Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, August 15, 2023 (part 4 of 6)

·1· · · · · ·And like I said, the other apartment is not even ·2· ·fully occupied.·And I can tell there's a difference in ·3· ·just sitting there in Green Valley and Business Center, ·4· ·how long you just -- you're waiting for the lights. ·5· · · · · ·And of course, the school.·There's a big
·6· ·concern about the overcrowding and the -- especially the ·7· ·elementary school.·So I'm just here to echo the
·8· ·concerns of the community that I'm hearing constantly. ·9· ·And a lot of people are totally against this new
10· ·apartment building.
11· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·We certainly thank you for 12· ·your feedback.
13· · · · · ·MS. PERKINS:·I'm sorry?
14· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·I said, we thank you for 15· ·your feedback.
16· · · · · ·MS. PERKINS:·Oh, thank you.
17· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·And my next speaker card 18· ·is Carol Chervinko?
19· · · · · ·MS. CHERVINKO:·Carol Chervinko.·First, thank 20· ·you for letting me speak tonight.·I had written a note 21· ·to Mr. Atkinson that I would like to share with you 22· ·tonight, that I also shared with the city council and 23· ·all their members.
24· · · · · ·Firstly, the environmental impact does not stop 25· ·when construction is done with the apartments.·You will 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
3 4
5 1
Commenter 2
Packet Page 409 of 860Attachment 2 Page 100 of 150

Page 5 ends

·1· ·continue to have CO2 emissions.·You will use additional ·2· ·water resources in the city of Fairfield.·And
·3· ·regardless of the transportation mitigation, there ·4· ·should be a new traffic study required at peak
·5· ·transportation hours and not use a national traffic ·6· ·study to determine how bad the traffic is at that area. ·7· · · · · ·I believe that the fees for the EIR should be ·8· ·paid now and not later.·Rezoning the business and
·9· ·industrial park for residential use leads to the
10· ·overcrowding of schools, such as Nelda Mundy, Green 11· ·Valley Middle School, and Rodriguez High School.·Nelda 12· ·Mundy's transitional kindergarten to 3rd grade are 13· ·already at capacity with 500 students.·Their 4th and 14· ·5th grades average 34 students per class.·Overcrowded 15· ·classes lead to poor test scores, because teachers 16· ·cannot adequately educate children.
17· · · · · ·Even for residents without children, a school's 18· ·reputation affects property values and can reflect 19· ·poorly on the school district.
20· · · · · ·Math scores are already below state level, at 21· ·30 percent.·More living units just means more students. 22· · · · · ·While there may be a two-story parking garage, 23· ·nothing has been said of guest parking.·If guest
24· ·parking imposes at the new hotel, the new hotel
25· ·management will not be pleased if their own guests have 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
1 2
3 4
5 6
Packet Page 410 of 860Attachment 2 Page 101 of 150

Page 6 ends

·1· ·no parking.
·2· · · · · ·There's definitely more room to build more ·3· ·residential housing at Suisun Parkway, where there are ·4· ·already two other developments.·I ask that you tell the ·5· ·city council that you will not rezone this area until a ·6· ·general plan amendment or a general plan is made.
·7· · · · · ·If it's good to pause and wait for the other ·8· ·thing on the agenda tonight, then it should be good ·9· ·enough to pause for these apartments.
10· · · · · ·Thank you for your time.
11· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Thank you for your
12· ·comments.·Do we have any speakers via Zoom?
13· · · · · ·UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:·Yes, it looks like we 14· ·have two hands raised.
15· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Yes, we're ready for you. 16· ·We're ready for our Zoom speakers.
17· · · · · ·MS. VILLANUEVA:·Hi there.·This is Brenda
18· ·Villanueva.·I'm the president of the Green Valley Lakes 19· ·Edgewater Development.·And I gave a statement in
20· ·regards to the EIR that was presented today as well as 21· ·my own thoughts.
22· · · · · ·The EIR for the Green Valley Apartments shares 23· ·how building these new apartments would impact the 24· ·immediate area but fails to include how the impact of 25· ·the environment itself would have on the apartments 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
6 7
1 Commenter 3
Packet Page 411 of 860Attachment 2 Page 102 of 150

Page 7 ends

·1· ·since done prior to January 9.·We saw in early January ·2· ·22 days of nonstop rain, producing over 9.6 inches in ·3· ·the Fairfield area.·Experts say that effects of climate ·4· ·change will bring large extremes of extreme dryness in ·5· ·the summer, fire danger, and heavy rains during the ·6· ·rainy season.
·7· · · · · ·Yet we haven't -- yes, we haven't seen rain in ·8· ·several years due to drought, but what happens if days ·9· ·of rain continue to occur every season?
10· · · · · ·My husband and I, we walk this area often with 11· ·our dogs.·We witness the small creek past Eastridge 12· ·along Rockville Road turned into a fast-moving river 13· ·flowing through the Vintage Valley neighborhood into the 14· ·pond by the library, the easement next to Green Valley 15· ·Road, and the easement bordering the freeway and the 16· ·current hotels.
17· · · · · ·There was a small lake in the center of the area 18· ·that's being considered for more apartments.·Currently 19· ·the water flows in through the immediate neighboring 20· ·easement to keep the current neighborhood safe.·And the 21· ·EIR was done prior to the 22 days of rain, prior to 22· ·seeing all the rainwater collect in the neighboring 23· ·easement, prior to seeing the water come streaming down 24· ·all the hills and streets in the immediate area and 25· ·possibly causing flooding and jeopardizing human life. 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
1 Packet Page 412 of 860Attachment 2 Page 103 of 150

Page 8 ends

·1· · · · · ·The EIR we just presented, the neighboring ·2· ·easement is a small wetlands.·She said, a small
·3· ·wetlands.·During the 22 days of continuous rain, the ·4· ·neighboring small wetland was not small.·It was
·5· ·considerable.
·6· · · · · ·I also want to mention, there are only 2.5 ways ·7· ·out of that immediate proposed apartment area.·The ·8· ·hotel recently changed the driveway closest to the main ·9· ·intersection from a two-way driveway to an outbound 10· ·driveway and also narrowing it for only one car to exit 11· ·at a time.
12· · · · · ·Also currently, there's only one driveway that 13· ·allows you to leave left or right.·And the other
14· ·driveway is only a one-way right driveway.
15· · · · · ·The proposal is to allow for approximately 300 16· ·residents, 250 cars who live in the small area.·In my 17· ·own experience, after being evacuated several times from 18· ·the wildfires in the past seven years, I see during a 19· ·rush to evacuate, specifically in this apartment
20· ·building, a huge traffic jam and danger to human lives. 21· · · · · ·I want to point out the EIR slide presented, 22· ·that wildfire is considered less than significant.·Let 23· ·me repeat that --
24· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·30 seconds.
25· · · · · ·MS. VILLANUEVA:·-- less than significant.
925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
1 2
Packet Page 413 of 860Attachment 2 Page 104 of 150

Page 9 ends

·1· · · · · ·Has never been evacuated from their home in that ·2· ·immediate area.·Definitely should re-evaluate that ·3· ·statement, especially during the summer months,
·4· ·especially October.
·5· · · · · ·My opinion is to keep with the original
·6· ·recommendation by the Planning Commission last year and ·7· ·not rezone this area residential.
·8· · · · · ·Thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts. ·9· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Thank you, Ms. Villanueva. 10· · · · · ·Now our next speaker?·Our next Zoom speaker? 11· · · · · ·MR. GREEN-HEFFERN:·Yes.·Can you hear me?
12· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Yes.
13· · · · · ·MR. GREEN-HEFFERN:·Yeah, this is Joe
14· ·Green-Heffern.·And I am a Fairfield resident in north 15· ·Cordelia.·And I am also president of the Turnstone 16· ·Homeowners Association.·I have two big concerns about 17· ·the adequacy of the EIR, irrespective of the merits of 18· ·the project itself.
19· · · · · ·First, the cumulative analysis of potential 20· ·impacts is flawed, and I will explain.
21· · · · · ·Second, the requested rezoning is a significant 22· ·land use impact.·Otherwise, they wouldn't be requesting 23· ·a zoning change, because it would not be allowed in this 24· ·area.·So fundamentally, it is a significant impact, not 25· ·less than significant.
925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
2 3
Commenter 4
1 2
Packet Page 414 of 860Attachment 2 Page 105 of 150

Page 10 ends

·1· · · · · ·So cumulative analysis is flawed because the ·2· ·map, figure 4.1, clearly misses many of the past
·3· ·projects and future projects that are housing related ·4· ·along Business Center Drive, which includes Bradford ·5· ·Park, which was an industrial or commercial area that ·6· ·was built -- converted to housing about five years ago, ·7· ·and all the apartments of Business Center Drive east of ·8· ·Suisun Valley Road.·They did include the new Green ·9· ·Valley 2 apartments, but they missed all the other 10· ·apartments.
11· · · · · ·Secondly, there are new projects, which include 12· ·Green Valley -- Middle Green Valley development in 13· ·Solano County, which, while it's not within the city, 14· ·accesses through this area on the same road that all 15· ·these other houses -- so the cumulative analysis is 16· ·flawed, because it doesn't include these past and future 17· ·projects.
18· · · · · ·In addition, the City, at least, has identified 19· ·three housing projects along Suisun Valley Road that 20· ·will be considered in the general plan for apartments. 21· ·So there are many, many housing developments that should 22· ·have been included in the cumulative.
23· · · · · ·Second, the -- any zoning to add more housing in 24· ·this area is inappropriate because it's not compliant 25· ·with the existing plan.·And, in fact, all the past 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
3 4
Packet Page 415 of 860Attachment 2 Page 106 of 150

Page 11 ends

·1· ·development in this area has been done on a piecemeal ·2· ·rezoning basis.·So it has led to this commercial and ·3· ·public services gap that we are dealing with now.
·4· · · · · ·So I don't agree that it's a less than
·5· ·significant impact from land use.·It's either
·6· ·potentially significant, that needs to be evaluated in ·7· ·the general plan, or it's significant, requiring
·8· ·rezoning under the general plan.
·9· · · · · ·And given that the City has decided to update 10· ·the general plan in the next six to twelve months, this 11· ·project should be denied until there is a vision for 12· ·this area.
13· · · · · ·Thank you for your consideration.
14· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Thank you, Mr. Heffern. 15· · · · · ·Would staff like to respond to any of the issues 16· ·raised by the commenters?
17· · · · · ·(Comments by Planning Manager Feinstein not 18· · · · · ·reported.)
19· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·I will now close the
20· ·public comment period and turn it back to the Commission 21· ·for their comments on the EIR.·Any commissioners?
22· · · · · ·PLANNING MANAGER FEINSTEIN:·And Commissioner 23· ·Matthews, this is a good time to talk about that and any 24· ·other comments that you all have.·And where there's 25· ·questions in regard to that, we're happy to answer and 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
YVer1f
PH-1
4 5
Packet Page 416 of 860Attachment 2 Page 107 of 150

Page 12 ends

·1· ·provide any further --
·2· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·So I'm looking at table ·3· ·4.12.8.·And that's where I see 840 expected cars -- ·4· ·daily cars due to this project; is that correct?
·5· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:· ·Let me get through to make sure ·6· ·I'm looking --
·7· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·There are no page
·8· ·numbers, so it's kind of hard.·But 4.12-13.
·9· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Okay.·Yeah, you're looking at the 10· ·trip generation table.·That's correct.·That's right, 11· ·for the project.
12· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Okay.·So what my
13· ·request is, is a comparison to what --
14· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
15· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·-- would be acceptable 16· ·under current zoning.
17· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Correct.
18· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·And I didn't find that 19· ·in here.
20· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
21· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Did I miss it?
22· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Not in the Transportation section. 23· ·We reported it in the Alternatives section.·Because in 24· ·this section, where you're looking currently, that is 25· ·the Transportation section of the EIR, right?·And you 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
YVer1f
PH-1
Commenter 5
1 Packet Page 417 of 860Attachment 2 Page 108 of 150

Page 13 ends

·1· ·can see that the project would generate about 840 daily ·2· ·trips --
·3· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Right.
·4· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·-- as shown in this table.·And ·5· ·then if we go to the Alternatives chapter, which is ·6· ·Chapter 6, and specifically if you go to Page
·7· ·Number 6-9 -- and I hope you have that --
·8· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·6-9?
·9· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
10· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Okay.·I don't see it -- 11· ·oh, Transportation.
12· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Right.·That first paragraph
13· ·describes the alternative of putting, you know, business 14· ·commercial -- I keep using the wrong term.·I need to 15· ·use the right word.
16· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·So are you saying under 17· ·current zoning, it would be --
18· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
19· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·2710 --
20· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Correct.
21· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·-- versus --
22· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·840 --
23· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·-- 840?
24· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·-- for the project.
25· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·So I just think that's 925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
YVer1f
PH-1
1 Packet Page 418 of 860Attachment 2 Page 109 of 150

Page 14 ends

·1· ·an area of big concern for anybody that lives or works ·2· ·in that area and that somehow we ought to highlight it, ·3· ·because --
·4· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
·5· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·-- looking for it, I ·6· ·couldn't find it.·So --
·7· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah, I understand it.·I get that. ·8· ·Yeah, we can definitely -- Commissioner Matthews,
·9· ·typically, because it's an alternative, that information 10· ·would be reported in this chapter, because it's a
11· ·discussion of an alternative --
12· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Yeah.
13· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·-- not the project, right?·But we 14· ·can highlight it by putting a table in here to show the 15· ·comparison.
16· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Okay.·Thank you.
17· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·That might be helpful.·Because we 18· ·do do that comparison here.·We do say that this
19· ·alternative generates a greater number of daily trips, 20· ·as you can see, about 1800 or so more than the project. 21· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS:·Yeah.
22· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Right?
23· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·I had a quick question. 24· ·You identified several areas that had significant
25· ·impact --
925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
YVer1f
PH-1
1 1
Commenter 6
Packet Page 419 of 860Attachment 2 Page 110 of 150

Page 15 ends

·1· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
·2· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·-- but you didn't really ·3· ·talk about the strategies in place to address that. ·4· · · · · ·Did that come out in the final report?
·5· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·I'm so sorry.·Can we go back to ·6· ·that slide?·Here we go.·So those are the seven areas. ·7· ·And I apologize if I might have miscounted them.
·8· ·Actually, there are six:·Air, biology cultural, and ·9· ·cultural resources are one group, geology soils, noise, 10· ·and transportation.·Those six areas.
11· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Gotcha.
12· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Yeah.
13· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Now, when you come out 14· ·with the final report, when you identify -- because you 15· ·said there were strategies in place to address those. 16· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·Correct.
17· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Would that be spelled out 18· ·in the final?
19· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·They are in the document currently. 20· ·All of the mitigation measures for impacts that we found 21· ·significant -- for instance, right here, we have three 22· ·air quality impacts that we found potentially
23· ·significant or significant.·And we have mitigation 24· ·measures for each one of them.
25· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Okay.
925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
YVer1f
PH-1
1 1
Packet Page 420 of 860Attachment 2 Page 111 of 150

Page 16 ends

·1· · · · · ·MS. BARATI:·In fact, you can see TRA -- the ·2· ·first one is TRA-1 and BIO-8.·Those are mitigation ·3· ·measures.·Then AQ-1 is a mitigation measure under air ·4· ·quality.·And AQ-2 is another mitigation measure under ·5· ·air quality.
·6· · · · · ·So there are -- corresponding to all of the ·7· ·significant impacts, we have mitigation measures in the ·8· ·document.
·9· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Thanks for that
10· ·clarification.
11· · · · · ·(Comments by Planning Manager Feinstein not 12· · · · · ·reported.)
13· · · · · ·COMMISSIONER CHILDS:·Any other commissioners? 14· ·Well, seeing none, we'll go back to our directed report 15· ·and commissioners' comments.
16· · · · · ·(End of video transcription.)
17· · · · · · · · · · · · · · --o0o--
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
YVer1f
PH-1
Packet Page 421 of 860Attachment 2 Page 112 of 150

Page 17 ends

·1· · · · · · · · · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
·2
·3· ·STATE OF CALIFORNIA· · · )
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )·ss.
·4· ·COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO· · ·)
·5
·6· · · · · ·I, Rick Galten, a Certified Shorthand Reporter, ·7· ·licensed by the State of California and empowered to ·8· ·administer oaths and affirmations pursuant to Section ·9· ·2093 (b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, do hereby 10· ·certify:
11· · · · · ·That the proceedings herein were recorded by 12· ·audio/video and recorded by me stenographically, and 13· ·were thereafter transcribed under my direction via 14· ·computer-assisted transcription;
15· · · · · ·That the foregoing transcript is a true record 16· ·of the proceedings which then and there took place; 17· · · · · ·That I am a disinterested person in this action. 18· · · · · ·IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have subscribed my name on 19· ·February 18, 2023
20 21
22 23· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·__________________________ · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·RICK GALTEN, CSR NO. 13202 24 25
925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
925-831-9029 [email protected]
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
Packet Page 422 of 860Attachment 2 Page 113 of 150

925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
(
(b) 17:9
-
--o0o-- 16:17
1 13202 17:23
18 17:19
1800 14:20
2 2023 17:19
2093 17:9
2710 13:19
4 4.12-13 12:8

4.12.8 12:3
6 6 13:6
6-9 13:7,8
8 840 12:3 13:1,22,23
A
acceptable 12:15
action 17:17
address 15:3,15
administer 17:8
affirmations 17:8
air 15:8,22 16:3,5
alternative 13:13 14:9,
11,19
Alternatives 12:23
13:5
apologize 15:7
AQ-1 16:3
AQ-2 16:4
area 14:1,2
areas 14:24 15:6,10
audio/video 17:12
B
back 15:5 16:14
BARATI 12:5,9,14,17,
20,22 13:4,9,12,18,20,
22,24 14:4,7,13,17,22
15:1,5,12,16,19 16:1
big 14:1
BIO-8 16:2
biology 15:8
business 13:13
C
California 17:3,7
cars 12:3,4
CERTIFICATE 17:1
Certified 17:6
certify 17:10
chapter 13:5,6 14:10
CHILDS 14:23 15:2,11,
13,17,25 16:9,13
Civil 17:9
clarification 16:10
Code 17:9
comments 16:11,15
commercial 13:14
Commissioner 12:2,7,
12,15,18,21 13:3,8,10,
16,19,21,23,25 14:5,8,
12,16,21,23 15:2,11,13,
17,25 16:9,13
commissioners 16:13
commissioners'
16:15
comparison 12:13
14:15,18
computer-assisted
17:14
concern 14:1
correct 12:4,10,17
13:20 15:16
COUNTY 17:4
CSR 17:23
cultural 15:8,9
current 12:16 13:17
D
daily 12:4 13:1 14:19
describes 13:13
directed 16:14
direction 17:13
discussion 14:11
disinterested 17:17
document 15:19 16:8
due 12:4
E
EIR 12:25
empowered 17:7
end 16:16
expected 12:3
F
fact 16:1
February 17:19
Feinstein 16:11
final 15:4,14,18
find 12:18 14:6
foregoing 17:15
found 15:20,22
G
Galten 17:6,23
generate 13:1
generates 14:19
generation 12:10
geology 15:9
Gotcha 15:11
greater 14:19
group 15:9
H
hard 12:8
helpful 14:17
highlight 14:2,14
hope 13:7
I
identified 14:24
identify 15:14
impact 14:25
impacts 15:20,22 16:7
information 14:9
instance 15:21
K
kind 12:8
L
licensed 17:7
lives 14:1
925-831-9029 [email protected]: (b)..lives Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
Packet Page 423 of 860Attachment 2 Page 114 of 150

925-831-9029
Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
M
make 12:5
Manager 16:11
Matthews 12:2,7,12,
15,18,21 13:3,8,10,16,
19,21,23,25 14:5,8,12,
16,21
measure 16:3,4
measures 15:20,24
16:3,7
miscounted 15:7
mitigation 15:20,23
16:2,3,4,7
N
noise 15:9
number 13:7 14:19
numbers 12:8
O
oaths 17:8
P
paragraph 13:12
person 17:17
place 15:3,15 17:16
Planning 16:11
potentially 15:22
Procedure 17:9
proceedings 17:11,16
project 12:4,11 13:1,24
14:13,20
provide 12:1
pursuant 17:8
putting 13:13 14:14
Q
quality 15:22 16:4,5
question 14:23
quick 14:23
R
record 17:15
recorded 17:11,12
report 15:4,14 16:14
reported 12:23 14:10
16:12
Reporter 17:6
REPORTER'S 17:1
request 12:13
resources 15:9
Rick 17:6,23
S
SACRAMENTO 17:4
section 12:22,23,24,25
17:8
Shorthand 17:6
show 14:14
shown 13:4
significant 14:24
15:21,23 16:7
slide 15:6
soils 15:9
specifically 13:6
spelled 15:17
ss 17:3
State 17:3,7
stenographically
17:12
strategies 15:3,15
subscribed 17:18
T
table 12:2,10 13:4
14:14
talk 15:3
term 13:14
TRA 16:1
TRA-1 16:2
transcribed 17:13
transcript 17:15
transcription 16:16
17:14
transportation 12:22,
25 13:11 15:10
trip 12:10
trips 13:2 14:19
true 17:15
typically 14:9
U
understand 14:7
V
versus 13:21
video 16:16
W
WHEREOF 17:18
word 13:15
works 14:1
wrong 13:14
Z
zoning 12:16 13:17
925-831-9029 [email protected]: make..zoning Emerick and Finch, Certified Shorthand Reporters

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF VIDEOTAPED PROCEEDINGS
PH-1
Packet Page 424 of 860Attachment 2 Page 115 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 3-86 PUBLIC HEARING (FEBRUARY 8, 2023)
Mortissa Perkins
Response to Comment PH-1-1
The commenter notes that a children’s playground is located on Bianco Circle to the north of the project site and expresses concern that children using the playground would be exposed to construction emissions while the project is under construction. The playground is about 200 feet from the northern boundary of the project site and there is an intervening stormwater basin and a number of tree clusters between the playground and the project site.

The potential for the project’s construction emissions to result in adverse health effects on off-site sensitive receptors was analyzed in the Draft EIR. The analysis, which is presented under Impact AQ- 4 in Section 4.2: Air Quality, found that there would be a significant health effect on residential receptors immediately adjacent to the project site on Malvasia Court and Bianco Circle. To address the impact, Mitigation Measure AQ-2 is set forth in the Draft EIR which requires the project contractor to ensure that all off-road diesel-powered construction equipment of 50 horsepower or more used for project construction at a minimum meets the California Air Resources Board Tier 2 emissions standards and is equipped with Level 3 diesel particulate filters or the equivalent. In addition, the project contractor will be required to implement Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which requires that a series of dust, particulate matter, and exhaust emissions control measures recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District be implemented during project construction. Both mitigation measures would ensure that the construction-phase air quality impacts on off-site sensitive receptors, such as the nearby residents and the children using the playground, would be less than significant.

Response to Comment PH-1-2
The commenter states that she would prefer that the project site be developed with either single- family homes, or a park, or a commercial development per the site’s current zoning.

The development of the project site with single-family homes was considered as an alternative in the Draft EIR Chapter 6.0: Alternatives, but was not further considered as it would not satisfy three of the project’s four objectives. Therefore, the alternative was not analyzed in detail. Similarly, development of the project site with a park would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed project and was therefore not further considered.

As the current zoning allows for the site to be developed with commercial and light industrial uses, development of the project site with a business office use was analyzed in detail as an alternative in Chapter 6.0. The analysis showed that a business office development on this site would result in comparable impacts on biological resources, geology and soils, and cultural resources but would result in more severe impacts in the areas of air quality, noise, transportation, and wildfire. All of the mitigation measures required for the proposed project would also be required for this alternative.

Packet Page 425 of 860Attachment 2 Page 116 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 3-87 Response to Comment PH-1-3
The commenter expresses concern regarding the traffic that would be generated by the project. The number of daily and peak hours trips that would be generated by the project are reported in the Draft EIR on page 4.12-13; about 840 daily vehicle trips would be generated. However, this number is substantially lower than 2,710 daily vehicle trips that would be generated if the site were to be developed as a business office, as reported in Section 6.3.2.2 of the Draft EIR.

Although the Draft EIR reports the number of daily vehicle trips and also provides an analysis of the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) added by the project, it does not analyze congestion on local roadways and intersections because roadway congestion is no longer an environmental impact under CEQA.

However, a level of service (LOS) analysis, which analyzes the increase in traffic congestion at study intersections, was completed for informational purposes and use by the City. Based on the LOS analysis, the project would not add more than 5 seconds of delay to the Business Center Drive and Green Valley Road intersection under Existing Plus Project conditions; therefore, no intersection improvements are warranted.

Response to Comment PH-1-4
Please see Response to Comment IND-6-5.

Response to Comment PH-1-5
The comment expressing opposition to the proposed project is noted and will be considered by the decision makers when making a decision with respect to the requested approvals.

Carol Chervinko
Response to Comment PH-2-1
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-2.

Response to Comment PH-2-2
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-1.

Response to Comment PH-2-3
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-3.

Response to Comment PH-2-4
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-4.

Response to Comment PH-2-5
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-5.

Packet Page 426 of 860Attachment 2 Page 117 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 3-88 Response to Comment PH-2-6
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-6.

Response to Comment PH-2-7
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-6-7. Please also see Response to Comment IND-1-1.

Brenda Villanueva
Response to Comment PH-3-1
Please see Responses to Comments IND-3-1 and IND-8-2.

Response to Comment PH-3-2
Please see Response to Comment IND-8-3.

Response to Comment PH-3-3
The comment is noted and will be considered by the decision makers when making a decision with respect to the requested approvals.

Joseph Green-Heffern
Response to Comment PH-4-1
Please see Responses to Comments IND-9-2 and IND-9-4.

Response to Comment PH-4-2
Please see Response to Comment IND-9-3.

Response to Comment PH-4-3
Please see Responses to Comments IND-9-2 and IND-9-4.

Response to Comment PH-4-4
Please see Response to Comment IND-9-3.

Response to Comment PH-4-5
Please refer to Response to Comment IND-1-1.

City Planning Commissioner Chris Matthews
Response to Comment PH-5-1
Please see Response to Comment LA-1-1.

Packet Page 427 of 860Attachment 2 Page 118 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA
P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 3-89 City Planning Commissioner Jerome Childs
Response to Comment PH-6-1
The Draft EIR sets forth mitigation measures for each significant or potentially significant impact that is identified based on the impact analysis. All of the impacts and corresponding mitigation measures are listed in Table 2.A: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, in Draft EIR Chapter 2.0:

Summary, and the same table is reproduced in Chapter 2.0: Summary, in this Final EIR. All of the project’s significant or potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with the proposed mitigation measures.

Packet Page 428 of 860Attachment 2 Page 119 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 3-90 This page intentionally left blank
Packet Page 429 of 860Attachment 2 Page 120 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 4-1

4.0 DRAFT EIR TEXT REVISIONS
This section presents specific changes to the text of the Draft EIR that are being made to clarify any errors or omissions of materials in the Draft EIR and corrections based on the City’s review of the Draft EIR and in response to comments received during the public review period. In no case do these revisions result in a change in the conclusions set forth in the Draft EIR nor result in new or substantially more severe impacts than those presented in the Draft EIR. Where revisions to the main text are called for, the page and paragraph are set forth, followed by the appropriate revision.

Added text is indicated by underlined text. Text deleted from the Draft EIR is shown in strikeout.

Page numbers correspond to the page numbers in the Draft EIR.

Table 2A: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures Environmental Impact TCR-2, as described in Table 2A: Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures on page 2-13 of the Draft EIR, is revised as shown below for consistency with the text on page 4.4-11 in Section 4.4: Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources. The Table 2A column heading is also revised to correctly state “Level of Significance prior to Mitigation” instead of “Level of Significant prior to Mitigation.”
Impact TCR-2 The project would not could 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 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.

Chapter 4.0: Cumulative Projects in the Vicinity of the Project Site Table 4A: Cumulative Projects in the Vicinity of the Project Site and the preceding paragraph on pages 4-5 and 4-2, respectively, of the Draft EIR have been revised as shown below to reflect the Middle Green Valley Specific Plan Project, which was inadvertently omitted from the cumulative analysis. Figure 4-1: Location of Cumulative Projects on page 4-3 of the Draft EIR has also been updated to include this project.

The cumulative context for land use development project effects is typically localized within the immediate vicinity of the project site or at the neighborhood level. Cumulative development in the project vicinity (within an approximately 1.5-mile radius of the project site) includes the projects listed in Table 4.A: Cumulative Projects in the Vicinity of the Project Site, below. Figure 4-1: Location of Cumulative Projects shows the location of the cumulative projects within a 1.5-mile radius of the project site. This radius was determined Packet Page 430 of 860Attachment 2 Page 121 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 4-2 to be adequate as it encompasses the Cordelia area and the Green Valley areas of western Fairfield and unincorporated Solano County. As western Fairfield is separated from the main city by a large swath of undeveloped land, an extension of the radius would not serve to encompass additional cumulative projects that would be relevant to the cumulative analysis. The projects included in Table 4.A and Figure 4-1 are either projects for which the City or County has have a project application on file or are projects that have been entitled but were not yet operational at the time that the EIR analysis was commenced (March 2022). Refer to the appropriate discussion in each topical section for further discussion of the cumulative assumptions relevant to each environmental topic.

Table 4.A: Cumulative Projects in the Vicinity of the Project Site Project/Location Project Description Project Status

1. Green Valley II Apartments
4501 Business Center Drive
281 multifamily residential units Under construction

2. Residence Inn
(APNs: 0148-540-140; -130; -120)
Hotel with 104 rooms Under construction
(anticipated completion in
May 2023)

3. PDC Industrial Warehouses
(APNs: 0148-540-080; -250; -260; and -
300)
Three industrial buildings: 201,000 square
feet, 115,000 square feet, 104,000 square
feet
Under construction

4. New Fire Station
(APN: 0148-540-360)
Fire station with three bays Not under construction
yet

5. The Enclave
(APN: 01800-540-360)
Subdivision with 143 single-family
residential units
Under construction

6. Cordelia Industrial Buildings
(APNs: 0180-150-130; 140; 180; 200;
and 220; and 180-160-160; and -170)
Three industrial buildings totaling 337,000
square feet
Not under construction
yet

7. Storage Pro 475 Lopes Road Self-Storage Facility: 136,000 square feet Operational

8. Pittman Road Self Storage
555 Pittman Road
Self-Storage Facility: 101,000 square feet Operational

9. Estaire (APN: 0044-130-300) 25 multi-family residential units Under construction

10. Middle Green Valley Specific Plan
(Near the intersection of Green Valley
Road and Mason Road)
322 single-family residential units and
associated parks and open space, village
green, and community service uses
Not under construction
yet
Source: City of Fairfield Community Development Department, Jonathan Atkinson, Senior Planner, email correspondence with Kristin Nurmela, LSA, Associate/Natural Resources Planner (March 3, 2022).

Solano County Board of Supervisors October 4, 2022 Staff Report and Attachments. Accessed on April 4, 2023 at:
https://www.solanocounty.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=38422 .

APN = Assessor’s Parcel Number

Packet Page 431 of 860Attachment 2 Page 122 of 150

C o rd e lia R dGr
e
e
n
Va
ll
e
y
Rd
Pit
t
manRdN e itze l R d
B u s in e ssCenterDrSuisun Valley RdLopes RdRed Top Rd 80 680
M a n g e ls B lv dTerm Reservoir RdEast
ri
dgeDrVi
nt
ageV
alleyDr
Kaiser DrOakwoodDr
B r i d g e p o r t A ve
O a k rid g e D rLakeshore D rDynastyDrWillottaDrPa
vili
o
n
DrC o r d e l ia R d
Link RdCitadelDr
SilveradoDr
Brittany DrRitchie
RdMason Rd
TrophyDrKnollDrWatt DrCentralPlD e Leu D r
Fulton Dr
Solano C o lle g e R dJ e n i L n
McgaryRdV intageL n
F e rm i D rKari LnRamsey RdG
reenValleyCreek
Cordelia
Slou
g
h SuisunCreek2 9
6 5
4 3
1 7
8 10
LEGEND
Project Boundary
Cumulative S tudy Area Boundary
Cumulative Projects
SOURCE: Nearmap (5/22/2021)
I:\BTI2101\GIS\MXD\CumulativeProjects.mxd (4/25/2023)
FIGURE 4.1
Green Valley 3 Apartments Project
Location of Cumulative Projects
0 1100 2200
FEET Note: See Table 4.A for cumulative project names and details Packet Page 432 of 860Attachment 2 Page 123 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 4-4 This page intentionally left blank
Packet Page 433 of 860Attachment 2 Page 124 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA
P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 4-5 Section 4.14.6.1: Impair Emergency Response Plans
The evaluation of the proposed project’s effects on emergency evacuation on pages 4.14-12 and

4.14-13 of the Draft EIR was updated as shown below to reflect the Middle Green Valley Specific Plan Project, which was inadvertently omitted from the analysis.

An evaluation of the proposed project’s potential effects on roadway capacity was completed to determine whether the addition of project traffic to area roadways could affect evacuation efforts in the event of an emergency (such as a wildfire). The analysis examined the project site and the surrounding residential areas of Green Valley to develop estimates of vehicular traffic and available roadway capacity on Green Valley Road, which would likely be the primary evacuation route that would be used by Green Valley residents to access I-80 in order to egress from the area of fire risk. Green Valley Road is a divided 4- lane arterial, south of Eastridge Drive. Based on the City of Fairfield Travel Model, Solano County Regional GIS Platform, and the approved Middle Green Valley Specific Plan Project located within unincorporated Solano County near the intersection of Green Valley Road and Mason Road, there are approximately 2,930 3,1225 existing or planned homes in the Green Valley corridor. Based on Cal Fire’s Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map, about 410 homes are estimated to be in the moderate hazard zone and 10 homes are estimated to be in the high hazard zone. There are no homes in the very high fire hazard zone, and the remaining 2,700 homes are not estimated to be in a fire hazard zone., of which about 2,510 are not located in a fire hazard zone, about 410 homes are in the moderate hazard zone, and 10 are in the high hazard zone (no homes are in the very high fire hazard zone). The project site is not located in a fire hazard zone. Given that most homes in the Green Valley corridor are not in the high fire hazard zone, it is possible that evacuation of the entire corridor may not be required. However, the evacuation analysis below includes all the existing homes as well as the 185 apartments added to the corridor by the proposed project, for a total of 3,115 3,307 dwelling units. The analysis also assumes that all traffic from these homes would travel via Green Valley Road to I-80 during an evacuation, although as noted above, residents of the area can also access the freeway via Suisun Valley Road.

Traffic conditions would vary, depending on whether the evacuation is ordered during the work hours or after hours (at night). In the event of a night-time evacuation, there would be very limited traffic on Green Valley Road, and it would be reasonable to assume that at least one vehicle per dwelling unit would exit the area via Green Valley Road over a period of 30 minutes to one hour. Based on the 3,115 3,307 dwelling units (which include the units added by the project), about 3,115 3,307 vehicles would travel south bound on Green Valley Road to access the freeway.

Green Valley Road is a four-lane divided arterial, with two lanes in each direction. During peak hour conditions, up to 3,540 vehicles per hour can be served by utilizing all four lanes (both directions of travel) to maintain LOS D operations. Capacity increases to 3,740 vehicles 5 The City of Fairfield Travel Model assumed approximately 120 units within the Middle Green Valley area; however, the analysis was updated by adding approximately 200 dwelling units to reflect the full extent (322 dwelling units) of the Middle Green Valley Specific Plan Project.

Packet Page 434 of 860Attachment 2 Page 125 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 4-6 per hour to maintain LOS E operations. Therefore, the roadway would have adequate capacity to accommodate approximately 1 vehicle per household in Green Valley by utilizing all four lanes (both directions) of travel.

In the event that the evacuation is ordered during work hours, additional traffic associated with the businesses located on Business Center Drive would be traversing the roadway; however, the number of residents that would evacuate would be fewer because many of the residents would already be away from their homes at that time. Based on daily traffic counts collected in 2022, approximately 1,330 vehicles were counted traversing southbound Green Valley Road during the morning peak hour. Assuming that about half of the 3,115 3,307 dwelling units would require evacuation and would generate a vehicle trip per dwelling unit (approximately 1,560 1,633 trips), all vehicles evacuating Green Valley should be accommodated during the peak hour by utilizing all four lanes of travel. As with the Atlas fire, it is anticipated that evacuation of businesses in the Green Valley area will not be required. Furthermore, employees of businesses located on Business Center Drive would have the ability to access the freeway from the Suisun Valley Road/Pittman Road interchange and avoid the use of Green Valley Road.

A study of available roadway capacity on Green Valley Road during AM and PM peak hours was also conducted. The study estimated the AM and PM peak hour trips that are generated by the existing homes, approved projects such as the Middle Green Valley Specific Plan, and also the new vehicle trips that would be generated by the proposed project. Based on the trip generation estimates, the study found that the existing Green Valley homes with approved projects would generate approximately 2,000 2,136 trips during the morning peak hour (520 555 inbound trips and 1,480 1,581 outbound trips) and approximately 2,700 2,864 trips during the evening peak hour (1,700 1,803 inbound trips and 1,000 1,061 outbound trips). The proposed project would add approximately 70 trips during the morning and evening peak hours, an increase of about 3 percent. The study compared the existing with proposed project peak hour trip generation by direction (inbound vs outbound) to existing counts. Roadway traffic count data was collected in March 2022 and approximately 1,330 vehicles were counted traveling southbound along Green Valley Road, south of Business Center Drive during the morning peak hour. The existing peak hour volume represents most of the nearly approximately 1,500 1,600 outbound vehicle trips expected to be generated during the AM peak hour. Based on a LOS D threshold, the corridor can accommodate up to 3,540 vehicles or 1,770 vehicles in one direction; therefore, the corridor can accommodate an additional 440 vehicles in one direction. Therefore, the roadway has available capacity to accommodate the estimated proposed project traffic.

Based on the foregoing evaluation, the proposed project would not generate a substantial amount of new traffic and would not add a substantial amount of traffic to the area roadways during an emergency evacuation.

Packet Page 435 of 860Attachment 2 Page 126 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA
P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5-1

5.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Lead Agency establish a program to monitor and report on mitigation measures adopted as part of the environmental review process to avoid or reduce the severity and magnitude of potentially significant environmental impacts associated with project implementation. CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 (a)(1)) requires that a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) be adopted at the time that the agency determines to carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared, to ensure that mitigation measures identified in the EIR are fully implemented.

The Draft MMRP for the Green Valley 3 Apartments Project EIR is presented in Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Final MMRP will be adopted when the City Council makes a final decision on the project. The MMRP in Table 5.A describes the implementation and monitoring procedures, responsibilities, and timing for each mitigation measure identified in the Final EIR, including:

Mitigation Measure: Provides the mitigation name, or identification, and the full text of the mitigation measure.

Implementation Procedure: Summarizes the steps to be taken to implement the measure.

Mitigation Timing: Identifies the stage of the project during which the mitigation action will be taken.

Mitigation Responsibility: Designates the entity responsible for implementation of the mitigation measure.

Monitoring and Reporting Procedure: Specifies procedures for documenting and reporting mitigation implementation.

Packet Page 436 of 860Attachment 2 Page 127 of 150

5-3

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

MM AQ-2: During construction of the proposed
project, the project contractor shall ensure all off-road diesel-powered construction equipment of 50
horsepower or more used for project construction at a
minimum meets the California Air Resources Board
Tier 2 emissions standards and is equipped with Level
3 diesel particulate filters or the equivalent.

Require construction equipment
meet stated specifications as part
of City’s project conditions of
approval.

Inspect construction site at regular
intervals to verify compliance with
equipment requirements.

During grading and
construction
Construction
Contractor
(implementation)

City of Fairfield Public
Works Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Confirm and
document at regular
intervals throughout
construction period in
project mitigation
monitoring report.

Biological Resources
MM BIO-1: If project construction activities are
scheduled during the nesting season for Swainson’s
hawks (March 1 to September 15), prior to
commencement of construction, a qualified biologist
shall conduct surveys according to the recommended
timing and methodology for Swainson’s Hawk
Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley, as
defined by the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory
Committee. Survey methods should be closely
followed by starting early in the nesting season (late
March to early April) to maximize the likelihood of
detecting an active nest. Surveys shall be conducted:
(1) within a minimum 0.25-mile radius of the project
Require Swainson’s hawk surveys
be conducted by a qualified
biologist, as specified, as part of
City’s project conditions of
approval.

Confirm that surveys are
conducted annually for duration of
project construction and
avoidance buffers are
implemented, as needed, based on
input by Project Applicant’s
qualified biologist and CDFW.

Prior to start of
construction and annually
throughout project
duration
Project Applicant
(implementation)

City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Project Applicant will
submit survey results
to City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department for
project files. Project
Applicant will also
provide
documentation of ITP,
if required.

Packet Page 438 of 860Attachment 2 Page 129 of 150

GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTRESPONSE TO COMMENTSJUNE 2023 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR‐RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5‐4 Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring and Reporting Procedure site or a larger area if needed to identify potentially impacted active nests, and (2) for at least the two survey periods immediately prior to initiating project‐related construction activities. Consistent with the Technical Advisory Committee Guidance, the recommended survey periods are March 20 to April 5, April 5 to April 20, and June 10 to July 30 (post‐fledging). Surveys shall occur annually for the duration of the project. The qualified biologist shall have a minimum of 2 years of experience implementing the survey methodology resulting in detections. If active Swainson’s hawk nests are detected, the project shall implement a 0.25‐mile construction avoidance buffer around the nest until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. If take of Swainson’s hawk cannot be avoided, the project applicant shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and obtain an Incidental Take Permit (ITP). Project Applicant obtain ITP if needed. MM BIO‐2: To mitigate for the loss of Swainson’s hawk and burrowing owl foraging habitat, the project applicant shall: (1) acquire suitable habitat land and permanently preserve foraging habitat through recording a conservation easement and implementing and funding a long‐term management plan in perpetuity, or (2) acquire Swainson’s hawk and burrowing owl foraging habitat mitigation credits from a mitigation bank approved by the CDFW prior to building permit issuance. Either mitigation option shall be consistent with CDFW’s 1994 Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawk in the Central Valley of California, which specifies that projects within 5 miles of an active nest tree but greater than 1 mile from the nest tree shall provide Require mitigation for loss of Swainson’s hawk and burrowing owl foraging habitat, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Project Applicant to provide documentation of conservation easement and long‐term management plan funding or approved mitigation bank credit purchase. Prior to start of construction Project Applicant (implementation) City of Fairfield Community Development Department (monitoring and reporting) Project Applicant will submit mitigation documentation to City of Fairfield Community Development Department for project files. Packet Page 439 of 860Attachment 2 Page 130 of 150

5-5

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

0.75 acre of foraging habitat for each acre of urban
development authorized (i.e., 0.75:1 ratio).

MM BIO-3: Prior to project activities, a habitat
assessment shall be performed following ‘Habitat
Assessment and Reporting Details’ of the CDFW Staff
Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. The habitat
assessment shall extend at least 492 feet from the
project site boundary or more where direct or
indirect effects could potentially extend off site (up
to 1,640 feet) and include burrows and burrow
surrogates. If the habitat assessment identifies
potentially suitable burrowing owl habitat, then a
qualified biologist shall conduct surveys following the CDFW 2012 Staff Report survey methodology.

Surveys shall encompass the project site and a
sufficient buffer zone to detect owls nearby that may
be impacted commensurate with the type of
disturbance anticipated, as outlined in the CDFW
2012 Staff Report, and include burrow surrogates
such as culverts, piles of concrete or rubble, and
other non-natural features, in addition to burrows
and mounds. Time lapses between surveys or project
activities shall trigger subsequent surveys, as
determined by a qualified biologist, including but not
limited to a final survey within 24 hours prior to
ground disturbance. The qualified biologist shall have
a minimum of two years of experience implementing
the CDFW 2012 Staff Report survey methodology
resulting in detections. Detected nesting burrowing
owls shall be avoided pursuant to the buffer zone
prescribed in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report and any
passive relocation plan for non-nesting owls shall be
subject to CDFW review.

Require burrowing owl habitat
assessment and surveys be
conducted by a qualified biologist,
as specified, as part of City’s
project conditions of approval.

Confirm that surveys are
conducted and avoidance buffers
are implemented, as needed,
based on input by Applicant’s
qualified biologist and CDFW.

Project Applicant coordinate any
required passive relocation with
CDFW.

Prior to start of
construction
Project Applicant
(implementation)

Packet Page 440 of 860Attachment 2 Page 131 of 150

GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTRESPONSE TO COMMENTSJUNE 2023 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR‐RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5‐6 Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring and Reporting Procedure MM BIO‐4: To the extent feasible, initial grading and vegetation removal activities shall occur during the non‐nesting season (September 1 to January 31). For any construction activities conducted during the nesting season, a qualified biologist (i.e., experienced in searching for passerine and raptor nests) shall conduct a preconstruction nest survey of all trees or other suitable nesting habitat in and within 250 feet of the limits of construction activities. The survey shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to the start of work. If the survey indicates the presence of nesting birds, the biologist shall determine an appropriately sized buffer around the nest in which no work shall occur until the young have successfully fledged. The size of the nest buffer shall be determined by the biologist and shall be based on the nesting species and its sensitivity to disturbance. In general, buffer sizes of up to 250 feet for raptors and 50 feet for other birds should suffice to prevent substantial disturbance to nesting birds, but these buffers may be increased or decreased, as appropriate, depending on the bird species and the level of disturbance anticipated near the nest. Require preconstruction nesting bird surveys be conducted by a qualified biologist, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Confirm that surveys are conducted and avoidance buffers are implemented, as needed, based on input by Applicant’s qualified biologist. Prior to start of construction Project Applicant (implementation) City of Fairfield Community Development Department (monitoring and reporting) Project Applicant will submit survey results to City of Fairfield Community Development Department for project files. MM BIO‐5: If project site ground clearing or vegetation removal activities for the proposed project are planned to occur between March 16 and October 31 (monarch breeding season), a preconstruction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to ground clearing or vegetation removal activities to determine if milkweed is present on the site and is being used for monarch breeding. The biologist will search for evidence of monarch eggs, caterpillars, chrysalises, and adults. If active monarch breeding is identified, the milkweed stand shall be avoided until the project applicant develops and implements a Require preconstruction survey for monarch butterfly be conducted by a qualified biologist, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Confirm that survey is conducted, avoidance buffers are implemented (as needed), and salvage and relocation plan is prepared and submitted to the USFWS and City for approval (as needed). Project Applicant Prior to start of construction Project Applicant (implementation) City of Fairfield Community Development Department (monitoring and reporting) Project Applicant will submit survey results to City of Fairfield Community Development Department for project files. Provide documentation of USFWS approval of salvage and relocation plan, if required, as well as documentation of Packet Page 441 of 860Attachment 2 Page 132 of 150

5-7

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

MM BIO-6: If monarch butterflies are found actively
feeding on the project site nectar plants during the
preconstruction survey in Mitigation Measure BIO-5
or during site grading or vegetation clearing
conducted between March 16 through October 31,
work shall be halted in the areas of feeding activity
and an appropriate buffer established, as determined
by a qualified biologist, until the monarchs leave the
site on their own.

Require stop work measure and
establishment of an avoidance
buffer, as specified, in the event of
monarch butterfly discovery as
part of City’s project conditions of
approval.

Prior to start of
construction and
throughout project
duration
Project Applicant
(implementation)

City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Project Applicant will
submit survey results
to City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department for
project files.

MM BIO-7: The riparian habitat shall be fully avoided.

Prior to initial ground disturbance, Environmentally
Sensitive Area (ESA) fencing shall be placed along the
limits of riparian vegetation to exclude construction
activities from the avoided area. ESA fencing shall be
maintained until construction is complete. No
vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities
shall be permitted beyond the fencing. Vehicles and
equipment shall not be operated or parked beyond
the fencing. Materials shall not be stored or staged
beyond or within 25 feet of the fencing.

Require ESA fencing be installed,
as specified, as part of City’s
project conditions of approval.

Inspect construction site at regular
intervals to verify compliance with
ESA fencing requirements.

During grading and
construction
Construction
Contractor
(implementation)

City of Fairfield Public
Works Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Confirm and
document at regular
intervals throughout
construction period in
project mitigation
monitoring report.

MM BIO-8: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit,
a formal wetland delineation shall be completed for
the project site by the project applicant and
submitted to the United States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) and the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB). The project applicant shall
obtain the necessary permits or approvals from the
USACE and RWQCB for any fill of jurisdictional areas.

All terms of the permits shall be implemented as a
condition of the project, including compensatory
mitigation as required by the USACE and RWQCB
under their “no net loss” policies. At a minimum,
Require a formal wetland
delineation be conducted,
regulatory permits obtained, and
permit conditions implemented, as
specified, as part of City’s project
conditions of approval.

Project Applicant provide copies of
regulatory permits and
documentation of compensatory
mitigation compliance.

Prior to issuance of
grading permit
Project Applicant
(implementation)

City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Project Applicant will
submit regulatory
permits and
documentation of
mitigation compliance
to City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department for
project files.

Packet Page 442 of 860Attachment 2 Page 133 of 150

5-9

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
MM CUL-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit for
the project, a qualified archaeologist (one who meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s standards) shall be
retained by the project applicant to provide
professional archaeological services. The qualified
archaeologist (or an archaeologist supervised by the
qualified archaeologist) shall be present at the pre-
grade conference to establish procedures for
archaeological resource monitoring. Those procedures
shall include provisions for temporarily halting or
redirecting work to permit sampling, identification,
and evaluation of resources deemed by the
archaeologist to potentially be historical resources or unique archaeological resources under the California
Environmental Quality Act. The qualified archaeologist
(or an archaeologist supervised by the qualified
archaeologist) also shall conduct on-site
archaeological monitoring during all ground-disturbing
work within native sediments associated with the
project. Ground-disturbing work requiring
archaeological monitoring shall include clearing and
grubbing (vegetation removal), initial rough grading,
and any trenching that occurs below the depth of
initial rough grading. After material has been initially disturbed on the project site, no additional monitoring for that material shall be required (i.e., if utility
Require qualified archaeologist be
retained by the Project Applicant
to conduct archaeological resource
monitoring, implement a stop
work measure and establish an
avoidance buffer in the event of
unanticipated discovery, and
conduct an evaluation, as
specified, as part of City’s project
conditions of approval.

In the event of an unanticipated
discovery, confirm that avoidance
buffers are implemented,
evaluation of the resource occurs,
and a report documenting the
methods and results of the work is
prepared.

Prior to start of
construction and
throughout project
duration
Project Applicant
(implementation)

City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Project Applicant will
report any
unanticipated
discoveries and
submit report
documenting the
methods and results
of the evaluation to
City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department for
project files.

Packet Page 444 of 860Attachment 2 Page 135 of 150

GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTRESPONSE TO COMMENTSJUNE 2023 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR‐RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5‐10 Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring and Reporting Procedure trenching occurs within rough graded sediments that were previously monitored, this utility trenching shall not be subject to archaeological monitoring). The qualified archaeologist shall be available on an on‐call basis for the duration of the project construction. Should archaeological resources be discovered during the ground‐disturbing work, ground‐disturbing construction activities shall be halted in the immediate vicinity of the find and redirected unaffected areas on site to allow for the proper evaluation for significance and treatment of the resources. Additional cultural resources work, if determined necessary, may include, but is not limited to, collection and documentation of artifacts, documentation of the cultural resources on State of California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Series 523 forms, or subsurface testing. Upon completion of any cultural resources work for the project, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of the work. This report shall be submitted to any descendant community involved in the investigation(s) and the Northwest Information Center (NWIC). MM CUL‐2: In the event that human remains are encountered on the project site, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected to unaffected areas on site and the County Coroner notified immediately consistent with the requirements of California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15064.5(e). State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, which shall Require stop work measure and establishment of an avoidance buffer in the event of unanticipated human remains discovery, and evaluation by the County Coroner, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. In the event of an unanticipated discovery, confirm that avoidance buffers are implemented, NAHC is notified (as needed), and MLD recommendations are During grading and construction Project Applicant (implementation) City of Fairfield Community Development Department (monitoring and reporting) Project Applicant will report any unanticipated discoveries to City of Fairfield Community Development Department for project files. Follow‐up documentation will also be filed. Packet Page 445 of 860Attachment 2 Page 136 of 150

5-11

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

With the permission of the project applicant, the MLD
may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall
complete the inspection within 48 hours of being
granted access to the project site. The MLD may
recommend scientific removal and nondestructive
analysis of human remains and items associated with
Native American burials.
implemented (as needed).

MM TCR-1: Prior to commencement of ground-
disturbing activities for the project (as described in
Mitigation Measure CUL-1), the project applicant
shall contact Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation to provide a
Native American tribal monitor during ground-
disturbing activities. The project applicant shall
provide 72-hours advance written notice of
commencement of ground-disturbing activities to
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation so that the Nation can
have a Native American tribal monitor present at the
project site. The tribal monitor shall be provided an
estimated construction schedule and invited to
attend the pre-construction conference.

1. This could include, but would not be limited to,
recordation of the resource on California Department
of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Series 523 forms.

Appropriate treatment of tribal cultural resources
that are not also archaeological resources shall be
determined in consultation with a qualified cultural
resources specialist and with Yocha Dehe Wintun
Require that a Yocha Dehe Wintun
Nation tribal monitor be retained
by the Project Applicant to
conduct monitoring, a written
notice and schedule be provided in
advance of construction, and a
stop work measure be
implemented in the event of an
unanticipated tribal cultural
resource discovery, as specified, as
part of City’s project conditions of
approval.

In the event of an unanticipated
tribal cultural resources discovery,
ensure that evaluation and
treatment of the resource occurs in
consultation with a qualified
cultural resources specialist and as
approved by the City and Tribe.

In the event of an unanticipated
human remains discovery and they
are identified as Native American
and the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
is determined to be the MLD,
ensure that treatment protocols, as
Prior to commencement
of ground-disturbing
activities and throughout
project duration
Project Applicant
(implementation)

City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Project Applicant will
report any
unanticipated
discoveries to City of
Fairfield Community
Development
Department for
documentation in
project files.

Approved treatment
plan and/or protocols
and any follow-up
documentation will
also be filed.

Packet Page 446 of 860Attachment 2 Page 137 of 150

GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTRESPONSE TO COMMENTSJUNE 2023 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR‐RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5‐12 Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring and Reporting Procedure Nation, and as reviewed and approved by the City of Fairfield. This could include, but would not be limited to, recordation of the resource on DPR Series 523 forms. In the event that human remains are encountered on the project site, Mitigation Measure CUL‐2 shall be implemented. If any human remains are identified as Native American and Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation is determined to be the Most Likely Descendant by the Native American Heritage Commission, treatment protocols consistent with Treatment Protocol for Handling Human Remains and Cultural Items Affiliated with Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation (Appendix E) shall be finalized in consultation with a qualified archaeologist and with Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, and as reviewed and approved by the City of Fairfield. These treatment protocols may include avoidance of the human remains, reburial on the project site, or reburial on tribal or other lands that will not be disturbed in the future. specified, are implemented in consultation with a qualified archaeologist and as approved by the City and Tribe. Geology and Soils MM GEO‐1: Prior to the issuance of any site‐specific grading or building permits, the City’s Building Division shall confirm that project plans have incorporated geotechnical recommendations included in the February 16, 2022 (or most current version) Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Wallace Kuhl & Associates and the project’s geotechnical engineer has reviewed and approved project plans. Prior to the issuance of building occupancy permits, the City’s Building Division shall ensure that implementation of all the geotechnical recommendations, including design criteria, specifications, and construction observations/inspection/testing, has been performed and documented in a construction completion report prepared by the project’s geotechnical engineer. Require that project plans incorporate geotechnical report recommendations, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Inspect project site to confirm geotechnical recommendations are implemented and review and approve construction completion report prepared by project geotechnical engineer prior to issuance of building occupancy permits. Prior to the issuance of grading and building permits Project Applicant (implementation) City of Fairfield Building Division (monitoring and reporting) Document construction completion report approval and implementation of geotechnical recommendations in project files. Packet Page 447 of 860Attachment 2 Page 138 of 150

5-13

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1858064v1 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation
Responsibility
Monitoring and
Reporting Procedure
MM GEO-2: In the event that fossils or fossil bearing
deposits are discovered during ground- disturbing
activities, excavations within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted. Ground
disturbance work shall cease until a City-approved
qualified paleontologist determines whether the
resource requires further study. The paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed in accordance with
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995), evaluate the potential
resource, and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be
followed before construction activities are allowed to
resume at the location of the find. If avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of construction activities on the discovery. The excavation plan shall be submitted to the City of Fairfield for review and approval prior to
implementation, and all construction activity shall adhere to the recommendations in the excavation plan.

Require stop work measure,
establishment of an avoidance
buffer in the event of unanticipated
fossil discovery, and evaluation by a
qualified paleontologist, as
specified, as part of City’s project
conditions of approval.

Confirm that avoidance buffers are
implemented, appropriate agencies
are notified, and excavation plan is
prepared and submitted to the City
for approval. Ensure that
construction activity adheres to
excavation plan recommendations.

Throughout project
duration
Project Applicant
(implementation)

City of Fairfield
Community
Development
Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Project Applicant will
report any
unanticipated
discoveries and submit
excavation plan to City
of Fairfield Community
Development
Department for
approval and
documentation in
project files.

Noise
MM NOI-1: The construction contractor shall ensure
that construction activities and equipment use,
whose specific location on the site may be flexible
(e.g., operation of compressors and generators,
cement mixing, general truck idling), shall be
conducted as far as possible from the nearest noise-
and vibration-sensitive land uses, and natural and/or
manmade barriers (e.g., intervening construction
trailers) shall be used to screen propagation of noise
from such activities towards these land uses. These
activities shall be located in the southeast quadrant
of the project site, as feasible.

Require construction activities and
equipment be located away from
sensitive land uses and noise
screening be utilized, as specified,
as part of City’s project conditions
of approval.

Inspect construction site at regular
intervals to verify compliance with
noise minimization measures.

During grading and
construction
Construction
Contractor
(implementation)

City of Fairfield Public
Works Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Confirm and
document at regular
intervals throughout
construction period in
project mitigation
monitoring report.

Packet Page 448 of 860Attachment 2 Page 139 of 150

GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT CITY OF FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTRESPONSE TO COMMENTSJUNE 2023 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR‐RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5‐14 Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring and Reporting Procedure MM NOI‐2: The construction contractor shall ensure that a minimum 12‐foot‐high barrier, such as plywood structures or flexible sound control curtains, shall be erected on the project site boundary adjacent to the sensitive receptors to minimize the amount of noise during construction. A 12‐foot‐high construction noise barrier would provide approximately 13 dBA reduction to the closest residential receptors to the north. Require construction contractor implement a 12‐foot noise barrier, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Inspect construction site at regular intervals to verify compliance with noise barrier requirements. During grading and construction Construction Contractor (implementation) City of Fairfield Public Works Department (monitoring and reporting) Confirm and document at regular intervals throughout construction period in project mitigation monitoring report. MM NOI‐3: The construction contractor shall ensure the use of power construction equipment with state‐of‐the‐art noise shielding and muffling devices. This specification shall be included on all project plans. Require construction equipment meet stated specifications and be included on project plans, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Inspect construction site at regular intervals to verify compliance with equipment requirements. During grading and construction Construction Contractor (implementation) City of Fairfield Public Works Department (monitoring and reporting) Confirm and document at regular intervals throughout construction period in project mitigation monitoring report. MM NOI‐4: The construction staging area shall be as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Staging shall occur in the southeast quadrant of the project site, as feasible. Require construction staging be located from sensitive receptors, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Inspect construction site at regular intervals to verify compliance with equipment staging requirements. During grading and construction Construction Contractor (implementation) City of Fairfield Public Works Department (monitoring and reporting) Confirm and document at regular intervals throughout construction period in project mitigation monitoring report. MM NOI‐5: The construction contractor shall ensure that no less than two weeks prior to commencement of construction, notification shall be provided to the off‐site residential, hotel, school, and church uses within 500 feet of the project site that discloses the construction schedule, including the types of activities and equipment that would be used throughout the duration of the construction period. Contact information shall also be posted where readily visible to the public. Require that Construction Contractor notify off‐site uses of project construction, as specified, as part of City’s project conditions of approval. Project Applicant to provide copy of notification and confirm that contact information is posted, as specified. No less than 2 weeks prior to commencement of construction Throughout project duration Construction Contractor (implementation) City of Fairfield Public Works Department (monitoring and reporting) Document construction notification in project files. Confirm and document at regular intervals that contact information is posted throughout construction period in project mitigation monitoring report. Packet Page 449 of 860Attachment 2 Page 140 of 150

5-15

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1858064v1 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) Table 5.A: Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measure Mitigation Procedures Mitigation Timing Mitigation
Responsibility
Monitoring and
Reporting Procedure
Transportation
MM TRA-1: The project applicant shall prepare and
implement a Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Program that includes measures to reduce the
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per multifamily dwelling
unit by a minimum of 5 percent. At a minimum, the
TDM Program shall include the following measures:
• Unbundled Parking Program: The project
applicant shall separate the cost of renting
parking spaces from the cost (rent) of the rental
unit. Tenants shall be required to pay separately
for every parking space that they would use
(When the cost of parking is optional, rather
than built into housing costs, those without cars
aren’t burdened with paying for unwanted
parking, and people who would use a car often
change their behaviors to avoid the extra cost).
• Pedestrian-Network Improvements: The project
applicant shall improve pedestrian access to the
nearest transit stops, as well as include
pedestrian-oriented elements such as planters,
benches, widened sidewalks, and improved
lighting, in the site plan.
• Carshare, Bikeshare, and Scootershare Program:

The project applicant shall establish a carshare,
bikeshare, electric bikeshare, and scootershare
program to provide tenants alternatives to the
use of a personal vehicle.

Require that the Project Applicant/
Property Manager prepare and
implement a TDM Program, as
specified, as part of City’s project
conditions of approval.

City review and approve prior to
issuance of grading and building
permits and review project site to
confirm implementation of
measures prior to issuance of
building occupancy permit.

Project Applicant/Property
Manager provide TDM Program
educational materials to residents
(e.g., brochures at the leasing
office, emails, notices, etc.) and
submit documentation of
implementation of unbundled
parking program and carshare,
bikeshare, and scootershare
program.

Prior to the issuance of
grading and building
permits
Project Applicant/
Property Manager
(implementation)

City of Fairfield Public
Works Department
(monitoring and
reporting)
Document TDM
Program approval and
implementation of
TDM measures in
project monitoring
report.

Packet Page 450 of 860Attachment 2 Page 141 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 5-16 This page intentionally left blank
Packet Page 451 of 860Attachment 2 Page 142 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1858064v1 P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 6-1

6.0 REPORT PREPARERS

6.1 LEAD AGENCY
City of Fairfield
Community Development Department
1000 Webster Street, Second Floor
Fairfield, California 94533
David Feinstein, Planning Manager
Meily Sheehan, Principal Planner
Jonathan Atkinson, Senior Planner

6.2 EIR CONSULTANTS
Barati Consulting, LLC
35688 Barnard Drive
Fremont, California 94536
Shabnam Barati, Ph.D., Principal
LSA
1504 Eureka Road, Suite 310
Roseville, California 95661
Theresa Wallace, AICP, Principal in Charge
Kristin Nurmela, Project Manager
Edward Heming, Associate Environmental Planner
Chris Graham, Senior Environmental Planner
Matthew Wiswell, Senior Environmental Planner
Amy Fischer, Principal, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cara Carlucci, Associate, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Steve Foreman, Principal Biologist
John Kunna, Associate Biologist
Kerrie Collison, Associate Cultural Resources Manager
J.T. Stephens, Principal, Noise
Ambarish Mukherjee, Principal, Transportation
Packet Page 452 of 860Attachment 2 Page 143 of 150

G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

C ITY OF F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT

R ESPONSE TO C OMMENTS
J UNE 2023

P:\BTI2101\PRODUCTS\RTC\Final\GV3 FEIR-RTC_June2023.docx (06/12/23) 6-2

6.3 OTHER TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
Fehr & Peers – Transportation
100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 600
Walnut Creek, California 94596
Sarah Chan, P.E., Senior Associate
WRA Environmental Consultants – Biological Resources
2169-G East Francisco Boulevard
San Rafael, California 94901
Jason Yakich, Biologist
Tom Origer & Associates – Cultural Resources
Post Office Box 1531
Rohnert Park, California 94927
Tom Origer, M.A./R.P.A.

Taylor Alshuth, B.A.

Wallace Kuhl Associates – Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Geotechnical Engineering 3422 West Hammer Lane, Suite D
Stockton, California 95219
Nancy M. Malaret, Project Environmental Scientist
Dennis B. Nakamoto, P.G., C.E.G., C.HG., Senior Hydrogeologist David R. Gius, Jr., Senior Engineer
TSD Engineering, Inc. – Stormwater
785 Orchard Drive, Suite 110
Folsom, California 95630
Marcus Lewis, P.E.

Packet Page 453 of 860Attachment 2 Page 144 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT – E RRATA
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1874474v2 C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV_3_Errata_to_Final_EIR 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 1

ERRATA TO THE FINAL EIR
GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2022030480
This Errata has been prepared to provide additional information and to make minor corrections and clarifications to the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Green Valley 3 Apartments Project. These EIR modifications clarify and refine the EIR and provide supplemental information to the City decision-makers and the public. The information provided herein does not represent significant new information as the term is defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), particularly as it clarifies and amplifies information and conclusions already presented in the Draft and Final EIR for the Project. Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines specifically states:
“New information added to an EIR is not ‘significant’ unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. ‘Significant new information’ requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that:
• A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
• A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted to reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. • A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it.
• The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.”
• CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 also provides that “[r]ecirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR... A decision not to recirculate an EIR must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.”
The corrections provided to the EIR in this Errata do not represent significant new information that would deprive the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the Project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect that the Applicant has declined to adopt, as the revised language merely clarifies that the project will (and was always intended to) install solar panels as part of construction and operation of the new building complex. The City has reviewed the information in this Errata and has determined that it does not change the EIR’s analysis or any of its basic findings or conclusions and does not require recirculation of the EIR.

Packet Page 454 of 860Attachment 2 Page 145 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT – E RRATA
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1874474v2 C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV_3_Errata_to_Final_EIR 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 2

ERRATA TO THE DRAFT AND FINAL EIR
Revisions to the EIR are shown below as excerpts from the EIR text. Added or modified text is underlined (example), while deleted text has a strike out (example) through the text, as the example shows.

Changes are listed by page and, where appropriate, by paragraph. Existing text to remain unchanged is included as plain text, without strikethrough or underlines, to provide context for the revisions, clarifications, and correction.

All other revisions/corrections throughout the remaining sections of the EIR shall be considered to be revised per the revisions/corrections provided below.

In conformance with Section 15121 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Draft EIR, technical appendices and reports thereof, together with the Final EIR/Response to Comments and this Errata, are intended to serve as documents that will generally inform the decision-makers and the public of environmental effects of the project.

If you have any questions regarding this Errata, please contact Jonathan Atkinson at (707) 428-7387 or via email at [email protected].

CHANGES INCORPORATED INTO THE EIR TEXT
Draft EIR Section, 3.0 Project Description, Section 3.3.6, Sustainable Development Characteristics
The following text on page 3-36 is revised as follows:

The proposed project would provide housing near existing business, commercial, and employment centers in the City of Fairfield. The project proposes to incorporate features to minimize energy and water consumption, improve indoor environmental quality, minimize waste disposed in landfills, and minimize vehicular traffic and associated air pollutant emissions. Sustainable development characteristics of the proposed project include the following:
• The project would comply with the CALGreen Code’s 2022 mandatory EV parking requirements for EVSE, EV ready, and EV capable spaces, and include additional EV capable spaces that would have the necessary conduits so that they may be converted in the future into additional charging stations and/or EV ready spaces to assist the project in meeting CALGreen Tier 2 level requirements.
• A minimum of 15 percent of the roof areas would be installed with reserved for future photovoltaic (PV) solar panels for onsite generation of electricity to the buildinginstallation.

Infrastructure (e.g., conduit and structural elements, etc.) would be provided to facilitate the future PV solar installation.

Draft EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, Section 3.6, Project Approvals The final paragraph on page 3.0-40 is revised as follows:

Packet Page 455 of 860Attachment 2 Page 146 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT – E RRATA
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1874474v2 C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV_3_Errata_to_Final_EIR 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 3 The City of Fairfield General Plan designates the project site as Business and Industrial Park (IBP), and per the Zoning Ordinance, the project site is zoned Industrial Business Park-North Cordelia Overlay (IBP-NC). As the proposed project includes residential uses which are not permitted under the current General Plan designation and zoning of this site, the project applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to redesignate the site as Residential Very High Density (RVH) and rezoning to RVH-NC. Additional approvals required from the City include Development Review.

Further, as a design feature included in the project description and as a required Condition of Approval, the Applicant shall install PV solar panels to cover a minimum of 15 percent of the usable roof areas, including supporting infrastructure (e.g., conduit, structural elements, etc.), for generation of renewable electrical power to the building.

Draft EIR Section 4.2, Air Quality
The following text on page 4.2-22 is revised as follows:

Building Control Measures. The BAAQMD has authority to regulate emissions from certain sources in buildings such as boilers and water heaters, but has limited authority to regulate buildings themselves. Therefore, the strategies in the control measures for this sector focus on working with local governments that do have authority over local building codes, to facilitate adoption of best control practices and policies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the California Code of Regulations, established by the California Energy Commission (CEC), regarding energy conservation and green building standards. In addition, the proposed project would include the following sustainability features:
a minimum of 15 percent of the roof areas would be reserved for future installed with photovoltaic (PV) panels solar installation; the building would be equipped with automated electrical lighting controls and occupancy sensor technology; all appliances would be electric and ENERGY STAR certified; all water fixtures (faucets, showerheads, and toilets) would be low flow and/or WaterSense certified for low water use; windows would be treated with energy efficient low emissivity (Low- E) coatings; paint would have reduced amounts of volatile organic compounds (low VOC) and be Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) version 4 qualified; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment would consist of high- efficiency ENERGY STAR certified condensing units with a seasonal energy efficiency rating (SEER) of 15; roofing material would include an ENERGY STAR rated thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) membrane to reflect ultraviolet rays and heat from the building; high-efficiency central heat pump boiler system would be installed for efficient hot water distribution throughout the residential building; floor systems would be fully insulated, and 2-inch by 6-inch exterior walls would provide added building insulation; energy efficient light-emitting diode (LED) light fixtures would be installed in the apartment building and for exterior lighting; and new landscape plants would be drought tolerant, native to California or other Mediterranean climates, or other low water use species. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the Building Control Measures.

Draft EIR Section 4.5, Energy
The following text on pages 4.5-9 and 4.5-10 are revised as follows:

Packet Page 456 of 860Attachment 2 Page 147 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT – E RRATA
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1874474v2 C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV_3_Errata_to_Final_EIR 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 4 Electrical demand associated with project operations would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar developments in the region. The project would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency, including the Title 24 standards. Title 24 building energy efficiency standards establish minimum efficiency standards related to various building features, including appliances, water and space heating and cooling equipment, building insulation and roofing, and lighting. In addition, as identified above, the proposed project would include the following sustainability features: a minimum of 15 percent of the roof areas would be installed with reserved for future photovoltaic (PV) solar panels installation; the building would be equipped with automated electrical lighting controls and occupancy sensor technology; all appliances would be electric and ENERGY STAR certified; all water fixtures (faucets, showerheads, and toilets) would be low flow and/or WaterSense certified for low water use; windows would be treated with energy efficient low emissivity (Low-E) coatings; paint would have reduced amounts of volatile organic compounds (low VOC) and be Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) version 4 qualified; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment would consist of high- efficiency ENERGY STAR certified condensing units with a seasonal energy efficiency rating (SEER) of 15; roofing material would include an ENERGY STAR rated thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) membrane to reflect ultraviolet rays and heat from the building; high-efficiency central heat pump boiler system would be installed for efficient hot water distribution throughout the residential building; swimming pool water would be heated using energy from solar panels installed on nearby roof areas; floor systems would be fully insulated, and 2-inch by 6-inch exterior walls would provide added building insulation; energy efficient light-emitting diode (LED) light fixtures would be installed in the apartment building and for exterior lighting; and new landscape plants would be drought tolerant, native to California or other Mediterranean climates, or other low water use species. Although energy consumption is largely a function of personal choice and the physical structure and layout of buildings, due to the features built into the project in compliance with CALGreen, the expected energy consumption during operation of the proposed project is expected to be lower than the typical usage rates for existing multi- family residential uses.

Draft EIR Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The following text on pages 4.7-23 and 4.7-24 are revised as follows:

Consistent with Policy OS 8.5, the proposed project would comply with and exceed the latest Title 24 standards of the California Code of Regulations, established by the California Energy Commission (CEC), regarding energy conservation and green building standards. The proposed project would include the following sustainability features: a minimum of 15 percent of the roof areas would be installed with reserved for future photovoltaic (PV) solar panels installation; the building would be equipped with automated electrical lighting controls and occupancy sensor technology; all appliances would be electric and ENERGY STAR certified; all water fixtures (faucets, showerheads, and toilets) would be low flow and/or WaterSense certified for low water use; windows would be treated with energy efficient low emissivity (Low-E) coatings; paint would have reduced amounts of volatile organic compounds (low VOC) and be Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) version 4 qualified; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment Packet Page 457 of 860Attachment 2 Page 148 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT – E RRATA
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1874474v2 C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV_3_Errata_to_Final_EIR 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 5 would consist of high-efficiency ENERGY STAR certified condensing units with a seasonal energy efficiency rating (SEER) of 15; roofing material would include an ENERGY STAR rated thermoplastic polyolefin (TPO) membrane to reflect ultraviolet rays and heat from the building; high-efficiency central heat pump boiler system would be installed for efficient hot water distribution throughout the residential building; floor systems would be fully insulated, and 2-inch by 6-inch exterior walls would provide added building insulation; energy efficient light-emitting diode (LED) light fixtures would be installed in the apartment building and for exterior lighting; and new landscape plants would be drought tolerant, native to California or other Mediterranean climates, or other low water use species.

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the City of Fairfield General Plan policies related to climate change.

Draft EIR Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The following text on pages 4.7-25 is revised as follows:

Energy Measures. Energy efficient measures in the AB 32 Scoping Plan are intended to maximize energy efficient building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings. As described above, the proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards, regarding energy conservation and green building standards. In addition, the proposed project would include the following sustainability features: a minimum of 15 percent of the roof areas would be installed with reserved for future PV solar panels installation; the building would be equipped with automated electrical lighting controls and occupancy sensor technology; all appliances would be electric and ENERGY STAR certified; all water fixtures (faucets, showerheads, and toilets) would be low flow and/or WaterSense certified for low water use; windows would be treated with energy efficient Low-E coatings; paint would have reduced amounts of low VOC and be LEED version 4 qualified; HVAC equipment would consist of high-efficiency ENERGY STAR certified condensing units with a SEER of 15; roofing material would include an ENERGY STAR rated TPO membrane to reflect ultraviolet rays and heat from the building; high-efficiency central heat pump boiler system would be installed for efficient hot water distribution throughout the residential building; floor systems would be fully insulated, and 2-inch by 6-inch exterior walls would provide added building insulation; energy efficient LED light fixtures would be installed in the apartment building and for exterior lighting; and new landscape plants would be drought tolerant, native to California or other Mediterranean climates, or other low water use species. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable energy measures.

Draft EIR Section 4.13, Utilities and Service Systems
The following text on pages 4.13-12 and 4.13-13 are revised as follows:

Packet Page 458 of 860Attachment 2 Page 149 of 150

F INAL E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACT R EPORT – E RRATA
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

1874474v2 C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV_3_Errata_to_Final_EIR 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 6 Electric Power and Natural Gas. The proposed project would connect to the existing electrical grid system infrastructure in proximity of the site and would receive service from PG&E. The proposed project does not include any natural gas infrastructure or appliances and no natural gas would be used on site for space or water heating, other than a small amount that would be used in the barbeque pits and would be supplied in tanks. The proposed project would be developed in compliance with California Code Title 24 standards and would be equipped with Energy Star certified appliances that would reduce the use of electricity. All lighting associated with the proposed project, including outside lighting, building façade lighting, parking structure lighting, and landscape lighting would utilize energy efficient light-emitting diode (LED) light fixtures and bulbs. Electrical vehicle (EV) charging facilities would be included in the surface parking areas around the apartment building and in the parking structure on the northeast corner of the site. Finally, the proposed project would be developed to facilitate future rooftop photo voltaic (PV) solar installation, through the installation reservation of a minimum of 15 percent of the roof area with PV infrastructure installation (i.e., structural elements, conduit). Implementation of these features as part of the proposed project would reduce the demand for electricity. The proposed project, upon full occupancy, is estimated to demand 1,124,294 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity annually. Total electricity demand in Solano County in 2020 was approximately 3,320.8 GWh (3,321 million kWh). Therefore, operation of the proposed project would increase the annual electricity consumption in Solano County by less than

0.01 percent.

Packet Page 459 of 860Attachment 2 Page 150 of 150

August 2023

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

FINDINGS
GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT

FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA

EXHIBIT B
Packet Page 460 of 860Attachment 3 Page 1 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1.0: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 4 SECTION 2.0: GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT ................................................ 6 SECTION 3.0: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR NOT SIGNIFICANT ............................................................................................................... 8 SECTION 4.0: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS-THAN- SIGNIFICANT LEVELS ................................................................................................. 14 SECTION 5.0: FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ............................................... 28 SECTION 6.0: GENERAL FINDINGS .............................................................................. 32

Packet Page 461 of 860Attachment 3 Page 2 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 3 GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT
CEQA FINDINGS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15091 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) prepared by the City of Fairfield (City) for the Green Valley 3 Apartments Project (project) consists of the Draft EIR and Response to Comments on the Draft EIR. The Final EIR identifies significant environmental impacts that would result from implementation of the project. However, the City finds that the inclusion of certain mitigation measures as part of project approval would reduce all significant impacts to less-than-significant levels.

As required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City, in adopting these CEQA Findings, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. The City finds that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is incorporated by reference and made a part of these findings and included as Exhibit A to the Resolution adopting these findings, meets the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the project. In accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City adopts these findings as part of the certification of the Final EIR for the project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3), the City also finds that the Final EIR reflects the City’s independent judgment as the lead agency for the project.

CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The City Council certifies the following with respect to the Green Valley 3 Apartments Project Final EIR:

A. The City Council has reviewed and considered the Final EIR.

B. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.

C. The Final EIR, and all related public comments and responses have been presented to the Planning Commission and City Council, and they have reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR and testimony presented at the public hearings prior to approving the project.

D. The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City, acting as the lead agency for the project.

Packet Page 462 of 860Attachment 3 Page 3 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 4 SECTION 1.0: INTRODUCTION

1.1 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR FINDINGS
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines states that:

No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

Thus, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that will otherwise occur with implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with another agency.

1.2 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For the purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the project consists of: a) matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to, federal, State and local laws and regulations; and b) the following documents which are in the custody of the City:
• Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report, dated March 2022, and all responses submitted regarding the Notice of Preparation;
• Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated January 9, 2023; • All written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public during the public comment period on the Draft EIR and responses to those comments (see Section 3.0 of the Final EIR, Responses to Comments);
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program;
Packet Page 463 of 860Attachment 3 Page 4 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 5 • All findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the project, and all documents cited or referred therein;
• All final reports, studies, memoranda, maps, correspondence, and all planning documents prepared by the City or the consultants to each, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to: a) the City’s compliance with CEQA; b) development of the project site; or c) the City’s action on the project; and
• All documents submitted to the City by agencies or members of the public in connection with development of the project.

1.3 ORGANIZATION AND FORMAT OF FINDINGS
Section 2.0 of these findings contains a summary description of the project, sets forth the objectives of the project, and provides related background information. Section 3.0 identifies the project’s potential environmental effects that were determined to be less than significant and do not require mitigation. Section 4.0 identifies the potentially significant effects of the project that were determined to be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with the recommended mitigation measures. All numbered references identifying specific mitigation measures refer to numbered mitigation measures found in the Final EIR. Section 5.0 discusses various project alternatives considered and the feasibility of each of these project alternatives. Section 6.0 includes a list of General Findings made and adopted by the City. These findings summarize the impacts and mitigation measures from the Final EIR and Responses to Comments document. Full descriptions and analyses are contained in the Draft EIR.

Packet Page 464 of 860Attachment 3 Page 5 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 6 SECTION 2.0: GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS PROJECT

2.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the project are to develop a well-designed, economically feasible residential community that consists of a variety of apartment unit types and incorporates sustainable development features. The project applicant’s key objectives for the project are to:
• Create a development of a scale and character that complements and is supportive of the surrounding uses;
• Develop a well-designed, economically feasible residential community that consists of a variety of unit types and sizes;
• Develop a residential project that contains a high density of residences to help meet City, regional, and State housing goals; and
• Improve the availability of rental housing in the Green Valley/Cordelia area of western Fairfield.

2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project includes the development of a single four-story, approximately 204,144-square-foot apartment building with 185 rental units situated around a central clubhouse area. The four-story building would consist of three wings and would be up to 49 feet tall. The apartment building would include 36 studio/one bath units, 66 one bedroom/one bath units, 77 two-bedroom/two bath units, and 6 three-bedroom/two bath units. The building would contain a central lobby area with two elevators.

The project would include common and private open spaces. Recreational amenities associated with the project would include a pool/spa area with outdoor showers, picnic and barbeque areas, an outdoor kitchen, outdoor fireplace and fire table lounging areas, table tennis and corn hole game areas, an outdoor yoga area, a hammock lounge area, and lawn areas for passive play. A dog run would be located in the western portion of the project site adjacent to the open space area along the drainage ditch.

The project site would be accessed from an existing drive aisle that connects the Fairfield Business Center to Business Center Drive. From this drive aisle, the project would be connected via two access points “driveways.” The internal circulation of the project site would consist of a drive aisle that would loop around the perimeter of the apartment building and the two-story parking structure. The project would include the development of an approximately 54,845-square-foot two- story parking structure (up to 18 feet tall) with additional surface parking areas surrounding the apartment building and clubhouse that would accommodate residents and visitors. Parking would also be provided in private garages and carports as well as surface parking spaces along the perimeter of the project site.

Packet Page 465 of 860Attachment 3 Page 6 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 7 The City of Fairfield General Plan designates the project site as Business and Industrial Park (IBP), and per the Zoning Ordinance, the project site is zoned Industrial Business Park-North Cordelia Overlay (IBP-NC). As the project includes residential uses which are not permitted under the current General Plan designation and zoning of this site, the project applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and rezone to redesignate the site as Residential Very High Density (RVH) and rezone as RVH-NC. Additional approvals required from the City include Development Review.

2.3 ALTERNATIVES
Based on the project objectives and anticipated environmental consequences, and pursuant to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the following project alternatives were selected for analysis:
• The No Project/No Development alternative assumes the continuation of existing conditions on the project site.
• The No Project/Development Consistent with Existing Zoning alternative assumes that the project site would be developed by another entity with a business office consistent with the site’s existing land use and zoning designations.
• The Reduced Project alternative would reduce the size of the apartment building and the number of residential units from four stories and 185 units under the proposed project to three stories and 130 units.

A more detailed description of these alternatives, and required findings, are set forth in Section 5.0 of these Findings: Feasibility of Project Alternatives.

Packet Page 466 of 860Attachment 3 Page 7 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 8 SECTION 3.0: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR NOT

SIGNIFICANT
The City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as discussed below, the following impacts associated with the project are not significant or less than significant.

3.1 AESTHETICS
The proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

The proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway.

The proposed project, which is located in an urbanized area, would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

The proposed project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the project area, would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to aesthetics.

3.1 AIR QUALITY
Operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard.

The proposed project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the project area, would not result in a significant cumulative impact on air quality.

3.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Packet Page 467 of 860Attachment 3 Page 8 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 9 The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the region, would not result in significant cumulative impacts on biological resources.

3.3 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

The project would not 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 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).

Cumulative development, including the proposed project, would not cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical resource or unique archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 or impact human remains or tribal cultural resources.

3.3 ENERGY
The proposed project would not result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.

The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the project area, would not result in cumulative impacts related to energy.

3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The proposed project would not, directly or indirectly, cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault; strong seismic ground shaking; seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or landslides.

The proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

The proposed project would not involve soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.

Packet Page 468 of 860Attachment 3 Page 9 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 10 The construction and operation of the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the project area, would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to geology and soils.

3.4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Operation of the project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

The proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

3.4 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The project would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.

The project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or, iv) impede or redirect flood flows.

The project is not in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, and would not result in the release of pollutants due to project inundation.

The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

3.4 LAND USE AND PLANNING
The proposed project would not physically divide an established community.

Packet Page 469 of 860Attachment 3 Page 10 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 11 The proposed project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with a plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

3.7 NOISE
Project occupancy and operations would not generate a substantial temporary 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.

The project would not generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

The project would not be located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, and would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Cumulative development in the project vicinity, including the proposed project, would not result in significant cumulative construction and operational noise impacts.

3.8 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
The proposed project would not require new or altered fire protection facilities in order to maintain adequate response times, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

The proposed project would not require new or physically altered police facilities, in order to maintain adequate response times, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

The proposed project would not require new or physically altered school facilities, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

The proposed project would not require new or physically altered parks and recreation facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts nor substantially increase the use of existing neighborhood parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of such facilities would occur.

The proposed project would not require new or physically altered library facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

Packet Page 470 of 860Attachment 3 Page 11 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 12 The construction and operation of the proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development in the project area, would not result in significant cumulative impacts on public services and recreational facilities.

3.9 TRANSPORTATION
The proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

The proposed project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

The proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

Development of the proposed project would not conflict with a plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities under cumulative conditions.

Development of the proposed project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable future developments, would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Development of the proposed project, in combination with reasonably foreseeable future developments, would not result in inadequate emergency access.

3.10 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The proposed project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.

The proposed project and reasonably foreseeable development would be served by sufficient water supply during normal, dry and multiple dry years.

The proposed project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

The proposed project would not 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.

The proposed project would comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.

Packet Page 471 of 860Attachment 3 Page 12 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 13 The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future development within a 1.5-mile radius of the proposed project, would not result in a significant cumulative impact on utilities and service systems.

3.11 WILDFIRE
The proposed project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

The proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors, and thereby would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.

The proposed project would not involve 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.

The proposed project would not 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.

The proposed project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future development within a 1.5-mile radius of the proposed project, would not result in a significant cumulative impact pertaining to wildfires.

Packet Page 472 of 860Attachment 3 Page 13 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 14 SECTION 4.0: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS-THAN-

SIGNIFICANT LEVELS
The Draft EIR identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from the proposed project. However, based upon substantial evidence in the record the City finds that for each of the significant or potentially significant impact identified in this section (Section 4.0) that changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR. Thus, adoption of these mitigation measures set forth below would reduce these significant or potentially significant effects to less-than-significant levels. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures would effectively make the mitigation measures part of the proposed project.

4.1 AIR QUALITY
Impact AQ-1: The project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Clean Air Plan. Implementation of measures that promote initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled and increase wetland carbon sequestration would be required to avoid conflicts with the Clean Air Plan.

Mitigation Measure TRA-1: The project applicant shall prepare and implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program that includes measures to reduce the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per multifamily dwelling unit by a minimum of 5 percent. At a minimum, the TDM Program shall include the following measures:
• Unbundled Parking Program: The project applicant shall separate the cost of renting parking spaces from the cost (rent) of the rental unit. Tenants shall be required to pay separately for every parking space that they would use (When the cost of parking is optional, rather than built into housing costs, those without cars aren’t burdened with paying for unwanted parking, and people who would use a car often change their behaviors to avoid the extra cost). • Pedestrian-Network Improvements: The project applicant shall improve pedestrian access to the nearest transit stops, as well as include pedestrian-oriented elements such as planters, benches, widened sidewalks, and improved lighting, in the site plan. • Carshare, Bikeshare, and Scootershare Program: The project applicant shall establish a carshare, bikeshare, electric bikeshare, and scootershare program to provide tenants alternatives to the use of a personal vehicle.

Mitigation Measure BIO-8: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a formal wetland delineation shall be completed for the project site by the project applicant and submitted to the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The project applicant shall obtain the necessary permits or approvals from the USACE and RWQCB for any fill of jurisdictional areas. All terms of the permits shall be implemented as a condition of the project, including compensatory mitigation as required by the USACE and RWQCB under their “no Packet Page 473 of 860Attachment 3 Page 14 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 15 net loss” policies. At a minimum, compensatory mitigation shall occur at a 1:1 mitigation ratio, taking into account function and value, distance, and seasonal wetland type.

Finding for Impact AQ-1: Mitigation Measure TRA-1 would reduce project VMT, and Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would ensure that project implementation results in “no net loss” of wetlands.

Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures TRA-1 and BIO-8 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact AQ-1 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact AQ-2: Construction of the proposed project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. While the project’s construction emissions would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds, the BAAQMD requires the implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures to reduce construction fugitive dust impacts to a less-than- significant level. Absent the implementation of BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, the proposed project’s construction-phase impact related to particulate matter would be significant.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Consistent with Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, the following controls are required to be included as specifications for the proposed project and implemented at the construction site:
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt tracked-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. • Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.
• All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.

Packet Page 474 of 860Attachment 3 Page 15 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 16 • A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact at the City of Fairfield regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The BAAQMD's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Finding for Impact AQ-2: Mitigation Measure AQ-1, which includes controls to minimize elevated dust/particulate matter during construction, would reduce construction-related air quality impacts to sensitive receptors. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact AQ-2 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact AQ-4: Project operation would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; however, emissions from project construction activities would exceed applicable thresholds. The project site is located near existing residential uses that could be exposed to toxic air contaminant (TAC) diesel exhaust emissions during the construction period.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: During construction of the proposed project, the project contractor shall ensure all off-road diesel-powered construction equipment of 50 horsepower or more used for project construction at a minimum meets the California Air Resources Board Tier 2 emissions standards and is equipped with Level 3 diesel particulate filters or the equivalent.

Finding for Impact AQ-4: Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would reduce impacts to sensitive receptors from elevated TAC concentrations during construction. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact AQ-4 to a less-than-significant level.

4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on Swainson’s hawks. There is documented Swainson's hawk nesting activity within the project vicinity, and the species could establish nests in the trees that are present in the adjacent riparian area. Thus, construction conducted during the nesting season for Swainson’s hawk could indirectly impact this species by causing adults to abandon nests in nearby trees, resulting in nest failure and reduced reproductive potential. Developing the project site with buildings and paved surfaces would remove marginal Swainson's hawk foraging habitat.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: If project construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season for Swainson’s hawks (March 1 to September 15), prior to commencement of construction, a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys according to the recommended timing and methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley, as defined by the Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee. Survey methods should be closely followed by starting early in the nesting season (late March to early April) to maximize the likelihood of detecting an active nest.

Surveys shall be conducted: (1) within a minimum 0.25-mile radius of the project site or a larger area if needed to identify potentially impacted active nests, and (2) for at least the two survey periods immediately prior to initiating project-related construction activities. Consistent with the Technical Advisory Committee Guidance, the recommended survey periods are March 20 to April 5, April 5 to Packet Page 475 of 860Attachment 3 Page 16 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 17 April 20, and June 10 to July 30 (post-fledging). Surveys shall occur annually for the duration of the project. The qualified biologist shall have a minimum of 2 years of experience implementing the survey methodology resulting in detections. If active Swainson’s hawk nests are detected, the project shall implement a 0.25-mile construction avoidance buffer around the nest until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. If take of Swainson’s hawk cannot be avoided, the project applicant shall consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) and obtain an Incidental Take Permit (ITP).

Mitigation Measure BIO-2: To mitigate for the loss of Swainson’s hawk and burrowing owl foraging habitat, the project applicant shall: (1) acquire suitable habitat land and permanently preserve foraging habitat through recording a conservation easement and implementing and funding a long- term management plan in perpetuity, or (2) acquire Swainson’s hawk and burrowing owl foraging habitat mitigation credits from a mitigation bank approved by the CDFW prior to building permit issuance. Either mitigation option shall be consistent with CDFW’s 1994 Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawk in the Central Valley of California, which specifies that projects within 5 miles of an active nest tree but greater than 1 mile from the nest tree shall provide

0.75 acre of foraging habitat for each acre of urban development authorized (i.e., 0.75:1 ratio).

Finding for Impact BIO-1: Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would require that protocol preconstruction surveys be conducted if construction commences during the nesting season. If nests are found during the survey, measures would be implemented to require avoidance of impacts to the nesting birds, in consultation with CDFW. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 would require acquisition of suitable foraging habitat and preserving it in perpetuity or purchase of Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat mitigation credits from a mitigation bank approved by CDFW prior to building permit issuance.

Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-1 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-2: The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on burrowing owls. It is possible that individual burrowing owls occasionally forage on the project site during the nesting or wintering season. Construction of the proposed project would also result in the loss of suitable foraging habitat for this species.

Mitigation Measure BIO-3: Prior to project activities, a habitat assessment shall be performed following ‘Habitat Assessment and Reporting Details’ of the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. The habitat assessment shall extend at least 492 feet from the project site boundary or more where direct or indirect effects could potentially extend off site (up to 1,640 feet) and include burrows and burrow surrogates. If the habitat assessment identifies potentially suitable burrowing owl habitat, then a qualified biologist shall conduct surveys following the CDFW 2012 Staff Report survey methodology. Surveys shall encompass the project site and a sufficient buffer zone to detect owls nearby that may be impacted commensurate with the type of disturbance anticipated, as outlined in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report, and include burrow surrogates such as culverts, piles of concrete or rubble, and other non-natural features, in addition to burrows and mounds. Time lapses between surveys or project activities shall trigger subsequent surveys, as determined by a qualified biologist, including but not limited to a final survey within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance. The Packet Page 476 of 860Attachment 3 Page 17 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 18 qualified biologist shall have a minimum of two years of experience implementing the CDFW 2012 Staff Report survey methodology resulting in detections. Detected nesting burrowing owls shall be avoided pursuant to the buffer zone prescribed in the CDFW 2012 Staff Report and any passive relocation plan for non-nesting owls shall be subject to CDFW review.

Finding for Impact BIO-2: Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would require that a habitat assessment and preconstruction surveys be conducted for burrowing owls in advance of project construction. Time lapses between surveys or project activities would trigger subsequent surveys, including a final survey within 24 hours prior to ground disturbance. Any detected nesting burrowing owls would be avoided, and any passive relocation plan for non-nesting owls would be subject to CDFW review.

Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-2 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-3: The proposed project could have a substantial effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on raptors, nesting birds, or other birds protected under the California Fish and Game Code and Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). If vegetation removal or grading and site preparation activities are conducted during the nesting season, project activities could directly impact nesting birds by removing the vegetation that supports active nests. Construction-related disturbance could also indirectly impact nesting passerine birds and raptors by causing adults to abandon nests in nearby trees and riparian vegetation, resulting in nest failure and reduced reproductive potential.

Implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3.

Mitigation Measure BIO-4: To the extent feasible, initial grading and vegetation removal activities shall occur during the non-nesting season (September 1 to January 31). For any construction activities conducted during the nesting season, a qualified biologist (i.e., experienced in searching for passerine and raptor nests) shall conduct a preconstruction nest survey of all trees or other suitable nesting habitat in and within 250 feet of the limits of construction activities. The survey shall be conducted no more than 7 days prior to the start of work. If the survey indicates the presence of nesting birds, the biologist shall determine an appropriately sized buffer around the nest in which no work shall occur until the young have successfully fledged. The size of the nest buffer shall be determined by the biologist and shall be based on the nesting species and its sensitivity to disturbance. In general, buffer sizes of up to 250 feet for raptors and 50 feet for other birds should suffice to prevent substantial disturbance to nesting birds, but these buffers may be increased or decreased, as appropriate, depending on the bird species and the level of disturbance anticipated near the nest.

Finding for Impact BIO-3: Mitigation Measure BIO-4 would require that a preconstruction survey be conducted for nesting birds if construction commences during the nesting season. The survey would be conducted within 7 days of starting construction work. If nests are found during the survey, the qualified biologist would establish an avoidance buffer until the young have successfully fledged.

Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure BIO-4, in conjunction with Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through -3 that also address birds protected under the California Fish Packet Page 477 of 860Attachment 3 Page 18 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 19 and Game Code and the MBTA, would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-3 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-4: The proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on monarch butterfly. Monarch butterflies have been documented to breed in the Green Valley area, and nectar plants that are used by the butterfly for feeding are present on the project site and in the adjacent riparian area. Grading and site preparation activities could disturb the butterflies feeding on the project site nectar plants and could disturb monarch butterfly breeding if milkweed (the obligate host plant that is used by monarch butterfly for breeding) establishes on the project site before project construction is commenced.

Mitigation Measure BIO-5: If project site ground clearing or vegetation removal activities for the proposed project are planned to occur between March 16 and October 31 (monarch breeding season), a preconstruction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 7 days prior to ground clearing or vegetation removal activities to determine if milkweed is present on the site and is being used for monarch breeding. The biologist would search for evidence of monarch eggs, caterpillars, chrysalises, and adults. If active monarch breeding is identified, the milkweed stand shall be avoided until the project applicant develops and implements a salvage and relocation plan that has been reviewed and approved by the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

Mitigation Measure BIO-6: If monarch butterflies are found actively feeding on the project site nectar plants during the preconstruction survey in Mitigation Measure BIO-5 or during site grading or vegetation clearing conducted between March 16 through October 31, work shall be halted in the areas of feeding activity and an appropriate buffer established, as determined by a qualified biologist, until the monarchs leave the site on their own.

Finding for Impact BIO-4: Mitigation Measure BIO-5 would require that a preconstruction survey be conducted if construction commences during the monarch breeding season. The survey would be conducted within 7 days of starting construction work to determine if milkweed is present on the site and is being used for monarch breeding. If active monarch breeding is identified, the milkweed stands would be avoided, and a salvage and relocation plan would be developed and implementation in consultation with the City and USFWS. Mitigation Measure BIO-6 would require that work be stopped if a monarch butterfly is found feeding and an appropriate buffer established until any monarch butterflies leave the project site. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures BIO-5 and BIO-6 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-4 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-5: The project could result in a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat from inadvertent disturbance during project construction. While the proposed project would be located outside of the existing riparian area, any project construction activities conducted adjacent to the riparian area would have the potential to result in inadvertent disturbance during construction.

Mitigation Measure BIO-7: The riparian habitat shall be fully avoided. Prior to initial ground disturbance, Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) fencing shall be placed along the limits of riparian vegetation to exclude construction activities from the avoided area. ESA fencing shall be maintained Packet Page 478 of 860Attachment 3 Page 19 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 20 until construction is complete. No vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities shall be permitted beyond the fencing. Vehicles and equipment shall not be operated or parked beyond the fencing. Materials shall not be stored or staged beyond or within 25 feet of the fencing.

Finding for Impact BIO-5: Mitigation Measure BIO-7 would ensure that the riparian habitat is fully avoided through the placement of ESA protective fencing that prohibits construction vehicle and equipment operation within the riparian area. No construction material storage or staging would be permitted beyond or within 25 feet of the fencing. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure BIO-7 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-5 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-6: The project would have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands through direct removal and filling. The proposed project would require the filling of a seasonal wetland that is located in a central location of the project site that cannot be avoided.

Finding for Impact BIO-6: Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would require that regulatory permits are obtained and all terms of the permits be implemented as a condition of the project, including compliance with agency “no net loss” policies. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-6 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact BIO-8: The proposed project could conflict with local policies or ordinances adopted for the protection of biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. A large willow on the project site within the adjacent riparian corridor could be classified as a protected tree under the City’s Municipal Code. While the tree would not be removed as part of the project, unless precautions are taken, project construction activities could adversely affect this tree, and the impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-9: The following tree protection measures shall be implemented during construction in the vicinity of the willow tree:
• All construction activity (grading, filling, paving, landscaping etc.) shall respect the root protection zone (RPZ) around the protected tree. The RPZ shall be a distance of 1.0 times the dripline radius measured from the trunk of the tree.

Packet Page 479 of 860Attachment 3 Page 20 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 21 • Temporary protective fencing shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to commencement of any construction activity conducted within 25 feet of the tree canopy. The fence shall be clearly marked to prevent inadvertent encroachment by heavy machinery. • Drainage shall not be allowed to pond around the base of the tree. • An International Society of Arboriculture (ISA)-Certified Arborist or tree specialist shall be retained to perform any necessary pruning of the tree during construction activity. • Roots exposed as a result of construction activities shall be covered with wet burlap to avoid desiccation and shall be buried as soon as practicable. • Construction materials or heavy equipment shall not be stored within the RPZ. • Only an ISA-Certified Arborist or tree specialist should make specific recommendations as to where the tree can safely tolerate some level of fill within the drip line. • Trenches which are required within the RPZ of the protected tree shall be bored (tunneled) under the root(s) using an auger or drill, rather than trenched, to minimize root disturbance. • Construction materials shall be properly stored away from the tree to avoid spillage or damage to the tree.

Finding for Impact BIO-8: As detailed in Mitigation Measure BIO-9, precautions would be implemented during project construction to protect the willow tree. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure BIO-9 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact BIO-8 to a less-than-significant level.

4.3 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CUL-2: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. While no evidence of the previously recorded archaeological site was observed within the project site during the cultural resources study, due to the number of cultural resources recorded within 0.25 mile of the project site, there is potential that ground-disturbing construction activities on the project site could impact previously unidentified archaeological resources.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, a qualified archaeologist (one who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards) shall be retained by the project applicant to provide professional archaeological services. The qualified archaeologist (or an archaeologist supervised by the qualified archaeologist) shall be present at the pre-grade conference to establish procedures for archaeological resource monitoring. Those procedures shall include provisions for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit sampling, identification, and evaluation of resources deemed by the archaeologist to potentially be historical resources or unique archaeological resources under the California Environmental Quality Act. The qualified archaeologist (or an archaeologist supervised by the qualified archaeologist) also shall conduct on-site Packet Page 480 of 860Attachment 3 Page 21 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 22 archaeological monitoring during all ground-disturbing work within native sediments associated with the project. Ground-disturbing work requiring archaeological monitoring shall include clearing and grubbing (vegetation removal), initial rough grading, and any trenching that occurs below the depth of initial rough grading. After material has been initially disturbed on the project site, no additional monitoring for that material shall be required (i.e., if utility trenching occurs within rough graded sediments that were previously monitored, this utility trenching shall not be subject to archaeological monitoring). The qualified archaeologist shall be available on an on-call basis for the duration of the project construction. Should archaeological resources be discovered during the ground-disturbing work, ground-disturbing construction activities shall be halted in the immediate vicinity of the find and redirected unaffected areas on site to allow for the proper evaluation for significance and treatment of the resources. Additional cultural resources work, if determined necessary, may include, but is not limited to, collection and documentation of artifacts, documentation of the cultural resources on State of California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Series 523 forms, or subsurface testing. Upon completion of any cultural resources work for the project, the archaeologist shall prepare a report to document the methods and results of the work. This report shall be submitted to any descendant community involved in the investigation(s) and the Northwest Information Center (NWIC).

Findings for Impact CUL-2: Mitigation Measure CUL-1 requires archaeological monitoring of all ground-disturbing work on the project site. If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing work, construction activities in the area of the find would be required to stop and the resource would be evaluated for significance. Pre-established procedures would be in place to address any significant finds. Provided archaeological resources are assessed and/or protected as they are discovered, impacts to currently unknown prehistoric and historic-period archaeological resources would be less than significant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact CUL-2 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact CUL-3: The proposed project could disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. No previously identified human remains exist on the project site; however, undiscovered human remains may be present below the ground surface on any property.

Should human remains be discovered and damaged during project construction, the impact would be considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2: In the event that human remains are encountered on the project site, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected to unaffected areas on site and the County Coroner notified immediately consistent with the requirements of California Code of Regulations (CCR) Section 15064.5(e). State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, which shall determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the project applicant, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the project site. The MLD may Packet Page 481 of 860Attachment 3 Page 22 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 23 recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.

Findings for Impact CUL-3: Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-2, which outlines procedures to be followed in the event that previously unidentified human remains are discovered, would reduce this impact to less than significant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure CUL-2 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact CUL-3 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact TCR-2: The project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource. As lead agency, the City has determined that while no tribal cultural resources have been identified on the project site either through Assembly Bill 52 consultations or on-site surveys, the project may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource if a previously unknown resource is later discovered and inadvertently damaged during ground-disturbing activities.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1: Prior to commencement of ground-disturbing activities for the project (as described in Mitigation Measure CUL-1), the project applicant shall contact Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation to provide a Native American tribal monitor during ground-disturbing activities. The project applicant shall provide 72-hours advance written notice of commencement of ground-disturbing activities to Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation so that the Nation can have a Native American tribal monitor present at the project site. The tribal monitor shall be provided an estimated construction schedule and invited to attend the pre-construction conference.

In the event that tribal cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities on the project site, appropriate treatment of tribal cultural resources that are also archaeological resources shall be determined in consultation with a qualified archaeologist and with Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, and as reviewed and approved by the City of Fairfield in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1. This could include, but would not be limited to, recordation of the resource on California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Series 523 forms. Appropriate treatment of tribal cultural resources that are not also archaeological resources shall be determined in consultation with a qualified cultural resources specialist and with Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, and as reviewed and approved by the City of Fairfield. This could include, but would not be limited to, recordation of the resource on DPR Series 523 forms.

In the event that human remains are encountered on the project site, Mitigation Measure CUL-2 shall be implemented. If any human remains are identified as Native American and Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation is determined to be the Most Likely Descendant by the Native American Heritage Commission, treatment protocols consistent with Treatment Protocol for Handling Human Remains and Cultural Items Affiliated with Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation (Appendix E) shall be finalized in consultation with a qualified archaeologist and with Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, and as reviewed and approved by the City of Fairfield. These treatment protocols may include avoidance of the human remains, reburial on the project site, or reburial on tribal or other lands that will not be disturbed in the future.

Packet Page 482 of 860Attachment 3 Page 23 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 24 Findings for Impact TCR-2: Mitigation Measure TCR-1 requires notification of Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation prior to any subsurface ground-disturbing activities so that the Nation can have a tribal monitor present during those activities. The project applicant would implement Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation treatment protocols in the event that Native American human remains are identified and Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation is determined to be the Most Likely Descendant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure TCR-1 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact TCR-2 to a less-than-significant level.

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact GEO-3: The project could be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. The upper 1 to 2 feet of soils on the project site are in a relatively soft condition due to the seasonal wetting and drying over the years. Differential settlement could occur if heavy loads were placed directly on these soils. In the area of the proposed parking structure, soils up to a depth of 40 feet are not suitable for the loads associated with the parking structure and differential settlement under the structure could occur.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1: Prior to the issuance of any site-specific grading or building permits, the City’s Building Division shall confirm that project plans have incorporated geotechnical recommendations included in the February 16, 2022 (or most current version) Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Wallace Kuhl & Associates and the project’s geotechnical engineer has reviewed and approved project plans. Prior to the issuance of building occupancy permits, the City’s Building Division shall ensure that implementation of all the geotechnical recommendations, including design criteria, specifications, and construction observations/inspection/testing, has been performed and documented in a construction completion report prepared by the project’s geotechnical engineer.

Findings for Impact GEO-3: The geotechnical report prepared for the project recommends that the upper 1 to 2 feet of soils be removed in the portions of the site that would support the apartment building and replaced with engineered fill. The geotechnical report also includes recommendations to either construct the parking structure on piers that are installed in competent soils, or a subgrade consisting of a compacted, aggregate pier system be installed which would also be stable under static conditions and not result in differential settlement at the garage structure site. The incorporation of all geotechnical report recommendations, as required by Mitigation Measure GEO- 1, into the project plans and documentation of their implementation in a construction completion report would reduce this impact to less than significant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact GEO-3 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact GEO-4: The project could be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Based on an analysis of project site soils, the surface and near-surface soils on the project site are highly expansive and are likely to shrink and swell substantially based on fluctuating moisture content. These soils are considered to have the potential Packet Page 483 of 860Attachment 3 Page 24 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 25 to cause substantial vertical movements of shallow conventional foundations, interior floor slabs, exterior flatwork, and pavements.

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

Findings for Impact GEO-4: The geotechnical report prepared for the project recommends either the expansive soils on the site be removed and replaced with imported, compactable, low-expansive soils or the site soils under the proposed structures and pavements be amended with lime treatment to reduce their shrink swell potential. The incorporation of all geotechnical report recommendations, as required by Mitigation Measure GEO-1, into the project plans and documentation of their implementation in a construction completion report would reduce this impact to less than significant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact GEO-4 to a less-than-significant level.

Impact GEO-6: The project would not directly or indirectly affect a unique geologic feature but could inadvertently destroy a unique paleontological resource or site. The geologic formation underlying the project is designated as having low paleontological resource sensitivity. Although the probability of uncovering paleontological resources on the project site is low, some potential still exists.

Mitigation Measure GEO-2: In the event that fossils or fossil bearing deposits are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, excavations within a 50-foot radius of the find shall be temporarily halted or diverted. Ground disturbance work shall cease until a City-approved qualified paleontologist determines whether the resource requires further study. The paleontologist shall document the discovery as needed in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology 1995), evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The paleontologist shall notify the appropriate agencies to determine procedures that would be followed before construction activities are allowed to resume at the location of the find. If avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effect of construction activities on the discovery. The excavation plan shall be submitted to the City of Fairfield for review and approval prior to implementation, and all construction activity shall adhere to the recommendations in the excavation plan.

Findings for Impact GEO-6: Implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-2, which outlines procedures to be followed in the event that previously unidentified paleontological resources are discovered, would reduce this impact to less than significant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure GEO-2 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact GEO-6 to a less-than-significant level.

4.5 NOISE
Impact NOl-1: Project construction activities would generate a substantial temporary 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. While construction noise will vary, it is expected that composite noise levels during construction would average 70 dBA at the Packet Page 484 of 860Attachment 3 Page 25 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 26 nearest sensitive residential receptor to the north during daytime hours. However, when grading activities are closer to the northern property line, based on a distance of 20 feet from source to receptor, noise levels would approach 90 dBA. Because construction activities would have the potential to reach 90 dBA and exceed the Federal Transit Administration 80 dBA construction noise standard at one or more of the adjacent sensitive receptors, construction of the project would result in a potentially significant construction noise impact.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: The construction contractor shall ensure that construction activities and equipment use, whose specific location on the site may be flexible (e.g., operation of compressors and generators, cement mixing, general truck idling), shall be conducted as far as possible from the nearest noise- and vibration-sensitive land uses, and natural and/or manmade barriers (e.g., intervening construction trailers) shall be used to screen propagation of noise from such activities towards these land uses. These activities shall be located in the southeast quadrant of the project site, as feasible.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The construction contractor shall ensure that a minimum 12-foot-high barrier, such as plywood structures or flexible sound control curtains, shall be erected on the project site boundary adjacent to the sensitive receptors to minimize the amount of noise during construction. A 12-foot-high construction noise barrier would provide approximately 13 dBA reduction to the closest residential receptors to the north.

Mitigation Measure NOI-3: The construction contractor shall ensure the use of power construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices. This specification shall be included on all project plans.

Mitigation Measure NOI-4: The construction staging area shall be as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Staging shall occur in the southeast quadrant of the project site, as feasible.

Mitigation Measure NOI-5: The construction contractor shall ensure that no less than two weeks prior to commencement of construction, notification shall be provided to the off-site residential, hotel, school, and church uses within 500 feet of the project site that discloses the construction schedule, including the types of activities and equipment that would be used throughout the duration of the construction period. Contact information shall also be posted where readily visible to the public.

Findings for Impact NOI-1: Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-5, which include the implementation of a noise barrier and additional construction noise minimization procedures, would reduce construction noise by at least 10 dBA. With the implementation of the mitigation measures, noise levels would be reduced by approximately 13 dBA to 77 dBA and would be below the 80 dBA construction noise standard. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-5 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact NOI-1 to a less-than-significant level.

Packet Page 485 of 860Attachment 3 Page 26 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 27

4.6 TRANSPORTATION
Impact TRA-2: The proposed project would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). The proposed project is expected to result in 46.3 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per multifamily dwelling unit, which exceeds the City’s 44.1 VMT per multifamily dwelling unit threshold by approximately 5 percent. While the addition of the proposed project reduces the citywide average VMT for multifamily dwelling units, the VMT generated by the proposed project on a per dwelling unit basis would exceed the significance threshold, resulting in a potentially significant VMT impact. Therefore, implementation of vehicle trip reduction programs would be required.

Findings for Impact TRA-2: Mitigation Measure TRA-1 would require the implementation of a TDM Program that would motivate the tenants to use alternatives to personal automobile travel through both positive incentives that encourage walking, biking and transit use, and through disincentives that impose a higher cost on people who choose to use personal automobiles for travel. Positive incentives would include pedestrian improvements and carshare, bikeshare and scootershare programs, whereas disincentives include separately charging for parking. Implementation of these measures would provide the required reduction in the VMT per multifamily dwelling unit and reduce this impact to less than significant. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that Mitigation Measure TRA-1 would be incorporated into the proposed project via conditions of approval and would reduce Impact TRA-2 to a less-than-significant level.

Packet Page 486 of 860Attachment 3 Page 27 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 28 SECTION 5.0: FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES

5.1 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
The Final EIR analyzed three alternatives in detail: the No Project/No Development Alternative, the No Project/Development Consistent with Existing Zoning Alternative, and the Reduced Project Alternative. The City hereby concludes that the Final EIR sets forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the Green Valley 3 Apartments Project so as to foster informed public participation and informed decision making. The City finds that the three alternatives identified and described in the Final EIR were considered and further finds them to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21081.

5.1.1 Objectives of the Proposed Project
The project applicant (Spanos Corporation) intends to develop a well-designed, economically feasible residential community that consists of a variety of apartment unit types and incorporates sustainable development features. The key objectives for the proposed project are to:
• Create a development of a scale and character that complements and is supportive of the surrounding uses;
• Develop a well-designed, economically feasible residential community that consists of a variety of unit types and sizes;
• Develop a residential project that contains a high density of residences to help meet City, regional, and State housing goals; and
• Improve the availability of rental housing in the Green Valley/Cordelia area of western Fairfield.

5.1.2 No Project/No Development Alternative
Under the No Project/No Development alternative, the project site would not be developed, and the existing conditions would continue. No grading or new construction would occur and the site would remain undeveloped.

The No Project/No Development alternative would avoid all of the significant impacts of the proposed project, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Finding: It is found pursuant to PRC Section 21081(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social and technological, or other considerations, make the No Project/No Development Alternative infeasible.

Therefore, the City finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project and rejects this alternative for any and all of the following reasons:

Packet Page 487 of 860Attachment 3 Page 28 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 29 The No Project/No Development alternative would not realize any of the project objectives because it would not develop a well-designed, economically feasible residential community that contains a high density of residences to help meet City, regional, and State housing goals, nor would it create a development of a scale and character that complements and is supportive of the surrounding uses.

This alternative would not assist the City of Fairfield in achieving the 2023-2031 Housing Element goal of providing a variety of housing opportunities for all income groups throughout the city, including different housing types, unit sizes, design, amenities, locations, and tenure as no housing would be added to the City under this alternative.

5.1.3 No Project/Development Consistent with Existing Zoning Alternative Should the proposed project not be approved by the City, it would be reasonable to expect that the project site would be developed by another entity consistent with the site’s existing specific plan land use and zoning designations, and available infrastructure. The project site is currently designated IBP-NC (Industrial Business Park – North Cordelia Overlay) by the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The types of projects typically allowed under the IBP-NC land use include administrative and professional offices, research and development parks, limited distribution facilities, light manufacturing, and assembly operations. A floor to area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 is permitted under this zoning designation. Although the existing zoning allows for any of the above uses to be developed on this site, this alternative assumes that the project site would be developed with business office uses similar to the adjacent office use on Business Center Drive. Based on a FAR of 1.0 for this zoning designation and the size of the project site, up to 250,000 square feet of office space could be constructed on the project site. Allowing for the required setbacks and parking needed to serve the office space, either one large four-story building or two smaller buildings between three and four stories in height would be developed on the project site under this alternative.

The No Project/Development Consistent with Existing Zoning Alternative would result in comparable impacts on biological resources, geology and soils, and cultural resources but would result in more severe impacts in the areas of air quality, noise, transportation, and wildfire. All of the mitigation measures required for the proposed project would also be required for this alternative.

Finding: It is found pursuant to PRC Section 21081(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social and technological, or other considerations, make the No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative infeasible.

Therefore, the City finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project and rejects this alternative for any and all of the following reasons:

The No Project/Development Consistent with Existing Zoning alternative would not achieve three of the four objectives of the proposed project. It would not develop a well-designed, economically feasible residential community that consists of a variety of unit types and sizes; would not develop a residential project that contains a high density of residences to help meet City, regional, and State housing goals; and would not improve the availability of rental housing in the Green Valley/Cordelia area of western Fairfield. This alternative would not assist the City of Fairfield in achieving the 2023- 2031 Housing Element goal of providing a variety of housing opportunities for all income groups throughout the city, including different housing types, unit sizes, design, amenities, locations, and tenure as no housing would be added to the City under this alternative.

Packet Page 488 of 860Attachment 3 Page 29 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 30

5.1.4 Reduced Project
The Reduced Project alternative would involve reducing the size of the proposed project by excluding the apartment units on the fourth level of the proposed apartment building. This would reduce the overall building space by approximately 56,000 square feet (i.e., an approximately 27 percent reduction compared to the proposed project) and the building height by approximately 12 feet. Under this alternative, a three-story, approximately 147,200-square foot apartment building would be constructed with a total of 130 residential units. All of the other improvements would be comparable to the proposed project, including the recreational facilities, parking garage, landscaping, site access, and roadways and paths for internal circulation. As the alternative would comprise 130 units, it would include parking spaces that would be proportionally reduced (233 parking spaces compared to 332 parking spaces under the proposed project).

The Reduced Project alternative would result in comparable impacts on resources such as biological resources, geology and soils, transportation, and cultural resources but would result in reduced impacts in the areas of air quality and noise. However, all of the mitigation measures required for the proposed project would still be required for this alternative.

Finding: It is found pursuant to PRC Section 21081(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social and technological, or other considerations, make the Reduced Project alternative infeasible. Therefore, the City finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project and rejects this alternative for any and all of the following reasons:

The Reduced Project alternative would achieve only two of the four objectives of the proposed project. It would create a development of a scale and character that complements and is supportive of the surrounding uses, and it would improve the availability of rental housing in the Green Valley/Cordelia area of western Fairfield, although by providing substantially fewer housing units, it would not satisfy this objective as effectively as the proposed project. Furthermore, due to the substantial reduction in the number of units, the Reduced Project alternative would not achieve other two objectives of the proposed project, which are to develop an economically feasible residential community and a high-density residential community that would help to meet City, regional, State housing goals. This alternative would not assist the City of Fairfield in achieving the 2023-2031 Housing Element goal of providing a variety of housing opportunities for all income groups throughout the city, including different housing types, unit sizes, design, amenities, locations, and tenure to the same extent as the proposed project. Based on the City’s Housing Element and the Association of Bay Area Governments’ Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the 2023-2031 planning period, the construction of 3,069 new units is required to meet housing needs in Fairfield within this timeframe. Further, in passing legislation in 2019 to address California’s severe housing shortage (Senate Bill [SB] 330, Housing Crisis Act of 2019, the Legislature recognized that the State is “experiencing a housing supply crisis, with housing demand far outstripping supply. In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita.” (Stats. 2019, ch. 654, § 2(a)(l) (“SB 330”).) SB 330 recognizes that the State needs “an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over the next 7 years.” (Id. at § 2(a)(4).) To bolster SB 330 and in recognition of the ongoing housing shortage, the Governor has allocated $13.6 billion and signed over 70 housing bills Packet Page 489 of 860Attachment 3 Page 30 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 31 in the last 2 years to provide cities and counties with the tools and support needed to build housing at all income levels.1 As such, approving the Reduced Project alternative would be incompatible with a fundamental objective of the project, and would be counter to the State’s and City’s goals of alleviating the current housing crisis.

5.2 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The No Project/No Development alternative would have the fewest impacts. Of the other two alternatives that are analyzed in detail, the No Project/Development Consistent with Existing Zoning alternative would have significant impacts in most resource topics that would be comparable to the proposed project. This alternative would have potentially greater air quality, noise, transportation, and wildfire impacts than the proposed project due to its larger size. The Reduced Project alternative would also have significant impacts in all resource topics that would be comparable to those of the proposed project, but due to the reduced size of the apartment building and the reduced number of housing units, this alternative would result in somewhat reduced construction- phase air quality and noise impacts. Therefore, the Reduced Project alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative. Nonetheless, as the Reduced Project alternative would only achieve two of the four objectives of the proposed project and would be counter to the State’s and City’s goals of alleviating the current housing crisis, the City finds that this alternative is infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project.

1 State of California. 2023. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom website. Governor Newsom’s Newly Created Housing Accountability Unit Marks First Year. Available at:
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/11/04/governor-newsoms-newly-created-housing-accountability-unit- marks-first-year/. Accessed on May 30, 2023.

Packet Page 490 of 860Attachment 3 Page 31 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 32 SECTION 6.0: GENERAL FINDINGS

1. The City, acting through the Community Development Department Planning Division, is the “Lead Agency” for the project evaluated in the EIR. The City finds that the EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. The City finds that it has independently reviewed and analyzed the project EIR, that the Draft EIR which was circulated for public review reflected its independent judgment and that the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City.

2. The EIR evaluated the following potential project and cumulative environmental impacts:
aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, public services and recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, wildfire, and alternatives. The EIR also adequately addressed other CEQA considerations, including Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes and Growth Inducing Impacts. The significant environmental impacts of the project, as well as alternatives to the proposed project were identified and analyzed in the EIR.

3. The City finds that the EIR provides objective information to assist the decision makers and the public at large in their consideration of the environmental consequences of the project. The public review periods provided all interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments regarding the Draft EIR. The Final EIR was prepared after the review period and responds to comments made during the public review period.

4. The Community Development Department Planning Division evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA, the Planning Division prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The Final EIR provides adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The Community Development Department Planning Division reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information regarding environmental impacts to the Draft EIR. The Lead Agency has based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the date of adoption of these findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the EIR.

5. The Final EIR documents changes to the Draft EIR. Having reviewed the information contained in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR, and the administrative record, as well as the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines regarding recirculation of Draft EIRs, the City finds that there is no new significant impact, substantial increase in the severity of a previously disclosed impact, significant new information in the record of proceedings or other criteria under CEQA that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR, or that would require preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR. Specifically, the City finds that:

Packet Page 491 of 860Attachment 3 Page 32 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 33 a. The Responses to Comments contained in the Final EIR fully considered and responded to comments claiming that the project would have significant impacts or more severe impacts not disclosed in the Draft EIR and include substantial evidence that none of these comments provided substantial evidence that the project would result in new or more severe significant impacts than were discussed in the Draft EIR, require considerably different mitigation measures. None of the comments provided substantial evidence that included significant new information or demonstrated a change in circumstances in which the project would be undertaken. b. The City has thoroughly reviewed the public comments received regarding the project and the Final EIR as it relates to the project to determine whether under the requirements of CEQA, any of the public comments provide substantial evidence that would require recirculation of the EIR prior to its certification and has determined that recirculation of the EIR is not required. c. None of the information submitted after publication of the Final EIR, including testimony at the public hearings on the project and late comment letters, constitutes significant new information or otherwise requires preparation of a supplemental or subsequent EIR. The City does not find this information and testimony to be credible evidence of a significant impact, a substantial increase in the severity of an impact disclosed in the Final EIR, or a feasible mitigation measure or alternative not included in the Final EIR.
d. The mitigation measures identified for the project were included in the Draft EIR and Final EIR. The final mitigation measures for the project are described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). Each of the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP is incorporated into the project. The City finds that the impacts of the project have been mitigated to the extent feasible by the mitigation measures identified in the MMRP.

6. CEQA requires the Lead Agency approving a project to adopt a MMRP or the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The mitigation measures included in the EIR as certified by the City and included in the MMRP as adopted by the City serve that function. The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures and project design features adopted by the City in connection with the approval of the project and has been designed to ensure compliance with such measures during implementation of the project.

7. In accordance with CEQA, the MMRP provides the means to ensure that the mitigation measures are fully enforceable. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City hereby adopts the MMRP.

8. In accordance with the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City hereby adopts each of the mitigation measures expressly set forth herein as conditions of approval for the project.

Packet Page 492 of 860Attachment 3 Page 33 of 34

CEQA F INDINGS
A UGUST 2023
G REEN V ALLEY 3 A PARTMENTS P ROJECT

F AIRFIELD, C ALIFORNIA

C:\Users\Shabnam\Documents\3. GVIII EIR\3. Project Files\FEIR (published)\7-30-23 docs\GV3_Findings 7-31-23 (final).docx (07/31/23) 34

9. The custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City decision is based is the City of Fairfield, Community Development Department Planning Division.

10. The City finds and declares that substantial evidence for each and every finding made herein is contained in the EIR, which is incorporated herein by this reference, or is in the record of proceedings in the matter.

11. The City is certifying an EIR for, and is approving and adopting findings for, the entirety of the actions described in these Findings and in the EIR as comprising the project.

12. The EIR is a project EIR for purposes of environmental analysis of the project. A project EIR examines the environmental effects of a specific project. The EIR serves as the primary environmental compliance document for entitlement decisions regarding the project by the City and the other regulatory jurisdictions.

Packet Page 493 of 860Attachment 3 Page 34 of 34

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 FairfieldCommunity Development Department NORTH Existing General Plan Land Use Designation
Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation
Very High Density Residential (RVH)
IBP
RVH

EXHIBIT C
Packet Page 494 of 860Attachment 4 Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT D

Page 1 ends

CITY COUNCIL

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Project Name: Green Valley 3 Apartments
Address: 4840 Business Center Drive (APN: 0148-540-350) Hearing Date: August 15, 2023
File No.: GPA2021-001, ZC2021-003, DR2021-013, and ER2021-036

Development Review approval has been granted subject to compliance with the following conditions which must be satisfied prior to issuance of building permits, unless noted otherwise:

1.0 SPECIAL CONDITIONS

1.1 Applicant shall incorporate the following special conditions reflecting the modifications and/or needed information into their plans as part of their submittal to the Building Safety Division of the Community Development Department:

A. Per City Council Resolution 91-277, the developer shall contribute to public art by doing either of the following:
i. Constructing or purchasing public art for inclusion in the project . Public art shall include, but shall not be limited to water features, sculptures, and tape stries. Design features incorporated into the proposed building architecture, such as cornices, pilasters, or special paving materials are not considered public art. The City shall approve all public art projects.

Or,
ii. Paying an in-lieu fee to the city in an amount equal to one-quarter of one percent of the total value of the development. The building permit valuation shall determine the total value of the development.

B. Prior to building permit issuance, actions shall be taken with the Fairfield Police Department Crime Prevention Division to meet the requirements of the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program. Contact Jeremy Profitt, Police Support Manager, at (707) 428 -7709 and/or [email protected].

C. All trees proposed along the perimeter of the project site shall be a minimum of 24 -inch box size at the time of planting.

D. The conifer evergreen screen trees along the northwest periphery of the project site shall be spaced no less than six feet in the center.

E. Details for the sectional garage doors shall be provided as part of the building permit submittal.

F. Details for the 14 bicycle parking spaces shall be provided as part of the building permit submittal.

Packet Page 495 of 860Attachment 5 Page 1 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 2 ends

G. The existing “4810-4860 Business Center Drive” monument sign and entryway improvements shall be preserved. The developer shall be responsible for repairing any damages caused to these improvements during project construction.

H. The developer shall install signage that explicitly prohibits parking in the area of t he site plan immediately in front of the trash room. All signage shall be consistent with the Fairfield Sign Ordinance.

I. Replace SW 7068 Grizzle Gray and SW 7004 Snowbound with earth-tone colors to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.

J. The trash room is approved. Should the trash room be removed from the plans, the project shall include details for trash enclosure(s) per Condition 4.2 as part of the building permit submittal.

1.2 All mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Report (ER2021-036) and referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project shall be implemented.

1.3 Comply with the conditions of the City of Fairfield Public Works Department as contained in the attached memo dated June 12, 2023.

1.4 Comply with the conditions of the City of Fairfield Fire Prevention Division as contained in the attached memo dated April 5, 2023.

1.5 Comply with the conditions of the Solano Irrigation District as contained in the attached memo dated September 8, 2021.

1.6 Comply with the conditions of the Fairfield -Suisun Sewer District as contained in the attached memo dated April 5, 2023.

1.7 Comply with the conditions of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) as contained in the attached letter dated April 12, 2023.

2.0 APPROVAL TIME LIMITS/REVOCATION

2.1 Approval of this application shall expire two (2) years from the date of approval. If building permits are not issued and diligently pursued toward completion, or the approved use has not commenced if no permits are required, the approval shall be void. A time extension may be granted if a written request is submitted by the applicant to the Community Development Department prior to the expiration of the application.

2.2 This approval shall not be valid unless and until the following additional approval(s) are granted:

A. City Council Approval of the following:
i. General Plan Amendment (GPA2021-001)
Packet Page 496 of 860Attachment 5 Page 2 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 3 ends

ii. Zone Change (ZC2021-003)
B. City Council Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report (ER2021-036)

3.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

3.1 The project shall proceed only in accordance with the approved plans titled “GREEN VALLEY 3 APARTMENTS” as prepared by TSD Engineering, Inc., Kephart, GHD, Inc., and Capitol City Design, Inc., consisting of thirty-five (35) sheets, dated "Received May 5, 2022" and “Received October 5, 2022, except as may be modified by the conditions contained herein and approved by the Planning Division pursuant to Section 3.2, and shall proceed in accordance with the Fairfield City Code. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval and required improvements, such as landscaping, shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City.

3.2 Submit the required number of sets of plans to the Building Safety Division of the Community Development Department for review and approval. Plans shall incorporate all conditions of approval and reflect the modifications and/or contain needed information prior to issuance of building permits. These plans shall include, but are not limited to, the detailed site plan, grading plan, landscape and irrigation plans, building plans, and construction details of items such as exterior lighting, walls, pavement textures, trash enclosures, and mechanical equipment.

3.3 Approval of this project shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Fairfield City Code (Zoning, Subdivision, Building Codes, etc.), Fairfield General Plan, and applicable policy plans.

3.4 When submitting for Plan Check, the applicant must provide to the Community Development Department a copy of these Conditions of Development Review with a cover letter specifying how and where the revised plans address each of the conditions. Plan Check by the Community Development Department will not be completed without compliance with this condition.

3.5 All construction plans, including but not limited to, the site plan, building elevations, landscaping and irrigation plans, grading plan, mechanical drawings, street improvement plans, and detailed drawings submitted to the Building Safety Division for permits shall be coordinated for consistency by the applicant prior to issuance of any permits or prior to final map approval as applicable, or commencement of the subject use, whichever comes first. Any ch ange or modification to one particular plan shall require the corresponding revisions on other plans. All plans shall be consistent with that approved by the Community Development Department. The applicant shall be responsible for correcting any inconsistency which may occur through error or omission during plan preparation or construction.

3.6 The project is subject to the Solano County Public Facilities Development fee. The applicant will be required to pay such fee at the rate which is in effect at the t ime a building permit is issued.

3.7 The Applicant, and property owner(s), and their successors in interest, shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officials, officers, agents and employees (collectively "Indemnitees") from and against any and all claims, actions, lawsuits, damages, losses and Packet Page 497 of 860Attachment 5 Page 3 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 4 ends

liabilities arising or resulting from the granting of this approval by the City or the exercise of the rights granted by this approval. This indemnification obligation shall include, but not be limited to, paying all fees and costs incurred by legal counsel of the City's choice in representing the Indemnitees in connection with any such claims, actions or lawsuits, any expert fees, and any award of damages, judgments, verdicts, court costs or attorneys' fees in any such claim, action or lawsuit. The City shall promptly notify Applicant and property owners of any claim, action, or proceeding and the City shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. In the event such a legal action is filed, the City shall estimate its expenses for litigation. Applicant or property owners shall deposit such amount with the City or enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. Applicant and property owners shall reimburse the City, and each of the Indemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by it in enforcing the indemnity herein provided.

4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT

4.1 A precise plan for all fences and retaining and screening walls shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building permits.

Such plan shall indicate the location, design and construction details. Fences or walls visible from public view on or off-site shall be provided with decorative treatment.

4.2 Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall be enclosed by a minimum six (6) foot high masonry wall with metal, solid view obstructing gates pursuant to City standards. Enclosure walls shall be constructed to prevent pedestrian entrance and/or waste deposit above or below all enclosure walls and gates. A pedestrian entrance with a door is recommended. For multi-family residential projects, facilities that are connected to a sanitary sewer, and building projects over 10,000 square feet, all trash enclosures shall be provided with a roof. Food fac ilities must have hot and cold water plumbed into the enclosure per the Solano County Department of Environmental Health. The area directly in front of the enclosure gates shall have “NO PARKING” painted in reflective paint on the ground, additionally “NO PARKING” signs shall be affixed to each gate.

Additional waste management signage shall be posted on-site and within the enclosure to limit contamination.

The precise location and construction details shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. The enclosure shall include a reinforced concrete apron as approved by the Public Works Department. All commercial and multifamily residential projects shall meet the requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code p ertaining to recyclable materials storage and handling and access to trash enclosures.

4.3 It shall be the applicant's responsibility to coordinate the location of all utility equipment with P.G. & E. Final locations of all above ground equipment must be a pproved by P.G. & E., the Community Development Department and Public Works Department prior to issuance of building permits.

4.4 All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers or air conditioning units shall be located out of public view and/or adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, or berming, painting and/or landscaping. Said appurtenances shall be Packet Page 498 of 860Attachment 5 Page 4 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 5 ends

indicated on the approved landscape and irrigation plans prior to issuance of building permits.

4.5 Existing trees and shrub groupings shall be retained whenever possible. All existing trees and shrub groupings to be impacted by development or any other construction related activities shall be located on the site plan, grading plan, landscape plan and irrigation plan. Trees to be preserved shall be protected by temporary fencing installed around the tree drip line for the duration of the project to prevent soil compaction, soil removal or deposit, or soil contamination. Fencing shall be maintained intact throughout construction and be removed after project completion.

4.6 Any outdoor storage shall be subject to review and approval by the Community Development Department. All outdoor storage areas shall be completely screened from public view by a decorative masonry or concrete wall or approved equal. All gates shall be solid view obstructing and constructed of metal or other durable and sturdy materials acceptable to the Department.

5.0 PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS

5.1 All parking spaces, aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. A detailed striping plan shall be provided in the construction drawings.

5.2 Any security gates and/or fences shall require details which shall be submitted to the Polic e and Fire Departments and Community Development Department for approval prior to issuance of building permits.

5.3 All landscaped areas adjacent to vehicle parking areas or travel lanes shall be contained by a minimum six (6) inch high, poured in place, concrete curb.

5.4 All drive surfaces abutting buildings or walls, when designated for vehicular parking, shall have concrete wheel stops.

5.5 The paving section for loading and receiving areas and access to the trash enclosure shall be designed to withstand weight of service vehicles. A section indicating the design shall be submitted for review and approval.

5.6 Provide dry sack or painted tex-cote finish to concrete bases of exterior light poles.

6.0 BUILDING DESIGN

6.1 Specific paint, siding, wall or roofing materials, finish textures, and windows or doors shall be in substantial compliance with that approved. Manufacturer specifications shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Samples of final color and materi als selections may be required by the Community Development Department to verify compliance.

6.2 Exterior aluminum window and door frames shall be treated in an anodized finish or painted with a powder coating or baked enamel process. The use of vinyl windows in a non-residential structure is subject to the approval of the Community Development Department.

6.3 All building drainage gutters, down spouts, vents, etc. located on the exterior walls shall be Packet Page 499 of 860Attachment 5 Page 5 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 6 ends

completely concealed from view or shall be architecturally compatible with the exterior building design and color to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.

6.4 Roof access ladders, if provided, shall be placed on the interior of the structures so as not to be visible from outside of the project.

6.5 All mechanical equipment and appurtenances of any type, whether located on roof tops, ground level or anywhere on the building structure, shall be screened so as not to be visible from public view on or off-site. For screening of ground-mounted equipment and appurtenances to be achieved through landscaping, such plantings must achieve full coverage within two years. For roof-mounted equipment and appurtenances, if screening cannot feasibly achieve zero visibility due to site topography, then screening shall be implemented to the greatest extent feasible to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.

6.6 A building section illustrating the location of all roof equipment in relation to height of the outside parapet shall be submitted. Roof equipment shall not project above the height of the parapet or roof top to the greatest extent feasible. When not feasible due to building design, a roof top screen which is architecturally integrated with the building elevation and exceeds the heigh t of the equipment shall be placed around the equipment to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department.

6.7 A roof plan shall be submitted with spot elevations showing location of all roof equipment including vents, stacks and skylights.

6.8 All overhead doors shall be color coordinated with the building.

6.9 All electrical equipment shall be located interior to the building (i.e., no exterior electrical cabinets), unless screened from public view in a manner acceptable to the Community Development Department. Any exterior equipment or cabinets shall be depicted on architectural and site plans submitted for plan check, with location of equipment and screening method clearly identified on plans and shall be painted to match the building color upon installation.

6.10 All windows and doorways shall receive wood or stucco built-up trim, or other accent treatment, on all elevations.

6.11 Where a fireplace or other heating system is vented to the side of any structure (i.e., no chimney or roof pipe is employed), the exterior portion of the vent and any related flashing shall be painted either a flat black color or a color that matches the surrounding wall.

6.12 Only the following woodburning appliances shall be installed in residential and commercial buildings: (1) a pellet-fueled wood heater; (2) an EPA certified wood heater; (3) a fireplace certified by EPA should EPA develop a fireplace certification program; or (4) a gas fireplace.

7.0 LANDSCAPING

7.1 This project shall utilize water conservation techniques, such as drip irrigation and drought tolerant plant species, as required in accordance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape Packet Page 500 of 860Attachment 5 Page 6 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 7 ends

Ordinance.

7.2 Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Such plans shall be prepared and stamped by a California licensed landscape architect or other equally educated and qualified experienced professional to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department and accompanied by a statement or stamp by a California licensed landscape architect or other equally educated and qualified experienced professional that the plans meet or exceed the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

7.3 Landscape plans shall be scaled to a minimum of 1 inch = 20 feet and shall specify the following:

A. The location and size of all plant materials and shall include a plant legend specifying species type (botanical and common name), container size, and quantity of all plant materials.

B. Spacing for trees and shrubs, when a particular 'effect' (street canopy, hedges, barriers, screens...) is required shall be specified. Spacing for all groundcovers shall be specified.

C. The locations of all pavements (vehicular and pedestrian), walls, fencing, buildings, roof overhangs and other structures, utility equipment (air conditioners, transformers, backflow preventers, etc.), property lines, and other pertinent site plan features.

7.4 Plant materials shall comply with the following:

A. Plant materials shall consist of a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs and groundcovers to provide design interest and as a protective measure against disease and insect infestation. Low-maintenance plants are also encouraged.

B. Only live groundcover is allowed in high visibility and pedestrian areas. Exceptions may be approved by the Community Development Department to include, but not be limited to, decorative gravel beds, decomposed granite paths or pedestrian spaces and areas to be covered by shrubs.

C. All landscape planting areas shall be mulched and/or covered with bark chips or other similar material, unless growth of live groundcovers would be impeded, or is necessary for weed control, as determined by the Community Development Department. Large areas of exposed soil are prohibited.

D. Drought tolerant species suitable for the Fairfield area are encouraged, as contained in the reference list prepared by the Public Works Department .

E. Plant material selections must consider the hardiness needs for the Fair field area. Species particularly susceptible to, or potentially damaged by, disease, insects, winter freeze and other climatic conditions in Fairfield are discouraged. Species exhibiting particular problems in the Fairfield area may not be permitted and, as such, plant substitutions may be required by the Community Development Department to fulfill this condition.

Packet Page 501 of 860Attachment 5 Page 7 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 8 ends

7.5 Plant material size and spacing shall comply with the following:

A. Minimum tree size shall be a mix of twenty-four (24) inch box, fifteen (15) gallon and five (5) gallon. Shrub size shall be a mix of five (5) gallon and one (1) gallon. The percentage of one (1) gallon and five (5) gallon shrubs and five (5) gallon trees shall be reviewed and approved based upon the location, spacing, hardiness, and growth rate of the plant species proposed; but said percentage shall not exceed 25 percent. Smaller sized containers may be utilized for ground covers.

B. The following trees shall be a minimum of twenty-four (24) inch box specimens at the time of planting:
i. Crape Myrtle (“Lagerstroemia”)
ii. Chinese Pistache (“Pistacia chinensis”)
iii. Flowering Crabapple (“Malus”)
iv. Redbud (“Cercis”)
C. Where plant materials are placed in two (2) or more rows, planting rows shall be staggered.

D. Evergreen trees required for screening purposes shall not be less than six (6) feet in height at time of planting.

E. Large shrubs required for screening purposes shall not be less than twenty-four (24) inches in height at time of planting. Spacing shall be between four (4) and six (6) feet on-center, as determined by the Community Development Department.

F. Groundcovers shall be spaced such that full coverage is achieved at the end of one to two years.

7.6 Planting and staking details shall comply with the following:

A. Landscape plans shall include planting and staking details in text and/or drawing form to insure proper installation and establishment of proposed plant materials.

B. Soils shall be tested to identify existing soil conditions and necessary amendments. All planting pits shall be twice the diameter of the diameter of the root container.

C. All trees shall be double-staked, except that twenty-four (24) inch or larger box trees may require guy wires or triple- staking as determined by the Community Development Department. Guy wires are prohibited within pedestrian traffic areas. Protect trees from contact with any wire used in staking.

D. Provide root deflectors for all trees planted within eight (8) feet of paved surfaces.

Packet Page 502 of 860Attachment 5 Page 8 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 9 ends

E. All planters in areas which have been compacted, such as adjacent to buildings and in parking lots, shall be de-compacted to the following depths: planters less than three (3) feet wide shall have compaction relieved to a minimum depth of twenty-four (24) inches below subgrade; planters three to ten (3 - 10) feet wide shall have compaction relieved to a minimum depth of 18 inches below subgrade; planters more than 10 feet' wide shall have compaction relieved to a minimum depth of 12 inches below subgrade; F. Planters 10 feet or less in width in locations that will not allow normal percolation of 24 to 36 hours maximum (such as adjacent to buildings) shall have drain pipes connected to the storm drain system or shall have dry wells installed as determined necessary by the Community Development Department;
G. The finished grade of planter islands or wells shall have a crown with a 2% slope down to surrounding grade or top of curb and a one (1) foot lip. Planters adjacent to buildings where a crown cannot be installed will require subdrains if adequate s urface drainage will not be provided.

7.7 Stormwater treatment areas shall have an enhanced aesthetic design through the combination of appropriate shrubs/groundcover, perennial herbaceous species, and rounded aggregate such as 'river rock'.

7.8 Screening of all ground-mounted utility equipment including air conditioners, transformers, backflow preventers, or other similar equipment for all non-residential buildings shall be indicated on the plans. Said screening shall include the use or combination of shr ubbery, berming, or structures.

7.9 Parking lot landscaping shall comply with the following:

A. Landscaping within the parking area shall be of a minimum dimension of five (5) feet in width as measured from the inside diameter of required curbing and shall be exclusive of any vehicle overhang.

B. All landscape areas shall be protected from automobiles with a six (6) inch high, poured-in- place, concrete curb or other suitable protective device meeting City approval.

7.10 Berms shall be illustrated according to slope, width, height above surrounding grade, and landscaping. Landscape berms shall be coordinated for consistency with the grading plan.

7.11 An automatic irrigation system shall service all landscaped areas.

7.12 All undeveloped building pads shall be fully landscaped and irrigated, or screened by perimeter shrubs to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department and shall be incorporated into the required landscape and irrigation plans.

7.13 During installation of landscaping and irrigation, and prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Safety Division, the landscape architect or design professional responsible for preparing the required plans, or his/her designee, shall monitor installation and Packet Page 503 of 860Attachment 5 Page 9 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 10 ends

visit the site prior to completion of the landscape work and, thereafter, provide a written statement confirming compliance with approved plans and approval of materials to the Community Development Department.

7.14 A redwood headerboard or equivalent shall be installed along all areas where landscaping is adjacent to undeveloped property to delineate between maintained and natural areas.

8.0 MAINTENANCE

8.1 All landscape areas shall be maintained in a healthy, thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.

8.2 Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed in public right -of-way shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City or Homeowner's Association.

8.3 All improvements on the site shall be constructed and continuously maintained in compliance with the approved plans.

8.4 The developer shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City (which shall be a recorded document) giving the City authority to ensure maintenance of structures, parking and loading areas, fencing and landscaping to the standards established by the approved plans at the time of final inspection of the project and shall also allow enforcement of outside storage violations. This agreement shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits.

9.0 OTHER STUDIES

9.1 A detailed on-site exterior lighting and photometric plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. The plan shall indicate fixture design, illumination, location, height and method of shielding, so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties and so as to provide a minimum of one -foot candle luminance at all exterior parking lot locations. Buffering techniques to reduce light and glare impacts shall be required for projects adjoining residential land and at no time shall light exceed one-foot candle luminance at the property lines for any project.

10.0 SIGNS

10.1 Signs are not part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this project shall be designed in conformance with the Sign Ordinance and established Sign Policy and shall require separate application and approval by the Community Development Department prior to installation.

11.0 INFORMATIONAL NOTES
Special Assessment Districts and Fees

11.1 Capital Improvement Fee: The City has adopted a Capital Improvement Fee (AB1600) to be paid as a part of the Building Permit Fees. All new development within the City is subject to this fee Packet Page 504 of 860Attachment 5 Page 10 of 11

EXHIBIT D

Page 11 ends

upon issuance of building permits, unless exempted by grandfather provisions. Contact the City’s Finance Department at (707) 428-7496.

Packet Page 505 of 860Attachment 5 Page 11 of 11

Page 2 of 14 ends

S:\Public Works Files\DEVEL\_Development Reviews\DR2021-xxx\-013_Green Valley III

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
Conditions of Development
Date:

To:

From:

Project Name:

Project Location:

Review Requested:

Copies To:

June 12, 2023
Jonathan Atkinson, Senior Planner
Melvin Aquino, Junior Engineer [email protected] Green Valley III – Proposed 185-unit multi-family apartment project proposed on 5.78-acre parcel
4840 Business Center Drive; APN: 0148-540-350
General Plan Amendment (GPA2021-001)
Development Review (DR2021-013)
Environmental Review (ER2021-036)
Planned Development Zoning (PD2021-001)
Zone Change (ZC2021-003)
Ryan N. Panganiban, Asst. Director of Public Works/City Engineer Jason Riley, Assistant City Engineer
Garland Wong, City Traffic Engineer
Trish Curran, Senior Engineer Tech
Helpful Phone Numbers
City of Fairfield Other Agencies
Finance Department (707) 428-7496 Army Corps of Engineers (916) 557-5250 Fire Department (707) 428-7550 California Department of Fish & Wildlife (707) 944-5500 Community Development (707) 428-7461 Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District (707) 429-8930 Public Works (707) 428-7485 Federal Emergency Management Agency (415) 923-7190 Comcast Cable (800) 945-2288
SBC Communications (707) 258-5136
Pacific Gas and Electric (707) 449-5769
Regional Water Quality Control Board (510) 622-2300
Solano Irrigation District (707) 448-6847

EXHIBIT D
Packet Page 506 of 860Attachment 6 Page 1 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 3 of 14 ends

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Site-Specific Development Conditions
Development Agreement Adherence:

1.The developer shall refer to the Development Agreement (DA), recorded June 4, 2001, including any subsequent amendments, and executed between the City of Fairfield and H.K. Shein Inc., for additional provisions for project improvements. The requirements and/or conditions found within the DA shall govern over these conditions of development in the event that there is a conflict found between the two documents.

Seismic Fault Zone:

2.The proposed building is near an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone (Fault Zone). The developer’s professional geotechnical engineer shall provide a recommendation, if any, for on-site design considerations for proximity to the fault zone. This recommendation shall be a specific section in the geotechnical report to be submitted to the City. The project Geotechnical Engineer shall evaluate liquefaction potential considering the proximity of the project to the fault. The project architect should design buildings appropriately to reflect the proximity of the project to the fault.

Old Green Valley Creek:

3.The proposed development is adjacent to an old segment of Green Valley Creek and may require additional permitting or authorization from external regulatory agencies. The developer shall acquire all necessary permitting pertaining to this old section of Green Valley Creek, if any, prior to beginning any construction Traffic Signal Improvements:

4.Pursuant to the DA, the developer shall pay their pro rata share of constructed and future traffic signals necessitated by this development at the following locations:
•Business Center Drive and Neitzel Road
•Suisun Valley Road and Neitzel Road
The traffic signal cost share for the above referenced signals has been established by the Public Works Traffic Division to be $5,635.06 ($974.92/acre x 5.78acres) which already reflects a 50% reduction, representative of the City’s pro rata share of improvements, based on AB-1600 fees. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of any building permits.

Contact the Public Works Engineering Department for details.

Demolition Plan:

5.The Developer’s Civil Engineer shall prepare a demolition plan for the project, which shall be submitted concurrent with the improvement plan package. The demolition plan shall address the following:
•Any existing pavement demolition, including existing drive aisles modifications and planter islands
Packet Page 507 of 860Attachment 6 Page 2 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 4 of 14 ends

•Any tree and overgrown shrub removals
•Any fencing to be removed and fencing to remain
•Any items to be saved in place and or protected, such as trees water meters, sewer cleanouts, drainage inlets or backflow prevention devices.

Water System:

6.In coordination with the adjacent parcel developer on APN: 0148-540-340, existing, separate stubs for domestic and irrigation water service were extended from Business Center Drive, across the adjacent parcel, up to the limits of this project parcel and are intended to serve this project site. The developer shall connect on-site domestic water and irrigation infrastructure for the proposed development to these two existing stubs only.

Developer shall work with the City Public Works Department to address any modifications to this intent.

In accordance with the current City of Fairfield Standard Specifications, each legal parcel shall only be allowed one public domestic water and one, separate irrigation service connection to the public main.

7.Public sub-meters or manifolds shall not be allowed for the proposed development. The developer may install privately owned and maintained sub-meters, downstream of the City-maintained water meter to serve the proposed units.

8.If one does not already exist, the developer shall install public water meters and backflow devices per current City standards and specifications along both service laterals, behind the existing sidewalk along Business Center Drive, per current City standards.

Sewer System:

9.In coordination with the adjacent parcel developer on APN: 0148-540-340, an existing sewer stub was extended from Business Center Drive, across the adjacent parcel, up to the limits of this project parcel and is intended to serve this project site. The developer shall connect on-site sewer infrastructure for the proposed development to this existing stub only. Developer shall work with the City Public Works Department to address any modifications to this intent.

10.If one does not already exist, the developer shall install a sewer cleanout per current City standards and specifications, along this service lateral behind the existing sidewalk along Business Center Drive, per current City standards.

Storm Drain System:

11.The submitted preliminary utility plan depicts on-site storm drain connection to an existing 24”-36” storm drain main within an existing private storm drain easement. The developer shall coordinate with, and receive approval from, all private easement stakeholders prior to any construction on or modifications to this private storm drain main.

Packet Page 508 of 860Attachment 6 Page 3 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 5 of 14 ends

Storm Water Detention:

12.An existing wetland/detention basin was constructed on APN: 0148-540-170 as part of the overall Green Valley Corporate Park development and is intended to provide adequate stormwater detention for parcels within the Corporate Park per the General Plan zoning in effect at the time. On-site stormwater detention may not be required, contingent upon proposed project compliance with zoning approved as part of the General Plan in effect at the time the detention basin was constructed. Any modifications or variances are subject to additional discussion and approval from the City Engineer regarding developer’s obligation to provide adequate stormwater detention on their project site, per current City standards.

Trash Enclosure and Recycling:

13.The location of trash enclosures shall be shown on the site plan. Based on the proposed building footprints and size, the developer shall be required to install a trash enclosure per current City Trash, Recycling & Organics Enclosure guidelines with a minimum footprint as determined by Public Works Staff. Contact Corey Beavers with the Public Works Department at (707) 428-7528 for more details.

Developer shall construct a concrete slab that extends 10 feet from the front of the enclosure. The slab shall be a minimum of 6 inches of reinforced concrete over 6 inches of Class II aggregate base compacted to 95%. Trash enclosures shall have roofs and drains that connect to sanitary sewer. Enclosure shall meet all CalGreen, CalRecycle, and City requirements and checklists. Developer shall work with Public Work staff to optimize trash enclosure orientation for vehicle pick-up. Contact Corey Beavers with the Public Works Department at (707) 428-7528 for more details.

14.Pursuant to the State of California’s goal to achieve a reduction in the statewide emissions of greenhouse gasses, short-lived climate pollutants, and to reduce the landfill disposal of organics and recyclables, the projects tenants must meet State's mandates for mandatory commercial recycling (AB 341) and mandatory commercial organics recycling (AB 1826). As of September 2020, CalRecycle has made the determination that businesses that generate two or more cubic yards per week of solid waste, recyclables, and organics must subscribe to mandatory organics recycling and Chapter 9 of the Fairfield Municipal Code requires that all businesses subscribe to solid waste, recycling, and organic recycling services. Please note, the S has mandated a reduction of 75% in organic waste levels and requires jurisdictions achieve the established threshold by 2025 (SB 1383). Furthermore if these goals are not met, local jurisdictions may impose penalties for noncompliance on regulated entities/businesses. Businesses are strongly encouraged to contact and set up services with the City’s Franchised Hauler, Republic Services, to meet all mandatory commercial recycling requirements.

Open Space, Public Safety and Park Maintenance Mello Roos District:

15.All new development within the City is required to annex into Community Facilities District #2012-2 (CFD #2012-2), an Open Space, Public Safety and Park Maintenance Mello Roos Packet Page 509 of 860Attachment 6 Page 4 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 6 of 14 ends

District. Property owners within the District will be required to pay special on-going annual assessments to be used for the following:
•Operation of open space within the Fairfield area
•Police and Fire Protection, including but not limited to expenses for personnel, equipment, and supplies
•Ongoing Maintenance of Neighborhood Parks
The developer shall furnish the necessary processing fees, documents and boundary map required to annex to the District prior to the issuance of any building permits. The annexation process shall be complete prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. (Please note that it may take up to 4 months, or longer, to complete the process).

Assessments will have an annual inflation adjustment. Please furnish the required annexation fees and e-mail the following information to Alvin Lei ([email protected]) in the City of Fairfield Public Works Department to begin the annexation process:
•Project Name
•Parcel Owner
•Parcel Owner e-mail
•Parcel Owner Phone Number
•Assessor Parcel Number
Mello Roos Community Facilities District:

16.The proposed development is within Community Facilities District No.3 (CFD #3). Property owners within the District are required to pay special on-going annual assessments to pay for interchange and infrastructure improvements within the North Cordelia area. Please contact Christiana Lewis ([email protected]) within the City Public Works Department for any additional information.

Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District:

17.The proposed development is within the North Cordelia Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District (LLMD #13). Property owners within the District are required to pay special on-going annual assessments to maintain common landscape and lighting improvements within the District. Please contact Christiana Lewis ([email protected]) within the City Public Works Department for any additional information.

Reimbursement Agreement:

18.Reimbursement Agreement No. 33 (RA #33) serves as a lien on the property proposed for development. The City previously installed public improvements which benefit the proposed project. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall pay for their fair share of the previously installed improvements as outlined in the Reimbursement Agreement. The amount of money to be collected prior to issuance of the building permit for the Reimbursement Agreement is $621.87 ($107.59/acre x 5.78) Contact the Public Works Department for details.

Packet Page 510 of 860Attachment 6 Page 5 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 7 of 14 ends

Other Approvals:

19.Approvals from other agencies may be required for this project. Contact the following agencies:
•Solano Irrigation District (SID) for any requirements to remove the property, or a portion of, from SID boundaries;
•Owner of Private Storm Drain Easement for approvals for project tie-in to existing storm drain utility
•AT&T for construction coordination and impacts within their 20’-wide easement •PT&T for construction coordination and impacts within their 20’-wide easement •Regulatory agencies for any coordination and necessary permitting for work within or adjacent to the old Green Valley Creek
•Adjacent corporate park property owners for any construction impacts to existing parking lot or vehicle access and circulation
Easements:

20.There are several existing easements within the project limits. There may be additional restrictions and/or limitations on improvements proposed within these easements. No permanent structures will be allowed within this easement, in addition to possible restrictions to any landscaping and/or fencing.

Miscellaneous:

21.Concurrent with the first improvement plan submittal to the Building Department, the developer shall submit a completed encroachment permit application to the Public Works Department.

22.Prior to, or concurrent with, issuance of any building permit, the developer shall be issued an encroachment permit from the City Public Works Department for all public improvements, if any, in the public right-of-way. The developer or his contractor shall furnish the necessary insurance, bonds and pay all fees associated with the encroachment permit. A field investigation fee shall be charged if any work within the right-of-way is performed either without or prior to securing an encroachment permit.

Packet Page 511 of 860Attachment 6 Page 6 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 8 of 14 ends

General Development Conditions
Geotechnical Investigation:

23.The developer shall retain a registered Geotechnical Engineer to conduct a Geotechnical Investigation of the project area. Two copies of the project Geotechnical Report shall be submitted to the Public Works Department prior to submittal of Construction Plans. The Geotechnical Report shall include details and recommendations regarding the following:
•Grading Limitations and Requirements
•Foundation Design
•Settlement
•Parking Lot Pavement Sections
Grading:

24.A grading plan shall be prepared by the developer's Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. The following information shall be shown on the Grading Plan:
•Existing contours, landscaping, fences, buildings, or other improvements •Existing trees to be saved in place or removed
•Furnish all necessary details to clearly convey recommendations outlined in the project geotechnical investigation
•Cut/Fill interfaces and limits of grading
•Lot boundaries and road rights-of-way
•Proposed pad elevations, finished contours and lot grading details •Top of curb elevations
•Perimeter cross-sections along all sides of the project to show the proposed project’s interface with abutting properties and streets •Plan view of proposed drainage facilities including storm drains, catch basins, manholes and underdrains
•Parking lot surface drainage, pavement grades, ridge lines, etc. •Street grades
•Details for proposed curb and gutter

25.The Project Engineer shall coordinate grading design closely with the project Geotechnical Engineer. Specifically, the Geotechnical Engineer shall be consulted to evaluate and address issues related to:
•Parking Lot Pavement Sections

26.The grading plan shall be reviewed and approved by the project Geotechnical Engineer prior to City approval. Provide a signature block for the project Geotechnical Engineer on the plan.

Packet Page 512 of 860Attachment 6 Page 7 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 9 of 14 ends

27.Slope grading shall comply with the Geotechnical Report. Slopes steeper than 3H:1V shall not be allowed in the public right-of-way. Slopes steeper than 2H:1V shall not be allowed on-site.

28.Retaining walls over 18 inches tall shall be concrete or masonry. Retaining walls over 4 feet tall shall be designed by a Civil or Structural Engineer.

Erosion Control and Stormwater Quality:

29.The developer shall incorporate the use of Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices to address the issue of ongoing post-construction stormwater quality for the project site. Examples of LID treatment measures include: bio-retention, harvesting and reuse, infiltration, and evapo-transpiration. The project engineer is strongly recommended to contact the Public Works Department in regards to the new design requirements.

30.An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be included as a part of the grading plan package. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by the developer's Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. The erosion control plan shall include protection measures such as: sedimentation basins, check dams, straw wattles and hydroseeding details.

31.The project shall comply with the requirements of the most current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued to the Fairfield-Suisun Urban Runoff Management Program.

32.The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for storm water discharges, including but not limited to the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit.

Applicants 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, shall obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit, 99-08-DWQ). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation, but does not include regular maintenance activities performed to restore the original line, grade, or capacity of the facility.

33.The applicant shall be responsible for developing and implementing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which shall be reviewed and approved by the Fairfield- Suisun Sewer District.

34.To limit pollutant generation, discharge and runoff to the maximum extent practicable, the project shall include stormwater pollution control measures listed within the document entitled “Storm Water Pollution Control Measures List”. This list is provided within Appendix B of the document entitled “Storm Water Requirements for Development Packet Page 513 of 860Attachment 6 Page 8 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 10 of 14 ends

Projects- Packet for Project Applicants”. Each identified source of pollutants may have one or more appropriate control measures as determined by the City of Fairfield.

35.All stormwater treatment measures shall be adequately operated and maintained. To ensure operation and maintenance of stormwater treatment measures, the property owner shall enter into a Stormwater Treatment Measures Maintenance Agreement with the City. This agreement shall be signed by the property owner and submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of the building permit. It is included in the document entitled “Storm Water Requirements for Development Projects- Packet for Project Applicants.”

36.The Developer shall install thermoplastic markers on all new catch basins. Markers may be purchased at the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District (FSSD) office. Contact the FSSD at 429-8930 for additional details.

37.Prior to the City’s issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, the City shall receive a self- certification by the Engineer of Record (Registered Civil Engineer) which certifies that the project’s grading, drainage and stormwater treatment systems conform to the approved plans, permits and city codes. The self certification shall be performed during construction and upon completion of the project by the Engineer of Record and documented on the appropriate city form.

Water System:

38.Proposed domestic water and irrigation services, within the public right-of-way, shall be constructed per current City Standard Details and Specifications.

39.Show the size and location of existing and proposed water services, meters and backflow prevention devices on the site plan. Show the size and location of water mains and the proposed points of connection for water services.

40.Existing services that are to remain unused shall be abandoned per City requirements, including valve removal at the connection to public infrastructure and installation of a blind flange on abandoned services.

41.The developer shall verify the size of the existing water services and water meters.

Services and meters shall be upsized by the developer, at their sole cost, as needed for the proposed use. Backflow prevention devices shall be installed or upgraded to meet current code requirements.

42.With the exception of water meters and meter boxes, all water facilities on the site side of the reduced pressure backflow prevention device (including the backflow preventor) shall be privately maintained by the property owner.

Packet Page 514 of 860Attachment 6 Page 9 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 11 of 14 ends

Water utilities between the public water main and the first structure off the public main (water meter, double detector check valve) shall be maintained by the City.

43.Irrigation services shall be stubbed to all landscaped areas. Irrigation and electrical control wire sleeves shall be installed as needed. Coordinate with the project Landscape Architect.

Sleeves shall be at least 12 inches below subgrade at street crossings.

44.A separate, public irrigation meter is recommended for projects with large landscaped areas. Project consultants need to consider the following factors in evaluating metering options:
•A connection fee and meter and box fee are charged for each meter whether it is a domestic meter or an irrigation meter. These fees are paid as a part of the building permit fee.
•Irrigation water which is separately metered from domestic water is billed at a lower rate than domestic water.
•Bimonthly sewer charges are based on domestic water use. Irrigation water which is separately metered will lower sewer bills.
•A "break-even" analysis should be conducted by project consultants to determine which is best:

Option 1
Install Separate
Irrigation Meter
Higher building permit fees, but lower bimonthly water
and sewer bills.

Option 2
Install Domestic
Water Meter Only
Lower building permit fees, but higher bimonthly water
and sewer bills.

Contact the Public Works Department for details.

Fire System:

45.In accordance with the City of Fairfield Standards and Specifications, each legal parcel shall have fire services separately connected to the public main. Connecting to existing private fire infrastructure shall not be allowed.

46.The City of Fairfield Fire Department requires separate shop drawings submitted directly to the Fire Department for review. The Developer shall furnish and provide all necessary documents to the Fairfield Fire Department for their review and approval.

47.Fire hydrants may be required on-site. Proposed buildings will require fire sprinklers.

Contact the Fire Department for details.

48.Show the size and location of proposed fire lines, hydrants, fire sprinkler risers and backflow prevention devices on the plan. Show the size and location of water mains and the proposed points of connection for fire lines.

Packet Page 515 of 860Attachment 6 Page 10 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 12 of 14 ends

49.A backflow preventor is required on the fire line. An above grade double check detector check valve is required on lines which serve building fire sprinklers. Specify the manufacturer, size and location of the fire line backflow preventor.

Solano Irrigation District:

50.The proposed project may be within the Solano Irrigation District service limits. The developer shall be responsible for paying all fees associated with removing the project parcel from SID limits or parcel limit adjustments.

Sewer System:

51.Proposed sewer services, within the public right-of-way, shall be constructed per current City Standard Details and Specifications.

52.Show the size and location of existing and proposed sewer laterals and cleanouts on the site plan. Show the size and location of sewer mains and the proposed points of connection for sewer laterals.

53.Developer shall connect proposed sewer utilities to existing public infrastructure per current City Standards and Specifications. Service laterals for industrial or commercial developments shall be minimum six (6) inches. Service laterals eight (8) inches or larger shall require connection to existing public infrastructure via a City Standard sewer manhole, per City Standard Detail SS2, and may require connection to on-site private infrastructure via a manhole, in-lieu of a cleanout.

54.Existing services that are to remain unused shall be abandoned per City requirements.

Storm Drain System:

55.Developer shall connect proposed storm drainage utilities to existing public infrastructure per current City Standards and Specifications. Direct connections to public infrastructure shall not be allowed and connections shall only be at existing or proposed storm drain structures.

56.Storm drainage for the 15-year storm shall be collected on-site and conveyed through storm drains to the public storm drain system. Show the size and location of existing and proposed storm drains and catch basins on the site plan. Show the size and location of public storm drain lines and the proposed points of connection for the on-site storm drain system.

57.Grading and drainage shall be designed so that surplus drainage (above and beyond that of the 15-year storm) not collected in site catch basins, is directed overland so as not to jeopardize existing or proposed buildings with flooding.

Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk:

Packet Page 516 of 860Attachment 6 Page 11 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 13 of 14 ends

58.The developer shall remove and replace damaged or nonstandard curb and gutter along both frontages of the project. Contact the Public Works Department to mark the existing curb and gutter along the project frontage that will need to be removed and replaced.

Parking Lot:

59.All new proposed drive aisles shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide and design to accommodate emergency vehicle and/or delivery vehicle turnaround.

60.Developer shall submit a parking lot circulation exhibit to the Public Works Department for review and shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer prior to any Building permit issuance.

Proposed improvements shall be designed and constructed in consideration of the submitted circulation exhibit. Design vehicle turning templates shall be used to layout parking lot planter islands and parking stalls. Circulation conflicts shall be evaluated, and design vehicle templates shall be shown on the exhibit. Turning movements shall maintain a minimum 12-inch overhang and wheel clearance from all vertical elements, including curbs, structures, and retaining walls and a minimum 24-inch clearance from all building structures. Garbage trucks shall be able to access trash enclosures. Service trucks shall be able to access delivery areas. Fire engines shall be able to access fire hydrants and building entrances.

61.The pavement section for the proposed parking lot shall be designed by a Geotechnical Engineer. The Public Works Department requires a minimum of 2 inches of asphalt concrete on 6 inches of aggregate base for light traffic areas. A minimum of 3.5 inches of asphalt concrete on 8 inches of aggregate base is required in areas where truck traffic is anticipated.

62.Parking lot construction shall be certified by design consultants. The project Geotechnical Engineer shall certify that "as-built" pavement sections and site compaction comply with the project Geotechnical Report and Site Plans.

63.The developer shall furnish a parking lot lighting, signing and striping plan.

Landscaping:

64.The project architect and engineer shall coordinate design closely with the project landscape designer. Specifically, they shall consult the landscape designer to evaluate and address issues related to:
•Fencing/wall layout and details
•Locations and sizes for irrigation services
•Locations, depths and sizes for irrigation and control wire sleeves at driveways and street crossings
•Sight distance constraints for fencing and landscaping Packet Page 517 of 860Attachment 6 Page 12 of 22

Green Valley III – 4840 Business Center Drive
June 12, 2023

Page 14 of 14 ends

•Depth of cover and tree setbacks over water, sewer and storm drain lines in landscape areas

65.Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be designed to comply with the City's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. Use of turf and other water intensive landscaping shall be minimized.

Maps:

66.If one does not exist, developer shall submit to the Public Works Department all documents necessary to create a permanent reciprocal access/parking/utility easement across common areas shared by parcels. This easement shall be created on a separate instrument and recorded prior to issuance of any final certificates of occupancy. Submit a draft copy of the document for the approval by the Public Works and Community Development Departments.

67.Right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City to accommodate the proposed street widening.

68.The parcel map shall be prepared in accordance with the State Map Act and all local ordinances.

Right-of-Ways and Easements:

69.All property lines and easements shall be shown on the site plan.

Miscellaneous:

70.All public improvements shall be designed and constructed to current City of Fairfield standards.

71.Existing public facilities damaged during the course of construction shall be repaired by the developer, at his sole expense, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

Packet Page 518 of 860Attachment 6 Page 13 of 22

MEMORANDUM

FAIRFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT
DATE: April 05, 2023
TO: Community Development Department, Building Department FROM: Bryan Just, Fire Department
SUBJECT: GPA2021-001, Green Valley III, General FD, Comment Comments made during the D.A.R.T / P&E and planning review process are preliminary in nature. Acceptance/approval does not permit non-compliance with codes, standards or ordinances. Comments may be made during the building permit and fire permit process.

GENERAL NOTES for reference and reminder; the following items may need to be addressed during the design, development, and permitting process.

1.Projects with multiple lots, or, which have shared access and utilities, are required to have legal agreements for shared access and utility easements. Building associations may be needed for maintenance and service of common property.

2.Illuminated premises identification (building address) is required per 2019 CFC 505, and City of Fairfield Ordinance. Address and/or suite identification shall also be placed on the front and rear doors to individual suites. Multiple buildings in a complex with the same address shall identify the buildings separately with building signage visible from the main property entrance.

3.Fire Control Rooms are required in all commercial buildings with fire sprinklers per City of Fairfield Ordinance. A Fire control room containing the fire sprinkler riser and the fire alarm control panel shall be provided. Access to the fire control room shall be from the exterior and identified with signage. The fire control room shall be a minimum of 5’x7’. Where a fire pump house is provided, the pump house shall be the fire control room. Fire control rooms, pump house and electrical rooms must be identified by signage.

EXHIBIT D
Packet Page 519 of 860Attachment 6 Page 14 of 22

2 4.Emergency Access Knox Box required at the fire control room, near front entrance and/or other areas as determined by the Fire Department. See Fire Prevention Standard #87-7.

5.Fire access lanes/roads must be provided within 150 feet from all portions of the building. Minimum 20 foot wide, 13’-6” high fire lanes shall provide 28 feet inside radius and 48 feet outside radius for apparatus turning. Where the building is greater than 30 feet in height, Fire Access shall be designed and maintained including widths of 26 feet for Aerial Apparatus (Ladder Truck). Access to rescue windows, balconies and the building roof shall be considered as part of mature landscape design. Access shall be per 2019 CFC 503, 504, and Appendix D and Fairfield Fire Prevention Standard 87-27. Provide fire department access plans showing compliance.

6.Signage identifying fire lanes is required on curbing adjacent to the buildings, fire hydrants, and fire sprinkler equipment as needed to provide clear access. See Fire Prevention Standard #92-40.

7.Gates and fencing on commercial properties shall be in compliance with the 2019 CBC, City of Fairfield ordinances and Fire Prevention Standard 95-44. All gates on commercial properties crossing fire access lanes shall be power operated and provided with Click-2-Enter and Knox key switches for emergency operations. Gates shall be placed in such a way to allow fire department apparatus to fully exit the roadway before/while operating the gates.

8.The number of fire hydrants to be determined by fire flow requirements per CFC Appendix B and C. If additional hydrants are necessary, they must be installed per Fire Prevention Standard #87-4. Additional hydrant(s) may be required to support the fire sprinkler system. Two city water connections are required when three on site hydrants are required. City hydrants shall be identified and used to meet the hydrant counts when possible.

9.Automatic sprinkler systems will be required for the proposed new buildings as specified in Section 903.2 of the California Fire Code and the City of Fairfield Ordinance 2016-24 and Fairfield Fire Prevention Standard 87-28. All commercial buildings greater than 5,000 square feet, and all new residential buildings shall install fire sprinkler systems. All existing buildings with fire sprinklers where a T.I. is constructed or a change of use is proposed, shall have the fire sprinkler system evaluated for compliance with the new/proposed use. Where alterat ions are required for compliance a separate permit is required. Installations shall comply with the National Fire Code Standards 13, 13D and 24 as applicable. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department directly for review and approval prior to issuance of any permits and performance of any inspections or tests. Fire flow report from the fire department is required for hydraulic calculation.

Packet Page 520 of 860Attachment 6 Page 15 of 22

3 10. All fire alarm systems shall be provided in compliance with 2019 CFC, 2019 NFPA 72 Fairfield City Ordinance and Fairfield Fire Prevention Standard 17-3. All fire alarm systems shall be supervised by an approved UL central station service. Monitoring systems shall conform to NFC Standards 70, NFPA 72 and the California Fire Code.

The subcontractor responsible for the installation is required to submit plans directly to the fire department and make arrangements for all permits, inspections and tests.

11. Provide one 2A-10-BC dry chemical fire extinguisher for every 3,000 square feet of floor area with a maximum travel distance not to exceed 75 feet.

12. Exterior storage is not permitted within 10 feet of a commercial building o r 10 feet of the property line. Use of a commercial property for outdoor storage shall request a use permit from the city planning department.

13. Waste accumulation, vegetation and building maintenance shall be maintained as to reduce potential fire hazards, fire spread, and risk to human life per 2019 CFC Chapter 3.

14. Identify the use or storage of hazardous, toxic, flammable or corrosive materials on site that may require special construction or protection systems. Annual fire permits are applied to businesses containing materials or performing operations identified as having an increased hazard. Permits conform to 2019 CFC, City of Fairfield Ordinances, and Fairfield Fire Prevention Standards.

Note: Fire pumps, stationary water supply, underground fire service, overhead fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems and gates crossing fire access are required to have separate plans and permits. All hood suppression, special monitoring system, clean agent, high pile storage, or the like shall be submitted for separate permit. The licensed contractor responsible for the design and installation is required to submit plans directly to the fire department and make arrangements for all permits, inspections and tests. [END]
Packet Page 521 of 860Attachment 6 Page 16 of 22

810 VACA VALLEY PARKWAY, SUITE 201, VACAVILLE, CA 95688 • TELEPHONE (707) 448-6847 • FAX (707) 448-7347 WWW.SIDWATER.ORG • @WE_ARE_SID

September 8, 2021
Meily M Sheehan
Senior Planner
Community Development Department
1000 Webster Street, 2nd Floor
Fairfield, CA 94533
Subject: Green Valley 3 (GPA2021-001, ZC2021-003, PD2021-001, DR2021-013, ER3032-036)
Dear Ms. Sheehan,
We are in receipt of the planning submittal for the subject project. The parcel associated with the proposed development (APN: 0148-540-350) is currently within the District boundary and therefore subject to the Rules and Regulations of the District. The project is also located in the City of Fairfield North Cordelia Service area which can provide non-potable water to commercial properties and street landscape areas per the terms of the 1987 Fairfield-SID Joint Exercise of Powers Subagreement No. 3 for the North Cordelia Service area.

The following are the Districts requirements for the development of the subject project:

1. Since the project is proposing to develop into residential properties, the associated parcels must be detached from the District. The developer will need to follow the District’s procedures on detachments and pay the appropriate detachment fees as calculated by the District.

2.The District will require the Developer to enter into a Development Work Order to cover all cost associated with detachment, review, and mitigation of the impacts the proposed development has on the District facilities. This Work Order must be signed, and a monetary deposit must be submitted to the District prior to the District reviewing and approving the maps and/or improvement plans. A separate Development Work Order may be needed for any required detachment cost.

DIRECTORS
JOHN D. KLUGE
PRESIDENT - DIV #1
CHARLES A. HERICH
DIV #2
MICHAEL J. BARRETT
DIV#3

PETE SANCHEZ
DIV #4

DERRICK LUM
VICE PRESIDENT - DIV #5

OFFICERS

CARY KEATEN

GENERAL MANAGER
PAUL R. FUCHSLIN

DISTRICT ENGINEER

MINASIAN, SPRUANCE,

MEITH, SOARES & SEXTON

ATTORNEYS

EXHIBIT D
Packet Page 522 of 860Attachment 6 Page 17 of 22

3. The Districts records do not show any existing non-potable meter services serving the proposed development. If non-potable water services are found during construction, they must be removed and terminated at the mainline.

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any questions, please contact me at (707) 455-4044 or by email at [email protected].

Respectfully,
Bao Nguyen
Assistant Civil Engineer
Packet Page 523 of 860Attachment 6 Page 18 of 22

Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District
1010 Chadbourne Road ● Fairfield, California 94534 ● (707) 429-8930 ● www.fssd.com 4/5/2023

MEMORANDUM
TO: City of Fairfield Community Development Department
ATTN: Jonathan Atkinson
FROM: Kyle Broughton
SUBJECT: Green Valley 3, APN Nos. 0148540140 & 0148540120 GPA2021-001, ZC2021-003, PD2021-001, DR2021-013, ER3032-036 185 Unit Apartment Complex
In response to the application for the project named above, the Sewer District requires the following:
1)All FSSD fees applicable to future development on the parcel are required to be paid upon issuance of a building permits, including but not limited to capacity fees, plan check fees, encroachment, and inspection. 2)The proposed development density exceeds what was assumed in the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District’s Master Plan and associated model. An update to the Distirct’s sewer model is required to incorporate these changes and confirm sewer capacity exists to serve the proposed density. The model update shall be at the developer’s expense. Any capacity deficiencies identified following the model update shall be remedied by the developer pr ior to any new connections to the impacted sewer. Existing sewer capacity is allotted on a first-come, first-serve basis upon receipt of connection fees.

Please send your comments directly to Kyle Broughton ([email protected]) or at:

Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District
1010 Chadbourne Road
Fairfield, CA  94534-9700

EXHIBIT D
Packet Page 524 of 860Attachment 6 Page 19 of 22

Page 2 of 2 ends

Sent via email
Packet Page 525 of 860Attachment 6 Page 20 of 22

Plan Review Team
Land Management
[email protected]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
P.O. Box 0000
City, State, Zip Code
PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 1
Public
April 12, 2023
Jonathan Atkinson
City of Fairfield
1000 Webster Street, 2nd Floor
Fairfield, CA 94533
Re: GPA2021-001: Green Valley 3 Apartments
4840 Business Center Drive, Fairfield, CA 94534
Dear Jonathan:

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review the subject plans. The proposed GPA2021- 001: Green Valley 3 Apartments is within the same vicinity of PG&E’s existing facilities that impact this property.

The plans for GPA2021-001: Green Valley 3 Apartments propose multiple uses withing PG&E’s existing electric transmission and anchor easements that will impact PG&E’s ability to access and maintain its existing electric transmission facilities and appurtenances. Said easements are recorded at Doc. #1997-00007749 and Doc. #2014-00072328.

The plans for GPA2021-001: Green Valley 3 Apartments propose a water quality basin, site light, and various species of trees within the easement recorded at Doc. #2014-00072328. The proposed water quality basin will inhibit PG&E’s ability to access and maintain the anchor within said easement. PG&E requests that the water quality basin is revised to be clear of the easement area. The proposed site light is a structure that is proposed within PG&E’s easement area. Said easement does not allow for the construction of any building or other structure within the easement area. The proposed site light must be removed from PG&E’s existing easement area. Various species of trees are proposed within PG&’E’s existing easement area. Said trees will inhibit PG&E’s ability to access and maintain the anchor within said easement and may constitute a hazard to PG&E’s existing facilities. PG&E requests that all trees proposed within the easement recorded at Doc. #2014-00072328 are removed from the easement area and that this space is limited to grasses. PG&E’s easement provides PG&E the right from time to time to trim and to cut down and clear away or otherwise destroy any and all trees and brush now or hereafter on said easement are and to trim and to cut down and clear away any trees on either side of said easement area which now or hereafter in the opinion of PG&E may be a hazard to the facilities installed by reason of the danger of falling there, or may interfere with the exercise of PG&E’s rights hereunder. Any trees or brush installed within PG&E’s easement may be at risk of being cut down and cleared away in the future.

The plans for GPA2021-001: Green Valley 3 Apartments propose various species of trees and a portion of the dog run area within the easement recorded at Doc. #1997-00007749. The proposed dog run area will with a perimeter fence will isolate PG&E from a portion of its existing easement area in which PG&E has the right of ingress to and egress from. The plans must be revised to remove all portions of the dog run from PG&E’s easement area. Various species of

EXHIBIT D
Packet Page 526 of 860Attachment 6 Page 21 of 22

PG&E Gas and Electric Facilities Page 2
Public
trees are proposed within PG&’E’s existing easement area. Said trees will inhibit PG&E’s ability to access and maintain its easement and may constitute a hazard to PG&E’s existing facilities.

PG&E requests that all trees proposed within the easement recorded at Doc. #1997-00007749 are removed from the easement area and that this space is limited to grasses. PG&E’s easement provides PG&E the right from time to time to trim and to cut down and clear away or otherwise destroy any and all trees and brush now or hereafter on said easement are and to trim and to cut down and clear away any trees on either side of said easement area which now or hereafter in the opinion of PG&E may be a hazard to the facilities installed by reason of the danger of falling there, or may interfere with the exercise of PG&E’s rights hereunder. Any trees or brush installed within PG&E’s easement may be at risk of being cut down and cleared away in the future.

Please contact the Building and Renovation Center (BRSC) for facility map requests by calling 1-877-743-7782 and PG&E’s Service Planning department at www.pge.com/cco for any modification or relocation requests, or for any additional services you may require.

As a reminder, before any digging or excavation occurs, please contact Underground Service Alert (USA) by dialing 811 a minimum of 2 working days prior to commencing any work. This free and independent service will ensure that all existing underground utilities are identified and marked on-site.

If you have any questions regarding this response, please contact me at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Justin Newell
Land Management
916-594-4068
Packet Page 527 of 860Attachment 6 Page 22 of 22

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

ORDINANCE NO. 2023-10

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 CITY OF FAIRFIELD ZONING MAP, REZONING ONE PARCEL AT 4840 BUSINESS CENTER DRIVE (APN: 0148-540-350) FROM INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK – NORTH CORDELIA OVERLAY (IBP-NC) DISTRICT TO RESIDENTIAL, VERY HIGH DENSITY – NORTH CORDELIA OVERLAY (RVH-NC) DISTRICT

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

SECTION 1. Chapter 25, Article I, Section 25.12.3 of the Fairfield City Code, also known as the City of Fairfield Zoning Map, is hereby amended as shown on the Sectional Zoning Map (ZC2021-003) attached hereto as Exhibit E:

Section 25.47.5 Findings. The City Council finds as follows:

A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan's goals, policies, and actions. Upon approval, the proposed amendments would change the General Plan designation of the Project site from Business and Industrial Park (IBP) to Residential Very High Density (RVH) and the zoning designation from IBP District to RVH District. The RVH District implements the Residential Very High-Density designation of the General Plan. The Project is consistent with the General Plan in that it anticipates multifamily residential developments in high-intensity areas with a density range of 22 to 32 units per gross developable acre. The Project is also consistent with the applicable development standards of the Zoning Ordinance, as proposed and conditioned.

B. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the city's public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare. The proposed amendments would redesignate 5.78 acres of vacant land from IBP to RVH for a multifamily residential development with 185 apartments. Residences, including apartments, currently exist in and along the periphery of Green Valley Corporate Park.

The addition of more residential land will not jeopardize public interest, health, safety, convenience, or the welfare of the City in that the planned multifamily residential development will be subject to a collection of conditions of approval to ensure its safe and orderly development and operation. The multifamily residential development will have two points of ingress and egress, allowing for sufficient Fairfield Fire Department access and resident evacuation in an emergency.

Additionally, more residences in North Cordelia can benefit the public interest as commercial uses in and around Green Valley Crossing and Cordelia Junction may flourish with more customers living in proximity. Furthermore, this may create future demand for additional commercial development and new business investment to benefit the Cordelia area and Fairfield in general.

C. The site is physically suitable (including, but not limited to, access, provision of utilities, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and absence of physical constraints) for the requested zoning designations and anticipated land uses/developments. The Project site is physically suitable for multifamily residential development. It is located within the Green Valley Corporate Park and surrounded by existing development with two points of access on Business Center Drive.

Because the Project site functions as part of a greater development with the two existing office buildings and the Residence Inn by Marriott, the provision of utilities is not an issue for the planned Packet Page 528 of 860Attachment 7 Page 1 of 2

ORD. NO. 2023-10

Page 2 ends

Fairfield City CouncilAugust 15, 2023

Fairfield City Council
August 15, 2023