton, CA $767,467.00 2 Shane Brown Electric Woodland, CA $998,095.00
3 St. Francis Electric, LLC San Leandro, CA $1,050,432.50 4 ARAM Electric, Inc. San Leandro, CA $1,178,228.86
5 Columbia Electric, Inc. San Leandro, CA $1,211,930.30 6 Bear Electrical Solutions Alviso, CA $1,286,687.50

Engineer’s Estimate $652,424.00

Packet Page 46 of 288Attachment 2 Page 1 of 1

Agenda Item No: 6.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 1, 2022
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Resolution 2022291 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Supporting and Proclaiming November 1319, 2022, “United Against Hate Week” RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
In 2017, “United Against Hate Week” was organized by a number of Bay Area Cities in response to racial intolerance. Since then, 41 Bay Area jurisdictions joined the effort by passing resolutions or proclamations acknowledging and expressing their communitywide support and participation in this weeklong campaign.

DISCUSSION
“United Against Hate Week” is a nationwide movement which was created in 2017 in direct response to the rise in expressions of hate and intolerance. This year, “United Against Hate Week” will take place on November 1319, 2022. The weeklong campaign is a call for 7 days of local civic action by people in our nation and the Bay Area community to stop the hate and intolerance that are a threat to the safety and civility of our neighborhoods, towns, and cities.

In April 2021, City Council adopted two resolutions (202160 and 202178) condemning and denouncing hate crimes, attacks, violence, and discrimination against all people, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, national origin, background, gender or sexual orientation.

By adopting this resolution, the City of Fairfield is expressing a commitment to combat racism, intolerance and hate by encouraging diverse community, faith, advocacy, and school groups to participate and help lead meaningful, locally driven actions every day and especially during “United Against Hate Week.” Staff will also post signage at City facilities to promote this campaign.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
Packet Page 47 of 288

Agenda Item No: 6.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 1, 2022 TO:Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Resolution 2022291 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Supporting andProclaiming November 1319, 2022, “United Against Hate Week”RECOMMENDED ACTIONAdopt resolution.STATEMENT OF ISSUEIn 2017, “United Against Hate Week” was organized by a number of Bay Area Cities in response toracial intolerance. Since then, 41 Bay Area jurisdictions joined the effort by passing resolutions orproclamations acknowledging and expressing their communitywide support and participation in thisweeklong campaign.DISCUSSION“United Against Hate Week” is a nationwide movement which was created in 2017 in direct response tothe rise in expressions of hate and intolerance. This year, “United Against Hate Week” will take place onNovember 1319, 2022. The weeklong campaign is a call for 7 days of local civic action by people inour nation and the Bay Area community to stop the hate and intolerance that are a threat to the safetyand civility of our neighborhoods, towns, and cities. In April 2021, City Council adopted two resolutions (202160 and 202178) condemning anddenouncing hate crimes, attacks, violence, and discrimination against all people, regardless of race,ethnicity, religion, national origin, background, gender or sexual orientation. By adopting this resolution, the City of Fairfield is expressing a commitment to combat racism,intolerance and hate by encouraging diverse community, faith, advocacy, and school groups toparticipate and help lead meaningful, locally driven actions every day and especially during “UnitedAgainst Hate Week.” Staff will also post signage at City facilities to promote this campaign.FINANCIAL IMPACT N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A
ALTERNATIVE ACTION
City Council may choose to not adopt this resolution.

STAFF CONTACT
Karen L. Rees, City Clerk
(707) 4287767
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Proposed Resolution
REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/20/2022 4:13 PM
Packet Page 48 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-291

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD SUPPORTING AND PROCLAIMING NOVEMBER 13-19, 2022, “UNITED AGAINST HATE WEEK”

WHEREAS, the United States is a nation of immigrants, whose strength comes from its diversity; and

WHEREAS, the United States Constitution enshrines equality on all individuals, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or political views; and

WHEREAS, in April 2021, the City Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2021-60 condemning hate crimes, attacks, and attitudes against the Asian-American and Pacific Islander community; and

WHEREAS, in April 2021, the council unanimously adopted Resolution 2021-78 denouncing hate crimes and violence against all persons and reaffirming the city of Fairfield’s commitment to ensure all members of the Fairfield community feel safe and welcome in the city ; and

WHEREAS, education, compassion, and cooperation are key to unlocking understanding and embracing differences between people; and

WHEREAS, the city of Fairfield is dedicated to preventing and opposing hate and intolerance in our community; and

WHEREAS, the city of Fairfield seeks to join other Bay Area, California, communities, and communities across the country in supporting and proclaiming November 13-19, 2022, as “United Against Hate Week,” which is an important step in bridging divisions and strengthening communities.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The City Council hereby proclaims the week of November 13-19, 2022, as “United Against Hate Week” and will support and encourage appropriate educational and community events during the week, and each and every day beyond.

Packet Page 49 of 288Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-291

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 50 of 288Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

Agenda Item No: 8.

AGENDA REPORT
DATE:November 1, 2022
TO:The Mayor and City Council
FROM:David Gassaway, Interim City Manager
SUBJECT:Public Hearing; and
Resolution 2022292 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration (ER2021038) and Approving a General Plan Amendment (GPA2021003) for the 8012 Industrial Center Project Involving Two Industrial Warehouse Buildings on Approximately 19.44 Acres at 300 Chadbourne Road (APNs:
0028750240, 250, 260, 270, 290, and 300); and
First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance 202216 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Amending Chapter 25, Article I of the Fairfield City Code (also Known as the Zoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map) to Rezone Approximately 19.44 Acres at 300 Chadbourne Road (APNs: 0028750240, 250, 260, 270, 290, and 300) from Regional Commercial (CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) District RECOMMENDED ACTION
Hold public hearing; adopt resolution; waive full readings, read by titles only; and introduce ordinance for first reading.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Will Parker of 8012 Industrial Center, LLC requests a General Plan Amendment from Highway and Regional Commercial (CHR) to Limited Industrial (IL) and a Zone Change from Regional Commercial (CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) District to facilitate the development of two industrial buildings at 300 Chadbourne Road (APNs: 0028750240, 250, 260, 270, 290, and 300).

DISCUSSION
On August 24, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC20229 approving Development Review (DR2021016) for the development of two industrial warehouse buildings and associated site improvements on a 19.44acre site at 300 Chadbourne Road. Building 1 (one) will have an area of 103,440 square feet and a height of 42 feet and Building 2 will have a b area of 225,113 square feet and a height of 46 feet. The project site was formerly home to Walmart for which the existing vacant building and site improvements will be demolished as part of the project. Additionally, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Packet Page 51 of 288

General Plan and Zoning Analysis: To facilitate the planned industrial development, the project requires City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment from CHR to IL and approval of a Zone Change from CR District to IL District. The required findings to approve both the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are presented in the attached Resolution and Section 1 of the attached Ordinance.

The project is consistent with the proposed General Plan designation in that it anticipates light and medium industrial activities, including warehousing, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing, and assembly for properties with the IL designation. The General Plan vision for the IL designation is implemented by the IL District. Although no specific operators or users have been identified as part of the project, Zoning Ordinance Table 2511: Industrial District Land Use Regulations would govern future uses that occupy the buildings under the IL District. The project is consistent with the applicable development standards of the Zoning Ordinance, as approved and conditioned.

The project is also consistent with the following General Plan Objectives:
• Objective LU 14:

Develop sufficient employment generating uses to maintain a positive City fiscal condition and housing balance.
• Objective LU 18:

Encourage infill development and compact growth.
• Objective ED 2:

Effectively concentrate industrial and commercial uses. • Objective ED 4:

Select commercial and industrial locations which are convenient, while compatible with the growth and future service needs of the community.
• Objective UD 8:

Encourage and approve infill development that is compatible with the surrounding area.

Environmental Review: Following a review of the project, staff prepared an Initial Study to analyze potential environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on the findings of the Initial Study, potential significant environmental impacts regarding biology, cultural resources, hazards/hazardous materials, transportation, and tribal cultural resources were identified. All the identified environmental impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels through the implementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, attached as Exhibit A of the Resolution, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared for the project in compliance with CEQA requirements.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A
PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
The following public notifications were provided for the November 1, 2022, City Council meeting:
published a public hearing notice in the Daily Republic newspaper on October 21, 2022 and mailed to all persons who own property within 500 feet and the applicant, and posted on the City of Fairfield Planning Division webpage on October 20, 2022. At the time of this writing, the staff has not received Packet Page 52 of 288

Agenda Item No: 8.AGENDA REPORTDATE:November 1, 2022 TO:The Mayor and City CouncilFROM:David Gassaway, Interim City ManagerSUBJECT:Public Hearing; andResolution 2022292 of the City Council of the City of Fairfield Adopting a MitigatedNegative Declaration (ER2021038) and Approving a General Plan Amendment(GPA2021003) for the 8012 Industrial Center Project Involving Two IndustrialWarehouse Buildings on Approximately 19.44 Acres at 300 Chadbourne Road (APNs:0028750240, 250, 260, 270, 290, and 300); andFirst Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance 202216 of the City Council of the Cityof Fairfield Amending Chapter 25, Article I of the Fairfield City Code (also Known as theZoning Ordinance and the Zoning Map) to Rezone Approximately 19.44 Acres at 300Chadbourne Road (APNs: 0028750240, 250, 260, 270, 290, and 300) fromRegional Commercial (CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) DistrictRECOMMENDED ACTIONHold public hearing; adopt resolution; waive full readings, read by titles only; and introduce ordinancefor first reading.STATEMENT OF ISSUEWill Parker of 8012 Industrial Center, LLC requests a General Plan Amendment from Highway andRegional Commercial (CHR) to Limited Industrial (IL) and a Zone Change from Regional Commercial(CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) District to facilitate the development of two industrial buildings at300 Chadbourne Road (APNs: 0028750240, 250, 260, 270, 290, and 300).DISCUSSIONOn August 24, 2022, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC20229 approvingDevelopment Review (DR2021016) for the development of two industrial warehouse buildings andassociated site improvements on a 19.44acre site at 300 Chadbourne Road. Building 1 (one) will havean area of 103,440 square feet and a height of 42 feet and Building 2 will have a b area of 225,113square feet and a height of 46 feet. The project site was formerly home to Walmart for which the existingvacant building and site improvements will be demolished as part of the project. Additionally, thePlanning Commission recommended City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendmentand Zone Change, and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.General Plan and Zoning Analysis: To facilitate the planned industrial development, the project requiresCity Council approval of a General Plan Amendment from CHR to IL and approval of a Zone Changefrom CR District to IL District. The required findings to approve both the General Plan Amendment andZone Change are presented in the attached Resolution and Section 1 of the attached Ordinance.The project is consistent with the proposed General Plan designation in that it anticipates light andmedium industrial activities, including warehousing, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing, andassembly for properties with the IL designation. The General Plan vision for the IL designation isimplemented by the IL District. Although no specific operators or users have been identified as part ofthe project, Zoning Ordinance Table 2511: Industrial District Land Use Regulations would govern futureuses that occupy the buildings under the IL District. The project is consistent with the applicabledevelopment standards of the Zoning Ordinance, as approved and conditioned. The project is also consistent with the following General Plan Objectives:• Objective LU 14: Develop sufficient employment generating uses to maintain a positive City fiscal condition and housingbalance. • Objective LU 18: Encourage infill development and compact growth. • Objective ED 2: Effectively concentrate industrial and commercial uses. • Objective ED 4: Select commercial and industrial locations which are convenient, while compatible with the growth andfuture service needs of the community. • Objective UD 8: Encourage and approve infill development that is compatible with the surrounding area. Environmental Review: Following a review of the project, staff prepared an Initial Study to analyzepotential environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on thefindings of the Initial Study, potential significant environmental impacts regarding biology, culturalresources, hazards/hazardous materials, transportation, and tribal cultural resources were identified. Allthe identified environmental impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels through theimplementation of mitigation measures. Therefore, a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration, attached asExhibit A of the Resolution, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan has been prepared for the project incompliance with CEQA requirements.FINANCIAL IMPACTN/APUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATIONThe following public notifications were provided for the November 1, 2022, City Council meeting:published a public hearing notice in the Daily Republic newspaper on October 21, 2022 and mailed to all persons who own property within 500 feet and the applicant, and posted on the City of Fairfield Planning Division webpage on October 20, 2022. At the time of this writing, the staff has not received any correspondence on the project.

ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
At it's August 24, 2022, meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the project that was duly noticed in the Daily Republic newspaper on August 3, 2022. Following the closure of the public hearing and deliberations, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC20229 in 50 vote, approving the Development Review. The Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The City Council may choose to deny any, or all, of the requests and not adopt the proposed resolution and ordinance. In this case, the 8012 Industrial Center project, as proposed, would not proceed.

STAFF CONTACT
Jonathan Atkinson, Senior Planner
(707) 4287387
[email protected]
COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney's Office, City Manager's Office
ATTACHMENTS:

Description
Proposed Resolution
Exhibit A through B
Proposed Ordinance
Exhibit C
Resolution PC202209_20220824 PC Minutes_PC Staff Report REVIEWERS:

Reviewer Action Date
Beavers, Esther Approved 10/24/2022 3:33 PM
Packet Page 53 of 288

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-292

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ER2021-038) AND APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA2021-003) FOR THE 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER PROJECT INVOLVING TWO INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS ON APPROXIMATELY 19.44 ACRES AT 300 CHADBOURNE ROAD (APNs: 0028-750-240, -250, -260, -270, -290, and -300)

WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, General Plan Amendment (GPA2021 -003), Zone Change (ZC2021-005), Development Review (DR2021-016), and Environmental Review (ER2021-038) applications for a proposed redesignation from Highway and Regional Commercial to Lim ited Industrial and rezone from Regional Commercial (CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) District as part of industrial development with two warehouse buildings totaling 103,440 square feet and 225,113 square feet respectively at 300 Chadbourne Road (APNs: 0028-750-240, -250, -260, -270, -290, and -300) (Project) were properly filed with the Community Development Department in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the official filing of such applications; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on August 24, 2022. City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the proposed Project in staff reports and through oral presentations before the Commission, and the Commission considered all public testimony and information presented during the public hearing regarding this application ; and

WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on November 1, 2022. City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the 80-12 Industrial Center Project in staff reports and through oral presentations before the council; and

WHEREAS, the council has reviewed the proposed revisions to the General Plan Land Use Diagram and finds these revisions beneficial and consistent with the purpose and intent of the General Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the Project that satisfies the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and

WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Project applies to the City Council’s actions as well as the project actions during the public hearing of the Planning Commission on August 24, 2022.

Packet Page 54 of 288Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

RES. NO. 2022-292

Page 2 ends

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD HEREBY RESOLVES:

Section 1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration, as contained in Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

Section 2. The General Plan Amendment, as contained in Exhibit B, is hereby approved.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: PRICE / BERTANI / MOY / PANDURO / TIMM / TONNESEN / VACCARO

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

MAYOR

ATTEST:

____________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 55 of 288Attachment 1 Page 2 of 2

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 1

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

City of Fairfield

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
(GPA2021-003)

LEAD AGENCY: City of Fairfield

NAME OF PROJECT: 80-12 Industrial Center

FILE NUMBER: GPA2021-003, ZC2021-005, DR2021-016, and ER2021-038

PROJECT SPONSOR: 80-12 Industrial Center LLC

PROJECT LOCATION: 300 Chadbourne Road

PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Development of two industrial warehouse buildings and associated site improvements on a 19.44-acre site. Building 1 will have a building area of 103,440 square feet and a height of 42 feet and Building 2 will have a building area of 225,113 square feet and a height of 46 feet. The project site was formerly home to Walmart for which the existing vacant building and site improvements will be demolished as part of the project. The project requires City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment from Highway and Regional Commercial to Limited Industrial and Zone Change from Regional Commercial (CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) District.

SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING: Six parcels of land comprise the 19.44-acre project site at 300 Chadbourne Road. The project site is bounded by Highway 12 to the north and Chadbourne Road to the west. There are existing developments that surround the project site, including auto dealerships across Highway 12 to the north, Jelly Belly to the east, Busch Campus Park to the south, and Sutter Health medical offices across Chadbourne Road to west. The project site is characterized by a large vacant building that was formerly home to Walmart and a surface parking with several mature trees and landscape improvements.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Based upon an initial study prepared for the project, it has been determined that the project may have the following significant environmental impacts, but with the mitigation measures, the potential impacts will be avoided or reduced to insignificant levels.

Potentially significant impacts were identified in the Initial Study for the following environmental topic areas: Biological Resources; Cultural Resources; Hazards/Hazardous Materials; Transportation; and Tribal Cultural Resources. Mitigation measures have been included in the Initial Study as follows.

Packet Page 56 of 288Attachment 2 Page 1 of 87

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 2

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

Biological Resources

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Migratory and Native Resident Nesting Birds

If construction is to be conducted during the breeding season of migratory birds (February 1 to August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction breeding bird survey in areas of suitable habitat (trees and vegetation, and also eaves and other building structures) within 15 days prior to the onset of construction activity. If bird nests are found, appropriate buffer zones shall be established around all active nests to protect nesting adults and their young from direct or indirect impacts related to project construction disturbance. Size of buffer zones shall be determined per recommendations of the qualified biologist based on site conditions and species involved. Buffer zones shall be maintained until it can be documented that either the nest has failed or the young have fledged.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Bat Roosts

The applicant shall conduct a Bat Habitat Assessment of all trees to be removed or trimmed and all structures scheduled for demolition. The Bat Habitat Assessment of the prior Walmart structure shall consist of a visual examination of the exterior and interior surfaces and spaces for suitable entry points, and signs of roosting bats (fecal pellet accumulations, urine or fur staining at entrances, insect prey remains, live or dead bats, characteristic odor, etc.). The Bat Habitat Assessment shall determine the presence of suitable roosting habitat in the form of tree cavities that could harbor colonial bats or exfoliating bark or suitable foliage to support solitary bats. If no bat habitat is found during the assessment, the structure can be demolished, or the tree can be removed or trimmed. If trees or structures contain suitable potential bat habitat, or if the presence of roosting bats is presumed, then additional mitigation shall be implemented as determined by the bat biologist if necessary.

Trees: Scheduled removal of trees with suitable bat habitat shall have a qualified bat biologist present at the time of removal and trimming during seasonal periods of bat activity (March 1 to April 15 or September 1 to October 15). If trees containing suitable potential bat habitat are scheduled for removal outside of these seasonal periods of bat activity, the qualified bat biologist shall conduct a visual survey of all suitable roost features to determine if bats are present, and then remove the tree if bats are not present. If roost features cannot be completely surveyed due to access, cavity depth and uncertainty remains regarding the potential presence of roosting bats, the removal of the subject tree shall be delayed until the appropriate seasonal period of bat activity cycle is completed as verified under the supervision by the qualified bat biologist.

Structures: If structures are found to contain suitable potential roost habitat or signs of past or present use by bats, or the presence of roosting bats is presumed, a detailed visual survey or night emergence survey shall be conducted to verify the absence of bats. Night emergence surveys can only be conducted when bats are active. Buildings containing bats or signs of past or present use by bats shall require either humane eviction (installation of blockage materials and Packet Page 57 of 288Attachment 2 Page 2 of 87

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 3

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

one-way exits), or partial dismantling, and only during seasonal periods of bat activity between March 1 to April 15 or between September 1 to October 15.

Mitigation BIO-3: Tree Preservation and Relocation

A. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall provide a detailed mitigation plan. The plan shall address the following issues:

1. Mitigation of potential impacts on preserved protected trees. If construction activities could impact protected trees which are to be preserved, the applicant shall provide a mitigation plan that indicates construction practices, tree care measures, irrigation methods, if any, aeration techniques, retaining walls and other grading improvements, and other measures which could increase the survival rates of trees to be saved. All construction projects that would impact the area underneath a protected tree’s dripline shall comply with City standards for acceptable construction practices adopted by the Planning Commission with the advice of the Open Space Commission.

2. Mitigation of trees removed during development.

a. On-site mitigation. When on-site mitigation is proposed, the plan shall indicate tree planting locations, size, and species of trees to be planted, and planting and irrigation methods.

b. Off-site mitigation. Because removal of protected trees has neighborhood and citywide impacts, as well as site-specific impacts, off-site mitigation is appropriate to help preserve the City’s overall quality of life and tree resources. Mitigation measures help preserve the extent and value of the City’s public and private tree resources. Off-site mitigation may be appropriate when on-site mitigation is not possible, when another site is available and preferred for mitigation planting, and a reasonable relationship exists between the impacts being created as a result of the tree removal and the benefits of the off-site mitigation. The Department of Community Development may approve one or both of the following two options for off-site mitigation:

1. The applicant implements a specific mitigation plan for an off-site location approved by the City which incorporates planting, irrigation, and monitoring (and replacement) for a five year period. The City may require a deposit to ensure that maintenance activities are implemented.

2. If a specific site has not been identified, the applicants may pay an in-lieu fee equal to the reasonable expenses incurred by the City or its contractors in installing off-site mitigation trees.

Packet Page 58 of 288Attachment 2 Page 3 of 87

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 4

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

Cultural Resources

Mitigation Measure CR-1: Archaeological Resources

If prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during grading and trenching activities, work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and make recommendations for mitigation to be followed by the applicant.

Adverse effects to such deposits shall be avoided. If such deposits cannot be avoided, it shall be determined, by a qualified archaeologist or equally qualified professional, whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If they are eligible, they shall be avoided, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated.

Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, thorough recording on Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 records (DPR523) or data recovery excavation. If data recovery excavation is selected, the excavation shall be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to the City of Fairfield and the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) (CCR Title 14(3) 15126.(b)(3)(C)).

Mitigation Measure CR-2: Archaeological Remains

If archaeological remains are discovered during grading activities, work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an Archeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If human remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of identification. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results and provide recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report shall be submitted to the City of Fairfield and the Northwest Information Center.

Hazards/Hazardous Materials

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Soil Management Plan

Should the project site’s future construction activities include excavating soil from beneath the existing Walmart TLE surface-grade and basement level concrete slab for offsite disposal, specific handling, waste characterization, and off-site disposal procedures shall be required. The project proponent shall prepare a project-specific Soil Management Plan (SMP) detailing these procedures prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Packet Page 59 of 288Attachment 2 Page 4 of 87

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 5

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

Transportation

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: Bikeway and Pedestrian Improvements

The project proponent, in coordination with City staff, shall implement proposed bikeway and pedestrian improvements to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impacts. Should the City adopt a VMT mitigation bank program or trip credit program, the appropriate fees or credits can be applied to the project.

Mitigation Measure TRA-2: Transportation Demand Management

The project proponent, in coordination with City staff, shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. The pedestrian-oriented design TDM measure shall be implemented on the front end by the developer, while ongoing TDM measures, including transit pass subsidies, commute marketing program, and carpool/vanpool incentives, shall be implemented and managed by the designated TDM Coordinator. An annual monitoring program shall be implemented to measure the TDM Program outcomes. To measure the TDM Program’s commute VMT reductions and mode share, a commute survey shall be administered to employees by the site occupant. In addition, traffic counts at the project driveways shall be collected and compared to the Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimated trip generation for the project site’s specific use. If the commute survey and project trip count data find that the project’s trip generation is at least five percent less than the ITE estimated trip generation, then the project’s TDM goal will be met. If the project’s TDM goal is not met, the project shall pay penalty fees as agreed upon with the City at the project approval stage.

Tribal Cultural Resources

Mitigation Measure TC-1: Cultural Sensitivity Training

Due to the possibility of archeological resources on the project site, the City of Fairfield shall require a note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources, including prehistoric Native American burials.

Prior to groundbreaking, construction personnel associated with earth moving equipment, drilling, grading, and excavating, shall be provided with basic archaeological and cultural sensitivity training conducted by a qualified archaeologist and in consultation with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. Issues to be included in the basic training shall be geared toward training the applicable construction crews in the identification of archaeological deposits and tribal cultural resources. Training shall include written notification of the restrictions regarding disturbance and/or removal of any portion of archaeological deposits and the proper procedures to follow should a resource be identified. The project applicant shall inform the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation of the project construction schedule and allow for a Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation tribal monitor to be present at the project site during any ground disturbance activities in native Packet Page 60 of 288Attachment 2 Page 5 of 87

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 6

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

soil, to ensure such activities do not negatively impact cultural resources. The tribal monitor shall also be provided an opportunity to attend the pre-construction briefing. The construction contractor, or its designee, shall be responsible for implementation of this measure.

Mitigation Measure TC-2: Protocol for Inadvertent Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources

If archaeological remains or tribal cultural resources are uncovered, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius shall be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the tribal monitor, can evaluate whether the resource requires further study.

The City shall require that the applicant include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered archaeological resources are found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Prehistoric archaeological site indicators include but are not limited to: obsidian and chert flakes and chipped stone tools; grinding and mashing implements (e.g., slabs and handstones, and mortars and pestles); bedrock outcrops and boulders with mortar cups; and locally darkened midden soils. Midden soils may contain a combination of any of the previously listed items with the possible addition of bone and shell remains, and fire-affected stones. Historic period site indicators generally include but are not limited to: fragments of glass, ceramic, and metal objects; milled and split lumber; and structure and feature remains such as building foundations and discrete trash deposits (e.g., wells, privy pits, dumps). If the resource is determined to be significant under CEQA, the City and a qualified archaeologist shall determine whether preservation in place is feasible. Such preservation in place is the preferred mitigation. If such preservation is infeasible, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan for the resource. The archaeologist shall also conduct appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive written report and file it with the appropriate information center (California Historical Resources Information System [CHRIS]), and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. For any tribal cultural resources found during the ground disturbance activities, the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation shall be immediately notified, and the appropriate treatment method for the uncovered resources shall be determined by the City and archaeologist in consultation with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation and its Yocha Dehe Treatment Protocol.

The treatment of human remains and any associated or unassociated funerary objects discovered during any soil-disturbing activity within the project site shall comply with applicable State laws.

This shall include immediate notification of the Solano County Coroner and the City of Fairfield of the discovery of any human remains.

EXHIBIT A
PAGE 7

S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\3 GPA2021-003 MND.docx

associated grave goods as provided in PRC Section 5097.98. Development activity on the impacted site will halt until the landowner has conferred with the MLD about their recommendations for treatment of the remains, and the coroner has determined that the remains are not subject to investigation under California Government Code Section 27491.

The project applicant, archaeological consultant, and MLD shall make all reasonable efforts to develop an agreement for the treatment, with appropriate dignity, of human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d)). The agreement should take into consideration the appropriate excavation, removal, recordation, analysis, custodianship, curation, and final disposition of the human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects. The California PRC allows 48 hours to reach an agreement on these matters. If the MLD and the other parties do not agree on the reburial method, the project will follow PRC Section 5097.98(b) which states that ". . . the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall reinter the human remains and items associated with Native American burials with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.”

DETERMINATION: On ______________, the City Council of the City of Fairfield determined that the proposed project, as submitted, will not have a significant effect on the environment, including any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources.

The Initial Study was prepared by the Community Development Department, City of Fairfield. A copy of the Initial Study is attached. Additional information may be obtained at the Community Development Department, Fairfield City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Second Floor, Fairfield, California 94533.

______________________________
MAYOR

ATTEST:

______________________________

CITY CLERK

Packet Page 62 of 288Attachment 2 Page 7 of 87

PAGE 1
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

NAME OF PROJECT: 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER

MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND COMPLIANCE RECORD
FILE NO.: GPA2021-003, ZC22021-005, DR2021-016, & ER2021-038 INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: Jonathan Atkinson, Senior Planner DATE: APPLICANT: 80-12 Industrial Center LLC

MITIGATION PLAN COMPLIANCE RECORD

MITIGATION

MEASURE

DEPARTMENT

ACTION(S)

REQUIRED

REQUIRED TIME

OF COMPLIANCE

ACTION TAKEN

VERIFIED
BY/DEPT.

DATE
BIO-1: Migratory
and Native
Resident Nesting
Birds
Community
Development
If construction is to be conducted during the breeding season of migratory birds (February 1 to August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre- construction breeding bird survey in areas of suitable habitat (trees and vegetation, and also eaves and other building structures) within 15 days prior to the onset of construction activity. If bird nests are found, appropriate buffer zones shall be established around all active nests to protect nesting adults and their young from direct or indirect impacts related to project construction disturbance. Size of buffer zones shall be determined per recommendations of the qualified biologist based on site conditions and species involved. Buffer zones shall be maintained until it can be documented that either the nest has failed or the young have fledged.

Within 15 days
prior to the onset
of project
construction
activity

BIO-2: Bat Roosts Community
Development
The applicant shall conduct a Bat Habitat Assessment of all trees to be removed or trimmed and all structures scheduled for demolition. The Bat Habitat Assessment of the prior Walmart structure shall consist of a visual examination of the exterior and interior surfaces and spaces for suitable entry points, and signs of roosting bats (fecal pellet accumulations, urine or fur staining at entrances, insect prey remains, live or dead bats, characteristic odor, etc.). The Bat Habitat Assessment shall determine the presence of suitable roosting habitat in the form of tree cavities that could harbor colonial bats or exfoliating bark or suitable foliage to support solitary bats. If no bat habitat is found during the assessment, the structure can be demolished, or the tree can be removed or trimmed. If trees or structures contain suitable potential bat habitat, or if the presence of roosting bats is presumed, then additional mitigation shall be implemented as determined by the bat biologist if necessary.

Trees: Scheduled removal of trees with suitable bat habitat shall have a qualified bat biologist present at the time of removal and trimming during seasonal periods of bat activity (March 1 to April 15 or September 1 to October 15). If trees containing suitable potential bat habitat are scheduled for removal outside of these seasonal periods of bat activity, the qualified bat biologist shall conduct a visual survey of all suitable roost features to determine if bats are present, and then remove the tree if bats are not present. If roost features cannot be completely surveyed due to Prior to issuance
of a grading
permit or building
permit

Packet Page 63 of 288Attachment 2 Page 8 of 87

PAGE 2
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

MITIGATION

MEASURE

DEPARTMENT

ACTION(S)

REQUIRED

REQUIRED TIME

OF COMPLIANCE

ACTION TAKEN

VERIFIED
BY/DEPT.

DATE
access, cavity depth and uncertainty remains regarding the potential presence of roosting bats, the removal of the subject tree shall be delayed until the appropriate seasonal period of bat activity cycle is completed as verified under the supervision by the qualified bat biologist.

BIO-3: Tree
Preservation and
Relocation
Community
Development
A. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall provide a detailed mitigation plan. The plan shall address the following issues:

2. Mitigation of trees removed during development.

a. On-site mitigation. When on-site mitigation is proposed, the plan shall indicate tree planting locations, size, and species of trees to be planted, and planting and irrigation methods.

Mitigation measures help preserve the extent and value of the City’s public and private tree resources. Off-site
mitigation may be appropriate when on-site mitigation is not possible, when another site is available and preferred Prior to issuance
of a grading
permit or building
permit

Packet Page 64 of 288Attachment 2 Page 9 of 87

PAGE 3
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

MITIGATION

MEASURE

DEPARTMENT

ACTION(S)

REQUIRED

REQUIRED TIME

OF COMPLIANCE

ACTION TAKEN

VERIFIED
BY/DEPT.

DATE
for mitigation planting, and a reasonable relationship
exists between the impacts being created as a result of the tree removal and the benefits of the off-site mitigation.

The Department of Community Development may approve
one or both of the following two options for off-site
mitigation:

1. The applicant implements a specific mitigation plan
for an off-site location approved by the City which
incorporates planting, irrigation, and monitoring (and
replacement) for a five year period. The City may
require a deposit to ensure that maintenance
activities are implemented.

2. If a specific site has not been identified, the
applicants may pay an in-lieu fee equal to the
reasonable expenses incurred by the City or its
contractors in installing off-site mitigation trees.

CR-1:

Archaeological
Resources
Community
Development
If prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during grading and trenching activities, work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and make recommendations for mitigation to be followed by the applicant. Adverse effects to such deposits shall be avoided. If such deposits cannot be avoided, it shall be determined, by a qualified archaeologist or equally qualified professional, whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA. If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If they are eligible, they shall be avoided, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated.

During project
construction

CR-2:

Archaeological
Remains
Community
Development
If archaeological remains are discovered during grading activities, work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an Archeologist shall be contacted to assess the situation. If human remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of identification. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

During project
construction

Packet Page 65 of 288Attachment 2 Page 10 of 87

PAGE 4
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

MITIGATION

MEASURE

DEPARTMENT

ACTION(S)

REQUIRED

REQUIRED TIME

OF COMPLIANCE

ACTION TAKEN

VERIFIED
BY/DEPT.

DATE

Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results and provide
recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report shall be submitted to the City of Fairfield and the Northwest Information Center.

HAZ-1: Soil
Management
Plan
Public Works,
Community
Development
Should the project site’s future construction activities include excavating soil from beneath the existing Walmart TLE surface-grade and basement level concrete slab for offsite disposal, specific handling, waste characterization, and off-site disposal procedures shall be required. The project proponent shall prepare a project-specific Soil Management Plan (SMP) detailing these procedures prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Prior to issuance
of a grading
permit

TRA-1: Bikeway
and Pedestrian
Improvements
Public Works,
Community
Development
The project proponent, in coordination with City staff, shall implement proposed bikeway and pedestrian improvements to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impacts. Should the City adopt a VMT mitigation bank program or trip credit program, the appropriate fees or credits can be applied to the project.

During project
design and
construction

TRA-2:

Transportation
Demand
Management
Public Works The project proponent, in coordination with City staff, shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. The pedestrian- oriented design TDM measure shall be implemented on the front end by the developer, while ongoing TDM measures, including transit pass subsidies, commute marketing program, and carpool/vanpool incentives, shall be implemented and managed by the designated TDM Coordinator.

An annual monitoring program shall be implemented to measure the TDM Program outcomes. To measure the TDM Program’s commute VMT reductions and mode share, a commute survey shall be administered to employees by the site occupant. In addition, traffic counts at the project driveways shall be collected and compared to the Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimated trip generation for the project site’s specific use. If the commute survey and project trip count data find that the project’s trip generation is at least five percent less than the ITE estimated trip generation, then the project’s TDM goal will be met. If the project’s TDM goal is not met, the project shall pay penalty fees as agreed upon with the City at the project approval stage.

During ongoing
project
operations

TC-1: Cultural
Sensitivity
Training
Community
Development
Due to the possibility of archeological resources on the project site, the City of Fairfield shall require a note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources, including prehistoric Native American burials.

Packet Page 66 of 288Attachment 2 Page 11 of 87

PAGE 5
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

MITIGATION

MEASURE

DEPARTMENT

ACTION(S)

REQUIRED

REQUIRED TIME

OF COMPLIANCE

ACTION TAKEN

VERIFIED
BY/DEPT.

DATE
training the applicable construction crews in the identification of archaeological deposits and tribal cultural resources. Training shall include written notification of the restrictions regarding disturbance and/or removal of any portion of archaeological deposits and the proper procedures to follow should a resource be identified. The project applicant shall inform the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation of the project construction schedule and allow for a Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation tribal monitor to be present at the project site during any ground disturbance activities in native soil, to ensure such activities do not negatively impact cultural resources. The tribal monitor shall also be provided an opportunity to attend the pre-construction briefing. The construction contractor, or its designee, shall be responsible for implementation of this measure.

TC-2: Protocol for
Inadvertent
Discovery of
Tribal Cultural
Resources
Community
Development
If archaeological remains or tribal cultural resources are uncovered, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius shall be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the tribal monitor, can evaluate whether the resource requires further study. The City shall require that the applicant include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement.

Any previously undiscovered archaeological resources are found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Prehistoric archaeological site indicators include but are not limited to: obsidian and chert flakes and chipped stone tools; grinding and mashing implements (e.g., slabs and handstones, and mortars and pestles); bedrock outcrops and boulders with mortar cups; and locally darkened midden soils. Midden soils may contain a combination of any of the previously listed items with the possible addition of bone and shell remains, and fire-affected stones.

Historic period site indicators generally include but are not limited to:
fragments of glass, ceramic, and metal objects; milled and split lumber; and structure and feature remains such as building foundations and discrete trash deposits (e.g., wells, privy pits, dumps). If the resource is determined to be significant under CEQA, the City and a qualified archaeologist shall determine whether preservation in place is feasible.

Such preservation in place is the preferred mitigation. If such preservation is infeasible, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan for the resource.

The archaeologist shall also conduct appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive written report and file it with the appropriate information center (California Historical Resources Information System [CHRIS]), and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials. For any tribal cultural resources found during the ground disturbance activities, the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation shall be immediately notified, and the appropriate treatment method for the uncovered resources shall be determined by the City and archaeologist in consultation with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation and its Yocha Dehe Treatment Protocol.

During project
construction

Packet Page 67 of 288Attachment 2 Page 12 of 87

PAGE 6
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

MITIGATION

MEASURE

DEPARTMENT

ACTION(S)

REQUIRED

REQUIRED TIME

OF COMPLIANCE

ACTION TAKEN

VERIFIED
BY/DEPT.

DATE

The treatment of human remains and any associated or unassociated funerary objects discovered during any soil-disturbing activity within the project site shall comply with applicable State laws. This shall include immediate notification of the Solano County Coroner and the City of Fairfield of the discovery of any human remains.

In the event of the Coroner's determination that the human remains are Native American, the coroner must contact the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC shall identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) of the deceased Native American (PRC Section 5097.98). The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for the means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in PRC Section 5097.98. Development activity on the impacted site will halt until the landowner has conferred with the MLD about their recommendations for treatment of the remains, and the coroner has determined that the remains are not subject to investigation under California Government Code Section 27491.

The project applicant, archaeological consultant, and MLD shall make all reasonable efforts to develop an agreement for the treatment, with appropriate dignity, of human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d)). The agreement should take into consideration the appropriate excavation, removal, recordation, analysis, custodianship, curation, and final disposition of the human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects. The California PRC allows 48 hours to reach agreement on these matters. If the MLD and the other parties do not agree on the reburial method, the project will follow PRC Section 5097.98(b) which states that ". . . the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall reinter the human remains and items associated with Native American burials with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.”
Packet Page 68 of 288Attachment 2 Page 13 of 87

PAGE 1
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION
AB 3180 (Public Resources Code section 21081.6) requires public agencies to adopt a reporting or monitoring program whenever: a) a Negative Declaration which incorporates mitigation measures is adopted for a project; and b) after certifying an EIR, CEQA findings are adopted which concludes that otherwise significant impacts will be substantially lessened or avoided through the adoption of mitigation measures.

The following procedures shall be followed to ensure compliance with AB 3180. Please note that these procedures are intended to cover all project categories (private or public) and all stages of a project when monitoring or reporting may be required. A typical mitigation or monitoring program will consist of the checklist (Appendix "A"), the General Provisions, and appropriate portions of the section titled "Types of project and mitigation and their monitoring/reporting procedures." The monitoring or reporting program may be attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration or EIR findings and made a part of that document.

The CEQA Guidelines require mitigation of "significant impacts", except where findings of overriding significance are made. Unless this threshold of "significant impact" is reached, it is advisable to address project issues as conditions of project approval outside the CEQA process.

Mitigation measures must be written in very clear language, and must specify what, who, when, where, and if possible, the why.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

A. Checklist: All mitigation measures for a Negative Declaration or EIR shall be incorporated into the attached checklist for the purpose of monitoring or reporting their implementation.

B. Disagreement over the interpretation of a mitigation condition: Where staff and the applicant cannot agree on the exact meaning of a mitigation condition, the matter shall be referred to the Community Development Director. The applicant shall have the right to appeal the Director's interpretation to the Planning Commission.

C. Reporting: All reports submitted by the developer and consultant shall be under the penalty of perjury.

D. Records: All records pertaining to a Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be kept in the project file at the offices of the Community Development Department.

Packet Page 69 of 288Attachment 2 Page 14 of 87

PAGE 2
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

E. Fees: For private projects, the applicant shall bear the cost of monitoring and/or reporting.

Fees charged for staff time shall be established by City Council Resolution. Where necessary, the applicant will be required to deposit a lump sum with the Community Development Department. Monitoring costs will be debited against said deposit. For public projects where fees are not charged, the cost of monitoring shall be borne by the Department responsible for the project.

F. Penalties: If an applicant fails to properly implement mitigation measures, the Community Development Director the appropriate City Department may issue a stop-work order, or deny subsequent approvals necessary to complete and occupy the project. In some cases, the City may require performance bonds or letters of credit to ensure that mitigation conditions are properly implemented. The amount of such bonds or letters of credit shall be determined by the Community Development Director. Failure to implement mitigation measures or to furnish required mitigation reports may be cause for suspension or revocation of a permit or the basis for legal action by the City to enforce compliance with the mitigation measure or reporting requirement.

TYPES OF PROJECTS AND MITIGATION AND THEIR MONITORING/REPORTING PROCEDURES:

Private Projects

A. Conditions affecting permanent construction. These conditions affect the permanent design and location of a structure. Examples include limiting building height, requiring a setback, or providing a landscape buffer.

• The department applying the condition signs off on the mitigation condition(s) before the building permit is issued, verifying that the plans conform with the condition(s).

• The building inspector ensures that construction conforms with approved plans.

• Affected department signs off on the mitigation condition(s) before final inspection/occupancy, verifying that the project conforms to the mitigation condition(s).

B. Conditions during construction. These conditions affect the way construction is carried out.

Examples will be hours of operation, erosion control plans, preservation of archaeological sites, and preservation and protection of marshes.

• Responsibility for monitoring and reporting shall be placed on the applicant. The City department which imposed the condition will investigate complaints and review reports that are submitted. City inspectors should be informed about mitigation conditions so they can report obvious violations.

• Reporting by applicant shall be under penalty of perjury.

Packet Page 70 of 288Attachment 2 Page 15 of 87

PAGE 3
S:\Planning\PC Meetings\PC-2022\22-08-24\Item A - 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER\4 GPA2021-003 MMRP.docx

C. Operational Conditions. These require permanent monitoring/reporting on a regular basis.

Examples will include: hours of operation, maximum occupancy, toxic handling and disposal, and limits on nuisances like noise and odors.

• The burden would be placed on the applicant to provide reports to the City as required.

The content and frequency of the reports would be specified as part of the conditions.

Specialized inspectors may be required.

• Failure to implement an operational mitigation measure or to furnish required mitigation reports may be cause for suspension or revocation of a permit or the basis for legal action by the City to enforce compliance with the mitigation measure or reporting requirement.

• Reporting shall be under penalty of perjury.

• The City may enter into agreement with another agency to monitor compliance (e.g. Fish and Game for creek conditions; County Health for toxins).

• Code enforcement officer, planning staff, appropriate City staff will investigate complaints, and also ensure that reports are submitted as required to the Community Development Department.

Packet Page 71 of 288Attachment 2 Page 16 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 1

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
Initial Study Questionnaire

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Project title: 80-12 Industrial Center Project
Contact Person: Jonathan Atkinson, Senior Planner
(707) 428-7387
[email protected]

Project Sponsor’s
Name and Address: 80-12 Industrial Center LLC
415 Mission Street, 45th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105

General Plan Designation: Highway and Regional Commercial (CHR) Zoning: Commercial Retail (CR)
Project Location: 300 Chadbourne Road

Longitude/Latitude: "N” 38°14'17.76"N "W” 122° 4'52.02"W Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 028-750-240, -250, -260, -270, -290 and -300

Highway 12
Packet Page 72 of 288Attachment 2 Page 17 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 2 AVAILABILITY OF DOCUMENT: This document is available for review at:
1000 Webster St, 2nd fl., Fairfield, CA; 8am-12pm, 1-5:30pm; Monday-Thursday, and the second, fourth, and fifth Fridays of each month.

Packet Page 73 of 288Attachment 2 Page 18 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 3 Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity
Packet Page 74 of 288Attachment 2 Page 19 of 87

80-12 Industrial Center Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationRegional Vicinity Exhibit 1
°
Source: Google Earth

NOT TO SCALE
Packet Page 75 of 288Attachment 2 Page 20 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 4 Exhibit 2: Project Vicinity

Packet Page 76 of 288Attachment 2 Page 21 of 87

80-12 Industrial Center Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationProject Vicinity Exhibit 2
°
Source: Google Earth

NOT TO SCALE
Packet Page 77 of 288Attachment 2 Page 22 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 5 Exhibit 3a: Conceptual Site Plan
Packet Page 78 of 288Attachment 2 Page 23 of 87

80-12 Industrial Center Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Conceptual Site Plan
Exhibit 3a
°
Source: HPA Architecture

NOT TO SCALE
Packet Page 79 of 288Attachment 2 Page 24 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 6 Exhibit 3b: Conceptual Site Plan, cont’d
Packet Page 80 of 288Attachment 2 Page 25 of 87

80-12 Industrial Center Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Conceptual Site Plan, cont'd
Exhibit 3b
°
Source: HPA Architecture

NOT TO SCALE
Packet Page 81 of 288Attachment 2 Page 26 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 7 Exhibit 4: Building 1 Elevation

Packet Page 82 of 288Attachment 2 Page 27 of 87

80-12 Industrial Center Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationBuilding 1 Elevation Exhibit 4
°
Source: HPA Architecture

NOT TO SCALE
Packet Page 83 of 288Attachment 2 Page 28 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 8 Exhibit 5: Building 2 Elevation
Packet Page 84 of 288Attachment 2 Page 29 of 87

80-12 Industrial Center Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationBuilding 2 Elevation Exhibit 5
°
Source: HPA Architecture

NOT TO SCALE
Packet Page 85 of 288Attachment 2 Page 30 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 9 OTHER PUBLIC AGENCY APPROVALS: N/A
TRIBAL NOTIFICATION: Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Yes No
NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation.

Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below could be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Less than Significant with Mitigation” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

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

Packet Page 86 of 288Attachment 2 Page 31 of 87

DETERMINATIONOn the basis of this initial evaluation:f I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have beenmade by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION willbe prepared.f I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and anENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentiallysignificant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has beenadequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described onattached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze onlythe effects that remain to be addressed.I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlierEIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have beenavoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, includingrevisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothingfurther is required.i*ob-os /oE /zozztofl attlan Atkinson, Senior PlannerDateS:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 lndustrial CenteACEQA\GPA2021-003 lS 2022-08-03.docx Page 10Packet Page 87 of 288Attachment 2 Page 32 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 11

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) A “Mitigated Negative Declaration” (Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated) applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA § 15063(c)(3)(D)). References to an earlier analysis should:
a) Identify the earlier analysis and state where it is available for review. b) Identify which effects from the environmental checklist were adequately analyzed in the earlier document, pursuant to applicable legal standards, and whether these effects were adequately addressed by mitigation measures included in that analysis. c) Describe the mitigation measures in this document that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and indicate to what extent they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

Packet Page 88 of 288Attachment 2 Page 33 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 12 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

Packet Page 89 of 288Attachment 2 Page 34 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 13 ISSUES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS – Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
X
Discussion: According to the City’s adopted Scenic Vistas and Roadways Plan (adopted in 1999), the project site is not located near an identified “Scenic Vista” or along an identified “Scenic Roadway.” The nearest scenic roadway, Cordelia Road, is approximately 0.63-mile south of the project site. Views of the project site from Cordelia Road are currently blocked by existing light industrial buildings located in between the project site and Cordelia Road. In addition, there are no officially designated State scenic highways in the City. The nearest scenic highway is State Route 29 (SR-29) (designated as eligible for listing), which is located 12.5 miles west of the project site in Napa County.1 Views of the project site are not afforded from SR-29 due to intervening topography, structures, and vegetation. Thus, the project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a State scenic highway.

As the project is located in an urbanized area, existing sources of light and glare typically come from vehicles traveling on adjacent roadways, streetlights, exterior lighting on surrounding buildings, and reflection from windows and roofs on the surrounding commercial/industrial development. The project is consistent with the applicable standards for development under the Zoning Ordinance and the City’s Design and Development Guidelines for industrial projects, as proposed and conditioned. In addition, the City requires, as a standard condition, that lighting be

1 California Department of Transportation State Scenic Highway System Map. nd. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa Accessed July 19, 2022.

Packet Page 90 of 288Attachment 2 Page 35 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 14 of appropriate intensity and shielded to avoid unreasonable impacts to surrounding property.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(Source 1)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
II. 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
Dept. 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 forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols
adopted by the California Air Resources Board. -- Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
Packet Page 91 of 288Attachment 2 Page 36 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 15

Discussion: The project site is located in an area designated as Urban and Built-Up Land on the California Department of Conservation Important Farmland Finder map for Solano County.2 The project site and adjacent land are not designated as farmland in any statewide study, nor do they involve any Williamson Act contracts. Furthermore, the project site is already developed and is not located in a forested area that would result in the conversion of forest land into a non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.
(Source 2)

2 California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ , accessed July 19, 2022.

Packet Page 92 of 288Attachment 2 Page 37 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 16

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
III. 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. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
Discussion: The project site is located along the northeastern portion of the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB). The SFBAAB includes all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties as well as the southern half of Sonoma County and the southwestern portion of Solano County. Fairfield has a semi-arid temperate climate. The annual average minimum temperature is 47°F in Fairfield. July is usually the warmest month with annual average maximum temperatures around 73°F. Fairfield gets, on average, over 23 inches of precipitation annually (Western Regional Climate Center). The region averages approximately 30 inches of rain per year, with most of the rain falling during winter. Fog from nearby marshes and bays is common during winter. The prevailing wind in the region is from the southwest through the Carquinez Strait and wind speeds average 20-45 miles per hour.

Air pollutants of concern in the air basin are primarily generated by three categories of sources:
mobile, stationary, and area sources. Mobile sources refer to operational and evaporative emissions from motor vehicles. Stationary sources include “point sources” which have one or more emission sources at a single facility. Point sources are usually associated with manufacturing and industrial uses and include sources such as refinery boilers or combustion equipment that produces electricity or process heat. Area sources include sources that produce widely distributed emissions. Examples of area sources include residential water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and consumer products, such as lighter fluid or hair spray. Criteria air pollutants (listed in the following section) are defined as pollutants for which the federal and state governments have established ambient air quality standards for outdoor concentrations. The federal and State standards have been set at levels Packet Page 93 of 288Attachment 2 Page 38 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 17 above which concentrations could be harmful to human health and welfare. These standards are designed to protect the most sensitive persons such as children, pregnant women, and the elderly, from illness or discomfort.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the State agency responsible for ensuring implementation of the California Clean Air Act (CAA), setting the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS), and overseeing air quality planning and control throughout the state. The California CAA established a legal mandate for air basins to achieve the CAAQS by the earliest practical date. These standards apply to the following 10 criteria pollutants: ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5), particulate matter ten microns or less in diameter (PM10), and lead (Pb), visibility-reducing particles, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. CARB is also responsible for designating air basin areas of the State as ‘attainment’, ‘nonattainment’, or ‘unclassified’ based on the 10 criteria pollutants per State standards. The air quality of a region is considered to be in attainment of the State standards if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for O3, CO, NO2, PM10, PM2.5, SO2 (1-and 24-hour), and lead are not exceeded, and all other standards are not equaled or exceeded at any time in any consecutive three-year period.

The SFBAAB is considered in non-attainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 with regards to standards established by the State of California. Management of air quality in the SFBAAB is the responsibility of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). Specifically, the BAAQMD has responsibility for monitoring ambient air pollutant levels throughout the air basin area and developing and implementing attainment strategies to ensure that future emissions will be within federal and State standards. The following plans have been developed by the BAAQMD to achieve attainment of the federal and state ozone standards:
• The Clean Air Plan (CAP) and Ozone Strategy fulfill the planning requirements of the California CAA.

• The Ozone Attainment Plan fulfills the federal CAA requirements.

In addition to the aforementioned plans, the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (“BAAQMD Guidelines”) set forth methodologies and quantitative significance thresholds that a lead agency may use to estimate and evaluate the significance of a project’s air emissions and health risks posed to nearby sensitive receptors.

Air quality impacts were evaluated in accordance with the methodologies recommended by CARB and the BAAQMD. Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled by technical consultants using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2016.3.2 (CalEEMod). Average daily emissions from project construction and from operational activities were calculated, including both on-site and off-site activities. According to Table 8, Construction Phase Daily Emissions and Table 9, Construction Phase Annual Emissions of the Air Quality and Climate Change Impact Assessment (Appendix A), neither the project’s construction nor net operational emissions would exceed the BAAQMD Guidelines thresholds for any criteria air pollutants, nor would the proposed project produce cumulatively considerable emissions of Packet Page 94 of 288Attachment 2 Page 39 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 18 nonattainment pollutants since the project would not exceed regional thresholds. Quantitative assessments of these discussed emissions, as well as CalEEMod projected construction equipment and methods, can be reviewed in the Air Quality and Climate Change Impact Assessment (Appendix A). Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

Neighboring properties are primarily industrial and commercial with some residential to the northeast but separated from the project site by SR-12. Given the lack of significant criteria pollutant impacts and lack of industrial sources in the project, the public exposures to project- generated pollutants would be of minimal concentration and toxicity. Therefore, the project impact on sensitive receptors would be less than significant.

The project does not involve other emissions that may affect a substantial number of people. The land uses that would comprise the project are not found in the Odor Screening Distances table in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, the project impact from other emissions that would affect a substantial number of people would be less than significant. (Source 3)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
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 or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have 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?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
X
Packet Page 95 of 288Attachment 2 Page 40 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 19

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
X
Discussion: The project site is bounded by Highway 12 to the north and Chadbourne Road to the west. There are existing developments that surround the project site, including auto dealerships across Highway 12 to the north, Jelly Belly to the east, Busch Campus Park to the south, and Sutter Health medical offices across Chadbourne Road to west. Vegetation on the property consists of a variety of planted trees and weedy and non-native grassland species and landscaping species common in disturbed urban sites.

The project site is in Covered Urban Zone 1 and therefore would be subject to the Solano Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) conservation measures. Figure 3-6 of the Solano HCP, Vegetation and Cover Types, as prepared by the Solano County Water Agency (SCWA), shows the site as “Developed” and not included within any of the mapped vegetation cover types. The nearest vegetation cover type mapped in the Solano HCP are nearby areas designated as Valley Floor Grassland Conservation Area.

A Biological Evaluation was prepared for the project site, which evaluates the site for impacts on special-status species. Special-status species are plant and animal species that meet the CEQA Guidelines definition of endangered, threatened, or rare (CEQA Guidelines §15380); species listed pursuant to California Endangered Species Act (CESA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), or Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA). Refer to Tables 1 and 2 of the Biological Evaluation (Appendix B-1) for additional information.

According to the Biological Evaluation, the project would not result in any significant adverse impacts on special-status plant or animal species and would not substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare, endangered, or threatened species of fauna. None of the special- status plant or animal species discussed in Tables 1 and 2 of the Biological Evaluation have the potential to occur at the project site.

Packet Page 96 of 288Attachment 2 Page 41 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 20 Special-Status Plants. All the special-status plant species listed in Table 1 of the Biological Evaluation as occurring in the project vicinity require habitat conditions that are not found at the site of the proposed project. Because of the urbanized nature of the project site and the surrounding area, the presence of a high component of non-native vegetation at the site, and the lack of specialized habitats known to harbor special status plants occurring in the vicinity, make this site a poor candidate for supporting special-status plant species. No special-status plant species occur on the property, therefore, no impacts to special-status species of flora would result from the proposed project.

Special-Status Animals. Two special-status animal species that have occurred in the vicinity of the project are Swainson’s Hawk and burrowing owl.

• Swainson’s Hawk: According to the Biological Evaluation, the project site does not provide habitat that would be suitable as a nesting or foraging habitat by Swainson’s Hawk, which prefers foraging in agricultural fields and grasslands in the vicinity of riparian systems. No impacts to Swainson’s Hawk would result from the project.

• Burrowing owl: Habitat for burrowing owl does not occur on the proposed project site. There are no ground squirrels or ground squirrel colonies on the property; therefore, there are no burrows suitable to support burrowing owl. No impacts to burrowing owl would result from the project.

No riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community as defined by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), Solano HCP, or the CEQA Guidelines occurs on or in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, no impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities would result from the project.

As no wetlands or waters of the U.S. or State are found on the property, development of the project as proposed would not result in filling (direct impacts) or any indirect impacts to any area that would be subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Porter-Cologne Act jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFBRWQCB), or subject to California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) jurisdiction of California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). No permits from the USACE, SFRWQCB, or CDFW would be required and no impacts to wetlands would result from the project.

A number of wildlife species, including a variety of bird species, were observed on the project site during the field survey. As a result of this finding, the following impact discussions regarding migratory and native resident nesting birds and bat roosts are discussed below and mitigation measures are required.

No aquatic habitats or fish exist on or adjacent to the project site; therefore, no impacts to migratory fish would occur with the project.

Packet Page 97 of 288Attachment 2 Page 42 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 21 Migratory and Native Resident Nesting Birds

Nesting bird species protected by the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) or CFGC could be impacted during project construction. The project would require the removal of a large number of trees that could provide suitable substrate for nesting birds. In fact, a family group of recently-fledged bushtits was observed on the project site, indicating that nesting by this species occurred on the site during the 2021 nesting season. Work related to construction involving the removal of trees or vegetation or related to building demolition during the February 1 to August 1 bird breeding season could result in mortality of nesting avian species, if they are present. To ensure compliance with the MBTA and the CFGC, bird nesting surveys are generally required if construction work requires vegetation removal during the bird nesting season.

Because the project proposes the removal of existing planted trees in landscape islands, berms and strips, and such removal could occur during the February 1 to August 31 breeding season, the project would therefore be required to conduct pre-construction breeding bird surveys prior to the removal of trees through Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would ensure that impacts to migratory and native resident nesting birds are reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Migratory and Native Resident Nesting Birds

Bat Roosts

The proposed project has the potential to affect special-status and common roosting bat species during either the removal of trees or demolition of the existing building (especially during removal of the Spanish tile roof). Bats have the potential to roost in existing vacant or underutilized buildings and other man-made structures and could be present within the structure. In addition, many of the planted trees along the borders of the project site, in the area of the existing building, along entrance roads, and within parking lots on the property are mature trees, show evidence of small cavities and exfoliating bark that could serve as roost sites for populations of bats or could harbor solitary bats.

Significant impacts to bats prohibited under the CFGC could result from disruption of an occupied non-breeding bat roost or the loss of a maternity colony of bats. This may occur through direct Packet Page 98 of 288Attachment 2 Page 43 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 22 disturbance from destruction of a roost site during removal or pruning of trees or an indirect disturbance causing behavioral alterations due to construction noise or vibration, or by increased human activity in the area. Because of this potential impact, a Bat Habitat Assessment is required to be conducted by a qualified bat biologist prior to construction in order to determine whether suitable habitat for bats is found in the trees that are scheduled for removal or trimming.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which requires this protocol to be activated to achieve humane removal of bat populations if present, would ensure that impacts to bats are reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: Bat Roosts

The project would not conflict with any policies of the City of Fairfield or of the Solano HCP. The project would adhere to the preservation of tree species protected by City and as described in further detail in the following sections.

Packet Page 99 of 288Attachment 2 Page 44 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 23

Tree Preservation

The project site was landscaped as a requirement of City of Fairfield development approval with a number of tree plantings persisting without irrigation since the site was vacated. The proposed project would require the removal of landscape trees, which are considered protected under Fairfield Municipal Code Section 25.36, Tree Conservation, of which Section 25.36.3, Protected Trees, states:

The following trees are hereby designated as protected trees by this ordinance:

A. All trees on public property.

B. Trees planted or preserved on private property or within the public right of way which were:

1. Required by the City as a condition of approval for the project; or

2. Shown on a landscape drawing or plan for a project approved by the City.

To be authorized to remove “protected” trees, Section 25.36.6, Tree Conservation and Mitigation Planning During Projects that Require City Review, requires the following:

A. An applicant proposing to remove (a) protected tree(s) as part of a project which otherwise requires review and action by City staff, the Commission, or the City Council, shall provide the following information to the City for use during project review:

1. A scaled drawing showing:
a. All protected trees that the applicant is proposing to preserve that might be impacted by development. These trees should be identified by species or type, condition, and size.
b. All protected trees proposed for removal. The applicant shall provide a table summarizing the size (diameter), condition, species, and other pertinent information such as canopy size. The applicant shall indicate the reason(s) for the removal of any protected tree. The City will review the tree removal requests based on the criteria in Section 25.36.7.

In order to create a design that would ensure tree health/stability that minimizes tree removal and protects tree resources on the project site during construction, a Tree Resource Analysis was performed (Appendix B-2). Site inspections were conducted during the month of August 2021.

Four-hundred forty-one (441) trees/tree groups were inspected, numerically tagged and inventoried. Where tree trunks were inaccessible due to dense shrubbery surrounds or transient encampment restrictions, trunk diameters were approximated. The project site is subject to frequent, strong wind forces developing from the western direction. The western side of the more exposed trees display “burned” and thinning canopies typical of those affected by high winds, low Packet Page 100 of 288Attachment 2 Page 45 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 24 soil moisture levels and/or salinity influences. Many trees lean dramatically to the east as a direct result of the high winds.

Following the tagged inventory, a Tree Mitigation Plan (Appendix B-3) was drafted compiling the findings from the Tree Resource Analysis. According to the findings, a total of 412 trees (326 in good condition, 86 in poor condition) are scheduled for removal, and a total of 126 protected trees are to be preserved on-site as part of the project landscaping. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, which requires the safe removal and preservation of protected trees pursuant to Section 25.36, Tree Conservation, of the Fairfield Municipal Code, impacts regarding tree preservation would be reduced to less than significant.

Mitigation BIO-3: Tree Preservation and Relocation

A. Prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall provide a detailed mitigation plan. The plan shall address the following issues:

2. Mitigation of trees removed during development.

a. On-site mitigation. When on-site mitigation is proposed, the plan shall indicate tree planting locations, size, and species of trees to be planted, and planting and irrigation methods.

1. The applicant implements a specific mitigation plan for an off-site location approved by the City which incorporates planting, irrigation, and monitoring Packet Page 101 of 288Attachment 2 Page 46 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 25 (and replacement) for a five year period. The City may require a deposit to ensure that maintenance activities are implemented.

2. If a specific site has not been identified, the applicants may pay an in-lieu fee equal to the reasonable expenses incurred by the City or its contractors in installing off-site mitigation trees.

The project has been reviewed pursuant to requirements of the Solano HCP and Natural Communities Conservation Planning Act (NCCP). The member agencies, including the City of Fairfield, have agreed to implement conservation measures to ensure the protection of threatened and endangered species and their habitat within the SCWA contract service area. The project site is within Covered Urban Zone 1; therefore, the project site would be subject to appropriate HCP conservation measures. Figure 3-6 of the HCP, Vegetation and Cover Types, shows the site as “Developed” and not included within any of the mapped vegetation cover types.

The nearest vegetation cover type mapped in the HCP are nearby areas designated as Valley Floor Grassland Conservation Area. The project is consistent with measures to ensure protection of special-status species covered by the Solano HCP and the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. A less than significant impact would occur.

(Source 4, 5, 6)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
X
Discussion: The project site is relatively flat and was previously fully graded and developed as a big box retail store with associated parking, landscaping driveway paving and parking lots. There have been no known discoveries of archeological resources at the site or within its immediate vicinity. However, cultural resources could be encountered unexpectedly during project construction. The greater Fairfield area has a rich tribal history, which has resulted in the discovery of human remains and artifacts during construction projects in the past.

Packet Page 102 of 288Attachment 2 Page 47 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 26

Construction of the proposed project may result in the identification of historic-era or prehistoric archaeological materials including human remains. In the event that such resources are encountered unexpectedly during excavation activities, the City requires that no resources shall be handled or photographed, and construction activity of subject property shall cease. In the event of inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources, Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2 shall be implemented. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2, project impacts to cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant.

Archaeological Resources

Archaeological resources could be discovered during grading and potentially significant impacts could result to unidentified archaeological resources during the project construction stage.

Mitigation Measure CR-1: Archaeological Resources

Archaeological Remains

Archaeological remains could be discovered during grading and potentially significant impacts could result to unidentified archaeological remains at the construction stage.

Mitigation Measure CR-2: Archaeological Remains

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 27 (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact VI. ENERGY – Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X

Discussion: An Energy Impact Assessment (Appendix C) was performed to evaluate the project’s overall energy consumption in using the following three categories of fuel consumption: 1) diesel and gasoline fuel use and associated vehicle trips generated (i.e., transportation sources); 2) natural gas usage; and 3) electricity consumption. The primary sources of project fuel energy consumption (diesel and gasoline) would come from off-road equipment activity (primarily during construction) and from on-road vehicular traffic (i.e., delivery trucks) and equipment used during operations to manage the warehouse (e.g., refrigeration, general HVAC, lighting, etc.).

Additional sources of project energy consumption would include electricity and natural gas (for building HVAC, refrigeration, etc.).

Project Construction Energy Consumption. During project construction, there would be a temporary consumption of energy resources required for the movement of equipment and materials. Compliance with local, State, and federal regulations would reduce short-term energy demand during the project’s construction to the extent feasible (the construction phase is estimated to last approximately 11 to 12 months total), and project construction would not result in a wasteful or inefficient use of energy. As summarized in Table 3 of the Energy Impact Assessment, off-road equipment consumption would amount to approximately 51,459 gallons of fuel and approximately 21,442,753 gallons for on-road Vehicle Fuel Consumption. Energy use during project construction would be primarily in the form of fuel consumption to operate heavy equipment, vehicles, machinery, and generators. Temporary power may also be provided to construction trailers or electric construction equipment; however, electricity use during project construction is expected to be minimal.

Packet Page 104 of 288Attachment 2 Page 49 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 28 Project Operational Energy Consumption. Once constructed, the proposed project would also use energy resources for the operation of the warehouse and office buildings (electricity and natural gas), and for on-road vehicle trips (gasoline and diesel fuel). As shown in Table 4 of the Energy Impact Assessment, project operational fuel resource consumption is estimated to result in a worst-case net increased fuel consumption of approximately 95,161 additional gallons annually compared to the zero-baseline scenario. Compared to the California Energy Commission’s (CEC) Retail Fuel Outlet Annual Reporting (CEC-A15) Results, which shows that approximately 180 million gallons of fuel was sold in Solano County during the most recent 2020 reporting year, the project’s estimated increase in fuel consumption would constitute an approximate 0.0005 percent of the overall total annual fuel energy consumption within the County.

Similarly, as shown in Table 5 and Table 6 of the Energy Impact Assessment, project operational electricity and natural gas consumption is estimated to result in a worst-case scenario increase of approximately 3,529,422 kilowatt hours (kWh) and approximately 1,727,244 kilo-British thermal unit (kBtu) of additional annual consumption compared to the zero baseline scenario.

Per the CEC’s most recent energy report, specifically the most recent “Natural Gas Consumption by County” and “Electricity Consumption by County” 2020 data sets for Solano County, nonresidential sector operations consumed an estimated 2.1 billion kWh’s and 1.6 billion kBtu’s total in 2020. Compared to the CEC’s 2020 County-wide data set, the project’s estimated increase in electricity and natural gas consumption would constitute in an approximate 0.002 percent and

0.0001 percent increase, respectively, compared to the total annual consumption within the County. As such, project activities would have a minimal effect on the local and regional fuel energy supplies and availability.

Project Energy Conservation. There are no unusual project characteristics or processes involved during construction or operations that would require the use of equipment or vehicles that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities, or the use of equipment that would not conform to current emissions standards and related fuel efficiencies. As required by the City, the project site would be developed using water and energy efficiency features as applicable, including water efficient landscaping, 32 parking spaces with EV infrastructure, nine parking stalls designated for clean air/carpool parking, LED light fixtures, and other warehouse features meant to reduce energy use from lighting (e.g., skylights, solar paneling, etc.). In addition, although not part of this project, there are future plans to develop 15 percent of the warehouse roofs with solar panels, which would further reduce the total facility energy consumption. Lastly, the proposed project would be constructed consistent with applicable CALGreen Building Code and Title 24, which would also reduce consumption from area and energy sources. For these reasons, the construction and operation of this proposed project would not require the creation of a new source of energy, and compliance with applicable State and local requirements would help ensure the project does not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.

Lastly, equipment and vehicles used by project workers and vendors would be subject to increasingly stringent federal and State fuel efficiency standards, which would minimize the Packet Page 105 of 288Attachment 2 Page 50 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 29 potential for inefficient fuel usage. The project would be required to comply with the provisions of 13 CCR Sections 2449 and 2485, which prohibit diesel- fueled commercial motor vehicles and off-road diesel vehicles from idling for more than five minutes. Heavy equipment would also be subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Construction Equipment Fuel Efficiency Standard (40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 1039, 1065, and 1068) and CARB’s AB 1493 (i.e., Pavley) regulations, which would also minimize inefficient fuel consumption and ensure that the fuel efficiency of equipment and vehicles operating on- and off-site would continue to improve over time. In the interest of cost efficiency and in accordance with federal and State requirements, on-site staff and vendors would not utilize fuel in a manner that is wasteful or unnecessary during project construction and operation phases.

For the reasons outlined above, the proposed project would not result in a potential impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and impacts would be less than significant.

Currently, the City of Fairfield does not yet have a specific threshold of significance for energy impacts. At this time, other than the policies found within the General Plan, the City has not adopted local programs or policies that support energy efficiency and/or sustainability that would apply to the project. Nonetheless, in accordance with the City’s General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element, the project would incorporate Green Building Code and energy efficiency measures as required by the City.

The project’s mobile equipment and vehicles would also comply with federal, state, and regional requirements where applicable. Specifically, the USEPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have adopted fuel efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks which apply to truck fleet operators, such as the project proponent. CARB has also adopted cleaner technology and fuel standards pursuant to AB 1493. While Phase 1 and Phase 2 regulation published by both the USEPA/NHTSA and CARB primarily apply to manufacturers of on-road vehicles and not the end user, it is assumed the project operator and off-site vendors will ensure engines purchased are certified in accordance with the appropriate state and federal regulations.

This would ensure that the efficiency of mobile equipment and vehicles would continue to improve over time through compliance with increasingly stringent standards adopted by applicable regulatory agencies. The energy modeling for trucks does not consider specific fuel reductions from these regulations, as they would apply to fleets as they incorporate newer trucks meeting the regulatory standards; however, these regulations would have an overall beneficial effect on reducing fuel consumption from trucks over time as older trucks are replaced with newer models that meet the standards.

The State of California’s Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan (adopted 2008, updated January 2011) outlines specific goals and strategies to help promote energy efficiency in California’s industrial sector in three (3) areas: 1) Support industry adoption of energy efficiency by integrating energy efficiency savings with achievement of GHG goals; 2) Build market value of and demand for energy efficiency; and 3) Provide technical and public policy guidance for resource efficiency. The Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan promotes reductions in energy consumption through compliance with Packet Page 106 of 288Attachment 2 Page 51 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 30 GHG emission reductions, water conservation, and proper waste disposal. As applicable, the project would utilize the best available equipment to improve diesel fuel efficiency, and equipment that uses energy would be implemented with modern design and technology to maximize efficiency improvements.

Lastly, the project is expected to have a minimal effect on local population growth (i.e., a warehouse would not require a large number of new on-site employees), and the 2020 Strategic Plan contains no additional control measures with which the project may conflict.

In summary, the project construction and operations activities would not result in a significant increase in energy consumption over the existing environmental baseline and would not conflict with or obstruct with a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

(Source 7)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project:
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. X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?

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
X
Packet Page 107 of 288Attachment 2 Page 52 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 31

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project:
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks direct or indirect to life or property? X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
X
Discussion: Based on the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment prepared for the project on August 11, 2021 (Appendix D), the project is not located on an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, as mapped by the California Geological Survey. The closest mapped active fault that could affect the project site is the Cordelia Fault zone located approximately 4.38 miles southwest of the project.

Therefore, the potential for fault rupture at the site is considered low. Although no active faults traverse the project site, as a condition of issuance of building and grading permits, the project would be required to comply with the requirements of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, as well as with the 2022 California Building Code (CBC), which includes specific design measures intended to maximize structural stability in the event of an earthquake. Construction of project structures would also be required to comply with current seismic design parameters and all other recommendations as contained in the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment to ensure the structural integrity of the project in the event of an earthquake. Impacts would be less than significant.

During a major earthquake, seismic shaking has the potential to occur at the project site, as is typical throughout the Bay Area and as experienced during both the 2014 South Napa earthquake and 1989 Loma Prieta events. Shaking during an earthquake can result in ground failure, such as that associated with soil liquefaction, lateral spreading, and cyclic densification. As such, it should be anticipated that the project site will experience moderate to strong ground shaking in the near future. However, as a condition of issuance of grading and building permits, the project would be required to comply with current CBC seismic design parameters and all other recommendations as contained in the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment. Compliance with these parameters would require proposed buildings to be designed and constructed to withstand expected seismic activity and associated potential hazards, thereby minimizing risk to the public and property. The project would be designed and developed consistent with the CBC and standard engineering Packet Page 108 of 288Attachment 2 Page 53 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 32 practices and reviewed in conjunction with the City Engineer. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

Based on the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment, it was concluded that the potential for on-site liquefaction would occur within the upper 50 feet below ground surface (bgs) and that liquefaction potential is considered low across most of the project site, with the exception of a single boring. Potentially liquefiable soils were identified between approximately 7.5 and 23 feet bgs in boring B-1, located at the northern end of the proposed location for Building 1 (see Figure 2 of Appendix D). The analysis indicated that approximately 2.5 inches of liquefaction-induced settlement may occur within this layer following a design seismic event and is a level of hazard common for the area. If the estimated settlement exceeds the tolerance of the proposed structures, the risk may be minimized through ground improvement. Because the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment only encountered the liquefiable soils in one boring, it was recommended that a supplemental geotechnical exploration including cone penetration tests be performed prior to grading and construction to better define the limits of the liquefiable soils and the potential need, if any, for localized ground improvement. Therefore, as a standard condition by the City, the project proponent would be required to provide this additional analysis to the City’s Public Works Director and to provide appropriate measures for the ground improvement to Building 1, which would be determined and implemented during the grading process. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

The majority of the project site contour is relatively flat and the potential for landslides is considered negligible. Therefore, no impact would occur.

Proposed construction activities would include clearing the site of vegetation, soil excavation, grading, asphalt paving, building construction, and landscaping. Such activities would disturb site soils, exposing them to the erosive effects of wind and water. However, all construction activities related to the proposed project would be subject to implementation of best management practices (BMPs) for erosion control, as required under National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act. NPDES requirements for construction projects of one acre or more in area are set forth in the Construction General Permit issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board Order No. 2009-0009- DWQ). Furthermore, the project’s demolition of the existing building, asphalt/planter removal, land clearing, grading, and construction activities would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 403 and 403.2 regulating fugitive dust emissions, thus minimizing wind erosion from such ground-disturbing activities. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate substantial erosion. Soil erosion impacts would be less than significant.

Expansive soils contain significant amounts of clay particles that swell considerably when wet and shrink when dried. Foundations constructed on these soils are subjected to large uplifting forces caused by the swelling. Without proper measures taken, heaving and cracking of both building foundations and slabs-on-grade could result.

Packet Page 109 of 288Attachment 2 Page 54 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 33 According to the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment, settlement-sensitive and compressible soils are present in the vicinity and at the project site. The proposed development may be supported on shallow, spread foundations, however, the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment recommends that general fills be limited to no more than 3 feet to limit static settlements.

Furthermore, as stated in the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment, the results from settlement analyses have yet to be confirmed, which would guide in creating the project’s design parameters. Therefore, as a standard condition by the City, the project would be required to complete these analyses and to create design parameters for the project prior to the approval of grading plans. Therefore, project impacts with regard to expansive soils would be less than significant.

The proposed project would be served by the municipal sewer system of the Fairfield California Municipal Utility (FMU) and would therefore have no need for a septic system or other alternative wastewater disposal system. There would be no impact.

Based on the results of the subsurface investigation conducted as part of the Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment, subsurface conditions at the project site typically consist of approximately 7 to 12 feet of silt, lean clay, and silty clay, underlain by soft to stiff lean clay and fat clay extending to a depth of approximately 52 to 57 feet bgs. This thick clay layer is underlain by interbedded strata consisting of dense to very dense silty sand and sandy silt, clay, and silty clay that extend to the maximum explored depth of approximately 100 feet bgs. Although the subsurface conditions are predominately composed of fine-grained soils, granular soils consisting of medium dense silty sand with gravel were encountered at boring B-1, within a depth range of approximately 7.5 to 23 feet bgs.

The project site is not anticipated to contain significant paleontological or geologic features. No prehistoric resources were identified during background research or field survey for the project site. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.

(Source 9)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
X
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
Packet Page 110 of 288Attachment 2 Page 55 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 34 Discussion: California State law defines Greenhouse Gases (GHG) to include the following six compounds: Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous Oxide (N2O), Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), Perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6). The State of California has implemented a series of greenhouse gas plans and policies aimed at reducing state greenhouse gas emissions.

On June 1, 2005, Executive Order (EO) S-03-05 was issued by Governor Schwarzenegger in order to set statewide emissions reduction standards. The order required the State to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) was codified into law in 2006 and codified into law the 2020 GHG emissions targets set by EO S-03-05. AB 32 represents the first enforceable statewide program to limit GHG emissions from all major sectors with penalties for noncompliance. Senate Bill (SB) 32 was signed into law in 2015 and sets into law the mandated reduction targets set in EO B-30-15, which required a reduction in GHG emissions to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030.

In collaboration with over twenty State agencies, CARB issued a Final Scoping Plan in 2017 in order to set a framework for the State to meet the overall reduction goals set in SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan identified key sectors of the implementation strategy, which includes improvements in low carbon energy, industry, transportation sustainability, natural and working lands, waste management, and water. Through a combination of data synthesis and modeling, CARB determined that the 2030 statewide target emissions limit is 260 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMTCO2e), and that further commitments will need to be made to achieve an additional reduction of 50 MMTCO2e beyond current policies and programs. Key elements of the 2017 Update include a proposed 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions from refineries and an expansion of the Cap-and-Trade program to meet the aggressive 2030 GHG emissions goal.

Locally, the City of Fairfield is currently in the process of preparing the Fairfield Forward Climate Action Plan (CAP), which will contain a series of measures to reduce GHG emissions by 2050. It is anticipated that the CAP will be adopted with the City’s General Plan update.

GHGs were evaluated in accordance with the methodologies recommended by CARB and the BAAQMD. Emissions were modeled by technical consultants using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2016.3.2 (CalEEMod). Sources of GHG emissions during operation include emissions from area sources, electricity, mobile sources, waste, and water. Emissions from area sources and electricity usage emissions are based on land use sizes, GHG emission factors for fuel combustion, and the global warming potential values for the GHGs emitted. As shown in Table 7, Operation Phase Trips, of the Air Quality and Climate Change Impact Assessment (Appendix A), total mobile-source GHG emissions are determined based on an estimated 994 weekday trips. Waste and water emissions are derived from the anticipated water usage and wastewater generated based on the project’s proposed land uses and the associated water demand factors.

Packet Page 111 of 288Attachment 2 Page 56 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 35 GHG impacts would not screen out but current practice in GHG impact assessment is best applied. Current practice for project-level GHG impact assessment is that of the first analysis taken by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in the Final Negative Declaration for the Phillips 66 Los Angeles Refinery Carson Plant – Crude Oil Storage Capacity Project on December 12, 2014, which states the following relative to GHG impacts from that project.

“The Refinery is subject to GHG emission reductions pursuant to AB 32, the state-wide GHG reduction plan. In December 2010, CARB adopted regulations establishing a cap- and-trade program for the largest sources of GHG emissions in the state that altogether are responsible for about 85 percent of California’s GHGs. Among these are fossil-fuel fired power plants, including both plants that generate power within California’s borders, and those located outside of California that generate power imported to the state. GHG emissions from this universe of sources were capped for 2013 at a level approximately two percent below the emissions level forecast for 2012, and the cap will steadily decrease at a rate of two to three percent annually from now to 2020. Sources regulated by the cap must reduce their GHG emissions or buy credits from others who have done so. This means that the additional power utilized at the LARC as a result of the proposed project cannot result in an increase in GHG emissions from the increased use of third-party power, compared to GHG emissions at the time of issuance of the NOP. The proposed project does not affect compliance with the requirements of AB 32, since no change in GHG emissions at LARC from operation of the proposed project are expected. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with AB 32, the applicable GHG reduction plan, policy, and regulations that have been adopted to implement AB

32.”

As discussed above, sources affected by the cap-and-trade regulation would not conflict with AB 32, the applicable GHG reduction plan, policy, and regulations that have been adopted to implement AB 32. Although the quote discusses third-party generated power, the same would be true for fuels in California including natural gas and automotive fuels that are produced or imported by a third-party. There is no direct stationary combustion component proposed under the project and indirect emissions would come from use of fuels and electricity captured upstream in the supply chain by AB 32 regulation and cap-and-trade. Therefore, the project would pay its fair share to mitigate the cumulative impact of GHGs on the environment and the impact is considered less than significant.

As shown in Table 12, GHG Emissions, of the Air Quality and Climate Change Impact Assessment (Appendix A), the project’s combined long-term net operational emissions and amortized construction emissions would be approximately 1,611.23 MTCO2e per year. Quantification of GHG emissions is provided for informational purposes; significance under CEQA is based on the project’s consistency with statewide and regional policies and plans to meet the state reduction goals set in AB 32, including CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan.

Packet Page 112 of 288Attachment 2 Page 57 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 36 As discussed above, the project would exclusively use electricity and fuels that are regulated by the AB 32 Scoping Plan and related programs such as cap-and-trade and the fuels program.

Accordingly, the project would pay its fair share of the cost to mitigate the cumulative impact of climate change. The project has no associated direct combustion feature and thus would have a less than significant impact.
(Sources 3)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
X
Packet Page 113 of 288Attachment 2 Page 58 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 37 Discussion: Exposure of the public or the environment to hazardous materials can occur through improper handling or use of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes particularly by untrained personnel, a transportation accident, environmentally unsound disposal methods, or fire, explosion, or other emergencies. The severity of potential effects varies with the activity conducted, the concentration and type of hazardous material or waste present, and the proximity of sensitive receptors.

Project construction could expose construction workers and the public to temporary hazards related to the transport, use, and maintenance of construction materials (i.e., oil, diesel fuel, transmission fluid, etc.). These activities would be short-term, and the materials used would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a significant safety hazard. All project construction activities would demonstrate compliance with the applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials, ensuring that all potentially hazardous materials are used and handled in an appropriate manner. Impacts concerning the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during project construction would be less than significant.

As discussed in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Phase I ESA) dated June 16, 2021, (Appendix E-1) prepared for the project, the project site does not contain recognized environmental conditions (REC), historical RECs (HRECs), or controlled RECs (CRECs). However, the Phase I ESA has revealed evidence of two potential environmental concerns associated with the project site including the following: 1) Due to lack of documentation available for the dismantling of the former Walmart Tire Lube Express (TLE) station, including the removal of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) and hydraulic lifts, associated residual impacts beneath the surface-grade and basement level concrete slab may be present; and 2) the project site was historically used as a pear orchard from at least 1937 to 1982. These historical agricultural activities may have included the application of organochlorine pesticides and associated metals such as arsenic and lead. Although residual concentrations of organochlorine pesticides and associated metals may be present in the site’s surface soil as a result of past agricultural activities, given the site’s planned commercial/industrial use and its previous grading and development activities, these residual concentrations, if any, would not be expected to present a concern.

Because the Phase I ESA at the time of preparation was unable to obtain documentation available for the dismantling of the former Walmart TLE station, including the removal of ASTs and hydraulic lifts, the Phase I ESA recommended that a Phase II Environmental Investigation be performed. Therefore, a Limited Phase II Environmental Investigation (Phase II ESA) was conducted in February 2022 (Appendix E-2). The results of the Phase II ESA did not identify environmental concerns associated with the project. However, it was noted that a limited area of petroleum-impacted soil is present in the vicinity of the former TLE sub-level vehicle maintenance area at depths of greater than 8 feet bgs. In addition, shallow soil below the TLE’s main level concrete slab contained chromium and nickel at concentrations that could potentially qualify as California or federal hazardous waste. Additional leachability testing would be necessary to make this determination. Therefore, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, which requires the Packet Page 114 of 288Attachment 2 Page 59 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 38 project proponent to prepare a Soil Management Plan (SMP), is required to reduce the project’s potentially significant hazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level.

Hazardous Materials Release. Project demolition activities could result in the release hazardous of materials into the environment. As discussed in the Phase II ESA, to evaluate whether subsurface environmental conditions of concern may exist that need to be addressed when redeveloping the project site, the detected concentrations were compared to the Commercial/Industrial: Shallow Soil Exposure environmental screening levels (ESLs) published in July 2019 (Revision 2) by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB).

The commercial/industrial ESLs were selected for comparison based on the proposed redevelopment plan for the project site.

For metals, the detected concentrations in soil were also compared against the CCR Title 22 Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) and the Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) and the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). Based on the industry rule-of-thumb, if a concentration detected in soil exceeds 20 times the TCLP or 10 times the STLC, then additional leachability analysis is required to determine if the soil would be characterized as Federal or California hazardous waste if excavated for offsite disposal; if a concentration detected in soil exceeds the TTLC, then the soil would be characterized as California hazardous waste. The results of this analysis are as follows:

• Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons: Total petroleum hydrocarbons detected onsite did not exceed commercial/industrial ESLs.
• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): VOCs detected onsite did not exceed commercial/industrial ESLs.
• Metals: The following metals were detected onsite:
o Arsenic was detected at concentrations ranging from 3.5 to 8.1 mg/kg, exceeding the commercial/industrial ESL, 0.31 mg/kg in the nine samples. However, the detected concentrations are below the background arsenic concentration accepted by the RWQCB for San Francisco Bay Area soil, 11 mg/kg.
o Chromium was detected in the shallow samples collected from the main level service bays (TLE-1 and TLE-2) at 130 mg/kg and 160 mg/kg, respectively, exceeding 10 times the STLC, 50 mg/kg, and 20 times the TCLP, 100 mg/kg. Given these detected concentrations, additional leachability testing would be required to determine if this soil would be characterized as hazardous waste if excavated for offsite disposal.

Chromium was detected in the other seven samples at concentrations ranging from 27 mg/kg to 41 mg/kg. None of the detected chromium concentrations exceeds the commercial/industrial ESL.
o Nickel was detected in the shallow samples collected from the main level service bays (TLE-1 and TLE-2) at 810 mg/kg and 1,100 mg/kg, respectively, exceeding 10 times the STLC for nickel, which is 200 mg/kg. Given these detected concentrations, additional Packet Page 115 of 288Attachment 2 Page 60 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 39 leachability testing would be required to determine if this soil would be characterized as hazardous waste if excavated for offsite disposal.
o Additional CCR T22 metals detected at concentrations greater than laboratory reporting limits and below their respective commercial/industrial ESL include antimony, barium, beryllium, cadmium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, vanadium, and zinc. Molybdenum, selenium, silver, and thallium were not detected at concentrations greater than laboratory reporting limits.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Should the project site’s future construction activities include excavating soil from beneath the existing Walmart TLE surface-grade and basement level concrete slab for offsite disposal, specific handling, waste characterization, and offsite disposal procedures shall be required. The project proponent shall prepare a project-specific Soil Management Plan (SMP) detailing these procedures prior to issuance of a grading permit.

There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the project site. The nearest school to the project site is Fairview Elementary School, located at 830 1st Street in Fairfield, approximately

1.75 miles to the northeast. In addition, operation and maintenance of the proposed project would not produce hazardous emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. No impact would occur.

As discussed in the Phase I ESA, the project site is listed in the following databases:
• The existing building is listed in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) NonGen/NLR database as a former generator of hazardous wastes including ignitable waste, corrosive waste, reactive waste, metals, benzene, chloroform, tetrachloroethylene, and other hazardous wastes. The subject site was listed as a small quantity generator in 2010.

Listings in the HAZNET and FINDS databases are similarly associated with former generation of hazardous wastes. No violations were reported.
• The existing building is listed in the Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System (SWEEPS) Underground Storage Tank (UST) database for a 1,000-gallon waste oil UST, which was installed in 1993 and removed in 1998. During removal, the UST was inspected for evidence of cracking or other damage, which was not found. Soil samples collected from beneath the UST showed no detectable concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons or benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX). These factors, in addition to the age of the UST, indicate a release into the environment was unlikely.

As discussed above, no previous hazardous materials releases nor violations have occurred onsite. Therefore, this impact is less than significant.

The project site is not located within a potentially hazardous airport area. The nearest airport to the project site is Travis Air Force Base located approximately 6.5 miles to the east. According to the Air Installation and Compatible Use Zone Study for Travis Air Force Base, California (December Packet Page 116 of 288Attachment 2 Page 61 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 40 2009), the project site is not located within any clear zones or accident potential zones.3 Therefore, no impact would occur relative to airport safety hazards.

The project would not interfere with an emergency response plan. As indicated in Section XVII, Transportation, of this IS/MND, the project does not propose changes to the City’s circulation system, such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections, and would not introduce incompatible uses to area roadways. Should partial lane closures be required as part of project construction activities, implementation of a traffic management plan would minimize congestion and ensure safe travel, including emergency access in the project vicinity. Impacts would be less than significant.

The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of wildland fires. As discussed in Section XX, Wildfire, the project site is located in a developed urban area surrounded by commercial/industrial uses and is not located in a zone designated as Very High Fire Hazard by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). Urban levels of fire protection would be provided to the project area. In addition, the project would adhere to building codes and any conditions included through review by the City’s Fire Department. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.

(Source 7, 8)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:

X
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
X

3 Travis Air Force Base. Air Installation and Compatible Use Zone Study for Travis Air Force Base. December 2009. Figure 4.8, Clear Zones and Accident Potential Zones.

Packet Page 117 of 288Attachment 2 Page 62 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 41

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project:
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite?
X
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
X
Discussion: As part of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, the USEPA has established regulations under the NPDES program to control direct stormwater discharges. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) administers the NPDES permitting program and is responsible for developing NPDES permitting requirements. The NPDES program regulates industrial pollutant discharges, which include construction activities. The SWRCB works in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards to preserve, protect, enhance, and restore water quality. The project site is within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB). In addition, the proposed project site is located within the service area of the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District.

Project construction could result in short-term impacts to water quality due to the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials, maintenance and operation of construction equipment, and earthmoving activities. These potential pollutants could damage downstream waterbodies. Dischargers whose projects disturb one or more acres of soil or whose projects disturb less than one acre but are part of a larger common plan of development that in total disturbs one or more acres, are required to obtain coverage under the SWRCB’s General Permit for Discharges of Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ (Construction General Permit). The Construction General Permit requires the project applicant to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would specify BMPs to be used during project construction to minimize or avoid water pollution, thereby reducing potential short-term impacts to water quality. Upon completion of the project, the project applicant would be required to submit a Notice of Termination to the SWRCB to indicate that construction has been completed.

Packet Page 118 of 288Attachment 2 Page 63 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 42

The project would not significantly increase the site’s impervious surfaces as the project site is already developed. Nonetheless, to accommodate peak runoff, storm drainage from the project site would be handled through on-site storm water treatment areas and piped off-site to the existing infrastructure per the conditions of approval prepared by the City Public Works Department. The project would be required to comply with the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District standard requirements to pre-treat storm run-off, including but not limited to the use of BMPs to address the issue of ongoing post-construction storm water quality for the project site. All project drainage improvements shall comply with the City of Fairfield Standard Specifications and Details, Engineering Design Standards (Section 4 - Storm Drainage). Additionally, the project applicant would be required to prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan and comply with the NPDES Permit and SWPPP requirement.

Therefore, the project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or areas including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces. Construction and operation of the project would result in a less than significant impact in this regard.

Water for the project would be provided by the City of Fairfield. According to the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City does not use groundwater as a water supply source because groundwater in the area is brackish and unsuitable for irrigation or drinking water use without relatively expensive treatment compared to other sources. Groundwater is not used in the municipal water supply of Fairfield and is not considered a viable component of water in Fairfield because of tidal inflows that impact water quality. In addition, existing water infrastructure already exists onsite due to being previously developed. Therefore, the project would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Impacts would be less than significant.

The project is not located within the 100-year flood hazard zone as indicated on the applicable Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map. No impacts regarding flood hazards, tsunami, or seiche zones would occur.

The City, including the project site, is located within the San Francisco Bay Area hydrologic region.

The SFRWQCB oversees basin planning and water quality in the San Francisco Bay Area hydrologic region. The Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin (Basin Plan) is the Board's master water quality control planning document. It designates beneficial uses and water quality objectives for waters of the State within the Region, including surface waters and groundwater.

It also includes programs of implementation to achieve water quality objectives and discharge prohibitions. The Basin Plan was duly adopted and approved by the State Water Resources Control Board, U.S. EPA, and the Office of Administrative Law where required. The latest version is effective as of December 22, 2006.

Packet Page 119 of 288Attachment 2 Page 64 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 43 As discussed above, the proposed project would not substantially increase the site’s impervious surfaces as the project site is already developed. However, the project is required to comply with the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District standard requirements to pre-treat storm run-off, including but not limited to the use of BMPs to address the issue of ongoing post-construction storm water quality for the project site. Additionally, the project proponent would be required to prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan and comply with the NPDES and SWPPP requirement.

Since the NPDES permit is intended to protect water quality, compliance with the permit would ensure that the project would not impair existing or potential beneficial uses of nearby or downstream water bodies and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan. The proposed project does not propose the drilling of a well to obtain groundwater for consumption; thus, the project would not conflict with a groundwater management plan. No impact would occur.

(Source 9)

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? X
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?
X
Discussion: The project is not in conflict with any applicable land use plan and meets the standards and regulations of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance with City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The proposed project is adjacent to existing industrial development. In this location, the project would create no physical division of the existing neighborhood. The project site is not subject to any adopted Specific Plans. Therefore, no impacts relative to land use and planning would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of
the state?
X
Packet Page 120 of 288Attachment 2 Page 65 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 44

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XII. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
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?
X
Discussion: According to Figure RS-4, Mineral Resources, of the Solano County General Plan Chapter 4, Resources, the project site is not located within an identified Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ). The project is not in conflict with any applicable land use plan and meets the standards and regulations of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance (with City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change). In addition, the project site has no history of use as a mineral resource recovery operation and is located in a predominantly developed area of the City. No impacts relative to mineral resources would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XIII. NOISE – Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
X
Discussion: Operation of the project would not result in increased exposure to noise in excess of City Standards, as the City does not have noise standards for industrial uses. Although the project may generate noise typical of light industrial manufacturing and warehousing operations, it is not anticipated that the project will produce excess noise.

Packet Page 121 of 288Attachment 2 Page 66 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 45 Noise generated by project construction activities would temporarily elevate ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. Noise impacts resulting from construction depend on the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise sensitive receptors. Construction noise impacts primarily occur when construction activities occur during noise-sensitive times of the day (early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), the construction occurs in areas immediately adjoining noise sensitive land uses, or when construction durations last over extended periods of time. The closest noise sensitive use is the residential community along the north side of SR-12, west of Beck Avenue, at approximately 900 feet or 0.17-mile northeast of the project site.

Typically, significant noise impacts do not result when standard construction noise control measures are enforced at the project site and when the duration of the noise generating construction period is limited to one construction season (typically one year) or less. Once construction moves indoors (building siding erected and roofed), minimal noise would be generated at the on-site location.

Based on the City’s Noise Ordinance Chapter 25, Article X, Noise Regulations, the project is limited to hours of construction between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Additionally, noise and vibration during construction would be moderated by the City standard construction noise requirements of which the project would be required to comply. As such, construction related noise impacts would be less than significant.

Refer to Discussion e in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Initial Study. The nearest airport to the project site is Travis Air Force Base located approximately 6.5 miles to the east and the project site is not located within any the airport’s land use compatibility zones. No impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X
Packet Page 122 of 288Attachment 2 Page 67 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 46 Discussion: Because the project involves the proposed demolition of an existing commercial building for the construction of two (2) concrete tilt-up industrial buildings, the project does not have potential to displace any people or housing. No existing homes would be removed, nor would a substantial number of new homes be required to house an increase in residents moving to the City. The project would not significantly induce population growth above that already assumed in the General Plan. No impact relative to population and housing would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) 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 public services:

Fire protection? X
Police protection? X
Schools? X
Parks? X
Other public facilities? X
Discussion: According to the City’s General Plan Public Facilities and Services Element, police protection services are provided by the City's Police Department located at 1000 Webster Street in Fairfield, approximately 3.5 miles east of the project site. Fire suppression services are provided by the City's Fire Department from five fire stations located throughout the City, the closest of which is Station 1 located at 2351 North Watney Way in Fairfield, approximately 1.3 miles east of the project site. Both the Fairfield Fire Department and Police Department have reviewed the proposed project plans and determined that limited additional resources would be required with project implementation. The Fire Department has imposed conditions to meet fire safety standards. In accordance with Fairfield Municipal Code Chapter 25, Article XI, Development Impact Fees, the project would be required to pay development impact fees for fire and police protection facilities to offset the impacts and increased demand for public services and facilities created by the project. A less than significant impact relative to fire and police protection services would occur.

Packet Page 123 of 288Attachment 2 Page 68 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 47 The proposed project does not include residential housing and would not increase the student population of the area. In addition, future population growth is accounted for in the General Plan since the project would be consistent with the land use and zoning designations (with Xity Council approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change). As such, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools in the project area, and no impact would occur.

The proposed project does not include residential housing and would not increase the population in the project area. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant increase in the demand for park space. As such, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks in the project area, and no impact would occur.

Other public facilities in the area would not be adversely impacted because the proposed project is not anticipated to add substantial population growth that would require the use of public facilities. As such, the project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities in the project area, and no impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XVI. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
X
Discussion: The demand for parks is determined by changes in housing and population. In this case, the project consists of the demolition of an existing commercial building for the construction of two (2) concrete tilt-up industrial buildings and no new residents or housing would be introduced to the area. The project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth or increase demand on parks and recreational resources. In addition, the project does not include recreational facilities or require the expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, the project would not result in the increased use or substantial physical deterioration of an existing neighborhood or regional park and no impact would occur.

Packet Page 124 of 288Attachment 2 Page 69 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 48

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XVII. TRANSPORTATION – Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
Discussion: Senate Bill 743 was adopted in 2013 to change how public agencies evaluate the transportation impacts of projects under CEQA. The law directed the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to propose revisions to the CEQA Guidelines to establish criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts that would “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(1).) Measurements of transportation impacts may include vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle miles traveled per capita/employee, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated. OPR released a Technical Advisory in December 2018 identifying VMT as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts for land use projects, land use plans, and transportation projects, and the Natural Resources Agency updated the CEQA Guidelines to replace congestion-based metrics such as Level of Service (LOS) with VMT as the basis for determining whether a project would have a significant impact on the environment. Automobile delay, as described by LOS or similar measures, is no longer considered a significant impact. (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3(a); Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) 43 Cal.App.5th 609.) The City Council adopted the City of Fairfield Senate Bill 743 Implementation Procedures (“SB 743 Implementation Procedures”), as well as the thresholds of significance and mitigation measures contained therein, on September 23, 2020.

The City retains the ability to use LOS as a condition of approval to maintain consistency with the General Plan and City policies. Therefore, projects over a certain size will continue to be evaluated for contributing to LOS deficiencies and this evaluation will be referred to as “local transportation analysis” to distinguish from impacts under CEQA. Pedestrian and bicycle circulation, safety, parking, traffic control warrant analysis, site circulation, and other operational topics will also continue to be addressed under local transportation analysis, as appropriate.

Packet Page 125 of 288Attachment 2 Page 70 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 49

The screening guidelines within the City’s SB 743 Implementation Procedures state that nonresidential projects that generate less than 110 daily trips, consist of 100 percent affordable housing or local serving retail, are within 0.5-mile of high-quality transit, or are located in a low VMT area as determined by screening maps shall be presumed to have less than significant impacts and do not require further VMT analysis.

A Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment (VMT Assessment) was prepared for the proposed project on February 23, 2022 (Appendix F). The Fairfield Guidelines for Project VMT Screening Transportation Analysis states that VMT analysis shall be prepared using the City of Fairfield travel demand model. VMT calculations were prepared for the following four scenarios: 1) Near- Term No Project; 2) Near-Term (2020) Plus Project; 3) Cumulative (2040) No Project; and 4) Cumulative (2040) Plus Project. Based on the Fairfield Guidelines for Project VMT Screening Transportation Analysis, a project would result in a significant impact if:

• Single-Family Residential Projects: Project VMT would be in excess of 85 percent of the City- wide average VMT per single-family dwelling unit;
• Multifamily Residential Projects: Project VMT would be in excess of 85 percent of the City- wide average VMT per multifamily dwelling unit;
• Office Projects: Project VMT would be in excess of 85 percent of the City-wide average VMT per 1,000 square feet of office space; or
• Other Projects (Retail, Industrial, and Other Non-residential Uses): Any net increase in total model-wide VMT.

Based on the project’s proposed industrial land use, the “Other Projects” threshold of significance would apply. As such, the project would result in a significant impact if the addition of the project increases the Near-Term or Cumulative total model-wide VMT.

Trip Generation. As discussed in the VMT Assessment, the project is estimated to generate approximately 600 daily vehicle trips, 90 AM peak hour trips, and 90 PM peak hour trips. The project is expected to generate 5,700 fewer daily trips than the previously occupied use, including approximately 150 fewer AM peak hour trip and 450 fewer PM peak hour trips.

VMT. As concluded in the VMT Assessment, the addition of the project is expected to increase the total VMT under Near-Term conditions by approximately 18,000 VMT and decrease total VMT by approximately 1,000 in Cumulative conditions. Therefore, the project would result in a significant impact in the Near-Term (2020) and a less than significant impact under Cumulative (2040) conditions. Therefore, mitigation measures are required to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

Because the project would result in a potentially significant VMT impact under the Near-Term conditions, Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2 are required. Mitigation Measure TRA-1 Packet Page 126 of 288Attachment 2 Page 71 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 50 requires the project to implement alternative transportation improvements as described in the General Plan. Specifically, as discussed in the VMT Assessment, the Fairfield Active Transportation Plan proposes to build new bicycle facilities adjacent to the project site. Class II buffered bike lanes are proposed along Chadbourne Road, between Cordelia Road and SR-12, adjacent to the project site. Additionally, Class II buffered bike lanes are proposed along Auto Mall Parkway, Cordelia Road, and Courage Drive, which intersect Chadbourne Road. The City of Fairfield’s Street Capital Improvement Program also includes pavement and ADA accessibility improvements on Beck Avenue, Chadbourne Road, Courage Drive, Cordelia Road, Guittard Way, and Low Court.

These improvements may increase the safety, bikeability, and walkability of the project site, thereby encouraging more biking or walking trips which can reduce VMT.

Mitigation Measure TRA-2 requires the project to implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program, since the project involves an employment-focused land use. TDM refers to strategies that motivate alternatives to automobile travel, either through positive incentives or walking, biking, and transit, or through adding additional costs to automobile use at the project site. Typical vehicle trip reduction strategies for employment-based development like the proposed project are related to commuter trip reductions. The recommended TDM measures include transit pass subsidies, a commuter marketing program, carpool/vanpool incentives, and a ridematch program; refer to Table 4 of the VMT Assessment for the detailed strategies and their respective VMT reduction percentages. Given the project site’s characteristics using a conservative assessment, the VMT Assessment assumes that the maximum reduction this site could achieve with implementation of the TDM program is approximately 5 percent. As such, implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and TRA-2 would reduce the project’s VMT impacts to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: The project proponent, in coordination with City staff, shall implement proposed bikeway and pedestrian improvements to reduce VMT impacts. Should the City adopt a VMT mitigation bank program or trip credit program, the appropriate fees or credits can be applied to the project.

Mitigation Measure TRA-2: The project proponent, in coordination with City staff, shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. The pedestrian-oriented design TDM measure shall be implemented on the front end by the developer, while ongoing TDM measures, including transit pass subsidies, commute marketing program, and carpool/vanpool incentives, shall be implemented and managed by the designated TDM Coordinator. An annual monitoring program shall be implemented to measure the TDM Program outcomes. To measure the TDM Program’s commute VMT reductions and mode share, a commute survey shall be administered to employees by the site occupant. In addition, traffic counts at the project driveways shall be collected and compared to the Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) estimated trip generation for the project site’s specific use. If the commute survey and project trip count data find that the project’s trip generation is at least five percent less than the ITE estimated trip generation, then the project’s TDM goal will be met. If the project’s TDM goal is not met, the project shall pay penalty fees as agreed upon with the City at the project approval stage.

Packet Page 127 of 288Attachment 2 Page 72 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 51 The design features of the proposed project do not incorporate any hazardous or incompatible features. The internal traffic circulation on the project site would not include sharp turns, and the drive aisles/fire lanes within the project site have been designed to be both efficient and safe for vehicular traffic. Additionally, the project would not be an incompatible use, nor would it be hazardous due to its design. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

The access and circulation features on the project site would accommodate emergency ingress and egress. The project is subject to the City’s development review to ensure that the project as designed does not temporarily or permanently interfere with the provision of emergency access or with evacuation routes. All emergency access features are subject to and must satisfy the City of Fairfield design requirements and be approved by the City’s Fire Department. During periods when partial road closures are required, the project proponent would be required to implement a temporary traffic management plan to minimize temporary impacts to emergency access and evacuation routes during the construction process. Therefore, the project would not result in inadequate emergency access and a less than significant impact would occur.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES – 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
X
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

X
Discussion: Pursuant to AB 52 requirements, the City of Fairfield commenced consultation with the appropriate and potentially affected Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPO) in October Packet Page 128 of 288Attachment 2 Page 73 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 52 2021. On October 29, 2021, the Yocha Dehe Cultural Resources Manager provided a letter stating that the project site was within the aboriginal territories of the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation and requested to be included in correspondence regarding project updates. The October 29, 2021 correspondence from the tribe did not identify specific mitigation measures to be included in the project. However, the City has provided mitigation for the inadvertent discovery of Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) (refer to Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-2 below). Additional correspondence was received from the Yocha Dehe Cultural Resources Manager on July 11, 2022, stating that the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation is not aware of any known cultural resources near the project site and that a cultural monitor is not needed. However, the Tribe recommends that cultural sensitivity training for any pre-project personnel to be added to the permit as a condition of approval. Cultural sensitivity training is included in Mitigation Measure TC-1. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-2 would reduce potentially significant impacts to TCRs to a less than significant level.

Tribal Cultural Resources

Tribal cultural resources could be discovered during grading and potentially significant impacts could result to unidentified tribal cultural resources at the construction stage. Implementation of Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-2 would ensure that potential impacts related to previously undiscovered historic or archaeological resources and human remains would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure TC-1: Tribal Cultural Resources
Due to the possibility of archeological resources on the project site, the City of Fairfield shall require a note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources, including prehistoric Native American burials.

Prior to groundbreaking, construction personnel associated with earth moving equipment, drilling, grading, and excavating, shall be provided with basic archaeological and cultural sensitivity training conducted by a qualified archaeologist and in consultation with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation. Issues that shall be included in the basic training will be geared toward training the applicable construction crews in the identification of archaeological deposits and tribal cultural resources. Training will include written notification of the restrictions regarding disturbance and/or removal of any portion of archaeological deposits and the proper procedures to follow should a resource be identified. The project applicant shall inform the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation of the project construction schedule and allow for a Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation tribal monitor to be present at the project site during any ground disturbance activities in native soil, to ensure such activities do not negatively impact cultural resources. The tribal monitor will also be provided an opportunity to attend the pre-construction briefing. The construction contractor, or its designee, shall be responsible for implementation of this measure.

Packet Page 129 of 288Attachment 2 Page 74 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 53 Mitigation Measure TC-2: Tribal Cultural Resources
If archaeological remains or tribal cultural resources are uncovered, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius shall be halted immediately until a qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the tribal monitor, can evaluate whether the resource requires further study.

For any tribal cultural resources found during the ground disturbance activities, the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation shall be immediately notified, and the appropriate treatment method for the uncovered resources shall be determined by the City and archaeologist in consultation with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation and its Yocha Dehe Treatment Protocol.

The treatment of human remains and any associated or unassociated funerary objects discovered during any soil-disturbing activity within the project site shall comply with applicable State laws.

This shall include immediate notification of the Solano County Coroner and the City of Fairfield of the discovery of any human remains.

Packet Page 130 of 288Attachment 2 Page 75 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 54 The project applicant, archaeological consultant, and MLD shall make all reasonable efforts to develop an agreement for the treatment, with appropriate dignity, of human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d)). The agreement should take into consideration the appropriate excavation, removal, recordation, analysis, custodianship, curation, and final disposition of the human remains and associated or unassociated funerary objects. The California PRC allows 48 hours to reach agreement on these matters. If the MLD and the other parties do not agree on the reburial method, the project will follow PRC Section 5097.98(b) which states that ". . . the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall reinter the human remains and items associated with Native American burials with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance."

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
facilities or storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider 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?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
X
Discussion: The project site is located within a developed area of the City and is already developed; therefore, the project would not require construction of new or expanded water, Packet Page 131 of 288Attachment 2 Page 76 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 55 wastewater treatment facilities or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. The responsible departments and agencies for wastewater and water supply have reviewed the project and determined that capacities would be adequate. The project would not significantly increase the site’s impervious surfaces as the project site is already developed; therefore, it is not anticipated that the project would generate stormwater beyond the capacity of the existing storm drainage system. As discussed in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Initial Study, the proposed drainage of this project would be required to comply with City standards for drainage and grading and the appropriate permits would be required to be obtained prior to construction. Impacts relative to water supply and utility facilities, would be less than significant.

Implementation of the project is anticipated to generate additional solid waste during the temporary, short-term construction phase, as well as the operational phase, but it would not be expected to result in inadequate landfill capacity. According to the General Plan Public Facilities and Services Element, solid waste management, including waste disposal and curbside recycling is handled by a local franchised hauler under contract with the City. Solid wastes are currently taken to Potrero Hills Landfill and recyclables processed at an interim facility in Fairfield. With project implementation, solid waste would be managed on-site and redirected to a secondary facility with adequate capacity. Therefore, impacts relative to solid waste would be less than significant.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XX. WILDFIRE -- 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?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
Packet Page 132 of 288Attachment 2 Page 77 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 56 Discussion: The project site is located in a developed urban area surrounded by commercial/industrial land uses. According to the CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer,4 and the Adopted State Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps,5 the project site is not located in a zone designated as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The proposed project would be required to comply with the provisions of the City of Fairfield Emergency Operations Plan, Solano County Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the emergency access requirements of the California Fire Code, which include but are not limited to providing access with adjoining uses and providing suitable access for emergency vehicles. In addition, emergency access to the site would be maintained during construction. Impacts would be less than significant.

The project site is generally flat and does not support areas of steep slopes. In addition, the project site is located within an urbanized area of the city, where the risk of wildland fire is decreased. As such, the proposed project would not be located in a critical fire danger zone or adjacent to wildlands subject to wildfires. Urban levels of fire protection would be provided to the project area. In addition, the project would adhere to building codes and any conditions included through review by the City’s Fire Department. Impacts would be less than significant.

The project site is located in a developed area of the city and is situated within close proximity to existing electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. The project is situated on a site that is already developed and includes existing access to adjoining uses and suitable access for emergency vehicles. In addition, the proposed industrial uses on-site would not include any features that would have the potential to exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Emergency access to the site would be maintained during project construction. Impacts would be less than significant.

The project site is relatively flat with no major changes in elevations. There are no channels or creeks running through the project site. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. In addition, there are no known landslides at the project site, nor is the site in the path of any known or potential landslides. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to risks involving flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. A less than significant impact would occur.

4 CalFire. nd. Fire and Resource Assessment Program: FHSZ Viewer. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ Accessed July 19, 2022.
5 CalFire. 2007. Map of CalFire’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Local Responsibility Area – Western Riverside County. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6754/fhszl_map60.pdf Accessed July 19, 2022.

Packet Page 133 of 288Attachment 2 Page 78 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 57

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
X
Discussion: As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources, after implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to biological resources. Similarly, as discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources, and Section XVIII, Tribal Cultural Resources, after implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2, TC-1, and TC- 2, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to human remains, archaeological resources, paleontological resources, and tribal cultural resources.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, this environmental analysis was conducted to determine if there were any project-specific effects that are peculiar to the project or its site.

No project-specific significant effects peculiar to the project or its site were identified that could not be mitigated to a less than significant level. The project would not induce substantial population growth or significant traffic volumes. The project would contribute to environmental effects in the area of noise. However, this impact would not be cumulatively considerable, since it is site-specific. Furthermore, mitigation measures incorporated herein mitigate any potential impacts associated with this environmental issue. Cumulative projects would be required to prepare the appropriate CEQA environmental documentation on a project-by-project basis.

Therefore, the project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.

Packet Page 134 of 288Attachment 2 Page 79 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 58

Given the scope and nature of the proposed development, project implementation would not result in environmental effects, which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Compliance with applicable existing laws and regulations and implementation of recommended mitigation measures would ensure that the project would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no additional mitigation measures are required.

Packet Page 135 of 288Attachment 2 Page 80 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 59 Sources:

1. City of Fairfield, City of Fairfield General Plan, 2002.

2. City of Fairfield, City of Fairfield Scenic Vistas and Roadways Plan, 1999.

3. California Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder mapping interactive online, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ , accessed December 28, 2021.

4. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment Program: FHSZ Viewer, https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ accessed July 19, 2022.

5. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Map of CalFire’s Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Local Responsibility Area – Western Riverside County, 2007. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6754/fhszl_map60.pdf Accessed July 19, 2022.

6. California Department of Transportation, State Scenic Highway System Map. https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46c c8e8057116f1aacaa Accessed July 19, 2022.

7. Fairfield Municipal Code, current through Ordinance 2022-07, passed April 19, 2022.

8. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Service Map Center online, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home , accessed December 15, 2021.

9. Fehr and Peers, Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment 80-12 Industrial Center, LLC Industrial Project, February 23, 2022.

10. Haley Aldrich, Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment, August 11, 2021.

11. Haley Aldrich, ASTM Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 300 Chadbourne Road Fairfield, California, June 2021.

12. Haley Aldrich, Limited Phase II Environmental Investigation Results 80-12 Industrial Center Development, February 24, 2022.

13. Huffman-Broadway Group Inc., Biological Evaluation for the 80-12 Industrial Center at 300 Chadbourne Road, Fairfield, Solano County, California, September 14, 2021.

14. Huffman-Broadway Group Inc. and James P. Allen and Associates, Tree Mitigation Plan 80-12 Industrial Project 300 Chadbourne Road Fairfield, Solano County, California, January 2022.

15. James P. Allen and Associates, Tree Resource Analysis 80-12 Industrial Center 300 Chadbourne Road, Fairfield Road, Fairfield CA APNs 028-750-240/50/60/70/80/90 & 300, September 13, 2021.

16. SESPE Consulting, Inc., Air Quality and Climate Change Impact Assessment 80-12 Industrial Center Project – Fairfield, CA, January 3, 2022.

17. SESPE Consulting Inc., Energy Impact Assessment 80-12 Industrial Center Project – Fairfield, California, January 24, 2022.

Packet Page 136 of 288Attachment 2 Page 81 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 60

18. Travis Air Force Base, Air Installation and Compatible Use Zone Study for Travis Air Force Base, December 2009, Figure 4.8, Clear Zones and Accident Potential Zones.

Packet Page 137 of 288Attachment 2 Page 82 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 61 Initial Site Assessment Checklist for Special Status Species or Habitat PROJECT NAME: 80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER
SITE LOCATION: 300 CHADBOURNE ROAD
ASSESSMENT PREPARED BY: JONATHAN ATKINSON, SENIOR PLANNER PRESENT?
SITE CHARACTERISTICS Yes No COMMENTS

I. GENERAL CRITERIA

A. Is the Proposed Project Site located
within one of the following Areas of Concern*:

Vernal Pool Species ____ X __________________________
Giant Garter Snake ____ X __________________________
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle ____ X __________________________ California Red-legged Frog ____ X __________________________ Coastal Marsh Species ____ X __________________________ Callippe Silverspot Butterfly ____ X __________________________ (i.e., Potrero Hills or the open space area formed
by Interstate Highways 80, 680, 780)

B. Is the Proposed Project Site located along a
watercourse?

____

__________________________

*See accompanying Areas of Concern Guidelines for descriptions and map.

If the answer to any of the above Section I criteria is “yes”:

1. The site should be evaluated by a qualified biologist/botanist to determine the presence of special status species and/or habitat for such species.

2. The project will require evidence of compliance with the federal Endangered Species Act. The applicant should contact the USFWS regarding compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the Solano Project Biological Opinion. Details are provided in the Areas of Concern Guidelines.

If “no”: Complete Section II of this checklist on the following pages.

The USFWS can be reached at: Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, Endangered Species Program 2800 Cottage Way, Rm. W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825.
(916) 414-6600

Packet Page 138 of 288Attachment 2 Page 83 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 62 Initial Site Assessment Checklist for Special Status Species or Habitat PRESENT?
SITE CHARACTERISTICS Yes No COMMENTS
II. SPECIES-SPECIFIC CRITERIA
Vernal Pool Species

Vernal pool and/or seasonal wetlands, including
alkaline wetlands and stock ponds

____

__________________________

Level topography with shallow depressions
capable of containing standing water during the
rainy season (Nov.-May)

____

__________________________

Has a wetland delineation has been completed?
____

__________________________

Grassland with low-lying areas with stunted
vegetation growth

____

__________________________

Shallow stock ponds which normally dry on an
annual basis

____

__________________________

Presence of the following soil types: Pescadero
series, Antioch series, San Ysidro series, Solano
series, and associated complex soils (excludes
existing developed areas and areas cultivated with
perennial crops )

____

__________________________

Giant Garter Snake

Freshwater marshes, sloughs, ponds, low flow
drainages, irrigation canals, backwater areas, rice
fields

____

__________________________

Emergent aquatic vegetation (e.g., cattails,
bulrushes)

____

__________________________

Grassy banks and vegetated uplands adjacent to
or within 200ft of habitats listed above

____

__________________________

Packet Page 139 of 288Attachment 2 Page 84 of 87

S:\Planning\Projects\ANX-GPA-ZC\GPA\GPA2021-003 80-12 Industrial Center\CEQA\GPA2021-003 IS 2022-08-03.docx Page 63 Initial Site Assessment Checklist for Special Status Species or Habitat PRESENT?
SITE CHARACTERISTICS Yes No COMMENTS
Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle

Creeks, small drainages, man-made watercourses
____

__________________________

Elderberry Shrubs ____ X __________________________

Riparian vegetation ____ X __________________________

California Red-legged Frog

Perennial and seasonal creeks and ponds, small
drainages, seeps and springs, stock ponds and
other artificial water sources

____

__________________________

Aquatic or riparian vegetation ____ X __________________________

Oak woodlands nearby or other suitable migration
corridors between wet areas

____

__________________________

Coastal Marsh Species
Brackish or salt marsh, tidal sloughs ____ X __________________________

Dense patches of pickleweed, saltgrass, or other
perennial marsh vegetation

____

__________________________

Adjacent high marsh (non-submerged) areas for
refuge

____

__________________________

Presence of any of above habitat conditions
within 1,000 feet of proposed new development

____

__________________________

Summary:

If the answer to any of the above Section II criteria is “yes”, the site should be evaluated by a qualified biologist or botanist to determine the presence of special status species and/or potential habitat of such species. Also, the applicant should contact the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office regarding compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the Solano Project Biological Opinion.

Packet Page 140 of 288Attachment 2 Page 85 of 87

80-12 INDUSTRIAL CENTER
Initial Study Appendices
• Appendix A Air Quality and Climate Change Memorandum
• Appendix B-1 Biological Evaluation
• Appendix B-2 Tree Resource Analysis
• Appendix B-3 Tree Mitigation Plan
• Appendix C Energy Analysis
• Appendix D Geotechnical Feasibility Report
• Appendix E-1 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
• Appendix E-2 Phase II Environmental Site Assessment
• Appendix F VMT Assessment
All appendices can be accessed on the City of Fairfield website:
https://www.fairfield.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/7473/637952302558900000

Packet Page 141 of 288Attachment 2 Page 86 of 87

General Plan Legend
Agriculture
AI Intensive
AE Extensive
Open Space
OSR Recreation
OSC Conservation
Residential
RVL Very Low Density
RL Low Density
RLM Low-Medium Density
RLM-C Low-Medium Density
(Cap)
RM Medium Density
RM-C Medium Density (Cap)
RH High Density
RVH Very High Density
Commercial
CN Neighborhood
CC Community/CBD
CS Service
CHR Highway & Regional
CO Office
Industrial
IL Limited
IG General
IBP Business & Industrial
Park
Other
PF Public Facilities
MU Mixed Use
Phasing/
Special Study Area
Suisun Marsh
Protection Boundary
Urban Limit Line
Boundary between
Phasing Areas D & E
Scale: N.T.S.

General Plan Land Use Exhibit
City of Fairfield
Community Development Department NORTH
Existing General Plan Land Use Designation
Highway and Regional Commercial
Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation
Limited Industrial
CHR
IL

EXHIBIT B
Packet Page 142 of 288Attachment 2 Page 87 of 87

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-16

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AMENDING CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE I, SECTION 25.12.3 OF THE FAIRFIELD CITY CODE (ALSO KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP) TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 19.44 ACRES AT 300 CHADBOURNE ROAD (APNs: 0028-750-240, -250, -260, -270, -290, AND -300) FROM REGIONAL

COMMERCIAL (CR) DISTRICT TO LIMITED INDUSTRIAL (IL) DISTRICT

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

Section 1. Chapter 25, Article I, Section 25.12.3 to the Fairfield City Code, also known as the City of Fairfield Zoning Map, is hereby amended as shown on the Sectional Zoning Map (ZC2021-005) attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Section 25.47.5 Findings. The City Council finds as follows:

A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan. The proposed Amendments would change the General Plan designation of the Project site from Highway and Regional Commercial to Limited Industrial and Zoning designation from Regional Commercial (CR) District to Limited Industrial (IL) District. The IL District implements the Limited Industrial designation of the General Plan. The Project is consistent with the General Plan in that it anticipates light and medium industrial activities, including warehousing, wholesale and distribution, manufacturing, and assembly for properties with the Limited Industrial designation. The Project is also consistent with multiple General Plan Objectives: Objective LU 14: Develop sufficient employment generating uses to maintain a positive city fiscal condition and housing balance; Objective LU 18: Encourage infill development and compact growth; Objective ED 2: Effectively concentrate industrial and commercial uses; Objective ED 4: Select commercial and industrial locations which are convenient, while compatible with the growth and future service needs of the community; and Objective UD 8: Encourage and approve infill development which is compatible with the surrounding area. The Project is consistent with each of these General Plan Objectives for the following reasons: The Project adds 328,553 square feet of flexible industrial space to the Fairfield market allowing for a variety of employment-generating uses. The Project is an infill development that will result in the redevelopment of a property that was formerly Walmart and is now largely underutilized. The Project effectively replaces a large vacant commercial building with two industrial warehouse buildings in a contiguous area with a collection of industrial buildings of varying sizes. The Project site is conveniently located along Highway 12 in the proximity of Interstate 80 and is already served by exist ing services and infrastructure.

The Project serves economic needs in that it will create industrial space that can accommodate employment-generating uses. The two industrial warehouse buildings will have respective building areas of 103,440 and 225,113 square feet and building heights Packet Page 143 of 288Attachment 3 Page 1 of 3

ORD. NO. 2022-16

Page 2 ends

Fairfield City CouncilNovember 1, 2022

Fairfield City Council
November 1, 2022