Fairfield City Council
September 2, 2025

32 N. PUBLIC FACILITIES

The potential impacts of the Project related to public facilities are driven by the number of residential units and associated population. As discussed in the project description above, most of the residential units in the Project are being re-allocated from already- entitled units in Villages I- II, so it is appropriate to analyze impacts associated with the Project public facilities as VAF impacts under the VAF EIR. These impacts were analyzed in VAF EIR Chapter 5 (Public Facilities and Services). The VAF EIR concluded that all impacts of the Project related to Public Utilities would be less than significant with mitigation. All of the mitigation measures adopted in the VAF EIR and its addenda would continue to apply to the Project, including the Project.

The Hawthorne Mill West project contemplated wastewater collection via the sanitary sewer lift station to be constructed as part of Village II, with a backup alternative of connecting to the existing sanitary sewer system at Portland Drive via a temporary lift station and sewer line under the proposed Portland Drive extension. The Project can utilize the now-built Village II sewage infrastructure and route sewage to the west to the sewer lift station. Other utility connections that were assumed to be routed under the proposed Portland Drive extension would be routed to the infrastructure that has already been built or is under construction to serve Village II. Because the Project does not affect the VAF-wide total number of units that was originally studied in the VAF EIR (2,327 total units), demand for all utility services will be similar to what was originally studied and approved in the VAF EIR, so the Project will not result in any new significant or substantially more severe impacts related to utilities.

Environmental Issues
Utilities - Would the project:

New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impact
No
Substantial
Change
from
Previous

VAF EIR
Analysis
No
Substantial
Change
from
Previous
Hawthorne
Mill EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
 X  
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
effects
 X  
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which would cause
significant environmental effects?
 X  

33 d) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
 X  
e) 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?
 X  
f) Be served by a landfill with
insufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
 X  
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
 X  

O. WILDFIRE
The Hawthorne Mill EIR included an analysis of risks related to wildfire in the Hazards section, consistent with the version of the CEQA Guidelines in place at the time the Hawthorne Mill EIR was certified. The Hawthorne Mill EIR concluded that potential impacts of the Hawthorne Mill West project related to wildfire would be less-than-significant as the project site is not located in a high or extreme wildfire hazard zone, and is relatively flat, surrounded by industrial and residential uses, and regularly grazed. Existing conditions on the Project site have not materially changed since the Hawthorne Mill EIR was certified, and the potential impacts of the Project related to wildfire are substantially similar to those analyzed in the Hawthorne Mill EIR. No mitigation was required in the Hawthorne Mill EIR.

Environmental Issues

Wildfire: If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project:

New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impact
No
Substantial
Change
from
Previous

VAF EIR
Analysis
No
Substantial
Change
from
Previous
Hawthorne
Mill EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
  X 
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
  X 

34 wildfire?
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result
in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
  X 
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
  X 

P. ENERGY
Since most of the units in the Project are being re-allocated from already approved Village I-II units, this Addendum considers them Village I-II units for the purposes of analyzing Energy impacts. The VAF EIR did not formally analyze potential energy impacts. State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G checklist thresholds were updated by the State Office of Planning and Research after publication of the VAF EIR. The current State CEQA Appendix G checklist contains separate thresholds for Energy, which are incorporated into this Addendum, and shown in the checklist below. However, the total number of units in VAF with the addition of the Project will remain the same as the number of units originally analyzed in the VAF EIR, so any Energy- related impacts associated with Project would be consistent with or less than those of the VAF Project. Additionally, the units in the Project will implement Title 24 energy efficiency standards, ensuring that it is more energy-efficient than those originally analyzed in the VAF EIR.

Energy Impacts- Would the project: New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impact
No
Substantial
Change
from
Previous

VAF EIR
Analysis
No
Substantial
Change
from
Previous
Hawthorne
Mill EIR
Analysis
No Impact
c) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
 X  
d) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
 X  

35 Q. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
A. Agricultural and Forest Resources: The Hawthorne Mill EIR concluded that residential development on the Project development area would have no impacts related to agricultural and forest resources. There is no change to this conclusion with the Project.

B. Mineral Resources: The Hawthorne Mill EIR concluded that residential development on the Project development area would have no impacts related to mineral resources. There is no change to this conclusion with the Project.

CONCLUSION

This Addendum is adopted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164. The Addendum reviews the proposed development activities and project changes discussed above. Through the adoption of this Addendum, the City determines that the proposed Project does not require a subsequent EIR or negative declaration under Guidelines Section 15162. The City further determines that the Hawthorne Mill EIR; the VAF EIR; the 2011, 2015 and 2018 Addenda to the VAF EIR; and this Addendum to the Hawthorne Mill EIR and the VAF EIR, adequately address the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project.

As provided in Section 15164 of Guidelines, this Addendum need not be circulated for public review, but shall be considered along with the prior environmental documents before making a decision to adopt the Project approvals.

The above referenced resolutions, ordinance, EIRs, and the 2011, 2015 and 2018 Addenda and this 2022 Addendum are all available for public review in the Community Development Department (1000 Webster Street, 2nd Floor Fairfield, CA) during regular business hours and are all incorporated herein by reference.

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 1 of 22 Memorandum
To: Tina Do Machado, AICP
Garland Wong, PE, TE
Public Works Department | City of Fairfield
From: Mario Tambellini, PE, TE
Nicole Scappaticci, PE
Noor Feyli
Date: May 6, 2025
Subject: Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis

1. INTRODUCTION
This memorandum has been prepared to present the results of a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for the proposed Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Project (Project) located in the City of Fairfield (City). The Project is located on two currently undeveloped parcels and is proposed to be part of the previously approved Villages at Fairfield. The Project would develop 150 relatively compact single family dwelling units and 226 duplex/condominium units for a total of 376 residential units.

The purpose of this TIA is to address the Project’s impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in relation to the prior analyses for the approved Villages at Fairfield and evaluate the Project’s potential off -site and on -site traffic operations. The local traffic operations analysis in this study was conducted to evaluate the adequacy of proposed queue storage lengths at the Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway intersection, as requested by the City.

The local access operations analysis portion of this TIA includes the following sections:

1. Introduction
o Project History
o Project Description
o TIA Approach

2. Local Traffic Operations Analysis
o Study Facilities and Analysis Scenarios
o Analysis Methodology
o Traffic Volumes and Geometries
o Intersection Queuing Analysis
o Site Access and Internal Circulation
The CEQA impact analysis portion of this TIA includes the following sections:

3. CEQA Transportation Analysis
o Multimodal Facilities
o Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Policy Analysis
A Conclusion section is also provided at the end of this memorandum.

PROJECT HISTORY
The current Project (Lago Vista) was formerly known as the Villages at Fairfield Village IIA project. Before Lago Vista/Villages at Fairfield Village IIA was proposed, the Hawthorne Mill West (HMW) (subsequently renamed to Cooper’s Landing) project was under consideration at the Project site. The Lago Vista Project is being proposed as an extension of the directly adjacent Villages at Fairfield Village II and is being integrated

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 2 of 22 into the overall Villages at Fairfield (VAF) project. The CEQA impacts of the overall VAF project were studied in The Villages at Fairfield Environmental Impact Report (VAF EIR). The VAF EIR was certified in 2005, and the overall VAF project was amended in 2010, 2015, and 2018 pursuant to Addenda to the 2005 VAF EIR.

The Addenda to the 2005 VAF EIR did not perform new traffic analysis for the revised VAF project as they found that the proposed changes in scope would not result in new impacts. The entire VAF project is covered by a Development Agreement as it has been amended.

The 2005 VAF EIR originally analyzed a total of 2,341 residential units, including 1,102 units in Villages I and II. The 2005 VAF EIR also originally included 24.3 acres of mixed-use development in Village II. Subsequently, the approved final maps for Villages I and II , which are consistent with the changes proposed in the three Addenda to the VAF EIR, included only 806 residential units (432 in Village I and 374 in Village II) . The currently approved Village II does not include any mixed -use area. Note that the land use quantities pertaining to the original VAF EIR described in this TIA refer to the land use quantities analyzed in the 2005 VAF EIR Traffic Impact Study, which studied a slightly higher number of units than was included in the original EIR Project Description. Page 29 of the 2005 VAF EIR Traffic Impact Study states:
“This analysis was conducted when the proposed Villages at Fairfield consisted of 2,341 residential units plus commercial, recreation, public facilities, and open space in northeast Fairfield. The current proposed project includes only 2,327 residential units, 14 less than analyzed in this report. Hence, the analysis is slightly conservative however this reduction in units does not affect the impacts or mitigation measures identified in this report.”
Based on the above, the certified 2005 VAF EIR analyzed the impact of trips from 296 residential units and

24.3 acres of mixed -use development beyond what is currently proposed in the approved final maps for Villages I and II. As a result, the VAF project as originally approved and studied under CEQA can accommodate additional units within the trip generation budget already studied for Villages I and II.

The approved final maps for Villages I and II (806 residential units) are mostly built out. The three final communities/units within Villages I and II are currently under construction. A new development within VAF, Parkside, has been proposed which is located within Village I and consists of 77 single-family detached dwelling units.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project is located on two currently undeveloped parcels, totaling approximately 37.8 acres, located north of Air Base Parkway and east of Abundance Way. The two parcels are identified as APNs 170 -050-040 and 170-050-550. The Project would gain access to the existing roadway network via new local roadway connections to Golden Way and High Line Drive. The Project would develop 150 relatively compact single family dwelling units and 226 duplex/condominium units for a total of 376 residential units. The Project also proposes a new 12-foot wide multi-use trail to the north of the site that would connect a cul-de-sac proposed at the north end of the Project site to a proposed 90-degree connection of Portland Drive and Nightfall Lane that would be const ructed by the Project. The Project location is included in Figure 1 and the Project site plan is shown in Figure 2.

The Project site is currently zoned as Industrial and Business Park (IBP), Residential Medium (RM), and Open Space Conservation (OSC). The Project site’s current general plan designation is Residential Low -Medium (RLM) and Open Space Conservation (OSC). Th e Project’s proposed zoning is Residential Low -Medium (RLM), Residential High (RH), and Open Space Conservation (OSC). The Project’s proposed general plan designation is Residential Low-Medium (RLM), Residential High (RH), and Open Space Conservation (OSC).

TIA APPROACH
Since the Project is being proposed as an extension of the overall VAF project, and the VAF project has an approved EIR, this TIA evaluates if/how the Project would change transportation impacts previously identified under the VAF EIR. The Project’s 150 compact single-family detached dwelling units and 226 duplex/condominium units would generate Project external trips. However, the Project’s trip generation is

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 3 of 22 anticipated to generally fit within the original VAF EIR trip generation for Villages I and II . In other words, trip “credits” from Villages I and II would be used to offset trips from the Project.

The TIA was prepared in accordance with the City of Fairfield local transportation analysis guidelines (dated December 22, 2020). Note that since the Project falls under the overall VAF project, which has an approved EIR, this TIA does not evaluate the Project as a “new” project, meaning this TIA does not evaluate the Project against new California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) considerations such as typical vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita thresholds. Instead, this TIA compares Project impacts to the approved VAF EIR.

The TIA includes a qualitative evaluation of VMT in the context of the Project generated VMT compared to the VMT generated by the VAF project in the approved EIR.

2. LOCAL TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS

STUDY FACILITIES AND ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
Traffic operations analyses were performed under the following scenarios:
• Existing Plus Background Plus Project Conditions
Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions represents a near-term future scenario when the remaining Villages at Fairfield (VAF) Villages I and II homes , as well as the proposed Par kside development located within Village I (Background growth) have been fully constructed and occupied, and the Project (Lago Vista) homes have been constructed and occupied. This scenario was selected for analysis in order to ensure that the proposed improvements to the study intersection are sized appropriately to accommodate queues that would be experienced after buildout of the VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Project.

The following one (1) intersection was included in this analysis:

1. Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway
The location of the above study intersection is shown in Figure 1. The study intersection was chosen based on how the anticipated trip assignment of the Project may cause slightly different travel patterns at these intersections compared to those studied under VAF EIR conditions. The intersection of Clay Bank Road & Air Base Parkway was not evaluated because traffic patterns/distribution of the proposed Project trips at this intersection would be the same as those studied in the approved VAF EIR.

!(1
Project Location
Project Location and Study Vicinity
Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\Tasks\Fig_1_Location_and_Facilities_Map.mxd 4/1/2024 5:13:13 PM nfeyli Figure 1
NORTH
0 700350
Feet
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
#

Figure 2

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 6 of 22

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Queuing Methodology
SimTraffic 12 software was used to estimate study intersection 95th percentile queueing under weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions. The SimTraffic microsimulation models were run for a 60 -minute analysis period with a 10 -minute warm -up period, and reported queues were based on the average of 10 runs.

SimTraffic Queueing reports and HCM 7th Edition reports were generated for the study intersection. Existing signal timings for the Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway intersection were obtained from the City and utilized in the analysis.

TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND GEOMETRIES
Existing Traffic Counts
AM and PM peak hour traffic counts for the one (1) existing study intersection were collected on Thursday, March 14, 2024. The AM peak hour is defined as the highest one hour of traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM on a typical weekday. The PM peak hour is defined as the highest one hour of traffic flow counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM on a typical weekday. Raw traffic count data sheets are provided in Attachment A. Existing conditions traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. Existing condition s lane geometrics and control are shown in Figure 4 for informational purposes.

!(1
Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes
Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
Clay Bank Road &
10 (0)
16 (11)
14 (8)
Clay Bank Road
9 (9)
336 (228)
220 (188)
Manuel Campos Parkway
119 (290)
6 (24)
173 (142)
Clay Bank Road
11 (3)
189 (278)
133 (159)
Manuel Campos Parkway
Manuel Campos Parkway1
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\T asks\TurningMovements\2023_Exist.mxd 5/2/2025 7:20:30 PM nscappaticci Figure 3
0 1,400700
Feet
NORTH
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour
Volumes
#
Project Location
Project Trip Distribution

!(1
Existing Conditions Lane Geometrics and Control
Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\Tasks\LaneGeometrics\Fig_LaneGeom_LaneGeom.mxd 4/1/2024 4:53:29 PM nfeyli Figure 4
NORTH
0 1,400700
Feet
Project Location
Stop Controlled Movement
Signalized Intersection
Turning Movement
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
#

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 9 of 22 Background Trip Generation
The trip generation data contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition was used to approximate the number of trips that will be generated by the VAF Villages I and II homes that were not yet constructed and occupied at the time traffic counts were collected . The VAF Villages I and II are located directly northwest/west of the Lago Vista Project . The number of in-progress (unoccupied and/or unconstructed) single-family residential dwellings was provided by the Project applicant . At the time traffic counts were taken for this TIA (March 14, 2024) , Village I Lot 2 Remainder had 49 unconstructed/unoccupied single family dwelling units, and Village II Lot 3 and 4 Remainders had 135 unconstructed/unoccupied single family dwelling units. The proposed Parkside development was also included in the background growth volumes.

The Parkside development proposes to construct 77 single -family detached homes on one currently undeveloped parcel on the southeast corner of the Passion Lane and Gulf Drive intersection located in Village I.

The ITE land use category of Single -Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) w as used to represent the Villages at Fairfield Village I and II Remainders and the Parkside development (Background growth). Table 1 shows the adjacent Background trip generation estimate.

Table 1. Background Trip Generation
Land Use Units Quantity Daily1
AM Peak Hour1 PM Peak Hour1
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached Housing –
Village II Lot 3 and 4 Remainders DU2 135 1,330 25 73 98 83 49 132 Single-Family Detached Housing –
Village 1 Lot 2 Remainder DU2 49 523 10 29 39 32 19 51
Parkside DU2 77 793 15 44 59 49 29 78
Total Project Trips 2,646 50 146 196 164 97 261
Notes:
1 Trip rates are based on fitted curve equations contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2DU = Dwelling Unit
As illustrated in Table 1, the in-progress Village I and II homes and proposed Parkside development are anticipated to generate a total of 2,646 daily trips, 196 AM peak hour primary trips (50 inbound, 146 outbound), and 261 PM peak hour trips (164 inbound, 97 outbound) under typical weekday traffic demand conditions, once constructed and occupied.

The trip distribution for the background trips was estimated using the latest version of the 2020 City of Fairfield Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model and engineering judgement. Background trip distribution and assignment are shown in Figure 5.

!(1
Background Growth Trip Distribution and Assignment
Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
Clay Bank Road &
Clay Bank Road2 (1)
1 (4)
Manuel Campos Parkway
4 (2)
20 (12)
Clay Bank Road
1 (2)
7 (21)
Manuel Campos Parkway
Manuel Campos Parkway1
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\T asks\TurningMovements\2023_Background.mxd 5/2/2025 7:19:52 PM nscappaticci Figure 5
15%
0 1,400700
Feet
NORTH
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour
Volumes
#
Project Location
% Project Trip Distribution
5%
7%
55% 8%
10%

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 11 of 22 Project Trip Generation
The trip generation data contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition was used to approximate the number of trips generated by the Project. The ITE land use category of Single -Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) and Single-Family Attached Housing (ITE Code 215) were used to represent the Project single family home and duplex units, respectively. Table 2 shows the Project trip generation estimate.

Table 2. Project Trip Generation
Land Use Units Quantity Daily1
AM Peak Hour1 PM Peak Hour1
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached Housing DU2 150 1,465 27 81 108 91 54 145 Single-Family Attached Housing DU2 226 1,672 28 84 112 78 54 132 Total Project Trips 3,137 55 165 220 169 108 277
Notes:
1 Trip rates are based on fitted curve equations contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2DU = Dwelling Unit
As illustrated in Table 2, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate a total of 3,137 daily trips, 220 AM peak hour primary trips (55 inbound, 165 outbound), and 277 P M peak hour trips (169 inbound, 108 outbound) under typical weekday traffic demand conditions.

The trip distribution for the Project was estimated based on using the latest version of the 2020 City of Fairfield TDF Model and engineering judgement. Project trip distribution and assignment are shown in Figure 6 . A plot of the select node Fairfield TDF Model run that was used to inform the Project trip distribution is included at the end of this memorandum as Attachment B.

Existing Plus Background Plus Project Conditions
Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions represents a near-term future scenario when the remaining VAF Villages I and II homes and Parkside development (Background growth) have been fully constructed and occupied, and the Project (Lago Vista) homes have been constructed and occupied. Background volumes and Project volumes were added to existing traffic counts in order to obtain Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions volumes. Existing volumes were also balanced up based on counts taken at the adjacent Clay Bank Road & Gulf Drive and Portland Drive & Manuel Campos Parkway/Cement Hill Road in order to be consistent with the Villages at Fairfield Parkside Transportation Impact Analysis (Wood Rodgers, May 2025).

The Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions volumes are shown in Figure 7.

Offsite roadway improvements are proposed alongside VAF Villages I and II, including improvements to the Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway intersection. It was assumed that the improvements shown in the VAF Village I Phase 3 Master Infrastructure Improvement Plans (Wood Rodgers, September 2021) would be in place under Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions , as the improvements are currently on track to be completed before buildout of the Lago Vista Project. Study intersection lane geometrics and control under Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions are shown in Figure 8.

!(1
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
Clay Bank Road &
Clay Bank Road
3 (8)
Manuel Campos Parkway
8 (5)
25 (16)
Clay Bank Road
8 (25)
Manuel Campos Parkway
Manuel Campos Parkway1
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\T asks\TurningMovements\2023_Proj.mxd 5/2/2025 7:20:46 PM nscappaticci Figure 6
15%
0 1,400700
Feet
NORTH
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour
Volumes
#
Project Location
% Project Trip Distribution
5%
7%
55% 8%
10%

!(1
Existing Plus Background Plus Project Traffic Volumes
Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
Clay Bank Road &
10 (0)
16 (11)
14 (9)
Clay Bank Road
9 (9)
345 (229)
229 (200)
Manuel Campos Parkway
133 (312)
6 (24)
222 (170)
Clay Bank Road
11 (3)
190 (294)
148 (205)
Manuel Campos Parkway
Manuel Campos Parkway1
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\T asks\TurningMovements\2023_E+B+P .mxd 5/2/2025 7:20:12 PM nscappaticci Figure 7
0 1,400700
Feet
NORTH
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
XX(XX) AM(PM) Peak Hour
Volumes
#
Project Location
Project Trip Distribution

!(1
Existing Plus Background Plus Project Lane Geometrics and Control Lago Vista TIA
Fairfield, CA
May 2025
J:\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Lago_Vista\Tasks\LaneGeometrics\Fig_PropLaneGeom_PropLaneGeom.mxd 4/1/2024 5:10:41 PM nfeyli Figure 8
NORTH
0 1,400700
Feet
Project Location
Signalized Intersection
Turning Movement
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
#

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 15 of 22

INTERSECTION QUEUEING ANALYSIS
Vehicle queuing was analyzed at the Clay Bank Road & Man uel Campos Parkway intersection for all movements under Existing Plus Background Plus Project traffic volumes and lane geometrics. Table 3 shows the projected 95th percentile queues compared against available storage lengths under Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions.

Table 3. Queueing Analysis Results
# Intersection Movement
Available
Storage
(ft)
Peak Hour
95th Percentile Queue (ft)
Existing Plus Background
Plus Project
1 Clay Bank Rd & Manuel
Campos Pkwy
NBL 205
AM 140
PM 119
EBL 340
AM 23
PM 11
WBL 215
AM 137
PM 131
Notes: One queued vehicle length is considered to be 20 feet long. Bold values indicate that queue exceeds storage length.

As shown in Table 3, all queues are projected to fit within available storage. SimTraffic 95th percentile queueing results are included in Attachment C. HCM 7th Edition Synchro operations reports are also included in Attachment C for informational purposes.

SITE ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION
The Project would gain access to the existing roadway network via new local roadway extensions of Golden Way and High Line Drive. On the west side of the Project site, which will contain the single -family detached dwelling units, internal circulation of the site would be provided by new local residential streets. The new residential streets would typically be 40 to 46 feet wide, including 5-foot sidewalks on both sides of the street, 8-foot parking lanes on one or both sides of the street, and 10 -to-12-foot travel lanes (one lane in each direction). On the southeast side of the Project, which will contain the condominium/duplex units, internal circulation of the site would be provided via private streets. The private streets would connect to the neighboring local residential streets in two locations, including the main connection of Street B to High Line Drive, and a secondary connection of Private Street I to residential Street D. Both Private Street connections to the condominium/duplex units would be gated. The private streets would typically be approximately 26 to 40 feet wide, including one travel lane in each direction, and in some cases, parking and/or a sidewalk on one side of the street.

Since none of the proposed Project streets would be through streets, only Project trips are projected to use Project streets. Therefore, the Project site is projected to experience up to 3,137 total daily trips spread out throughout all of the Project streets. The connections to High Line Drive and Golden Way are also projected to experience 3,137 total daily trips, with High Line Drive experiencing approximately 75 percent of the traffic, and Golden Way experiencing approximately 25 percent of the traffic due to the projected Project trip distribution and proximity of each local residential street to the proposed homes. Based on the number of trips projected to occur on Project roadways, the proposed street sections are projected to be adequate to support on-site vehicular circulation. It is recommended that stop signs or yield signs be installed at the intersection of all proposed residential streets and/or private streets. It is recommended that the on -site intersections generally be one -way or two -way yie ld or stop controlled, with the street that has lower volumes being controlled.

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 16 of 22 The overall Project site would have two primary access points to the surrounding local roadway system. The condominium/duplex community on the southeast portion of the site would have two gated access points to the adjacent residential streets for community residents. The Project also proposes one Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) Driveway with knock down bollards on the southwest corner of the Project site connecting proposed residential Street A with Air Base Parkway. It is recommended that the knock down bo llards on the EVA Driveway be positioned far enough away from the edge of traveled way on Air Base Parkway so that two standard vehicle lengths could queue in front of the bollards without queueing back into Air Base Parkway (at least 50 feet). In addition , it is recommended that clear sight distance triangles be maintained free of obstacles at the EVA Driveway to allow emergency vehicles entering and exiting the EVA Driveway sufficient vision of surrounding traffic. Clear sight distance triangles at the EV A Driveway are shown in Attachment D at the end of this memorandum. There are existing 8-foot wide shoulders on Air Base Parkway adjacent to the proposed EVA Driveway that emergency vehicles could use to pull in and out of the driveway.

If the sight distance triangles are kept clear and the 8 -foot wide shoulders on Air Base Parkway are maintained, the EVA Driveway is projected to be adequate for emergency access.

3. CEQA TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

MULTIMODAL FACILITIES
Existing Multimodal Facilities
Pedestrian sidewalks currently exist along the east side of High Line Drive and along both sides of Golden Way to the west of the Project site . Horizon Circle has existing sidewalks on both sides of the street. Clay Bank Road has existing sidewalks on both sides of the street south of Merriment Place, and only on the west side of the street north of Merriment Place. A multi-use path exists along the Linear Park that runs diagonally northwest of the Project area from Clay Bank Road near Canal Street to Portland Drive.

Clay Bank Road has existing class II bicycle lanes between Rebecca Drive and Air Base Parkway. Cement Hill Road has existing class II bicycle lanes west of Clay Bank Road. Air Base Parkway is designated as a class II bicycle lane facility adjacent to the Project in the current Solano County Active Transportation Plan for Fairfield (Solano Transportation Authority, adopted in 2020).

The City of Fairfield is served by the Fairfield and Suisun Transit (FAST). Currently, there are no fixed-route transit stops within a half mile walk of the Project site. The closest transit stop to the Project site is located at Dover Avenue & Cement Hill Road ( FAST Route 1), which is an approximately 1.8 mile walk from the Project site . However, FAST Connect on -demand microtransit operates Monday through Friday from approximately 6:00 AM to 8:00 PM and on Saturday from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM. The Project site is located in the FAST Connect Northeast Fairfield Zone. Therefore, Project residents would be able to use the FAST Connect “Ride Pingo” ride-share app to book a shared transit trip from the Project site to anywhere within the Northeast Fairfield Zone. If a Project resident needs to travel outside the zone, FAST Connect would drop them off at the nearest fixed-route stop. The FAST Route 1 transit stop at Dover Avenue & Cement Hill Road is located with the Northeast Fairfield Zone. Therefore, Project residents could access FAST via the Ride Pingo ride-share app.

Proposed Multimodal Facilities
The Project generally proposes sidewalks along both sides of the proposed Residential Streets adjacent to the single-family detached dwelling units in the west side of the Project site . In the southeast side of the Project site, where the condominiums/duplexes are proposed, the Project generally proposes north -south sidewalks along Private Streets E, J, and B, as well as an east -west pedestrian path from the leasing office at the center of the site to the eastern edge of the site. The Project also proposes a multi-use trail on the north side of the Project site that would connect the cul -de-sac at the north end of the proposed Court A to a proposed 90-degree connection of Portland Drive to Nightfall Lane to be constructed by the Project.

The VAF Village I Phase 3 Master Infrastructure Improvement Plans propose new sidewalks on the east side of Clay Bank Road between Merriment Place and Manuel Campos Parkway, as well as on the north and south

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 17 of 22 sides of Manuel Campos Parkway between Clay Bank Road and Portland Drive. The VAF Village I Phase 3 Master Infrastructure Improvement Plans also propose buffered class II bike lanes on both sides of Clay Bank Road between Merriment Place and Manuel Campos Parkway, and on both sides of Manuel Campos Parkway between Clay Bank Road and Portland Drive. The multimodal improvements on Clay Bank Road are planned to be constructed by spring 2025. The multimodal improvements on Manuel Campos Parkway are planned to be constructed before buildout of the Lago Vista Project.

According to the current Solano County Active Transportation Plan for Fairfield, additional planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the study area include extending the existing class I multi-use path along the linear park in both directions (west and east), and further extension of class I and class III bicycle facilities and routes along Manual Campos Parkway/Cement Hill Road in both directions (west and east). The Fairfield existing and planned bicycle network from the Solano County Active Transportation Plan for Fairfield is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Fairfield Existing and Proposed Bicycle Network

There are currently no proposed transit facilities within the vicinity of the Project site.

Multimodal Impact Criteria
The Fairfield VMT Guidelines outline the following impact criteria for multimodal operations (pedestrian, bicycle, and transit access) in the City:
“Impacts on alternative modes can result from projects that in themselves generate a significant number of trips for these modes or that are located on roadways that have been designated to serve these modes of travel. The assessment of impacts may be based on one or more of the following factors: counts for bicycle and pedestrian movements, location of bus stops, street width, collision history, transit boardings and alightings, and approved land use and transportation plans and capital improvement project s. Generally, project will be asked to implement pedestrian and bicycle improvements that have been identified in transportation plans, specific plans, or landscaping plans. Also, site -specific improvements may be identified to encourage alternate modes and /or enhance the safety of alternate modes."

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 18 of 22 Multimodal Impacts
The Project is anticipated to increase pedestrian, bicycle, and transit demand in the study area. However, the increase in demand is not projected to put existing facilities over capacity or adversely affect existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, or transit facilities in a way that would discourage their use. The Project would not result in unsafe conditions for bicyclists or pedestrians or result in unsafe bicycle/pedestrian/motor vehicle conflicts. The Project proposes to construct on -site sidewalks th at would serve the majority of the site. In the condominium/duplex community, pedestrians could travel along the low-speed private streets in order to reach the provided sidewalk paths that lead to the external pedestrian facilities.

Due to the suburban characteristics of the area, there are not a large number of key bicycle and pedestrian destinations in the study area. Key destinations could ultimately include the Linear Park to the northwest, the Laurel Creek Park and Elementary Sch ool to the west, and the existing and proposed retail along Clay Bank Road to the west. Project residents could reach the Linear Park via proposed internal sidewalks, the proposed trail connection to Portland Drive/Nightfall Lane, and existing sidewalks al ong Portland Drive or Nightfall Lane. Project residents could reach the Laurel Creek Park and Elementary School via existing sidewalks along High Line Drive, Horizon Circle, Clay Bank Road, and Cement Hill Road. Similarly, Project residents could reach the existing and proposed shopping on Clay Bank Road via existing sidewalks along High Line Drive, Horizon Circle, and Clay Bank Road. Any existing gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle routes to key destinations are already proposed to be filled by the Project or VAF Village I Phase 3 Master Infrastructure Improvement Plans, which would be constructed before buildout of the Lago Vista Project. The Lago Vista Project would provide sidewalk and bike route connectivity from the nearby existing facilities to the Project residences via improvements (sidewalks and local roads for bike routes) on internal Project roadways. Project residents would also have the option to use the FAST Connect on-demand microtransit.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) POLICY ANALYSIS
Approved Environmental Document
As stated in the Project History section of this TIA, t he certified 2005 VAF EIR originally analyzed a total of 1,102 units in Villages I and II as well as 24.3 acres of mixed-use development in Village II. Subsequently, the approved final maps for Villages I and II included only 806 residential units (432 in Village I and 374 in Village II) and no mixed-use area. Therefore, the certified 2005 VAF EIR analyzed the impact of trips from 296 residential units and 24.3 acres of mixed -use development beyond what is currently proposed in the approved final maps for Villages I and II. As a result, the VAF project as originally approved and studied under CEQA can accommodate additional units within the trip generation budget already studied for Villages I and II.

Trip Generation Comparison
The land uses proposed by the combined current VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Lago Vista Project are different than those that were proposed and studied for VAF Villages I and II under the VAF EIR. However, a comparison of the trip generation shows that the combined current VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Lago Vista Project would generally generate less trips than the land uses studied for VAF Villages I and II under the VAF EIR.

The VAF EIR project description included development of 204 low -medium density units and 628 high density units in Village I and 270 low-medium density units with a 24.3 -acre mixed-use lot (assumed to be 77% commercial use in Appendix 3 of the VAF EIR) in Village II. The previously approved Villages I and II trip generation was obtained from Chapter 4 of the VAF EIR Appendix 3: Traffic Analysis for The Villages at Fairfield (TJKM, February 4, 2005).

Currently proposed build-out of Village I includes 432 single-family dwelling units, and currently proposed build-out of Village II includes 374 single-family dwelling units. The proposed Parkside development, which is an extension of Village I, proposes 77 single -family dwelling units. The currently proposed Lago Vista Project, which is an extension of Village II, includes 150 single -family dwelling units and 226

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 19 of 22 condominium/duplex dwelling units. Trip generation for the combined current VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Lago Vista Project was estimated using industry standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition trip generation rates.

Table 4 summarizes the trip generation comparison of the land uses studied for VAF Villages I and II under the VAF EIR (VAF EIR Conditions) and the combined current VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Lago Vista Project (Currently Proposed Conditions).

Table 4. VAF Villages I and II EIR vs Currently Proposed Trip Generation Comparison Location Description Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
In Out Total In Out Total

VAF EIR
Conditions1
Village I 204 Low-Med Density Units,
628 High Density Units 6,115 89 384 473 393 203 596
Village II 270 Low-Med Density Units,

24.3 Acres Mixed-Use 6,978 115 193 308 359 297 656
Total 13,093 204 577 781 752 500 1,252
Currently
Proposed
Conditions2
Village I 432 Single-Family Detached
DU3 3,878 71 211 282 248 145 393
Village II 374 Single-Family Detached
DU 3,396 62 185 247 216 127 343
Parkside 77 Single-Family Detached
DU 793 15 44 59 49 29 78
Lago Vista
150 Single-Family Detached
DU, 226 Single-Family
Attached (Duplex) DU
3,137 55 165 220 169 108 277
Total 11,204 203 605 808 682 409 1,091
Difference (EIR – Final Buildout) 1,889 1 -28 -27 70 91 161 Notes:
1 Source: Villages at Fairfield Environmental Impact Report, Table 4-6 and VAF EIR Appendix 3: Traffic Analysis for The Villages at Fairfield (TJKM, February 4, 2005), Tables IX and X. The VAF EIR trip generation is based on rates found in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition.
2 Trip rates based on fitted curve equations for the proposed land use consistent with information contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition
3DU = Dwelling Units
As shown in Table 4, the Currently Proposed Conditions of Villages I and II with the addition of the proposed Parkside development and Lago Vista Project trips would generate 1,889 fewer daily trips, 27 more AM peak hour trips, and 161 fewer PM peak hour trips than the VAF EIR Conditions trip generation for Villages I and II.

The Currently Proposed Conditions of VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Lago Vista Project have similar access points to the surrounding local roadway network as the VAF EIR Conditions project layouts did, including direct access to Clay Bank Road and Manual Campos Parkway. The similar access points means that traffic generated by the combined c urrent VAF Village I, Village II, Parkside development, and Lago Vista Projet would generally distribute to study intersections similar to the project distribution assumed in the VAF EIR.

Currently Proposed Conditions are estimated to generate 27 more AM peak hour trips than VAF EIR conditions. The slight difference in AM peak hour trips would not be large enough to affect traffic operations at nearby intersections or result in new traffic impacts or mitigations beyond those studied in the VAF EIR.

Currently Proposed Conditions are estimated to generate 161 less PM peak hour trips than VAF EIR conditions. The slight difference in PM peak hour trips means that PM traffic operations at nearby intersections would be the same or better than operations studied in the VAF EIR. Currently Proposed Conditions are estimated to generate 1,889 less daily trips than VAF EIR conditions. The slight difference in daily trips means that VMT generated by the overall VAF development would be the same or less than studied in the VAF EIR.

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 20 of 22 Since the background land use and transportation context in the Project area has not changed substantially such that new environmental impacts are anticipated from development of the Project site , reliance on the approved EIR is generally acceptable as established in Concerned Dublin Citizens (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1318–1320 and Olen Properties Corp. v. City of Newport Beach (2023) Cal.App.5th. These court decisions found that a change in the CEQA Guidelines is not new information triggering new CEQA analysis so long as the impacts of the project were considered in the initial EIR. Since VMT was included in the air quality analysis section of the approved VAF EIR, it can be argued that VMT was considered for development of the Project site. Since the proposed Project site has a previously approved EIR that considered VMT, reliance on the approved EIR is acceptable and the Project would not be required to reevaluate transportation CEQA impacts.

Comparison to the Hawthorne Mill West Site
From a VMT perspective, there may be a nominal difference between the previously proposed HMW project that would have routed trips via Portland Drive and Manuel Campos Parkway and the Lago Vista configuration that would route trips via Village II to Clay Bank Road. Routing trips to the west may in fact reduce VMT compared to the HMW configuration as it shortens the distance to I-80.

VAF EIR Mitigation Measures at Offsite Intersections
The approved VAF EIR included implementation of several transportation mitigation measures at nearby intersections, including improvements at the intersection of Clay Bank Road and Air Base Parkway. Since the improvements identified by the VAF EIR have alr eady been installed at the intersection of Clay Bank Road and Air Base Parkway, the intersection is projected to have sufficient capacity to serve VAF development trips, including trips from Lago Vista and Parkside.

4. CONCLUSION
Project Description
The Project is located on two currently undeveloped parcels, totaling approximately 37.8 acres, located north of Air Base Parkway and east of Abundance Way. The Project would gain access to the existing roadway network via new local roadway connections to Golden Way and High Line Drive. The Project would develop 150 relatively compact single family dwelling units and 226 duplex/condominium units for a total of 376 residential units. The Project also proposes a new 12 -foot wide multi-use trail to the north of the site that would connect a cul-de-sac proposed at the north end of the Project site to a proposed 90-degree connection of Portland Drive and Nightfall Lane that would be constructed by the Project.

LOCAL TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Project Trip Generation
The proposed Project is anticipated to generate a total of 3,137 daily trips, 220 AM peak hour primary trips (55 inbound, 165 outbound), and 277 P M peak hour trips (169 inbound, 108 outbound) under typical weekday traffic demand conditions.

Intersection Queueing Analysis
Vehicle queuing was analyzed at the Clay Bank Road & Manel Campos Parkway intersection for all movements under Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions using SimTraffic software. Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions represents a near-term future scenario when the remaining VAF Villages I and II homes, and Parkside development (Background growth) have been fully constructed and occupied, and the Project ( Lago Vista ) homes have been constructed and occupied. It was assumed that the improvements shown in the VAF Village I Phase 3 Master Infrastructure Improvement Plans (Wood Rodgers, September 2021) would be in place under Existing Plus Background Plus Project conditions. All queues are projected to fit within available storage.

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 21 of 22 Site Access and Internal Circulation
The Project would gain access to the existing roadway network via new local roadway extensions of Golden Way and High Line Drive. The new residential streets would typically be 40 to 46 feet wide, including 5-foot sidewalks on both sides of the street, 8 -foot parking lanes on one or both sides of the street, and 10 -to-12- foot travel lanes (one lane in each direction). Private Street connections for the condominium s would be gated. The private streets would typically be approximately 26 to 40 feet wide, including one travel lane in each direction, and in some cases, parking and/or a sidewalk on one side of the street.

Based on the number of trips projected to occur on Project roadways, the proposed street sections are projected to be adequate to support on-site vehicular circulation. It is recommended that stop signs or yield signs be installed at the intersection of all proposed residential streets and/or private streets. It is recommended that the on-site intersections generally be one-way or two-way yield or stop controlled, with the street that has lower volumes being controlled.

Emergency Access
The Project proposes one Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) Driveway with knock down bollards on the southwest corner of the Project site connecting proposed residential Street A with Air Base Parkway. It is recommended that the knock down bollards on the EVA Driveway be positioned far enough away from the edge of traveled way on Air Base Parkway so that two standard vehicle lengths could queue in front of the bollards without queueing back into Air Base Parkway (at least 50 feet). In addition, it is recommended that clear sight distance triangles be maintained free of obstacles at the EVA Driveway to allow emergency vehicles entering and exiting the EVA Driveway sufficient vision of surrounding traffic. Clear sight distance triangles at the EVA Driveway are shown in Attachment D. There are existing 8-foot wide shoulders on Air Base Parkway adjacent to the proposed EVA Driveway that emergency vehicles could use to pull in and out of the driveway. If the sight distance triangles are kept clear and the 8 -foot wide shoulders on Air Base Parkway are maintained, the EVA Driveway is projected to be adequate for emergency access.

CEQA TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
Multimodal Impacts
The Project is anticipated to increase pedestrian, bicycle, and transit demand in the study area. However, the increase in demand is not projected to put existing facilities over capacity or adversely affect existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, or transit facilities in a way that would discourage their use. The Project would not result in unsafe conditions for bicyclists or pedestrians or result in unsafe bicycle/pedestrian/motor vehicle conflicts. The Project proposes to construct on -site sidewalks th at would serve the majority of the site. In the condominium/duplex community, pedestrians could travel along the low-speed private streets in order to reach the provided sidewalk paths that lead to the external pedestrian facilities. Any existing gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle routes to key destinations are already proposed to be filled by the Project or VAF Village I Phase 3 Master Infrastructure Improvement Plans. Project residents would also have the option to use the FAST Connect on-demand microtransit.

VMT Policy Analysis
The Currently Proposed Conditions of Village I, Village II, and Parkside development with the addition of the proposed Lago Vista Project trips would generate 1,889 fewer daily trips, 27 more AM peak hour trips, and 161 fewer PM peak hour trips than the VAF EIR Conditions trip generation for Villages I and II. The slight difference in AM peak hour trips would not be large enough to affect traffic operations at nearby intersections or result in new traffic impacts or mitigations beyond those studied in the VAF EIR. Therefore the Lago Vista Project would not be projected to result in any new transportation impacts beyond those studied in the VAF EIR. Since the proposed Project site has a previously approved EIR that considered VMT, and the background land use and transportation context in the Project area has not changed substantially such that new environmental impacts are anticipated from development of the Project site, reliance on the approved EIR is acceptable and the Project would not be required to reevaluate transportation CEQA impacts.

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis 22 of 22 The approved VAF EIR included implementation of several transportation mitigation measures at nearby intersections, including improvements at the intersection of Clay Bank Road and Air Base Parkway. Since the improvements identified by the VAF EIR have alr eady been installed at the intersection of Clay Bank Road and Air Base Parkway, the intersection is projected to have sufficient capacity to serve VAF development trips, including trips from Lago Vista and Parkside.

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis

ATTACHMENT A

TRAFFIC COUNTS

Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
ID: 24-080057-001 Day:

City: Fairfield Date:

AM 10 16 14 0 AM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
PM 0 11 8 0 PM

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
0 1 1 0 0.5 9 0 9
1 228 0 336
4 0 0 0 0.5 188 0 220
7 0 3 0.3 TEV 1236 0 1340 0 0 0 0
189 0 278 0.3 PHF 0.95 0.95
133 0 159 0.3 0 0.5 0.5 1

AM NOON PM PM NOON AM
PM 0 142 24 290 PM
NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON
AM 0 173 6 119 AM
Pedestrians (Crosswalks)
Totals (PM) Total Bikes (PM)
0 369

NORTHBOUND
Clay Bank Rd
Totals (NOON) Total Bikes (NOON)
NONE
576 0 322
Totals (AM) 358 Total Bikes (AM)
Manuel Campos Pkwy

EASTBOUND

WESTBOUND
Manuel Campos Pkwy523 0 370

CONTROL
Signalized
0 NONE
04:15 PM - 05:15 PM 36
Clay Bank Rd & Manuel Campos Pkwy
Peak Hour Turning Movement Count
Clay Bank Rd Thursday
SOUTHBOUND 3/14/2024
4:00 PM - 06:00 PM

PEAK HOURS
07:15 AM - 08:15 AM 22 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM

COUNT PERIODS

NOONAM PM
PM
AM
AM
NOON
PM
PM
NOON
AM
AM
NOON
PM
NOON
NOON
PM
AM
NOON
AM
PM
NOON
AM
PM
NOON
PM
AM
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 1
0 0
1 0
0 0
0 1
0 0
0 0
0 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
00 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
9 228
188159
278
3 0
11 8
290
24 142
0 0
00 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 9
336
220133
189
7 10
16 14
119
6 173

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis

ATTACHMENT B
FAIRFIELD TDF MODEL – PROJECT SELECT NODE PLOT

Base Year 2020 Plus Project Scenario – Select Project Node 601 Run Daily Bi-Directional Volumes (Total ADT)

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis

ATTACHMENT C
SYNCHRO HCM 6
TH

EDITION LOS REPORTS AND QUEUEING REPORTS

Lago Vista TIA
1: Clay Bank Rd & Manuel Campos Pkwy AM Existing Plus Project Peak Hour HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Wood Rodgers, Inc Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 11 190 148 229 345 9 222 6 133 14 16 10 Future Volume (veh/h) 11 190 148 229 345 9 222 6 133 14 16 10 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 12 200 156 241 363 9 234 6 140 15 17 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 236 281 208 293 624 15 297 317 268 309 178 115 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1947 1441 1781 3543 88 1781 1870 1585 1781 1061 686 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 12 182 174 241 182 190 234 6 140 15 0 28 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1611 1781 1777 1854 1781 1870 1585 1781 0 1747 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 6.0 6.3 8.0 5.7 5.8 7.7 0.2 4.9 0.4 0.0 0.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 6.0 6.3 8.0 5.7 5.8 7.7 0.2 4.9 0.4 0.0 0.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.89 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.39
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 236 256 232 293 313 327 297 317 268 309 0 293 V/C Ratio(X) 0.05 0.71 0.75 0.82 0.58 0.58 0.79 0.02 0.52 0.05 0.00 0.10 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 874 1163 1054 874 1163 1214 874 1132 960 874 0 1086 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 23.2 24.9 25.1 24.7 23.1 23.1 24.4 21.2 23.1 21.1 0.0 21.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.4 1.8 2.2 0.6 0.6 1.8 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 2.3 2.3 3.1 2.2 2.3 3.1 0.1 1.7 0.2 0.0 0.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 23.2 26.3 26.9 26.9 23.7 23.7 26.2 21.2 23.7 21.1 0.0 21.6 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C C C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 368 613 380 43
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.5 25.0 25.2 21.4
Approach LOS C C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.8 14.6 15.3 15.4 13.9 16.6 15.2 15.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.8 5.8 5.1 * 5.1 5.8 5.8 4.6 5.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 40.0 30.0 * 38 30.0 40.0 30.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.0 8.3 9.7 2.8 2.4 7.8 2.4 6.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.3
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.

Lago Vista TIA
1: Clay Bank Rd & Manuel Campos Pkwy PM Existing Plus Project Peak Hour HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Wood Rodgers, Inc Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 3 294 205 200 229 9 170 24 312 9 11 0 Future Volume (veh/h) 3 294 205 200 229 9 170 24 312 9 11 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width Adj. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 3 309 216 211 241 9 179 25 328 9 12 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 198 373 254 255 758 28 249 443 374 256 438 0 Arrive On Green 0.11 0.18 0.18 0.14 0.22 0.22 0.14 0.24 0.24 0.14 0.23 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 2021 1378 1781 3494 130 1781 1870 1581 1781 1870 0 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 3 271 254 211 122 128 179 25 328 9 12 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1622 1781 1777 1847 1781 1870 1581 1781 1870 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.1 10.7 11.1 8.4 4.2 4.3 7.0 0.8 14.6 0.3 0.4 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 10.7 11.1 8.4 4.2 4.3 7.0 0.8 14.6 0.3 0.4 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 198 328 299 255 385 401 249 443 374 256 438 0 V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.83 0.85 0.83 0.32 0.32 0.72 0.06 0.88 0.04 0.03 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 732 973 888 732 973 1011 732 947 801 732 973 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 28.9 28.6 28.8 30.4 24.1 24.1 30.1 21.6 26.8 26.9 21.6 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.0 2.6 2.6 0.2 0.2 1.5 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 4.3 4.1 3.5 1.6 1.7 3.0 0.3 5.4 0.1 0.2 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 28.9 30.7 31.4 33.0 24.2 24.2 31.5 21.6 29.5 26.9 21.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C C C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 528 461 532 21
Approach Delay, s/veh 31.0 28.3 29.8 23.9
Approach LOS C C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.3 19.3 15.3 22.2 13.9 21.6 15.1 22.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.8 5.8 5.1 * 5.1 5.8 5.8 4.6 5.1 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 30.0 40.0 30.0 * 38 30.0 40.0 30.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.4 13.1 9.0 2.4 2.1 6.3 2.3 16.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary
HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 29.7
HCM 7th LOS C
Notes
* HCM 7th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.

Queuing and Blocking Report
AM Existing Plus Project Peak Hour 05/02/2025
03_E+B+P_AM Lago Vista TIA SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc Page 1
Intersection: 1: Clay Bank Rd & Manuel Campos Pkwy
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L T TR L T TR L T R L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 29 118 100 162 111 73 168 31 68 45 62 Average Queue (ft) 7 54 42 81 38 22 85 4 37 15 17
95th Queue (ft) 23 97 76 137 82 55 140 21 62 42 47
Link Distance (ft) 474 474 553 553 849 849 788
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 340 215 205 160
Storage Blk Time (%) 0 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0

Queuing and Blocking Report
PM Existing Plus Project Peak Hour 05/02/2025
04_E+B+P_PM Lago Vista TIA SimTraffic Report
Wood Rodgers, Inc Page 1
Intersection: 1: Clay Bank Rd & Manuel Campos Pkwy
Movement EB EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB
Directions Served L T TR L T TR L T R L TR
Maximum Queue (ft) 21 171 166 161 92 50 141 51 116 37 34 Average Queue (ft) 2 84 64 75 26 11 70 12 60 7 7
95th Queue (ft) 11 143 123 131 60 33 119 38 96 29 28
Link Distance (ft) 474 474 553 553 849 849 788
Upstream Blk Time (%)
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Storage Bay Dist (ft) 340 215 205 160
Storage Blk Time (%) 0
Queuing Penalty (veh) 0
Network Summary
Network wide Queuing Penalty: 0

Villages at Fairfield Lago Vista Transportation Impact Analysis

ATTACHMENT D

EVA DRIVEWAY SIGHT DISTANCE TRIANGLES

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS ONE PROJECT AT A TIME
3301 C St, Bldg. 100-BTel 916.341.7760
Fax 916.341.7767 Sacramento, CA 95816

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868

January 23, 2025

Rob White
Vice President Planned Communities
Lewis Management Corp.
9216 Kiefer Blvd.

Sacramento, CA 95826

Re: EIR Addendum Biological Summary for the Lago Vista Project

This letter was prepared to support the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) addendum for the Lago Vista Project (Project) located within two Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 0170-050-090 and 0170-050-220 in Fairfield, California (Project Area). The purpose of this letter is to summarize additional biological considerations and regulatory changes that have occurred since the preparation of the Partially Recirculated Draft EIR (PDEIR; State Clearinghouse No. 2009032001) for the Hawthorne Mill Project in May 2014, under which the Project Area was initially evaluated. The report herein also includes a summary of biological surveys and mitigation that have been completed to date, as well as a discussion of additional requirements that will need to be completed prior to the initiation of Project construction.

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
The following sections address items that have been completed by the Project to date as well as outstanding items that will need to be completed prior to the initiation of any ground disturbance.

1.1 Biological Surveys and Mitigation Requirements

1.1.1 Burrowing Owl

Per MM-BIO 1f of the PRDEIR, protocol-level wintering (“non-breeding”) and nesting (“breeding”) season surveys for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia; BUOW) shall be conducted prior to the initiation of construction, with a final pre-construction survey conducted no more than 30 days prior to the first ground-disturbing activity. Past survey efforts were completed by WRA in 2020, 2021 and 2022. In 2023, four protocol-level breeding surveys were conducted for the Project. No burrowing owl or evidence of burrowing owl was observed within the Project Area or immediate vicinity during any site visit.

Given that the PDEIR includes requirements for both breeding and non-breeding surveys, the City of Fairfield (City) may require the Project to repeat a full year of BUOW surveys prior to the initiation of the Project. This would include four breeding surveys between February 15 and August 31 as well as four non-breeding surveys September 1 and January 31. To allow for

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
2 potential Project initiation in 2025, BUOW protocol-level wintering surveys began in 2024 and protocol-level breeding surveys will occur in 2025.

Per MM-BIO-1f, mitigation for BUOW is only required if owls are found onsite or within 600 meters of the Project Area.

1.1.2 Swainson’s Hawk and Other Raptors
MM-BIO-1d requires that habitat management lands be provided for each acre of Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni; SWHA) foraging habitat developed or removed within 5 miles of a recently active nest, in accordance with the CDFW (1994) mitigation requirements. 1 Per the
PDEIR, these lands shall be protected through fee title acquisition or conservation easement on agricultural lands, or other suitable lands that provide foraging habitat for SWHA.

At the time when the PDEIR was published in 2014, all lands within the Project Area occurred greater than 1 mile but less than 5 miles of a “recently active” SWHA nest (i.e., active in the last 5 years); therefore, foraging habitat mitigation was required at a 0.75:1 ratio. Currently, three recently active Swainson’s hawk nests are documented within two miles of the Project Area. As such, foraging habitat mitigation is still currently required at a 0.75:1 ratio to comply with MM- BIO-1d.

In addition to SWHA mitigation, MM-BIO-1h requires that the loss of suitable foraging habitat for general raptors within the Project Area be mitigated for at a 1:1 ratio through the purchase of credits at an approved off-site mitigation bank or the permanent preservation of suitable habitat. This will need to be completed prior to the commencement of the Project.

Lastly, MM-BIO-1g requires that a pre-construction survey for nesting raptors be conducted within the Project Area and surrounding 500 feet no more than 14 days prior to the onset of Project activities during the raptor nesting season (January 1 and August 31). If Project activities are also initiated within the nesting season for SWHA (April 1 through September 31), the survey will need to include suitable SWHA nesting habitat within 5 miles of the Project Area.

1.1.3 Rare Plants
WRA conducted two focused rare plant surveys within the Project Area in April 2022. Table 1 below summarizes the special-status plant species identified and mapped during the site visits.

Table 1. Summary of Special-Status Plant Species Mapped within the Project Area in April 2022

SPECIES SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS POPULATION

ACREAGE
Contra Costa goldfields Lasthenia conjugens Federally Endangered, CNPS Rank 1B.1

0.06 acres
Ferris' goldfields Lasthenia ferrisiae CNPS Rank 4.2 0 acres* saline clover Trifolium
hydrophilum
CNPS Rank 1B.2 0 acres*

1 Department of Fish and Game (CDFW). November 1994. Staff Report Regarding Mitigation for Impacts to Swainson’s Hawks (Buteo Swainsoni) in the Central Valley of California.

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
3 bearded popcornflower Plagiobothrys
hystriculus
CNPS Rank 1B.1 0.01 acres (759
SF)
pappose tarplant Centromadia parryi
ssp. parryi
CNPS Rank 1B.2 0.43 acres
*These species were documented with the Open Space Area during the 2022 surveys. However, these species were not documented within the Project Area.

No additional rare plant surveys are required at this time.

Per MM-BIO-1b, preservation credits shall be purchased from an offsite mitigation bank at a 1:1 ratio to mitigate for impacts to occupied Contra Costa goldfield (Lasthenia conjugens) and pappose tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. Parryi) habitat. Proof of purchase of preservation credits shall be provided prior to issuance of grading permits for the Project.

The PDEIR does not include species-specific mitigation measures for Ferris’ goldfields, bearded popcornflower or saline clover, nor general mitigation measures for special-status species.

1.1.4 Wetlands
In November 2007, the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) issued a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination (PJD) which included the Project Area (Corps File No. 299100N). Distribution of the wetlands and non-wetland waters of the U.S. were preliminarily groundtruthed during a 2020 site visit in support of the Hawthorne Mill and Cooper’s Landing – Biological Constraints Assessment and Permitting Strategy (WRA 2020). The presence of these aquatic features was determined based on field observations made during the January 2020 site visit. Field observations included the presence of identifiable wetland vegetation, wetland hydrology (such as inundation), and topography indicative of where water would collect, such as depressions.

However, the type and extent of aquatic features should be considered preliminary, and a formal delineation of Waters of the U.S. and State should be conducted to confirm presence and extent of potentially jurisdictional features within the Project Area. An updated wetland delineation would also reflect any changes to feature jurisdiction based on the 2023 Conforming Rule, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)- and Corp-issued final rule amending the 2023 definition of “Waters of the US” to conform with the recent Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA.

1.2 Additional Regulatory Considerations
The following section addresses any relevant regulatory changes that have occurred since the PDEIR was published and evaluates implications that should be considered in the EIR addendum for the current Project.

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
4 1.2.1 Special-status Wildlife

BALD EAGLE
Bald Eagle (BAEA; Haliaeetus leucocephalus) BAEA are known to occur in the vicinity of the Project area (CNDDB 2024), Based on a 2018 CNDDB documented occurrence, BAEA have been reported to roost in a large walnut tree that occurs along the west bank of McCoy Pond, near the eastern boundary of the Study Area (CDFW 2022). While no nest structures or indications of nesting have been observed to date, this tree has potential to provide nesting habitat for this species in the future. Depending on the timing of construction, Project activities including noise, vibration, odors, and movement of workers or equipment could affect nests and have the potential to result in nest abandonment.

As previously noted, MM-BIO-1g requires that a pre-construction survey for nesting raptors be conducted within the Project Area and surrounding 500 feet no more than 14 days prior to the onset of Project activities during the raptor nesting season (January 1 and August 31). In addition, if Project activities are also initiated within the nesting season for SWHA (April 1 through September 31), the survey will need to include suitable SWHA nesting habitat within 5 miles of the Project Area (MM-BIO-1d). It is WRA's opinion that these measures are sufficient to detect BAEA nests given the limited availability of nesting habitat within the Project site and immediate vicinity.

WESTERN POND TURTLE
The PDEIR included the following measure (MM-BIO-1j) to address potential impacts to dispersing western pond turtles (WPT; Actinemys marmorata):

Prior to initiating construction activities within 25 feet of suitable aquatic habitat for Pacific (western) pond turtle, pre-cons
truction surveys shall be conducted. If observed,
WPT shall be relocated to a nearby, suitable location away from construction activities.

At the time the PDEIR was published in 2014, WPT w as listed as a CDFW Species of Special Concern and could be relocated without the need for additional permits or consultation.

However, this species was proposed as Threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on October 3, 2023 (88 FR 68370). Federal proposed species are entitled to procedural protections under the ESA but are not protected from “take” until they are listed. Take as defined under the ESA means "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct." It is anticipated that the final rule for WPT will be issued by the end of 2024. If WPT are listed at that time, any subsequent take (including the relocation described in MM-BIO-1j) would be in violation of the ESA without take authorization from the USFWS.

The PDEIR determined that the perennial aquatic habit ats on and adjacent to the Project Area were unlikely to support breeding populations but may provide marginal habitat for dispersal and foraging. However, the evaluation in the PDEIR included numerous aquatic feat ures that are no longer immediately adjacent or necessarily relevant to the current Project. For example, Strassberger Basin, which was deemed as the only location to contain suitable year-round habitat for WPT, is no longer directly adjacent to the Project Area. Given the reduced footprint of

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
5 the current Project Area and considering the new regulatory context, WRA recommends that the EIR addendum re-evaluate potential impacts to WPT, focusing specifically on the suitability of McCoy Basin adjacent to the Project Area and upland habitat within the Project Area.

Based on WRA’s analysis, McCoy Basin is unlikely to support WPT due to its high alkalinity, absence of vegetative cover, and lack of suitable habitat features (e.g., algal mats and basking sites). Additionally, upland habitat within the Project Area does not provide dry, friable soils suitable for nesting adjacent to McCoy Basin. WRA biologists have conducted numerous site visits along McCoy Basin and throughout the Project Area during year-round survey efforts for burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and have not detected any WPT individuals along the bank, in adjacent drainage features, or within upland habitat. Given that McCoy Basin is unlikely to support this species and upland habitat within the Project Area is unsuitable for nesting, it’s unlikely that individuals would be present in the Project Area, even for dispersal. As such, no impacts to WPT are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project and the inclusion of MM- BIO-1j is not recommended.

CRO

TCH BUMBLE BEE
Crotch bumble bee (CBB; Bombus crotchii) was reinstated as a state candidate species on September 30, 2022, and is thus afforded protections under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). As such, impacts to this species will need to be evaluated under CEQA. Impacts to CBB were not evaluated at the time the PDEIR was published in 2014.

Crotch bumble bee occurs in grassland and scrub habitats, and has also been documented in agricultural areas. Like other bumble bee species, CBB is a social species with an annual life cycle. Queens emerge from hibernation in the late winter/early spring to establish a new colony.

The colony produces workers throughout the spring and summer, and reproductives (i.e. drones and queens) in the early fall. Nests are built in pre-existing cavities. They are commonly found underground, in abandoned rodent burrows, or aboveground in grass tufts, rock piles, abandoned bird nests, or tree cavities. CBB feeds on pollen and nectar during all life stages; preferred host species include (but are not limited to) milkweeds (Asclepias spp.), chaenactis (Chaenactis spp.), clarkias (Clarkia spp.), larkspurs (Delphinium spp.), buckwheats (Eriogonum spp.), lupines (Lupinus spp.), medicks (Medicago spp.), bladderpod (Peritoma arborea), phacelias (Phacelia spp.), poppies (Eschscholzia spp.), and sages (Salvia spp.). Queens overwinter in hibernacula; little is known about habitat requirements for hibernacula; bare ground, leaf litter and/or duff, and pre-existing cavities may provide overwintering habitat.

The Project Area is within the current known range of CBB and the nearest documented CNDDB occurrence is approximately 4 miles north of the Project Site. While pre-existing mammal burrows are present along the northeastern boundary of the Project Area, all burrows observed by WRA biologists exhibited fresh sign of ground squirrel occupancy (i.e., droppings, fruit pieces) during burrowing owl surveys in 2023. Additionally, grassland habitat within the Project Area is regularly grazed by cattle and lacks host plants that are known to provide pollen and nectar sources for this species. As such, it in unlikely that the Project Area supports suitable habitat for CBB. No additional avoidance measures for CBB are recommended.

MOUNTAIN LION
Mountain Lion (Puma c
oncolor) was listed as a state candidate species in April 2020, which granted protection under CESA to populations within a proposed evolutionarily significant unit

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
6 (ESU) located in Southern California and the central coast of California. While impacts to mountain lions were not evaluated in the 2014 PDEIR, the Project Area is outside of the current designated ESU range. As such, no additional considerations for mountain lions are required at this time.

BURR

OWING OWL
On October 15, 2024, burrowing owl was listed as a state candidate species by the California Fish and Game Commission. During the listing review process, burrowing owl will be temporarily afforded the same protections as state-listed species throughout the entirety of California. As such, any projects with potential to result in “take” will need to obtain an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) from CDFW. Under CESA, the term “take” is defined as any effort or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill an individual. It is assumed that passive relocation (i.e. burrow exclusion) efforts will no longer be allowed without an ITP and CDFW-approval.

Impacts to burrowing owl were evaluated at the time the PDEIR was published in 2014. The mitigation measure for burrowing owl (MM-BIO-1f) requires the following: protocol-level wintering and nesting season surveys to be conducted prior to construction; a pre-construction burrowing owl survey will be performed ahead of ground-disturbance within the Project Area; and, if owls are detected, appropriate measures from the 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 2012) will be implemented.

Given the new candidate listing, if any burrowing owls are detected during future survey efforts, the Project may be required to obtain an ITP from CDFW to avoid take liability, and a Burrowing Owl Mitigation Plan may be necessary, in accordance with applicable regulations at the time of project construction. If burrowing owl is no longer a candidate or listed species under CESA at the time of project construction, an ITP will not be required for this species but avoidance measures shall be implemented accordingly.

1.2.2 Aquatic Resources
On August 29, 2023, the EPA and the Corps issued a final rule amending the 2023 definition of “Waters of the US” to conform with the recent Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA. The Conforming Rule limits Federal jurisdiction of wetlands to only those that are adjacent to (touching) relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water. Wetlands isolated from these bodies of water do not meet the Federal definition of wetlands and do not require a Federal Corps permit to fill.

Previously identified Corps-jurisdictional wetlands and non-wetland waters within or immediately adjacent to the Project Area may still be considered Corps-jurisdictional if a hydrological surface connection is present to McCoy Basin or connected drainages. If no surface connection exists, then the aquatic features may still be jurisdictional per the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).

The Project has been designed to avoid impacts to potentially jurisdictional features. Given that the most substantive wetland study was conducted in 2007 with subsequent ground truthing confirmation as recent as 2020, a full wetland delineation may be recommended to ensure that no Project impacts to jurisdictional features occur.

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
7 1.3 Summary and Recommendations
In summary, additional surveys for BUOW, SWHA, and nesting birds will be required prior to the initiation of the Project. The Project will need to permanently preserve suitable habitat or purchase credits at an approved off-site mitigation bank for impacts to general raptor foraging habitat, per MM-BIO-1h. In addition, SWHA foraging habitat mitigation is required prior to the start of the Project given that recently active nests are documented within 5 miles of the site.

Since the PDEIR was published, the regulatory status has changed for the following species:
western pond turtle, Crotch bumblebee, burrowing owl, and mountain lion. No potentially significant impacts to CBB or mountain lion are anticipated as a result of the Project. Therefore, no additional measures for these species are deemed necessary. A measure for WPT was included in the original PDEIR but is not recommended in the EIR Addendum given that it may not be implementable in the future and is deemed unnecessary given the location of the Project Area. Implementation of the mitigation measures for burrowing owl from the PDEIR will avoid potentially significant impacts. However, if burrowing owls are observed onsite during future surveys, an ITP from CDFW may be required to avoid take lability, and a Burrowing Owl Mitigation Plan may be necessary, in accordance with applicable regulations at the time of project construction. If burrowing owl is no longer a candidate or listed species under CESA at the time of project construction, an ITP will not be required for this species but avoidance measures shall be implemented accordingly.

Lastly, an updated full wetland delineation in the vicinity of the Project is recommended to confirm jurisdictional feature distribution and subsequent Project impact avoidance.

Please contact me with any questions.

Sincerely,

Leslie Lazarotti
WRA, Inc.

[email protected]

Cc: Tommy Dryer
WRA, Inc.

[email protected]

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868