Agenda, first session — Fairfield City Council, November 18, 2025 (part 1 of 6)

CITY OF FAIRFIELD

CITY COUNCIL

MEETING AGENDA

Tuesday, November 18, 2025, 6:00 p.m.

Harry T. Price Memorial Council Chamber
1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 or Via Zoom
Councilmember Manveer Sandhu will be attending remotely via Zoom. Teleconference Location (Gov't Code 59453 (b)) 440 N. Wolfe Road, Sunnyvale, CA 94085. **Open to the Public** Notice to Public
The City of Fairfield is committed to providing meeting facilities that are accessible to persons with disabilities and/or have language barriers. To request meeting materials in alternative formats, or to request a sign language interpreter, realtime captioning, or other accommodation, please contact the City Clerk's Office, at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting at (707) 428-7400.

For individuals with hearing or speaking limitations, dial 711 or (800) 735-2922 (English). For Spanish, Tagalog or other language, please dial (800) 855-3000 and provide the communication assistant with the following City telephone number: (707) 399-4010.

DISCLOSURE OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS:

Pursuant to Government Code 84308, City Council Members are disqualified and not able to participate in any agenda item involving contracts (other than competitively bid, labor, or personal employment contracts), franchises, discretionary land use permits and other entitlements if the City Council Member received more than $250 in campaign contributions from the applicant or contractor, an agent of the applicant or contractor, or any financially interested participant who actively supports or opposes the City's decision on the agenda item in the 12 months prior to the date the item is on the agenda. Members of the City Council who have received, and applicants, contractors or their agents who have made, campaign contributions totaling more than $250 to a City Council Member in the 12 months prior to the date the item is on the agenda are required to disclose that fact for the official record of the subject proceedings. Disclosures must include the amount of the campaign contribution and identify the recipient City Council Member and may be made either in writing to the City Clerk before the agenda item or by verbal disclosure during consideration.

Members of the public can observe the meeting on Roku City of Fairfield, Xfinity Channel 26, AT&T U-Verse Channel 99, and web streamed live at www.youtube.com/FFCATV. The public may join the meeting via Zoom at: https://fairfield.ca.gov/zoomcitycouncil or via phone (408) 638-0968, Webinar ID: 814 7538 5275, Passcode: 7074287400
Pages
A. CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
B. ROLL CALL
Councilmember Doug Carr
Councilmember Doriss Panduro
Councilmember Manveer Sandhu
Councilmember Scott Tonnesen
Councilmember K. Patrice Williams
Vice Mayor Pam Bertani
Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy
C. INVOCATION - Chaplain Heather Bodwell of Travis Air Force Base D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
E. COUNCIL REPORTS
F. CITY MANAGER REPORT
G. CITY ATTORNEY REPORT
H. CITY CLERK REPORT
I. PRESENTATIONS
I.1 City Celebrates America Recycles Day with Naming of the Big Belly Monsters Contact: Corey Beavers, (707) 428-7528
J. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons wishing to address the City Council on subjects not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the council may do so at this time. The council cannot discuss or take action on matters, not on the agenda for this meeting, but councilmembers may briefly respond to statements made or questions raised by the public, ask for clarification from staff, refer the matter to staff, request staff to report back To the council at a subsequent meeting, or place the matter on a future agenda. To speak on an agenda item please use the “raise your hand” feature or press *9 on your phone. Speakers are limited to three minutes per item, as determined by the mayor.

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

Recommended Action:

To approve the consent calendar.

K.1 CM Approval of Meeting Minutes for October 2025 9
Approval of Meeting Minutes for October 2025

Page 2 of 809 ends

Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Esther Beavers, (707) 428-7402
Recommended Action:

Approve the meeting minutes.

K.2 Resolution 2025-218 CM Canceling January 6, October 6, and November 3, 2026, City Council Meetings
21 Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Esther Beavers, (707) 428-7402
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.3 Resolution 2025-219 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 Backbone Landscape Improvements Acceptance
24 Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Backbone Landscape Improvements as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.4 Resolution 2025-220 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Construction Acceptance
27 Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Construction Improvements as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.5 Resolution 2025-221 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Park Landscape – Phase 1 Construction Acceptance
30 Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Park Landscape – Phase 1 Construction Improvements as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.6 Resolution 2025-222 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 5 33

Page 3 of 809 ends

Subdivision Improvements Acceptance
Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 5 Subdivision Improvements as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.7 Resolution 2025-223 PW Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station Parking Lot Acceptance
36 Accepting the Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station Parking Lot Project as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.8 Resolution 2025-224 PW Red Top Zone II Pump Station Acceptance 39 Accepting the Red Top Zone II Pump Station Improvements as Complete Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.9 Resolution 2025-225 PW Budget Adjustment for the Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District
42 Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District Operating Budget for Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter Repairs and Maintenance
Funding Source: $60,000; Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District Fund Contact: Chris Lewis, (707) 428-7089
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.10 Resolution 2025-226 PW Annex Territory Courage Investments Warehouse and Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes
47 Declaring the City of Fairfield’s Intention to Annex Territory (Courage Investments Warehouse Project) to Community Facilities District No. 20122 and

Page 4 of 809 ends

Authorizing the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 71 Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Valerie Standfill, (707) 428-7055
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.11 Resolution 2025-227 PW Annex Territory and Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes
65 Declaring the City of Fairfield Intention to Annex Territory (Archway Recovery Services) to Community Facilities District No. 20122 and Authorizing the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 72
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Valerie Standfill, (707) 428-7055
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.12 Resolution 2025-228 CD Compu-Tech Lumber Second Amendment 83 Approving and Authorizing the Execution of the Second Amendment to Ground Lease Between the City of Fairfield and Compu-Tech Lumber Products, Inc. for a Portion of Walters Road
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Dave Zellers, (707) 428-7436
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

K.13 Ordinance 2025-09 CD Mobile Food Vending and Licensing 90 Creating Chapter 5F (Mobile Food Vending and Licensing Ordinance) of the Fairfield Municipal Code to Establish Mobile Food Vendor Regulations Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Keisha Mamaril, (707) 428-7039
Recommended Action:

Provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 2025-09.

K.14 Ordinance 2025-12 CD to Redesignate Parkside Project in Villages of Fairfield 107 Amending Chapter 25, Article I, Section 25.12.3 of the Fairfield City Code (Also Known as the City of Fairfield Zoning Map) to Rezone the Parkside Site, a Vacant 7.99-Acre Site Located East of Passion Lane, South of Gulf Drive, and North of the Linear Park Trail (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN]: 0170- 010-052) from Public Facilities (PF) to Residential Medium (RM)

Page 5 of 809 ends

Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Meily M Sheehan, (707) 428-7474
Recommended Action:

Provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 2025-12
K.15 Resolution 2025-229 FN Adding a Rule to Allow an Annual and Quarterly Billing Option for Utility User Tax Payments
501
Implementing a New Payment Rule Pursuant to Chapter 18.42 of the Fairfield Municipal Code to Allow an Annual and Quarterly Billing Option for Utility User Tax Payments
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Ashley Doyle, (707) 428-7596
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

L. NEW BUSINESS
L.1 Resolution 2025-230 HR Amending Terms and Conditions for Fairfield Police Officers’ Association Memorandum of Understanding
505
Amending the Terms and Conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding for the Fairfield Police Officers’ Association
Funding Source: $1,175,470; General Fund
Contact: Farbod Pirouzmand, (707) 428-7397
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

L.2 Resolution 2025-231 HR Amending Terms and Conditions for Fairfield General Management Association Memorandum of Understanding
556
Amending the Terms and Conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding for the Fairfield General Management Association
Funding Source: $489,513; General Fund
Contact: Farbod Pirouzmand (707) 428-7397
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

L.3 Resolution 2025-232 HD Agreements for the Vista Ridge Motel Conversion 599 Approving the Loan Agreement and Regulatory Agreement Between City of Fairfield and Fairfield North Texas Street, LLC, Community Revitalization and Development Corporation, and Danco Communities; and Approving the Standard Agreement Between City of Fairfield and the California Housing and Community Development Department to Support the Rehabilitation of the

Page 6 of 809 ends

Property Located at 3331 N. Texas St (Vista Ridge)
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: LaTanya Terrones, (707) 428-7454
Recommended Action:

Adopt resolution.

M. PUBLIC HEARINGS
M.1 Ordinance 2025-10 CD Building Standards Code Adoption 750 Repealing and Replacing Chapter 5 of the City Of Fairfield Municipal Code (Also Known as the Building and Housing Code of the City of Fairfield), Adopting by Reference Title 24, of the 2025 California Code of Regulations, Known Collectively as the California Building Standards Code; Respectively Part 2, California Building Code; Part 2.5, California Residential Building Code; Part 3, California Electrical Code; Part 4, California Mechanical Code; Part 5, California Plumbing Code; Part 6, California Energy Code; Part 7, California Wildland Urban Interface Code; Part 8, California Historical Building Code; Part 9, California Fire Code (as Amended in Chapter 8 of the City of Fairfield Municipal Code); Part 10, California Existing Building Code; Part 11, California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code); Part 12, California Referenced Standards Code, and Also Adopting the 2024 International Property Maintenance Code, and Supplementary Secondary References Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Jeff Thomas, (707) 428-7442
Recommended Action:

Hold public hearing; provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 2025-10.

M.2 Ordinance 2025-11 FD Fire Code Amendments 793
Amending Chapter 8 (Fire Protection) of the Fairfield City Code, Adopting by Reference California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 7, Part 9, Known as the 2025 California Fire Code, with Amendments to Reflect Local Conditions, and Adopting by Reference Certain Provisions of the 2024 International Fire Code Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Steven Conti, (707) 428-7550
Recommended Action:

Hold public hearing; provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 2025-11.

M.3 Continued Ordinance 2025-13 PW Repeal and Replace Chapter 22 of the Municipal Code
808
Repeal and Replace Chapter 22 of the Fairfield Municipal Code in its Entirety Funding Source: N/A

Page 7 of 809 ends

Contact: Michael J. Hether, (707) 428-7485
Recommended Action:

N/A
N. ADJOURN
ADJOURN TO TUESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2025, 6:00 P.M., HARRY T. PRICE MEMORIAL COUNCIL CHAMBER.

Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the City of Fairfield to all or a majority of the Fairfield City Council less than 72 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at City Hall, in the 4th floor lobby, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California during normal business hours.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
I, Esther Beavers, Deputy City Clerk, do hereby certify that I have caused a true copy of the above notice and agenda to be delivered to each of the members of the Fairfield City Council, at the time and in the manner prescribed by law and that this agenda was posted at City Hall, 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California on Thursday, November 13, 2025.

Page 8 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.1

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: CM Approval of Meeting Minutes for October 2025 Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Esther Beavers, (707) 428-7402

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the meeting minutes.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Minutes need approval by the City Council.

DISCUSSION
The City Council Minutes for October 2025 have been approved by the city attorney and need council approval.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to modify the minutes, which will result in bringing this item back at a future date.

COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney’s Office

Page 9 of 809 ends

STAFF CONTACT
Esther Beavers, Deputy City Clerk
(707) 428-7402
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: 10-21-2025 Closed Session Minutes
Attachment 3: 10-21-2025 City Council Minutes

Page 10 of 809 ends

1 CITY OF FAIRFIELD

CLOSED SESSION MEETING

MINUTES
October 21, 2025, 5:00 p.m.

City Manager's Office Conference Room
1000 Webster Street, 4th Floor, Fairfield, CA 94533
_____________________________________________________________________ A. CALL TO ORDER 5:00 PM
Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

B. OPEN SESSION
C. ROLL CALL
Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo called roll. On roll call were Councilmembers Doriss Panduro, Manveer Sandhu, Scott Tonnesen, and Vice Mayor Pam Bertani, and Mayor Moy. Councilmembers Doug Carr, and K. Patrice Williams were absent.

D. PUBLIC COMMENTS
No members of the public wished to speak at public comment.

E. CLOSED SESSION
The City Council went into closed session on the following items with the listed people present:

F. PRESENTATIONS
F.1 Labor Negotiations
Present were City Manager David Gassaway, Assistant City Manager / Human Resources Director Farbod Pirouzmand, Human Resources Manager Angela Broaddus, Finance Director John Furtado, City Attorney David Lim (Zoom), and Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo.

F.2 Conference with Legal Counsel—Existing Litigation
Present were City Manager David Gassaway, Assistant City Manager / Human Resources Director Farbod Pirouzmand, Human Resources Manager Angela Broaddus, Finance Director John Furtado, Attorney Shannon Ripple [CP1.1]

Page 11 of 809 ends

2 (Zoom), City Attorney David Lim (Zoom), and Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo.

F.3 Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation Present were City Manager David Gassaway, Assistant City Manager / Human Resources Director Farbod Pirouzmand, Finance Director John Furtado, City Attorney David Lim (Zoom), and Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo.

F.4 Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code 54956.8) Present were City Manager David Gassaway, Assistant City Manager / Human Resources Director Farbod Pirouzmand, Finance Director John Furtado, Public Works Director Sanjay Mishra, Economic Development Specialist Jennifer Rice, City Attorney David Lim (Zoom), and Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo.

G. ADJOURN
The City Council came out of closed session. Mayor Moy adjourned the meeting at 5:57 p.m.

Mayor City Attorney

Page 12 of 809 ends

1 CITY OF FAIRFIELD

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
October 21, 2025, 6:00 p.m.

Harry T. Price Memorial Council Chamber
1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 or Via Zoom
_____________________________________________________________________ A. CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
Mayor Catherine "Cat" Moy called the meeting to order at 6:09 pm.

B. ROLL CALL
On roll call were Councilmembers Doriss Panduro, Manveer Sandhu, Scott Tonnesen, Vice Mayor Pam Bertani and Mayor Moy. Councilmembers Doug Carr and K. Patrice Williams were absent.

Councilmember Tonnesen left the meeting at 7:31 p.m.

C. INVOCATION - Pastor Jeff Hood of First Baptist Church Pastor Jeff Hood of First Baptist Church gave an invocation.

D. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Sandhu led the Pledge of Allegiance.

E. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Sandhu wished everyone a Happy Diwali, Festival of Lights. He shared he looked forward to presenting a proclamation celebrating Diwali, recognizing three separate local Hindu groups.

Vice Mayor Bertani reported that she and the Fairfield Clergy Action Network (CAN) were hosting a Fresh Food Festival (Giveaway) at Grange Middle School on October 22. CAN is also coordinating the annual Thanksgiving dinner set for Tuesday November 25, 2025, at the Fairfield Community Center, Willow Hall, at 12 pm for those in need. Lastly, she spoke about the Vista Ridge project and invited the community to attend an informational meeting on October 22, 5-7 pm, at Willow Hall.

Councilmember Panduro invited the public to attend the Dia de los Muertos ("Day of the Dead") event on October 30, 6-8 pm, at the Community Center and also Civic Center Pond, which will have a community ofrenda (alter) and candlelight vigil. She explained that in the Hispanic culture, this event is a beautiful celebration honoring those who have passed

Page 13 of 809 ends

2 away (normally celebrated November 1-2). Residents can place photos of their deceased loved ones (including pets) or memorable items to celebrate their lives on the ofrenda, which will be open to the public until November 3.

Next, she reported that the homeless Winter Shelter would open on November 1 at the BayNorth Church of Christ at 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue. Free bus rides to the shelter will be offered to participants on Routes 3 and 6. The shelter will remain open until March 31, 2026. Doors open each night from 6:30 to 8 pm.

Councilmember Tonnesen did not have a report.

Mayor Moy reported she just returned from Japan where she spoke at United Nations University for the 2025 Japan–United States Leadership Summit, co-hosted by United Nations University and Japan-United States Sister City Association before an audience of 70 global business leaders, scientists, and government officials. Mayor Moy said she had the distinct honor of delivering a series of presentations about Fairfield and the U.S. commitment to smart city innovation and sustainability.

F. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
City Manager David Gassaway announced that October is Cybersecurity Awareness Month and he thanked the IT Department for their excellent efforts in this regard. Since 2004, the U.S. Government and information technology industry have worked together each October to ensure every American has the resources they need to stay safer and more secure online. He reported that Rancho Solano Golf Course would host a Cybersecurity Conference: "Duty of Care in the Digital Age" October 28–29, 2025. For more information on cybersecurity, visit: www.fairfield.ca.gov/cyber.

G. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo had nothing to report.

H. CITY CLERK'S REPORT
City Clerk Karen Rees thanked several new Adopt-A-Street groups: K&K General Contractors (South Watney Way); Casa Nova Mobile Home Park (Martin Road); Padilla's Premier Lawn Care (Mankas Corner Road); and Green Valley Middle School (Stonewood Drive). She announced that there are still seats open on the following boards and committees: one seat on the Golf Advisory Board (GAB); one seat on the Solano Commission for Women and Girls; one seat on the Solano County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Trustees; one seat for District 2 on the Landscape Oversight Committee; and several openings on the Youth Commission (recruitment is ongoing) for local youth ages 13-19. Anyone interested in any of these positions can email [email protected] for an application and more information.

I. PRESENTATIONS
I.1 Proclamation Declaring Breast Cancer Awareness Month Presented by Mayor Catherine Moy

Page 14 of 809 ends

3 Mayor Cat Moy presented a proclamation declaring it Breast Cancer Awareness Month to President Barbara Rigdon of Solano Midnight Sun Foundation, a nonprofit that offers financial assistance to patients going through breast cancer treatment.

I.2 Proclamation Declaring Filipino American History Month Presented by ViceMayor Pam Bertani Vice Mayor Pam Bertani presented a proclamation celebrating Filipino American History Month to members of the Filipino American Community of Fairfield, Suisun, and Vacaville (Fil-Am of FSV, Inc.) members Vice President Jacob Francisco, Board Chairperson Abe Bautista, and Advisor Robert Basa.

I.3 Proclamation and Poem Declaring Diwali Festival of Lights Presented by Councilmember Manveer Sandhu and Poet Laureate Michael Wyly Councilmember Manveer Sandhu presented a proclamation celebrating Diwali, Festival of Lights, to several local groups: Fairfield Hindu Temple, Bharatiya Heritage Foundation, and Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara Sahib. Diwali is a major Indian celebration, and it is India's most important festival. It is celebrated by Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, and Buddhists in India and across the globe.

J. PUBLIC COMMENTS
The following individuals from Fairfield Professionals Firefighters Association (FFPA) spoke about their lack of an employment contract: Tyler Dombrowski, Talmage Pierson, Ryan LaRowe, Chase Diaz, Mike Guerra, and Phil Bailey.

Carol Haddock and Lan Nguyen spoke about the Vista Ridge Project.

Larry Stevenson spoke about an incident in Suisun City.

Shayla Lewellon spoke about 1100 Texas Street and the bathrooms at Allan Witt Park.

K. CONVENE JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AUTHORITY L. HOUSING AUTHORITY CONSENT CALENDAR
L.1 Resolution HA2025-04 HD Approving Additional Funding to the OutsourceIT Housing Quality Inspection Contract
Councilmember Sandhu made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar. Vice Mayor Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Councilmember Sandhu
Seconded by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Adopt resolution.

Page 15 of 809 ends

4 Absent (3): Councilmember Carr, Councilmember Tonnesen, and Councilmember Williams
Motion Carried (4 to 0)
M. RECONVENE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Moy reconvened the City Council meeting at 7:34 pm.

N. CONSENT CALENDAR
There were no requests to speak on consent calendar items.

Vice Mayor Bertani made a motion to approve the consent calendar. Councilmember Sandhu seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Seconded by: Councilmember Sandhu
To approve the consent calendar.

Motion Carried
N.1 CM Approval of Meeting Minutes for September 2025
Approve the meeting minutes.

N.2 Resolution 2025-195 PW Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Transportation Development Act Claim
Adopt resolution.

N.3 Resolution 2025-196 PW Proposition 218 Written Communication Requirements
Adopt resolution.

N.4 Resolution 2025-197 PW Telstar Instruments Contractor’s Service Agreement Adopt resolution.

N.5 Resolution 2025-198 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 6 Subdivision Improvements Acceptance
Adopt resolution.

N.6 Resolution 2025-199 PW Budget Adjustment for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 – Rolling Hills
Adopt resolution.

Page 16 of 809 ends

5 N.7 Resolutions 2025-200 and 2025-201 PW Installing Solar and Roller Shades and Floor Replacement for City Hall
Adopt resolutions.

N.8 Resolution 2025-202 IT Microsoft Renewal with Crayon Software Experts, LLC Adopt resolution.

N.9 Resolution 2025-203 IT CDW Government Purchase for Virtual Servers Adopt resolution.

N.10 Resolution 2025-204 IT Cybersecurity Purchase with ePlus Adopt resolution.

N.11 Resolution 2025-205 PD California Office of Traffic Safety 2025-26 Selective Traffic Enforcement Program Grant
Adopt resolution.

N.12 Resolution 2025-206 FN Authorizing the Director of Finance to Write Off Uncollectible Debt
Adopt resolution.

O. NEW BUSINESS
O.1 PW Updated Landscape Oversight Committee Recommendations for Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District Proposition 218 Balloting Process
Senior Public Works Management Analyst gave a brief presentation. There were no requests to speak.

Vice Mayor Bertani made a motion to approve Item O.1. Councilmember Sandhu seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Seconded by: Councilmember Sandhu
Receive report, open discussion, and provide direction to staff.

Motion Carried
O.2 Resolution 2025-207 HR Amending Terms and Conditions for Fairfield Police Managers’ Association Memorandum of Understanding
Human Resources Director Farbod Pirouzmand gave a brief presentation. There were no requests to speak on this item.

Page 17 of 809 ends

6 Councilmember Panduro made a motion to approve Item O.2. Councilmember Sandhu seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Councilmember Panduro
Seconded by: Councilmember Sandhu
Adopt resolution.

Motion Carried
O.3 Resolution 2025-208 CM Community Action Partnership of Solano Joint Powers Authority Memorandum of Understanding
Homeless Services Manager Samantha Burrows and Deshawn Waters, Executive Director of Community Action Partnership of CAP Solano JPA gave a joint presentation.

Councilmember K. Patrice Williams called in online (as she was out of town) to speak on Item O.3. During Ms. Williams’s comment, Vice Mayor Bertani left the dais, and Deputy City Attorney Christian Petrangelo requested a brief recess due to a lack of quorum. Upon the Vice Mayor’s return to the dais, a quorum was reestablished, and the meeting was reopened. Ms. Williams finished her comment.

There were no other requests to speak. Councilmember Panduro made a motion to approve the item. Vice Mayor Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Councilmember Panduro
Seconded by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Adopt resolution.

Motion Carried
O.4 Resolution 2025-209 and Ordinance 2025-10 CD Building Standards Code Adoption
Chief Building Officer Jeff Thomas gave a presentation. There were no requests to speak.

Mayor Moy made a motion to approve Item O.4. Vice Mayor Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Mayor Moy
Seconded by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Adopt resolution, waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce ordinance for first reading.

Page 18 of 809 ends

7 Motion Carried
O.5 Resolution 2025-210 and Ordinance 2025-11 FD Fire Code Amendments Fire Marshal Steven Conti gave a brief presentation. There were no requests to speak. Vice Mayor Bertani made a motion to approve Item O.5. Councilmember Sandhu seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Mayor Moy called a short recess at 8:21 pm.

Moved by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Seconded by: Councilmember Sandhu
Adopt resolution, waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce ordinance for first reading.

Motion Carried
P. PUBLIC HEARINGS
P.1 Ordinance 2025-09 CD Mobile Food Vending and Licensing Economic Development Project Manager Keisha Mamaril gave a presentation.

Mayor Moy opened the public hearing. There were no requests to speak. Ms.

Mamaril and Police Services Manager Jeremy Profitt answered questions from council. Mayor Moy closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Panduro made a motion to approve Item P.1. Vice Mayor Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Hold public hearing; waive full reading, read by title only, and introduce ordinance for first reading.

P.2 Resolution 2025-211 FN Updated Fee Schedule
Finance Director John Furtado gave a brief presentation. Mayor Moy opened the public hearing. Mubasher Choudhery provided a public comment. Mayor Moy closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Sandhu made a motion to approve Item P.2. Vice Mayor Bertani seconded the motion. The motion carried 4-0.

Moved by: Councilmember Sandhu
Seconded by: Vice Mayor Bertani
Hold public hearing and adopt resolution.

Motion Carried

Page 19 of 809 ends

8 P.3 Continued Resolution 2025-212 CD Approving an Addendum to the Villages at Fairfield EIR and Approving a General Plan Amendment for Parkside. Ordinance 2025-12 CD Parkside Zone Change
As City Manager Gassaway stated during his report, Item P.3 public hearing is continued to the November 4, 2025 council meeting.

N/A
Q. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 8:46 pm to November 4, 2025, to the Harry T. Price Memorial Council Chamber.

Mayor City Clerk

Page 20 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.2

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-218 CM Canceling January 6, October 6, and November 3, 2026, City Council Meetings
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Esther Beavers, (707) 428-7402

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
City staff reviews the calendar of meeting dates for the upcoming year to determine if any of the first and third Tuesday meetings conflict with holidays or vacation breaks. Any meeting dates that have conflicts may be canceled in advance.

DISCUSSION
Following a review of the 2026 calendar for upcoming City Council meetings, it is recommended that January 6, October 6, and November 3, 2026, meetings be canceled. Council agenda distribution for the first meeting in January occurs during the Christmas/ New Year holiday week.

The first meeting in October is traditionally canceled to allow for a vacation break and National Night Out. The first meeting in November is canceled due to Election Day. Additional council meetings may be called as the need arises, and standard noticing procedures would be followed at that time.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION

Page 21 of 809 ends

The council may choose not to cancel the meetings or select alternative dates.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Esther Beavers, Deputy City Clerk
(707) 428-7402
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Proposed Meeting Schedule

Page 22 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-218
CANCELING JANUARY 6, OCTOBER 6, AND NOVEMBER 3, 2026, CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WHEREAS, City staff reviewed the 2026 calendar and determined that some of the first and third Tuesday meeting dates conflict with holidays, vacation breaks, and election day.

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

Section 1. January 6, October 6, and November 3, 2026, City Council meetings are hereby canceled.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: MOY/BERTANI/CARR/PANDURO/SANDHU/TONNESEN/WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSENT: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________
MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________

CITY CLERK

Page 23 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.3

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-219 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 Backbone Landscape Improvements Acceptance
Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Backbone Landscape Improvements as Complete Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Adoption of the resolution will formally accept the improvements for the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Backbone Landscape as complete.

DISCUSSION
One Lake Holding, LLC (Developer) has completed all the required improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement adopted by the City Council on July 17, 2018, by Resolution No. 2018-171. The improvements consist of landscaping within the medians and roundabouts along One Lake Drive, Village Square Boulevard, and Lake Place.

Staff inspected the landscape improvements and found them to be complete in accordance with City standards and the requirements of the landscape improvement agreement. The final punch list was completed on September 26, 2025. The proposed resolution accepts the landscape improvements as being complete, except for the obligation of the Developer to repair or reconstruct defective work for a period of one year after final acceptance.

Page 24 of 809 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Upon council acceptance, the ongoing maintenance of the medians and roundaboutslandscaping along One Lake Drive, Village Square Boulevard, and Lake Place will be funded by Community Facilities Districts (CFD) 2018-1 and 2023-2.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Tom Martian, Public Works Interim Construction Manager
(707) 428-7478
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution

Page 25 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-219
ACCEPTING THE CANON STATION AREA 4 BACKBONE LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS AS

COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council executed an improvement agreement with One Lake Holding LLC (Developer) for the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Backbone Landscape Improvements on July 17, 2018, by Resolution No. 2018-171; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has completed all the required improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement approved by the council.

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

Section 1. The City hereby accepts the improvements as complete pursuant to the improvement agreement between the City and the Developer approved by the council on July 17, 2018.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 26 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.4

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-220 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Construction Acceptance
Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Construction Improvements as Complete Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Adoption of the resolution will formally accept the lake construction for the Canon Station Planning Area 4 as complete.

DISCUSSION
One Lake Holding, LLC (Developer) has completed all the required improvements for the lake construction in accordance with the improvement agreement adopted by the City Council on July 16, 2019, by Resolution No. 2019-170. The completed construction includes the lake itself, installation of drainage and overflow systems, remote monitoring equipment for lake level observation, chemical controls, and related appurtenances necessary for proper lake maintenance and operation.

Staff has inspected the lake and installations and found them to be complete in accordance with City standards and the requirements of the improvement agreement. The final punch list was completed on September 26, 2025.

The proposed resolution accepts the lake construction as being complete, except for the obligation of the Developer to repair or reconstruct defective work for a period of one year after final acceptance.

Page 27 of 809 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City. The Homeowner’s Association (HOA) will be responsible to maintain the lake and all associated components, including the pump station and related systems, to ensure proper lake functionality. The city and Developer have executed a Maintenance, Access Easement, Reimbursement and Lease Agreement dated November 12, 2019, which specifics the roles and responsibilities for on-going lake operations. A portion of funding for lake maintenance is provided by revenue collected by the Train Station Specific Plan Community Facilities District Tax.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Tom Martian, Public Works Interim Construction Manager
(707) 428-7478
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution

Page 28 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-220
ACCEPTING THE CANON STATION PLANNING AREA 4 LAKE CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS

AS COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council approved an improvement agreement with One Lake Holding LLC (Developer) for the Canon Station Area 4 Lake Construction on July 16, 2019, by Resolution No. 2019-170; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has completed all the require improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement approved by the council.

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

Section 1. The City hereby accepts the improvements as complete pursuant to the improvement agreement between the City and the Developer approved by the council on July 16, 2019.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 29 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.5

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-221 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Park Landscape – Phase 1 Construction Acceptance
Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Park Landscape – Phase 1 Construction Improvements as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Adoption of the resolution will formally accept the improvements for the Canon Station Planning Area 4 Lake Park Landscape – Phase 1 Construction as complete.

DISCUSSION
One Lake Holding, LLC (Developer) has completed all required improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement adopted by the City Council on September 17, 2019, by Resolution 2019-215. The completed improvements include over four acres of landscape improvements, a parking lot, a meandering pedestrian trail around the entire lake, boardwalk, pathway lights, and various amenities including: play structures, exercise equipment, park tables, and trash receptacles.

Page 30 of 809 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the City. The Homeowner’s Association (HOA) will be responsible to maintain the lake park including landscaping, trash and debris, structures and improvements, lighting, security cameras, etc. The city and Developer have executed a Maintenance, Access Easement, Reimbursement and Lease Agreement dated November 12, 2019, which specifics the roles and responsibilities for on-going lake park maintenance obligations and operations. A portion of funding for lake maintenance is provided by revenue collected by the Train Station Specific Plan Community Facilities District Tax.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Tom Martian, Public Works Interim Construction Manager
(707) 428-7478
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution

Page 31 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-221
ACCEPTING THE CANON STATION PLANNING AREA 4 LAKE PARK LANDSCAPE – PHASE 1

CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS AS COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council approved an improvement agreement with One Lake Holding LLC (Developer) for the Canon Station Area 4 Lake Park Landscape – Phase 1 Construction on September 17, 2019, by Resolution No. 2019-215; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has completed all the require improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement approved by the council.

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

Section 1. The City hereby accepts the improvements as complete pursuant to the improvement agreement between the City and the Developer approved by the council on September 17, 2019.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 32 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.6

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-222 PW Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 5 Subdivision Improvements Acceptance
Accepting the Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 5 Subdivision Improvements as Complete
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Adoption of the resolution will formally accept the subdivision improvements for the Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 5 Subdivision (Subdivision) as complete.

DISCUSSION
One Lake Holding, LLC, (Developer) has completed all the required improvements for the Subdivision in accordance with the subdivision improvement agreement adopted by the City Council on September 7, 2021, by Resolution No. 2021-216. The Subdivision consists of 97 lowdensity single-family residential homes that go directly abut the Lake Trail Park providing direct access to the park amenities.

Staff have inspected the subdivision improvements and found them to be complete in accordance with City standards and the requirements of the subdivision improvement agreement. The final punch list was completed on October 9, 2025. The proposed resolution accepts the subdivision improvements as being complete, except for the obligation of the Developer to repair or reconstruct defective work for a period of one year after final acceptance.

Page 33 of 809 ends

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Acceptance of the public improvements by the council will obligate the City to maintain the public improvements, including Big Sky Drive, Amaranth Place, Lavander Place, and the public water, sewer, and storm drain utilities. On-going maintenance of these public improvements will be funded by the City’s General Fund. The Homeowner’s Association (HOA) will be responsible for the maintenance of the sidewalks, streetlights, and associated appurtenant facilities, with a portion of these costs to be funded through Community Facilities District (CFD) No. 2018-1.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Tom Martian, Public Works Interim Construction Manager
(707) 428-7478
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution

Page 34 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-222
ACCEPTING THE CANON STATION PLANNING AREA 4 – NEIGHBORHOOD 5 SUBDIVISION

IMPROVEMENTS AS COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council executed an improvement agreement with One Lake Holding, LLC (Developer) for the Canon Station Planning Area 4 – Neighborhood 5 Subdivision on September 7, 2021, by Resolution No. 2021-216; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has completed all the required improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement approved by the council.

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

Section 1. The City hereby accepts the improvements as complete pursuant to the improvement agreement between the City and the Developer approved by the council on September 7, 2021.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 35 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.7

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-223 PW Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station Parking Lot Acceptance
Accepting the Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station Parking Lot Project as Complete Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The adoption of the resolution accepts the Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station Parking Lot Project (Project) as complete.

DISCUSSION
On January 21, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-07, approving the plans and specifications and awarding a contract with Mountain Cascade Inc. (Mountain Cascade) to construct an additional 158 parking spaces, 27 of which were designed for the future installation of electric vehicle charging stations. The Project also included landscaping, lighting, and concrete sidewalk improvements.

Construction started on April 21, 2025. During the construction of the Project, two change orders were issued, resulting in a contract adjustment of $1,377.92. The first change order addressed the relocation of one of the existing islands to avoid a gas line and included the addition of a new island with associated electrical work. The second was a deductive change order issued to adjust quantities for additional work. The final punch list items for the Project were completed on September 9, 2025. The parking lot was opened to the public on October 29, 2025.

Page 36 of 809 ends

The total construction authorization for the Project was approved for $2,327,850.25. This amount included a total bid of 2,116,227.50 and a 10% contingency of $211,622.75. The final cost for the Project was $2,117,605.42, which is approximately 9.03% below the amount authorized for construction.

Following the council’s acceptance of the Project as complete, a notice of completion will be filed with the County of Solano’s Recorders Office.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
After council acceptance, the ongoing maintenance of the improvements will be funded through the Fairfield-Vacaville Train Station Fund, which receives revenue from the Transportation Development Act (TDA). Funds collected from the City of Vacaville’s TDA allocation will reimburse the City of Fairfield for 50% of the ongoing maintenance costs associated with the Project.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Tom Martian, Public Works Interim Construction Manager
(707) 428-7478
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution

Page 37 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-223

ACCEPTING THE FAIRFIELD-VACAVILLE HANNIGAN TRAIN STATION PARKING LOT PROJECT AS

COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the plans and specifications and entered into a contract with Mountain Cascade Inc (Mountain Cascade) for the Fairfield-Vacaville Hannigan Train Station Parking Lot Project (Project) on January 21, 2025, by Resolution No. 2025-07; and WHEREAS, Mountain Cascade has completed the Project in accordance with the contract approved by the council.

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

Section 1. The City hereby accepts the Project as complete pursuant to the agreement between the City and Mountain Cascade approved by the council on January 21, 2025.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 38 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.8

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-224 PW Red Top Zone II Pump Station Acceptance Accepting the Red Top Zone II Pump Station Improvements as Complete Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Tom Martian, (707) 428-7478

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Adoption of the resolution will formally accept the improvements for the Red Top Zone II Pump Station as complete.

DISCUSSION
Albert D. Seeno Construction Co. (Developer) has completed all the required improvements for the Red Top Zone II Pump Station (Zone II Pump Station) in accordance with the improvement agreement adopted by the City Council on May 17, 2022, by Resolution No. 2022-92. The Developer designed and constructed a hydro pneumatic pump station to provide water service to the developments along Red Top Road.

Staff inspected the improvements and found them to be complete in accordance with City standards and the requirements of the improvement agreement. The final punch list was completed on September 26, 2025. The proposed resolution accepts the improvements as being complete, except for the obligation of the Developer to repair or reconstruct defective work for a period of one year after final acceptance.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
Acceptance of the public improvements by the council will obligate the City to maintain the Zone II Pump Station, related appurtenances, and facilities including on-site storm infrastructure,

Page 39 of 809 ends

masonry walls, automatic gate, and on-site lighting. Ongoing maintenance for the public improvements will be funded by the Water Utility Fund.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions, acceptance may be delayed so that staff may provide the necessary additional information.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Tom Martian, Public Works Interim Construction Manager
(707) 428-7478
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution

Page 40 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-224

ACCEPTING THE RED TOP ZONE II PUMP STATION IMPROVEMENTS AS COMPLETE WHEREAS, the City Council executed an improvement agreement with Albert D. Seeno Construction Company, LLP (Developer) for the Red Top Zone II Pump Station (Zone II Pump Station) on May 17, 2022, by Resolution No. 2022-92; and WHEREAS, the Developer has completed all the required improvements in accordance with the improvement agreement approved by the council.

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

Section 1. The City hereby accepts the improvements as complete pursuant to the improvement agreement between the City and the Developer approved by the council on May 17, 2022.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 41 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.9

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-225 PW Budget Adjustment for the Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District
Authorizing an Update to the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District Operating Budget for Sidewalk, Curb, Gutter Repairs, and Maintenance Funding Source: $60,000; Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District Fund Contact: Chris Lewis, (707) 428-7089

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The Public Works Department is requesting an update to the fiscal year (FY) 2025-2026 Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District (District) operating budget, increasing appropriations by $60,000 to cover the cost of sidewalk, curb, and gutter repairs and maintenance.

DISCUSSION
The District was established in 1973 for the construction and improvement of streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, storm drains, sewer mains, water mains, and underground electrical, telephone, and gas facilities in the Cordelia area.

The District map as shown in Exhibit A and generally encompasses the area south of Interstate 80 from Central Way just east of Interstate 680, to properties in the Central Place cul-de-sac west of the Dan Wilson Creek, and Pittman Road extending south to Cordelia Road.

After the completion of the initial construction of the improvements, the District’s remaining fund balance as of June 30, 2025, is $104,324.51.

Page 42 of 809 ends

The department is requesting an update to the FY 2025-2026 District operating budget, increasing appropriations by $60,000, which will be financed using the District’s existing fund balance, to cover the cost of various repairs and maintenance. The work will include the removal and replacement of damaged or deteriorated sidewalks, curbs, and gutters, and the removal of several tripping hazards.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total authorization for a one-time budget adjustment of $60,000 from fund balance to increase appropriations in the FY 2025-2026 Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District operating budget (Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District Fund).

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The City Council may choose not to approve the budget adjustment or direct staff to return with more information.

COORDINATED WITH
Finance Department

STAFF CONTACT
Chris Lewis, Sr. Management Analyst
(707) 428-7089
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Exhibit A -Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District Map

Page 43 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-225
AUTHORIZING AN UPDATE TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026 PITTMAN ROAD – CENTRAL WAY

ASSESSMENT DISTRICT OPERATING BUDGET FOR SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER REPAIRS, AND

MAINTENANCE
WHEREAS, the Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District (District) was established in 1973 for the construction and improvement of streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, storm drains, sewer mains, water mains, and underground electrical, telephone, and gas facilities in the Cordelia area; and
WHEREAS, various facilities within the District require repairs and maintenance, including the removal and replacement of damaged or deteriorated sidewalks, curbs, and gutters, and the removal of several tripping hazards; and
WHEREAS, the cost for the required repairs and maintenance was not included in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 District operating budget; and
WHEREAS, a budget adjustment of $60,000 from the District’s available fund balance to increase appropriations in its operating budget is required to cover the cost of the repairs and maintenance; and
WHEREAS, the District’s available fund balance as of June 30, 2025, is $104,324.51; and WHEREAS, the revised appropriation constitutes an update to the FY 2025-2026 budget approved pursuant to Resolution No. 2025-103.

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

Section 1. The council hereby approves a one-time budget adjustment of $60,000 from the Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District fund balance to its operating budget (Fund 369).

Section 2. The council hereby approves an increase in appropriations of $60,000 to the FY 2025- 2026 Pittman Road – Central Way Assessment District (Fund 369) operating budget.

Page 44 of 809 ends

RES. NO. 2025-225

Page 2 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 45 of 809 ends

EXHIBIT A
Eligible Projects
* The opening of new streets and the improving thereof by grading and the construction therein, to city standards, of base pavement, wearing surface, curbs, gutters and sidewalks, storm drainage pipes, inlets and appurtenances, sanitary sewer mains, wye branches, manholes, laterals and appurtenances, water mains, valves, hydrants, services and appurtenances, underground electrical power, telephone and gas facilities.
* Construction of storm drainage pipes and appurtenances thereto * The construction of a lift station and a sanitary sewer force main and appurtenances thereto
Pittman Road - Central Way
Assessment District (54) Map
Key Assessment District 90 Boundary Assessment District 54 Boundary CORDELIA RD

PITTMAN RD

Page 46 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.10

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-226 PW Annex Territory Courage Investments Warehouse and Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes
Declaring the City of Fairfield’s Intention to Annex Territory (Courage Investments Warehouse Project) to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 and Authorizing the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 71
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Valerie Standfill, (707) 428-7055

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The adoption of the attached resolution will begin the proceedings for the annexation of certain property, known as Courage Investments Warehouse Project, to Community Facilities District 2012-2 (CFD 2012-2). CFD 2012-2 was established as an annexable district to provide funding to offset the increased cost for public safety services, open space operation, and park maintenance created by new development.

DISCUSSION
On November 20, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2012-233, establishing CFD 2012-2 under the Mello-Roos Act with the intention that future development within the City of Fairfield would annex to this district. The special taxes collected from the property owners within the District are used to fund public safety services, open space operation, and park maintenance.

The property proposed for annexation is owned by Courage Investments #2, LLC, a California limited liability company and is located north of Courage Drive and west of North Watney Way within the boundary of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0028-761-320 and 0028-761-350, as

Page 47 of 809 ends

shown on Exhibit A. The development of the property will be a light industrial warehouse.

Development of this property will change the property’s characteristics and manner in which the property will be used, thereby creating a need for more services funded by CFD 2012-2.

The City contracts with Willdan Financial Services for the preparation of the necessary resolutions and balloting procedures for the annexation process. This process is a specialty service that the City has contracted out since 1995, on an individual consultant services basis for each development requiring annexation into a Mello-Roos community facilities district.

Adoption of the Resolution of Intention is the first step to annexing this property to CFD 2012-2.

This will be the 71st annexation to the district. The resolution also establishes January 20, 2026, as the public hearing date for the final consideration of the annexation of the property to CFD 2012-2. Once the annexation is complete, the property owners will be required to pay annual special taxes for the property beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2026-2027, as itemized on their property tax bill in accordance with the rate set forth in the CFD 2012-2 Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.

The CFD 2012-2 Rate and Method of Apportionment was established as part of the formation of the District and fixed FY 2012-2013 as the base year for the annual special tax rate as shown in Exhibit B. Since the formation, special taxes have increased based on the cost inflator allowed in the original formation documents. The special tax rate for the District for FY 2025-2026 is shown on Exhibit C.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The anticipated annual revenue to be received by the City from CFD 2012-2 (Fund 332) for this annexation is estimated to be $4,006.05, which is based on the FY 2025-2026 maximum special tax rate of $0.029 per net square foot of lot area for 134,164 square feet for Industrial property.

The CFD 2012-2 maximum special tax rates include an automatic annual consumer price index (CPI) adjustment. The process for the annexation is funded by the developer, and no general fund money is used for this effort.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
If the council has any questions concerning the required annexation of this development, this item may be rescheduled until the next council meeting to allow staff to provide the necessary background information. However, if the annexation is not approved, the conditions of approval for this development would not be fulfilled and the development process would cease.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

Page 48 of 809 ends

STAFF CONTACT
Valerie Standfill, Management Analyst
(707) 428-7055
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Exhibit A – Boundary Map
Attachment 4: Exhibit B – Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax Attachment 5: Exhibit C – Maximum Special Tax Rate

Page 49 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-226
DECLARING THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD’S INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY (COURAGE INVESTMENTS WAREHOUSE PROJECTS) TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2 AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN FOR ANNEXATION NO. 71 WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted proceedings to establish Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (CFD) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (Act), Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing at Section 53311, of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, under the Act, the council, as the legislative body for the CFD, is empowered with the authority to annex territory to the CFD and now desires to undertake proceedings to annex territory to the CFD.

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

Section 1. The council hereby finds and determines that public convenience and necessity require that territory be added to the CFD.

Section 2. The name of the existing CFD is “Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation and Park Maintenance).” Section 3. The territory included in the existing CFD is as shown on the map thereof filed in Book 24 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at page 87-100 in the Office of the County Recorder, County of Solano, State of California, to which map reference is hereby made, as well as the maps for Annexations 1 through 40 filed in Book 25 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Pages 8, 12, 14, 19, 20, 31, 33, 34, 35, 38, 44, 45, 51, 53, 54, 57, 58, 59, 65, 64, 66, 68, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97 and 99 and the maps for Annexations 41 through 67 filed in Book 26 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Pages 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 18, 23, 24, 25, 26, 34, 35, 40, 41, 42, 54, 55, 58, 66, 67, 85, 92, 95 and 98 and the map for Annexation 68 through 70 filed in Book 27 of Maps of Assessment and Community Facilities Districts at Pages 2, 7, and 11 which have been filed with the Solano County Recorder’s Office.

The territory now proposed to be annexed to the CFD is as shown on Exhibit A Annexation 71 Boundary Map No. 71 to the CFD, on file with the city clerk, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof, the boundaries of which territory are hereby preliminarily approved. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause the recordation of said Annexation Map No. 71 to the CFD, showing the territory to be annexed, in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Solano within 15 days of this resolution's adoption date.

Page 50 of 809 ends

RES. NO. 2025-226

Page 2 ends

Section 4. The types of public services financed by the CFD and pursuant to the Act consist of those services (Services) described in Exhibit A to Resolution No. 2012-233 adopted by the council on the 20th day of November 2012, (Resolution of Formation). It is presently intended that the Services will be shared, without preference or priority, by the existing territory in the CFD and the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD. It has been determined that this project will intensify the use of the property, creating a need for more services under this CFD.

Section 5. Except to the extent that funds are otherwise available to the CFD to pay for the Services and/or the principal and interest as it becomes due on bonds of the CFD issued to finance the Services, a special tax sufficient to pay the costs thereof is intended to be levied annually within the CFD and collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes. The proposed rate and method of apportionment of the special tax among the parcels of real property within the CFD, as now in existence and following the annexation proposed herein, and in sufficient detail to allow each landowner within the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD to estimate the maximum amount such owner will have to pay, is described in Exhibit B, and the maximum special tax rate for the 2025-2026 fiscal year is described in Exhibit C. Both Exhibits are hereby incorporated by this reference.

Section 6. Notice is given that on January 20, 2026, at 6:00 p.m., in the regular meeting place of the council at Harry T. Price Memorial Council Chamber, located at 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California, the council, as legislative body for the CFD, will conduct a public hearing on the annexation of territory to the CFD and consider and finally determine whether the public interest, convenience and necessity require said annexation of territory to the CFD and the levy of said special tax therein.

Section 7. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause notice of said public hearing to be given by publication one time in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the CFD. The publication of said notice shall be completed at least seven days before the date herein set for said hearing.

Said notice shall be substantially in the form specified in Section 53339.4 of the Act.

Page 51 of 809 ends

RES. NO. 2025-226

Page 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 52 of 809 ends

ANNEXATION MAP NO. 71 (COURAGE INVESTMENTS WAREHOUSE PROJECT) COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2
(PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, OPEN SPACE OPERATION, AND PARK MAINTENANCE)

CITY O FFAIRFIELD

CO UNTY O FSO LANO

STATEO FCALIFO RNIA
Vic inityMa p
FILED IN THEO FFICEO FTHE CITY CLERKTHIS___________DAY
O F__________,20____.

IHEREBY CERTIFY THATTHE W ITHIN MAP SHO W ING PRO PO SED BO UNDARIES O F ANNEX ATIO N MAP NO . 71 (CO URAGE

INVESTMENTSW AREHO USEPRO JECT)O FCO MMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO .2012-2 (PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES,O PEN SPACE

O PERATIO N, AND PARK MAINTENANCE), CITY O F FAIRFIELD,

CO UNTY O FSO LANO ,STATEO FCALIFO RNIA,W ASAPPRO VED BY

THE CITY CO UNCILO F THE CITY O F FAIRFIELD ATA REGULAR MEETING, THEREO F, HELD O N THE ____________ DAY O F
____________,20___,BY ITSRESO LUTIO NNO .___________________. _______________________________________

CITY CLERK

CITY O FFAIRFIELD
FILED THIS _________________DAY O F_________________,20___, AT THE HO UR O F ____________ 0’CLO CK _________,M.IN BO O K __________PAGE(S)___________O FMAPSO FASSESSMENTAND
CO MMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND INSTRUMENT NO .
_________________INTHEO FFICEO FTHECO UNTY RECO RDERIN
THECO UNTY O FSO LANO ,STATEO FCALIFO RNIA.

GLENNZO O K,ASSESSO R/RECO RDER
_______________________________________

BY DEPUTY

CO UNTY RECO RDER

CO UNTY O FSO LANO

STATEO FCALIFO RNIA

REFERENCE IS MADE TO THAT BO UNDARY O F CO MMUNITY
FACILITIESDISTRICTNO .2012-2(PUBLICSAFETY SERVICES,O PEN

SPACE O PERATIO N,AND PARK MAINTENANCE)O F THE CITY O F FAIRFIELD RECO RDED W ITH THE SO LANO CO UNTY RECO RDER’S O FFICE O N DECEMBER 28,2012,IN BO O K 24 O F MAPS O F
ASSESSMENTANDCO MMUNITY FACILITIESDISTRICTO NPAGES87-
100.

THELINESANDDIMENSIO NSO FEACHLO TO RPARCELSHO W NO N

THIS DIAGRAM SHALL BE THO SE LINES AND DIMENSIO NS AS
SHO W NO NTHESO LANO CO UNTY ASSESSO R’SMAPSFO RTHO SE
PARCELSLISTED.

THESO LANO CO UNTY ASSESSO R’SMAPSHALLGO VERN FO RALL

DETAILCO NCERNING THELINESANDDIMENSIO NSO FSUCHLO TS
O RPARCELS.

SHEET1O F1
Legend
Annexa tion 71
1 Ma p Referenc e Num b er
2 Site
N
W
a tn
e
y
W
a
y
Coura ge Dr
1 MAPREFERENCE
NUMBER

ASSESSO R'S

PARCELNUMBER
1 0028-761-320
2 0028-761-350
C
h
a
d
b
o
urn
e
R
d
Hwy12
DwightD.EisenhowerHwy

Page 53 of 809 ends

EXHIBIT B

RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAX
A Special Tax of City of Fairfield Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (“CFD”) shall be levied on all Assessor's Parcels within the CFD and collected each Fiscal Year commencing in Fiscal Year 2012-13 in an amount determined by the City through the application of the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax set forth below. All of the real property in the CFD, unless exempted by law or by the provisions hereof, shall be taxed for the purposes, to the extent and in the manner herein provided.

A. DEFINITIONS
The terms hereinafter set forth have the following meanings:
“Acre or Acreage” means the land area of an Assessor’s Parcel, expressed in acres, as shown on an Assessor’s Parcel Map, or if the land area is not shown on an Assessor’s Parcel Map, the land area shown on the applicable Final Subdivision Map, other final map, other parcel map, other condominium plan, or functionally equivalent map or instrument recorded in the Office of the Country Recorder. The square footage of an Assessor’s Parcel is equal to the Acreage multiplied by 43,560.
“Act” meansthe Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code of the State of California, as amended. “Administrative Expenses” means the actual or estimated costs incurred by the City as administrator of the CFD to determine, levy and collect the Special Taxes, including salaries and benefits of City employees whose duties are directly related to administration of the CFD and the fees of consultants, legal counsel, the costs of collecting installments of the Special Taxes upon the general tax rolls, preparation of required reports; and any other costs required to administer the CFD as determined by the City.
“Affordable Residential” or “Affordable Unit(s)” means for each Fiscal Year, any Dwelling Unit(s) located on an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property that is available at an affordable housing cost, as defined by Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5, or an affordable rent, as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50053, to lower income households as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5. Affordable Units will require annual application to the City for verification of their affordable housing status on or prior to April 1 st preceding the Fiscal Year in
which the Special Tax is being levied. Any Unit not verified and approved by the City as an Affordable Unit shall be classified as Taxable Property for the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. The City will have the authority to approve and establish policies regarding Affordable Units and their status.

Page 54 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 2 ends

“Annual Escalation Factor” means the annual percentage increase, if any, in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose area as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the twelve months ending the previous December.
“Assessor's Parcel” means a parcel of land shown on an Assessor's Parcel Map with a parcel number assigned by the Assessor of the County that corresponds to a number shown on the County Assessor’s roll.
“Assessor's Parcel Map” means an official map of the Assessor of the County designating parcels by Assessor's Parcel number.
“Base Year” means Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2013.
“Building Permit” means a permit issued for new construction of a residential or non-residential structure. For purposes of this definition, “Building Permit” shall not include permitsissued solely for grading, utility improvements, or other such improvements that are constructed and installed and are not intended for human occupancy.
“Certificate of Occupancy” means a certificate issued by the City that authorizes the actual occupancy of a Dwelling Unit for habitation by one or more residents or the occupancy of a Nonresidential structure. “CFD Administrator” means an official of the City, or designee thereof, responsible for determining the Special Tax Requirement and providing for the levy and collection of the Special Taxes.
“CFD” means City of Fairfield Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space and Park Maintenance).
“City” means the City of Fairfield.
“City Clerk” means the City Clerk for the City or his or her designee. “City Engineer” means the City Engineer for the City or his or her designee. “Commercial Property” means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for any nonresidential use located in a commercial zoning district as described in Section 25.22 of the Zoning

Page 55 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 3 ends

Ordinance and all other property considered commercial as coded by the County’s assessor or as determined by the City, as of April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
“Council” means the City Council of the City, acting as the legislative body of the CFD. “County” means the County of Solano, California.
“Density” meansfor each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property the number of Dwelling Units per Acre determined pursuant to City’s Zoning Ordinance, or applicable Specific Plan, or a projectspecific approval, whichever reflects the most accurate number of Dwelling Units planned for the project.
“Developed Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel within the CFD for which a Certificate of Occupancy was issued on or prior to April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied, based on the number of Dwelling Units, the amount of Commercial or Office building floor area, and/or the amount of Industrial lot area included in each Certificate of Occupancy for that Assessor’s Parcel.
“Dwelling Unit” means each separate residential unit that comprises an independent facility capable of conveyance or rental separate from adjacent residential units, in which a person or persons may live, which comprises an independent facility and is not considered to be for nonresidential use only. “Exempt Property” means for each Fiscal Year, an Assessor's Parcel within the CFD not subject to the Special Tax. Exempt Property includes: (i) Public Property, (ii) Property Owner Association Property, (iii) Affordable Units, (iv) Assessor’s Parcels with public or utility easements making impractical their utilization for other than the purposes set forth in the easement, (v) Undeveloped Property and (vi) property reasonably designated by the City or CFD Administrator as Exempt Property due to deed restrictions, conservation easement, or similar factors. “Final Map” means an Assessor’s Parcel Map, a Final Subdivision Map, parcel map, condominium plan, or any other map functionally considered to be an equivalent development map that has been recorded in the Office of the County Recorder.
“Final Subdivision Map” means a subdivision of property creating single family residential buildable lots by recordation of a final subdivision map or parcel map pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 6610 et seq.), or recordation of a condominium plan pursuant to California Civil Code Section 1352, that creates individual lots for which building

Page 56 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 4 ends

permits may be issued without further subdivision and is recorded prior to April 1 preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
“Fiscal Year” means the period starting July 1 and ending on the following June 30. “High Density Residential Housing” means all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property for which a building permit has been issued as of April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied for a residential structure consisting of two or more Dwelling Units, including, but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, condominiums, and apartment units intended for multi-family apartment and condominium development of 18 Dwelling Units or greater per Acre. “Industrial Property” means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for any allowable use in an industrial zoning district, as described in Section 25.24 of the Zoning Ordinance, which is not an office or financial institution and all other property considered industrial as coded by the County’s assessor or as determined by the City, as of April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
“Land Use Class” means any of the classes listed in Table 1. “Lot” means an individual legal lot created by a Final Map for which a Building Permit could or has been issued.
“Maximum Special Tax” means the maximum Special Tax, determined in accordance with Section ”C” below, that can be levied by the CFD in any Fiscal Year on any Assessor’s Parcel. “Mixed-Use Property” means an Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property containing or planned for containing a structure or structures that consists of one or more Dwelling Units, but also has dedicated space for non-residential use.
“Multi-Family Residential” means an Assessor’s Parcel within the CFD for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing a residential structure or structures consisting of two or more Dwelling Units, including, but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, town homes, condominiums, and apartment units, intended for development of less than 18 Dwelling Units per Acre, as of April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied. “Non-Residential” means an Assessors’ Parcel within the CFD for which a Building Permit has been issued for a non-residential use and which does not contain any Dwelling Units.

Page 57 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 5 ends

“Office Property” means all Assessor's Parcels of Developed Property for which a building permit(s) has been issued for purposes of constructing non-residential property for an office or financial institution in an industrial zoning district, as described in Section 25.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Office property includes all office and financial institutions, as described in Table 25- 11 of the Zoning Ordinance and all other property considered office as coded by the County’s assessor or as determined by the City, as of April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.
“Open Space” means any lands and interest in lands of a term of not lessthan five years, including easements, rights-of-way, and other interests, deemed appropriate for the use as public open space in, around, or adjacent to the City of Fairfield. “Open Space Operation” means the estimated and reasonable costs of operating public open space lands including maintenance of improvements, fire control measures, educational programs and park ranger services. The costs for these activities include but not limited to (i) the costs of contracting for open space operation services, (ii) the salaries and benefits of City staff, including staff, that directly provide open space operation services, (iii) the expense related to equipment, apparatus, and supplies related to these services and authorized by the Act, and (iv) City overhead costs associated with providing such services within the CFD. “Open Space Operation Requirement” means, for any Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied, the amount equal to the budgeted costs for Open Space Operation applicable to the CFD for such Fiscal Year.
“Park” means a public park owned by the City of Fairfield, as defined in Section 12B.1 of the Municipal Code of the City of Fairfield.
“Park Maintenance” means the estimated and reasonable costs of providing park maintenance, including but not limited to (i) the costs of contracting for park maintenance services, (ii) the salaries and benefits of City staff, including maintenance staff, that directly provide park maintenance services, (iii) the expense related to equipment, apparatus, and supplies related to these services and authorized by the Act, and (iv) City overhead costs associated with providing such services within the CFD.
“Park Maintenance Requirement” means, for any Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied, the amount equal to the budgeted costs for Park Maintenance applicable to the CFD for such Fiscal Year.

Page 58 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 6 ends

“Property Owner Association Property” means for each Fiscal Year any property within the CFD that is owned by, or irrevocably dedicated asindicated in an instrument recorded with the County Recorder to a property owner association, including any master or sub-association. “Proportionately” means for Developed Property, the ratio of the actual Special Tax levied per Unit to the Maximum Special Tax per Unit for Developed Property is equal for all Assessor’s Parcels of Developed Property.
“Public Property” means for each Fiscal Year any property within the CFD that is, or is expected to be, used for rights-of-way, parks, public schools or any other public purpose determined by the CFD Administrator or is owned by or irrevocably offered for dedication to the federal government, the State, the County, the City or any other public agency. Public Property does not include property for which a public agency is a landowner within the meaning of Section 53317(f) of the Act.
“Public Safety Services” means the estimated and reasonable costs of providing police services, fire protection and suppression services, and paramedic services including but not limited to (i) the costs of contracting for police, fire, and paramedic services, (ii) the salaries and benefits of City staff, if the City directly provides police services, fire protection and suppression services, and/or paramedic services, (iii) the expense related to equipment, apparatus, and supplies related to these services and authorized by the Act, and (iv) City overhead costs associated with providing such services within the CFD.
“Public Safety Services Requirement” means, for any Fiscal Year in which Special Taxes are levied, the amount equal to the budgeted costs for Public Safety Services applicable to the CFD for such Fiscal Year.
“Reserve Fund for Maintenance” means a fund that shall be created and maintained for the CFD for each Fiscal Year to provide necessary cash flow for the first six months of each Fiscal Year, reserve capital to cover monitoring, maintenance and repair cost overruns and delinquencies in the payment of Special Taxes and a reasonable buffer to prevent large variationsin annual Special Tax levies.
“Single-Family Residential” means an Assessors’ Parcel within the CFD for which a Building Permit has been issued for purposes of constructing a residential structure consisting of one single-family Dwelling Unit, as of April 1st preceding the Fiscal Year in which the Special Tax is being levied.

Page 59 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 7 ends

“Special Tax” means the Special Tax to be levied in each Fiscal Year on each Assessor's Parcel of Taxable Property to fund the Special Tax Requirement and shall include Special Taxes levied or to be levied under Sections “C” and “D”, below.
“Special Tax Requirement” means that amount required in any Fiscal Year for the CFD to pay for:
(i) the Public Safety Services Requirement; (ii) the Open Space Operation Requirement; (iii) the Park Maintenance Requirement; (iv) reasonable Administrative Expenses; (v) any amounts required to establish or replenish a reserve fund that will not exceed 50% of the Special Tax requirement for that Fiscal Year; (vi) any amounts required to establish or replenish the Reserve Fund for Maintenance to the Reserve Fund for Maintenance Requirement; and (vii) pay for reasonably anticipated delinquent Special Taxes based on the delinquency rate for Special Taxes levied in the previous Fiscal Year; less any surplus of funds available from the previous Fiscal Year’s Special Tax levy.
“State” means the State of California.
“Taxable Property” means all Assessor's Parcels within the CFD that are not Exempt from the Special Tax pursuant to law or as defined herein.
“Undeveloped Property” means, for each Fiscal Year, an Assessor’s Parcel within the CFD for which a Certificate of Occupancy has not been issued on or prior to April 1 st preceding the Fiscal
Year in which the Special Tax is being levied and is not classified as Property Owner Association Property or Public Property, including an Assessor’s Parcel that is designated as a remainder parcel by any final documents and/or maps available to the CFD Administrator. “Zoning Ordinance” means the Zoning Ordinance adopted by the City of Fairfield, as found in Chapter 25 of the Fairfield City Code.

B. ASSIGNMENT TO LAND USE CATEGORIES
Each Fiscal Year, commencing with Fiscal Year 2012-13, using the definitions above, each Assessor’s Parcel within the CFD shall be classified as Taxable Property or Exempt Property. In addition, each Fiscal Year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2012-2013, each Assessor’s Parcel of Taxable Property shall be further classified as Developed Property or Undeveloped Property. Developed Property shall be further classified as Single-Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential, High Density Residential, Mixed-Use Property, Commercial Property, Office Property, or Industrial Property.

Page 60 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 8 ends

C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE

1. Developed Property
TABLE 1
Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property
Community Facilities District No. 2012-2
Fiscal Year 2012-13 (Base Year)
Land Use Class Description Maximum Special Tax
1 Single-Family Residential $736.77 per Dwelling Unit
2 Multi-Family Residential $503.28 per Dwelling Unit
3 Mixed-Use Property
Sum of applicable Land Uses,
Maximum Special Tax Rate
4 High Density Residential $489.68 per Dwelling Unit
5 Commercial $0.21 per gross square foot of
building floor area
6 Office
$0.07 per gross square foot of
building floor area
7 Industrial $0.02 per net square foot of lot area
On each July 1st following the Base Year, the Maximum Special Tax rates in Table 1 shall be increased in accordance with the Annual Escalation Factor.

2. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section A.

For each Fiscal Year, if the use or ownership of an Assessor's Parcel of Exempt Property changes so that such Assessor's Parcel is no longer classified as one of the uses set forth in Section A, therefore making such Assessor's Parcel no longer eligible to be classified as Exempt Property, such Assessor's Parcel shall be deemed to be Taxable Property and shall be taxed pursuant to the provisions of Section C.1.

Page 61 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 9 ends

D. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE SPECIAL TAX
Commencing with Fiscal Year 2012-13, and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, the CFD Administrator shall calculate the Special Tax Requirement based on the definitions in Section “A” and levy the Special Tax as follows until the amount of the Special Tax levied equals the Special Tax Requirement:

The Special Tax shall be Proportionately levied each Fiscal Year on each Assessor’s Parcel of Developed Property up to 100% of the applicable Maximum Special Tax. The applicable Maximum Special Tax shall be based on the Developed Property’s classification as SingleFamily Residential, Multi-Family Residential, Mixed-Use Property, High Density Residential, Commercial, Office or Industrial Property.

E. APPEALS
Any landowner who pays the Special Tax and believes that the amount of the Special Tax levied on their Assessor’s Parcel is in error shall first consult with the CFD Administrator regarding such error. If following such consultation, the CFD Administrator determines that an error has occurred, the CFD Administrator may amend the amount of the Special Tax levied on such Assessor’s Parcel. If following such consultation and action, if any, the landowner believes such error still exists, such person may file a written notice with the City Clerk of the City appealing the amount of the Special Tax levied on such Assessor’s Parcel. Upon the receipt of any such written notice, the City Clerk shall forward a copy of such notice to the City Engineer who shall establish as part of the proceedings and administration of the CFD, a special three-member Review/Appeal Committee. The Review/Appeal Committee may establish such procedures, as it deems necessary to undertake the review of any such appeal. The Review/Appeal Committee shall interpret this Rate and Method of Apportionment and make determinations relative to the annual administration of the Special Tax and any landowner appeals, as herein specified. The decision of the Review/Appeal Committee shall be final and binding as to all persons.

F. MANNER OF COLLECTION
Special Taxes levied pursuant to Section “D” above shall be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes; provided, however, that the CFD may directly bill the Special Tax, may collect Special Taxes at a different time or in a different manner if necessary to meet the financial obligations of the CFD or as otherwise determined appropriate by the City Council.

Page 62 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 10 ends

G. TERM OF SPECIAL TAX
Taxable Property in the CFD shall remain subject to the Special Tax in perpetuity or until the City Council takes appropriate actions to terminate the Special Tax pursuant to the Act.

Page 63 of 809 ends

EXHIBIT C
Maximum Special Tax for Developed Property
Community Facilities District No. 2012-2
Fiscal Year 2025-2026
Land Use Class Description Maximum Special Tax
1 Single-Family Residential $1,099.97 per Dwelling Unit 2 Multi-Family Residential $751.38 per Dwelling Unit
3 Mixed-Use Property
Sum of applicable Land Uses,
Maximum Special Tax Rate
4 High Density Residential $731.07 per Dwelling Unit
5 Commercial $0.314 per gross square foot of
building floor area
6 Office
$0.104 per gross square foot of
building floor area
7 Industrial $0.029 per net square foot of lot
area
On each July 1st following the Base Year, the Maximum Special Tax rates in Table 1 shall be increased in accordance with the Annual Escalation Factor as defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment.

Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA)

Page 64 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.11

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-227 PW Annex Territory and Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Declaring the City of Fairfield Intention to Annex Territory (Archway Recovery Services) to Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 and Authorizing the Levy of Special Taxes Therein for Annexation No. 72
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Valerie Standfill, (707) 428-7055

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The adoption of the attached resolution will begin the proceedings for the annexation of certain property, known as Archway Recovery Services, to Community Facilities District 2012-2 (CFD 2012-2). CFD 2012-2 was established as an annexable district to provide funding to offset the increased cost for public safety services, open space operation, and park maintenance created by new development.

The property proposed for annexation is owned by St. Stephen Christian Methodist Episcopal Church, a California non-profit religious corporation and is located south of Peach Tree Drive and east of Heath Drive within the boundary of assessor’s parcel number (APN) 0034-050-320, as shown on Exhibit A. The development on the property will be a rehabilitation center (Archway Recovery Services). Development of this property will change the property’s characteristics and

Page 65 of 809 ends

manner in which the property will be used, thereby creating a need for more services funded by CFD 2012-2.

Adoption of the Resolution of Intention is the first step to annexing this property to CFD 2012-2.

This will be the 72nd annexation to the district. The resolution also establishes January 20, 2026, as the public hearing date for the final consideration of the annexation of the property to CFD 2012-2. Once the annexation is complete, the property owners will be required to pay annual special taxes for the property beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2026-2027, as itemized on their property tax bill in accordance with the rate set forth in the CFD 2012-2 Rate and Method of Apportionment of Special Tax.

The CFD 2012-2 Rate and Method of Apportionment was established as part of the formation of the District and fixed FY 2012-2013 as the base year for the annual special tax rate as shown in Exhibit B. Since the formation, special taxes have increased based on a cost inflator allowed in the original formation documents. The special tax rate for the District for FY 2025-2026 is shown on Exhibit C.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The anticipated annual revenue to be received by the City from (Community Facilities District 2012-2 Fund) for this annexation is estimated to be $5,643.42, which is based on the FY 2025-2026 maximum special tax rate of $0.314 per net square foot of building area for 18,000 square feet for commercial property. The CFD 2012-2 maximum special tax rates include an automatic annual consumer price index (CPI) adjustment. The process for the annexation is funded by the developer, and no general fund money will be used for this effort.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

Page 66 of 809 ends

STAFF CONTACT
Valerie Standfill, Management Analyst
(707) 428-7055
[email protected]

Page 67 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-227
DECLARING THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD’S INTENTION TO ANNEX TERRITORY (ARCHWAY RECOVERY SERVICES) TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2 AND AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN FOR ANNEXATION NO. 72 WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted proceedings to establish Community Facilities District No. 2012-2 (Public Safety Services, Open Space Operation, and Park Maintenance) (CFD) pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (Act), Chapter 2.5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5, commencing at Section 53311, of the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, under the Act, the council, as the legislative body for the CFD, is empowered with the authority to annex territory to the CFD and now desires to undertake proceedings to annex territory to the CFD.

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

Section 1. The council hereby finds and determines that public convenience and necessity require that territory be added to the CFD.

The territory now proposed to be annexed to the CFD is as shown on the Annexation Map No. 72 to the CFD, on file with the city clerk, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part hereof, the boundaries of which territory are hereby preliminarily approved. The city clerk is hereby directed to cause the recordation of said Annexation Map No. 72 to the CFD, showing the territory to be annexed, in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Solano within 15 days of this resolution's adoption date.

Page 68 of 809 ends

RES. NO. 2025-227

Page 2 ends

Section 4. The types of public services financed by the CFD and pursuant to the Act consist of those services (Services) described in Exhibit A to Resolution No. 2012-233 adopted by the council on November 20, 2012, (Resolution of Formation). It is presently intended that the Services will be shared, without preference or priority, by the existing territory in the CFD and the territory proposed to be annexed to the CFD. It has been determined that this project will intensify the use of the property, creating a need for more services under this CFD.

Section 6. Notice is given that on January 20, 2026, at 6:00 p.m., in the regular meeting place of the council at Council Chambers, located at 1000 Webster Street, Fairfield, California, the council, as legislative body for the CFD, will conduct a public hearing on the annexation of territory to the CFD and consider and finally determine whether the public interest, convenience and necessity require said annexation of territory to the CFD and the levy of said special tax therein.

Said notice shall be substantially in the form specified in Section 53339.4 of the Act.

Page 69 of 809 ends

RES. NO. 2025-227

Page 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 70 of 809 ends

ANNEXATION MAP NO. 72 (ARCHWAY RECOVERY SERVICES)
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2012-2
(PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, OPEN SPACE OPERATION, AND PARK MAINTENANCE)

CITYOFFAIRFIELD

COU NTYOFSOLANO

STATEOFCALIFORNIA
Vic in ityMap
FILED IN THEOFFICEOFTHE CITYCLERKTHIS___________DAY
OF__________,20____.

IHEREBY CERTIFY THATTHE WITHIN MAP SHOWING PROPOSED
BOU NDARIESOFANNEXATION MAPNO.72(ARCHWAYRECOVERY
SERVICES)OFCOMMU NITYFACILITIESDISTRICTNO.2012-2(PU BLIC

SAFETY SERVICES, OPEN SPACE OPERATION, AND PARK

MAINTENANCE),CITYOFFAIRFIELD,COU NTYOFSOLANO,STATEOF

CALIFORNIA,WASAPPROVED BYTHECITYCOU NCILOFTHECITY

OFFAIRFIELD ATAREGU LAR MEETING,THEREOF,HELD ON THE
____________DAYOF____________,20___,BYITSRESOLU TIONNO. ___________________.
_______________________________________

CITYCLERK

CITYOFFAIRFIELD
FILED THIS _________________DAYOF_________________,20___, AT THE HOU R OF ____________ 0’CLOCK _________,M.IN BOOK __________PAGE(S)___________OFMAPSOFASSESSMENTAND
COMMU NITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND INSTRU MENT NO.
_________________INTHEOFFICEOFTHECOU NTYRECORDERIN
THECOU NTYOFSOLANO,STATEOFCALIFORNIA.

GLENNZOOK,ASSESSOR/RECORDER
_______________________________________

BYDEPU TY

COU NTYRECORDER

COU NTYOFSOLANO

STATEOFCALIFORNIA

REFERENCE IS MADE TO THAT BOU NDARY OF COMMU NITY
FACILITIESDISTRICTNO.2012-2(PU BLICSAFETYSERVICES,OPEN

SPACE OPERATION,AND PARK MAINTENANCE)OF THE CITY OF
FAIRFIELD RECORDED WITH THE SOLANO COU NTY RECORDER’S
OFFICE ON DECEMBER 28,2012,IN BOOK 24 OF MAPS OF
ASSESSMENTANDCOMMU NITYFACILITIESDISTRICTONPAGES87-
100.

THELINESANDDIMENSIONSOFEACHLOTORPARCELSHOWNON

THIS DIAGRAM SHALL BE THOSE LINES AND DIMENSIONS AS
SHOWNONTHESOLANO COU NTYASSESSOR’SMAPSFORTHOSE
PARCELSLISTED.

THESOLANO COU NTYASSESSOR’SMAPSHALLGOVERN FORALL

DETAILCONCERNING THELINESANDDIMENSIONSOFSU CHLOTS
ORPARCELS.

SHEET1OF1
Legend
An n e xatio n 72
Site
AirBase Pk wy
Highway
80 Pe ac hTre e Dr
H
e
a
h
t
D
r
APN
0034-050-320

Page 71 of 809 ends

EXHIBIT B

Page 72 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 2 ends

Page 73 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 3 ends

Page 74 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 4 ends

Page 75 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 5 ends

Page 76 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 6 ends

Page 77 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 7 ends

Page 78 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 8 ends

C. MAXIMUM SPECIAL TAX RATE

2. Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in Section A.

Page 79 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 9 ends

Page 80 of 809 ends

Exhibit B

Page 10 ends

Page 81 of 809 ends

Exempt Property
No Special Tax shall be levied on Exempt Property as defined in the Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA)

Page 82 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.12

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution 2025-228 CD Compu-Tech Lumber Second Amendment Approving and Authorizing the Execution of the Second Amendment to Ground Lease Between the City of Fairfield and Compu-Tech Lumber Products, Inc. for a Portion of Walters Road Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Dave Zellers, (707) 428-7436

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt resolution.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Staff is recommending the City enter into the Second Amendment to Ground Lease (Second Amendment) with Compu-Tech Lumber Products, Inc. (Compu-Tech) for the purpose of extending the term of the lease for use of a portion of Walters Road.

DISCUSSION
The City and Compu-Tech entered the Ground Lease dated August 28, 2014, and First Amendment dated November 9, 2023 (the Lease) for the purpose of leasing and using a portion of the unimproved Walters Road.

The Lease is set to expire on December 31, 2025, and Compu-Tech has requested to extend the Lease for an additional 12 months.

Both the City and Compu-Tech would like to enter the proposed Second Amendment to extend the term of the Lease.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The City will receive an annual rent payment of $5,000 to be deposited into the General Fund (101-6505).

Page 83 of 809 ends

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
N/A

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
The council may choose to modify the proposed Second Amendment or not approve the proposed amendment.

COORDINATED WITH
N/A

STAFF CONTACT
Jennifer Rice, Economic Development Specialist
(707) 428-7727
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Resolution
Attachment 3: Proposed Second Amendment

Page 84 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-228

APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO GROUND LEASE BETWEEN THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD AND COMPU-TECH LUMBER PRODUCTS, INC.

FOR A PORTION OF WALTERS ROAD
WHEREAS, the City and Compu-Tech Lumber Products, Inc. (Compu-Tech) entered into the Ground Lease dated August 28, 2014, and the First Amendment dated November 9, 2023 (the Lease) for the purpose of leasing and using a portion of the unimproved Walters Road (Property); and
WHEREAS, the Lease is set to expire on December 31, 2025, and Compu-Tech has requested to extend the Lease for an additional twelve months; and

WHEREAS, the City and Compu-Tech wish to enter the proposed Second Amendment to Ground Lease.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby approves the Second Amendment to Ground Lease by and between the City and Compu-Tech substantially in the form and content presented and attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Section 2. The council authorizes the city manager to do all things necessary to implement and execute the Second Amendment to Ground Lease attached as Exhibit A.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 85 of 809 ends

SECOND AMENDMENT TO GROUND LEASE
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO GROUND LEASE ("Second Amendment") is made and entered into on this
-
daY of 2025, by and between the CitY of
Fairfield, a municipal corporation ('ol-andlord") and Compu-Tech Lumber Products, Inc., aCalifornia corporation ("Tenantoo) (collectively "the Parties").

Recitals
The Parties hereto reciteo declare and agree as follows:A. Landlord and Tenant (as successor to Compu-Tech Lumber Company, a California corporation) entered into that certain Ground Lease, dated August 28, 2014 and the FirstAmendment to Ground Lease dated November 9, 2023, (collectively "the Lease") with respect toright-of-way property located near Walters Road, in the City of Fairfield as described in ExhibitA attached hereto (the'oProperty").

B. The current term of the Lease will expire on December 31,2025, and the Parties wish enter into this Second Amendment now in order to amend in part the Lease in anticipation of such expiration.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which arehereby acknowledged, Landlord and Tenant agree that certain terms ofthe Lease shall be amendedas follows:

1. Term. Effective on January 1,2026, and provided the Tenant has abided by the terms and conditions of the Lease and is not then in default thereunder, Section 4 of the Lease shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows:

Section 4. Term.

4.1 The initial term of this Lease shall be for one (1) year commencing on January l, 2026 (o'Commencement Date") and shall terminate one (1) year following theCommencement Date unless Sooner terminated as herein provided ("Term").

4.2 If the Landlord determines in its sole discretion that the Property is needed for the extension of Walters Road or other public purposes, Landlord may terminate this Leaseupon thirty (30) days written notice to Tenant. Tenant hereby waives any relocation benefits and right to a longer notice period under any state, federal or local program for any which it may be if this Lease is terminated pursuant to to its terms.
this Paragraph 4.2, or if this Lease

INITIALS
prior to the date which is ninety (90) days before the end of the Term otherwise term

4.3 and provided Tenant shall not then be in default under the provisions ofthis Lease, the Tenant may I I 24 5-0001 \2867 24 I v2.doc

Page 86 of 809 ends

request to exercise an option to extend the Term of the Lease for an additionalterm of up to one (l j year by providing written notice to Landlord. The Lease shall not be extended beyond the initial term itated in Section 4.1 unless the Lease terms, including, but not limited to Rent' are renegotiated and agreed upon in writing, and it is determined by the Landlord that it does notrequire the Property for the extension of Walters Road.

4.4 Each party shall have the right to terminate this Lease in the exercise of its sole discretion at any time during the Term hereof by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the other; provided, however, Tenant shall not be entitled to a refund of rents paid or then currentlydue.

2. Rent. Effective on January 7,2026, and provided that Tenant has abided by the terms and conditions ofthis Lease and is not then in default hereunder, Section 5 of the Lease shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows:

Section 5. Rent and Security Deposit.

5.1 Tenant covenants and agrees to pay Rent during the Term of this Lease as provided in this Section 5. Rent shall be payable to Landlord at the Landlord's address set forth herein or such other address as the Landlord shall direct in writing to Tenant.

5.2 Tenant agrees to pay Rent during the Term in the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) per year (the "Rent"). The Rent shall be paid in annual installments in advance on or beiore January 1,2026,and on January I of each calendar year during the remainder of the Term.

5.3 Tenant has deposited with Landlord the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) (the "Deposit") to secure Tenant's performance of its obligations hereunder, including,but not limited to, those in Section 16. Landlord shall return the Deposit to Tenant within thirty (30) days of Tenant's surrender of the Property if Tenant has complied with all requirements of this Lease, including, but not limited to, the provisions in Section 16.

3. Terms: Conflicts. The terms and conditions of the Lease are incorporated herein by this reference, and capitalized terms used in this Second Amendment and not herein definedshall have the same meanings ascribed thereto in the Lease. Except as specifically set forth herein, this Second Amendment shall in no way modifr, alter or amend the remaining terms ofthe Lease, all of which are ratified by the parties and shall remain in full force and effect. To the extent there is any conflict between the terms and conditions of the Lease and this Second Amendment, the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment will govern and control.

4. Approvals. Each party hereby represents and warrants to the other that the consent or approval of nothird party, including, without limitation, a lender, is required with respect to theexecution of this Second Amendment, or if any such third-party consent or approval is required, the affected party has obtained any and all such consents or approvals.

5. Authorization. The persons who have executed this Second Amendment represent and warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Second Amendment in their individual or representative capacity as indicated.
-2-
I I 24 5 -000 I U8 67 24 I v 2. doc

Page 87 of 809 ends

6. Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in counterparts, which counterparts stratt Ue construed as a single document and have the same effect as if all ofthe partieshad executed the same instrument.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Second Amendment on the day and year first written above.

LANDLORD: TENANT:

City of Fairfield,a municipal corporation
Com Lumber Productsr lnc.,
By:

Name:

Title:
f,ol0 (^
a
By:

Name:

Title:

David GassawayCity Manager
1 1 24 5 -O00 1U867 2 4 1 v 2. do c
-JPage 88 of 809
EXHIBIT "A"
All that real property situated in the City of Fairfield, County of Solano, State of California, more particularly described as follows:All of parcel "C'o as recorded in Book 9 of Parcel Maps, at page 34 Solano County Records and ,.Walter Road" as recorded in Book 9 of Parcel Maps at Page 68 Solano County Records. +cr)I
s.
t
$
q
F $'&**\
It
I
il
'l&
*
li
$
ii
.{t t
llli, ,irlr . l- r ll
iIirl
;iiiii 1{ii!r
ii iil i
iiiiitl
iiriiiiir
ffil
.+qr
G.
cr. Oh l. I
irii$i
$ii tst
ilis$i
e.

S+
\\qt
et
ffr z9 y\a a vq
+
:c
Lq

4., Cl !.1
I
I lrrt r
ldtt)
cr.l
6I ir
ltt
JI
l" I
rIl*t
.9,
J}
l"
A-l1 1 24 5 -000 1 Ug 67 2 4 1 v 2. do c

Page 89 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.13

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2025-09 CD Mobile Food Vending and Licensing 2nd Reading Creating Chapter 5F (Mobile Food Vending and Licensing Ordinance) of the Fairfield Municipal Code to Establish Mobile Food Vendor Regulations
Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Keisha Mamaril, (707) 428-7039

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 2025-09.

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
The growing popularity of mobile food vendors has increased demand for clear operational guidelines. The proposed ordinance would amend the Fairfield Municipal Code to permit and regulate mobile food vendor activities within city limits.

DISCUSSION
Mobile food vendors have become a popular and convenient dining option, contributing to the diversity and vibrancy of the local economy. However, the City currently lacks clear guidelines and regulations specific to mobile food vendors to address the operation of these businesses, which has led to issues for code enforcement. These include mobile food vending vehicles parking in unauthorized areas, blocking traffic and pedestrian paths, and failing to meet health and safety standards. The absence of clear and enforceable regulations allows mobile food vendors to operate at a lower cost and at a proximity that impedes regular business operations for established brick and mortar restaurants, creating unfair competition.

The proposed ordinance is designed to regulate the location, hours of operation, and business practices of mobile food vendors in a way that ensures they operate responsibly and contribute positively to the community.

Page 90 of 809 ends

The ordinance would provide:
 Permitting Requirements: A fair process for obtaining the necessary permits to operate a mobile food vending vehicle, including health and safety inspections and annual licensing.  Operating Hours and Restrictions: Guidelines to prevent mobile food vendors from operating in areas that could disrupt traffic or impede regular business operations of local restaurants.
 Public Safety and Sanitation Standards: Requirements for mobile food vendors to maintain clean and sanitary conditions, including waste disposal and food handling standards.

This ordinance aims to provide clear and enforceable regulations that support a healthy and sustainable mobile food vending industry while maintaining public safety, supporting local businesses, and minimizing disruptions in the community.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
The proposed ordinance on mobile food vendors is expected to generate additional revenue through a new permitting and licensing system. This would include application fees, and fines for non-compliance. The new fees are anticipated to offset the administrative costs of enforcement, monitoring, and inspections. By creating a more regulated environment, the City can also reduce costs associated with code enforcement issues and unregulated operations, which currently strain resources.

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
The Economic Development Division published a public hearing notice in the Daily Republic newspaper on September 3, 2025, and on September 28, 2025. The council held a public hearing for the item on October 21, 2025, and moved to introduce Ordinance 2025-09 for a first reading.

As of the writing of this staff report, the staff has not received any subsequent correspondence on the project.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Council may choose to deny any or all of the requests and not adopt the proposed ordinance. In this case, the proposed Mobile Food Vending and Licensing permitting process would not occur, and the existing Peddler’s Permit process would remain to permit mobile food vendor operations.

COORDINATED WITH
City Attorney’s Office and Police Department

STAFF CONTACT
Keisha Mamaril, Economic Development Project Manager
(707) 428-7039
[email protected]

Page 91 of 809 ends

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Ordinance

Page 92 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-09
CREATING CHAPTER 5F (MOBILE FOOD VENDING AND LICENSING ORDINANCE) OF THE

FAIRFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH MOBILE FOOD VENDOR REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds as follows:

A. Mobile food vendors contribute to the economic vitality and culinary diversity of the City of Fairfield, offering accessible and affordable food options to residents and visitors.

B. The increased presence of mobile food vendors requires appropriate regulations to ensure compatibility with existing land uses, traffic safety, public health, and the equitable use of public space.

C. Clear operational guidelines for mobile food vendors are necessary to maintain public health standards, manage solid waste, minimize noise and emissions, and avoid disruption to brick-and-mortar establishments.

D. Regulating the location, hours of operation, and permitting process for mobile food vendors is essential for protecting pedestrian access, emergency response routes, and the orderly use of city rights-of-way.

E. The council has held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed ordinance in accordance with the rules and regulations regarding such.

SECTION 2. A new chapter 5F, “Mobile Food Vending and Licensing” is hereby added to the Fairfield Municipal Code to read as follows:

Chapter 5F
Mobile Food Vending and Licensing
5F.1 – Title and purpose.

This Chapter, known as Mobile Food Vending and Licensing, establishes a citywide program regulating mobile food vendor operations on public and private property within the City of Fairfield. These regulations aim to ensure the safety, cleanliness, and convenience of mobile food vending operations while promoting a vibrant and diverse food culture.

Page 93 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 2 ends

This Chapter is also written to comply with stormwater pollution prevention requirements under the San Francisco Bay Region Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (NPDES Permit No. CAS612008), particularly provisions regulating mobile businesses (Provision C.2.f).
5F.2 – Definitions.

Applicant. The individual, group, company, partnership, or other recognized legal entity seeking a Mobile Food Vendor License from the City of Fairfield.

Assembly Area. An indoor or outdoor place where people may gather for any permitted purpose.

Customer. Any person with whom a Mobile Food Vendor conducts business.

Employee. Any person hired or paid compensation by, or any person under contract to, a Mobile Food Vendor.

Food Vending. The business of selling raw or cut fruit, produce, prepared foods and nonalcoholic beverages, and/or prepackaged foods and beverages, where:

1. Food is prepared off-site in a commercial commissary and/or prepared on-site within the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle, per Solano County Health Regulations.

2. Food is ordered and served from a truck, trailer, or other equipment or vehicle as permitted by Solano County Health Department.

3. Fruit and produce are sold to customers without preparation or cooking by a vendor.

4. Food is served to-go or outdoors as part of a sanctioned event.

5. Food is paid for prior to consumption.

Full-Service Restaurant. An establishment serving food and beverages prepared on-site where food orders are taken and delivered at a customer’s seating area.

Group Site or Group Site Food Vending. The stationary operation of two (2) or more Mobile Food Vendors clustered together on a single site and operating at the same time.

Group Site Organizer or Responsible Party. The individual or legal entity who is directly responsible for organizing and/or conducting the Group Site and/or the facility manager, and his or her respective designees.

Limited-Service Restaurant. An establishment serving food and beverages and prepared on-site where customers may order full meals from a walk-up counter for on- or off-site consumption.

Page 94 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 3 ends

Mobile Food Vendor License. The City’s annual or temporary permit required to, place, operate, maintain, or allow Mobile Food Vending within the City of Fairfield city limits.

Mobile Food Vendor Permitted Area. The areas and public rights-of-way that are permitted for a Mobile Food Vendor License.

Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle. Any motorized vehicle such as a truck, trailer or other equipment or vehicle from which Food Vending services are provided, as permitted by Solano County Health Department. Not included in this definition is the preparation of food and serving food outside of a vehicle, typically under a tent, canopy, or from a booth.

Mobile Food Vendor. Any person who is Food Vending from a Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle for immediate service and/or consumption.

Property Owner. The holder of the fee title to property, whether a person, partnership, corporation, or other entity recognized by the law, and lessees, permittees, assignees, or successors in interest.

Public Right-of-Way. Any public street, road, avenue, highway, named or unnamed alley, lane, court, place, trail, parkway, sidewalk, or other public way operated and/or controlled by the City, or subject to an easement owned by or dedicated to the City.

School. Any public, charter, or private school serving children between kindergarten and high school.

Site. The specific public or private property location, including any Public Right-of-Way, for which an Applicant or Responsible Party has been issued a Mobile Food Vendor License.

Solano County Health Department. The Solano County Department of Resource Management, Environmental Health Division or such other departments of the County of Solano are responsible for licensing of food and enforcement of food health laws.

Stationary. A Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle shall be considered stationary if it remains in a single location for the purpose of Food Vending for more than 6 consecutive hours within a 24-hour period.
5F.3 – License Required.

A. Except as may be allowed by a previously granted or by any ordinance or resolution establishing and regulating a street market or farmer’s market in the City, or as permitted for a limited period by a Special Event Permit, it shall be unlawful for any individual, group, or legal entity to operate a Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle in the City jurisdiction without first obtaining a Mobile Food Vendor License as specified in this Chapter.

Page 95 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 4 ends

B. Any individual, group, or legal entity desiring to engage in Food Vending in the City shall first file an application for a Mobile Food Vendor License with Business Licensing pursuant to procedures established in this Chapter.

C. A separate Mobile Food Vendor License shall be required for each Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle.

D. The individual, group, or legal entity desiring to engage in Food Vending shall obtain and maintain all required permits from the City of Fairfield, Solano County Health Department, and other regulatory agencies, including, but not limited to the City’s Building Division, Planning Division, and/or Fire Department permits.

E. A violation of this Chapter may result in the suspension or revocation of a Mobile Food Vendor License and civil penalties. Refer to Section 5F.9 in this Chapter for suspension and revocation procedures.
5F.4 – Application Requirements.

Application for a Mobile Food Vending License shall be made by the owner of the affected Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle, or his or her authorized agent, on a form prescribed by the Community Development Department.

Each application for a Mobile Food Vending License shall include:

A. Name, current address, telephone number, and copy of a photo ID of the Applicant.

B. If Applicant is an agent of an individual, company, partnership, corporation, or other entity, the name and business address of the principle.

C. A description of the food or merchandise offered for sale.

D. A non-refundable application fee.

E. If the proposed location is on private property, written consent in a form approved by the City from the Property Owner (if other than self) permitting the Mobile Food Vendor or Group Site to locate on the property.

F. If the Mobile Food Vendor is Stationary or a Group Site:

1. A map or illustration, showing:
i. The proposed location(s); and
ii. The address and Assessor's Parcel Number of the subject or nearest parcel, and/or specific section of the Public Right-of-Way in a designated parking space; and
iii. The two (2) nearest street intersections.

Page 96 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 5 ends

2. A site plan for each proposed location, containing:
i. If on a parcel, the location and dimensions of all proposed Mobile Food Vending Vehicles, any public seating or other site amenities (including chairs and tables), buildings or other structures on site, paved areas, driveways, trash receptacles, garages, parking spaces, maneuvering aisles, and pavement striping.
ii. If in the Public Right-of-Way, location and dimensions of the proposed Mobile Food Vending Vehicle, sidewalks, curb cuts, trash receptacles, and obstructions such as parking meters,
telecommunication boxes, street trees, and light poles.

3. The proposed schedule for the individual Food Vending Site or Group Site includes dates, and start and end times of the vending period.

G. Photographs of the site(s) and Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle(s); A description of the type of vehicle to be used, the vehicle’s registration and license number, and the Applicant’s California driver’s license number.

H. A copy of Applicant’s valid and current Solano County Health Department Mobile Food Permit.

I. A copy of Applicant’s valid and current City of Fairfield Business License.

J. A California seller's permit number pursuant to Section 6067 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

K. A description of the Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle and a copy of current Department of Motor Vehicles Registration.

L. Certification of a food handler course and proof of all required approvals from the Solano County Health Department.

M. A maintenance plan and list of Best Management Practices for cleaning, spill prevention, and waste handling. The maintenance plan must include litter pickup in the vicinity of the proposed vending location or the proposed vending route, as well as the lawful disposal of any liquid or solid waste resulting from the vending operation (including, but not limited to, fats, oil, juice, cooking material, scraps, etc.). The maintenance plan shall also include a description of how any equipment used (including, but not limited to, utensils, containers, grills, etc.) will be cleaned and sanitized.

N. The commercial address where the Mobile Food Vendor Vehicles will be stored and serviced during non-operating hours.

Page 97 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 6 ends

O. The following information shall be provided regarding the commercial kitchen or commissary to be used by the Applicant, if any:

1. Proof of all required approvals from Solano County Health Department; and

2. A valid lease between the Mobile Food Vendor and a commercial kitchen or commissary.

P. Proof of liability insurance in the amount and subject to the terms on file with the City’s risk manager. The City’s risk manager shall promulgate provisions regarding insurance requirements for Mobile Food Vendors and shall be in an amount which is determined to be sufficient to adequately protect the City, persons, and property for injuries or damages which may be caused by activity under this Chapter. Such insurance shall name as additional insured the City of Fairfield, its officers, agents, and employees, and shall further provide that the policy shall not terminate or be canceled without 30 calendar days’ advance written notice to the City of Fairfield.

Q. Any other reasonable information regarding time, place, and manner of the Mobile Food Vendor License that the director of community and economic development or designee requires to evaluate the proposal.

R. Certification by the Applicant that the information contained in the application is true to his or her knowledge and belief.
5F.5 – Expiration and Renewal.

A. Initial licenses shall be valid until December 31 of the current year.

B. Licenses shall be renewed on an annual basis. The City of Fairfield shall send notice to the licensee. The licensee shall submit the renewal annually, prior to the license’s expiration date. A licensee may continue operations while an application for renewal is pending with the City of Fairfield. All renewal applications shall be filed with Business Licensing.

C. Applications for renewals shall include all submittal materials as required at initial application, updated as necessary, proof of continuing compliance with health and safety regulations, and payment of the non-refundable renewal fee. Renewal licenses shall be valid for a one-year period beginning January 1. 5F.6 – Operational Standards.

A. A Mobile Food Vendor License cannot be transferred or conveyed from the licensee of record or otherwise assigned to another person.

B. If a Mobile Food Vendor transfers its mobile Food Vending business assets, the recipient of the assets shall, before operating, apply for and obtain a new Mobile Food Vendor License from the City of Fairfield.

Page 98 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 7 ends

5F.7 – Operational Standards.

Mobile Food Vendors shall comply with the following standards and conditions:

A. Appearance and condition of the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle.

1. All Mobile Food Vending Vehicles shall clearly display a current City of Fairfield business license, Solano County Health Department permit (and decal), and City of Fairfield Mobile Food Vending License (and decal) in plain view and at all times.

2. Aside from the signage required by subsection (a), no more than 3 signs shall be attached to any Mobile Food Vending Vehicle, with a maximum aggregate display surface of 30 square feet of signage per Mobile Food Vending Vehicle.

3. The regular permitted hours of operation for all individual Mobile Food Vending Vehicle are 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., daily.

B. Utilities.

1. Mobile Food Vending Vehicles shall either be entirely self-sufficient in regard to gas, electricity, water, and telecommunications, or shall be required to apply for appropriate permits for any utility hook-ups or connections to on-site utilities to ensure building and public safety and consistency with applicable building codes.

C. Refuse, trash, and litter maintenance.

1. The Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Site Organizer shall not throw, deposit, discharge, leave, or permit to be thrown, deposited, discharged, or left, any fat, oil, grease, refuse, garbage, or other discarded or abandoned objects, articles, and accumulations, in or upon any street, alley, sidewalk, gutter, storm drain, inlet, catch basin, conduit or other drainage structure, or upon any public or private lot of land in the city.

2. A minimum of one 32-gallon litter receptacle shall be within 15 feet of each Mobile Food Vending Vehicle for customers and employees.

3. Mobile Food Vending Vehicle and Group Site organizers shall maintain the subject site and adjacent Public Right-of-Way free of litter on and within 100 feet radius of their site.

4. At a minimum, all refuse shall be removed from the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle location or Group Site and properly disposed of after each vending period.

5. Failure to adequately clean up after a mobile Food Vending operation date shall be grounds for denying an Applicant's request for license renewal.

D. Performance standards.

1. Noise levels from Food Vending facilities shall not exceed the city's noise ordinance standards. Vendors should use low-noise emission generators.

Page 99 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 8 ends

2. Noise and odors from Food Vending facilities shall be contained within the immediate area of the permitted mobile Food Vending location.

3. The Mobile Food Vending Vehicle shall not obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

4. The Mobile Food Vendor shall maintain site circulation for pedestrians and access consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

E. Security.

1. The site shall be maintained in a safe and clean manner at all times.

2. Mobile Food Vending Vehicles and Group Sites shall have adequate lighting to ensure customer safety. Lighting shall be directed downwards and away from public streets and adjacent properties.

F. Seating, chairs and tables for stationary Mobile Food Vending.

1. Depending on site size, configuration and location, a plan for site amenities, including but not limited to tables and chairs, portable restroom facilities, and/or temporary shade structures, may be permitted in conjunction with the operation of a Food Vending site. A site plan depicting the proposed location of any site amenities shall be submitted for review and approval in conjunction with a Mobile Food Vending License application.

2. No part of a Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or any other equipment or furniture related to the operation of the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle shall encroach onto a public sidewalk.

G. Other requirements.

1. Mobile Food Vending Vehicles shall be maintained in operating condition at all times and shall be movable at all times.

2. No Mobile Food Vending Vehicle shall become a permanent fixture on the site or be considered an improvement to real property.

3. The Mobile Food Vendor shall always maintain a valid Solano County Health Department permit. If the permit expires, or is suspended or revoked, then all food sales shall cease until the permit is reinstated.

4. The Group Site Organizer or their representative shall be personally present at all times during group site operations.

5. Proof of liability insurance in the amount required by the City shall be maintained by the Mobile Food Vendor or Group Site Organizer.

6. The posting of the Mobile Food Vending License at the site is required at all times.

7. The Mobile Food Vendor or Group Site Organizer shall have a working telephone where they can be reached directly at all times during Food Vending.

8. The Mobile Food Vendor shall park so that its service window faces the sidewalk and serve customers through its service window.

Page 100 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 9 ends

9. The sale or soliciting the sale of any alcoholic beverages or controlled substances from any Mobile Food Vending Vehicle is strictly prohibited.

10. The Mobile Food Vendor shall comply with all applicable State and local laws, including, without limitation, all traffic and parking laws. 5F.8 – Permitted area.

Mobile Food Vending Vehicles and Group Sites shall be subject to the following location requirements:

A. Mobile Food Vending shall only be located in the Mobile Food Vending Permitted Area, and may be located on private property, on publicly owned property, or on the Public Right-of-Way. Food Vending in the street portion of a Public Right-ofWay is restricted. The director of community and economic development or designee is authorized to adopt a Mobile Food Vending Permitted Area Map and make amendments or correct administrative errors to such maps. Any additional location requirements, as determined by the director of community and economic development or designee is also authorized to adopt any additional location requirements in addition to the requirements described in this Chapter.

B. A location for a Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Site shall not be permitted:

1. 100 feet from another Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Site, unless permitted to operate at designated street Public Right-of-Way, or are permitted to operate on different days of the week from the same location.

2. Within 1000 feet from the parcel boundary of a school serving children between kindergarten and high school between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday as per the Administrative Guidelines.

C. Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Sites also cannot block or impede access to:

1. Required parking or driveways

2. Bicycle racks

3. Signal crossings

4. Required off-street parking

5. Parking meters

6. Pedestrian or bicycle routes

7. Emergency vehicle routes

8. Building entrances and exits

9. Required accessibility routes and curb cuts

10. Easements

11. Trash enclosure areas or access to trash bins/trash enclosures

12. Other city facilities, as determined by the director of community and economic development or designee
D. Mobile Food Vending Vehicles and Group Sites shall maintain site circulation and access consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Page 101 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 10 ends

E. In accordance with Section 114315 of the California Retail Food Code, Mobile Food Vending Vehicles stop to conduct business for more than one hour, shall operate within 200 feet of an approved, readily available and functioning restroom facility.

Executive portable toilet facilities with handwashing stations may satisfy this requirement.

F. Each Mobile Food Vending Vehicle and Group Site shall be located within 200 feet of a restroom facility that employees can legally access. 5F.9 – License Approval, Denial, Suspension, Revocation, and Appeals.

A. The director of community and economic development or designee shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Mobile Food Vendor License application based on the standards and criteria set forth in this Chapter and/or in the Administrative Guidelines. The director of community and economic development or designee may impose conditions of approval on a Mobile Food Vendor License in the exercise of his or her reasonable discretion. The Applicant shall be notified of any conditions of approval in writing.

B. The director of community and economic development may deny, suspend or revoke a license issued under this Chapter. A license may be denied, suspended or revoked for any of the following reasons:

1. Fraud, misrepresentation or a false statement contained in the application for a license.

2. Fraud, misrepresentation or a false statement made in connection with the selling of food.

3. The receipt of an “F” grade during an inspection or an investigation in response to a complaint from the Solano County Health Department.

4. Repeated failure to address pollutant discharge(s), including but not limited to wash water discharge, fuel, detergents, tire dressings, foams, or any other chemicals.

5. Violating any of the operating standards required under this Chapter; or

6. Violating any of the license conditions imposed by this Chapter; or

7. Causing a public nuisance or causing an unlawful or criminal activity occurring during the operation of a Mobile Food Vending activity or Group Site; or any other violation of this Chapter.

C. Any person who has been notified regarding the denial of their Mobile Food Vendor License application or the possible suspension or revocation of their Mobile Food Vendor License may appeal the decision pursuant to Chapter 1, Section 1.15 of the Fairfield Municipal Code.

D. When circumstances demonstrate that continued operation by a Mobile Food Vendor poses an imminent threat to the public’s health and safety, the City of

Page 102 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 11 ends

Fairfield may immediately suspend or revoke a Mobile Food Vendor License. The Mobile Food Vendor may request a hearing pursuant to Chapter 1, Section 1.16 of the Fairfield Municipal Code. The Community Development Department shall issue findings of fact, conclusions of law and a decision.

E. It is unlawful for a Mobile Food Vendor whose license has been suspended or revoked to continue to operate. If the City of Fairfield suspends or revokes a license, the Mobile Food Vendor shall immediately cease all Food Vending operations.

F. A Mobile Food Vendor aggrieved by an order issued by the Community Development Department may appeal the order to state district court. 5F.10 – Food Safety; Health Inspections and Certificates.

A. Food hygiene standards. Mobile Food Vendors shall comply with all Solano County Health Department regulations.

B. Food safety certification. At all times, at least one person working in a Mobile Food Vending Vehicle must hold a current food safety certification.

C. Health inspections. For the purpose of protecting public health and safety, Solano County shall ensure that Mobile Food Vending Vehicles are inspected on an ongoing, randomized basis, based on their classification and inspection grade.

D. Recordkeeping. The City of Fairfield shall establish and maintain a database to record the names of licensees, inspections, inspection reports and public complaints. The database shall also allow Mobile Food Vendors to provide documentation to Solano County as needed.

E. Inspection criteria and grading. Health inspections shall be conducted by Solano County using inspection criteria based on the state food code and a score-based grading system established by Solano County based on objective factors. The inspection criteria shall provide a letter-grade format that rates the vendor with an “A,” “B,” “C,” or “F” grade, based on the score received during the inspection. If a vendor receives two consecutive “A” grades, it shall be given a certificate of excellence. If a vendor receives an “F” grade, the City of Fairfield may suspend the vendor’s license until the vendor corrects the violations, is re-inspected and receives a grade of “A,” “B,” or “C.”
F. Health certificate. Upon completion of an inspection, the Solano County shall issue a health certificate to the Mobile Food Vendor displaying the vendor’s letter grade or achievement of excellence and record the grade in the database.

Page 103 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 12 ends

G. Mobile Food Vendor License decal. Once all required County inspections and permits are approved, and the vendor has both a valid City of Fairfield business license and an approved Mobile Food Vendor License, the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle may legally operate in the City. The operation must comply with all applicable requirements set by the County, City, and other relevant agencies. The Mobile Food Vendor must place the official City of Fairfield Mobile Food Vendor License decal in a clearly visible spot on the Mobile Food Vendor Vehicle. This decal confirms that the vehicle is fully approved and authorized to operate within the City.
5F.11 – Enforcement.

The City of Fairfield Code Enforcement Division or designee shall be responsible for enforcing this Chapter. If periodic inspections are necessary to monitor compliance, reinspection fees shall be assessed against the party responsible.

A. Violation. Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this Chapter is declared to be prima facie evidence of an existing violation, a continuing blight and a declared public nuisance and may be abated by the City’s code enforcement division or designee, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 27 of the Fairfield Municipal Code. Any person in violation will be subject to administrative penalties, citations, civil action and/or other legal remedies that may be available to the City.

B. Responsibility. If a Mobile Food Vending Vehicle is on a privately owned parcel, the parcel owner and the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Site Organizer have joint and several liability for compliance with this Chapter, including fees, administrative citations, civil actions, and/or legal remedies relating to a Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Site. The parcel owner remains liable for any violation of duties imposed by this Chapter even if the parcel owner has, by agreement, imposed on the Mobile Food Vending Vehicle or Group Site Organizer the duty of complying with the provisions of this Chapter.

C. Revocation. The City of Fairfield reserves the right to revoke any Mobile Food Vending License at any time for any of the reasons stated in Section 5F.9 of this Chapter or if it is found that the approved activity is violating any of the provisions of the City of Fairfield Municipal Code.

Revocation shall be immediately effective upon written notice of the revocation by the City of Fairfield code enforcement division or designee. Should a Mobile Food Vendor License be revoked, the vendor shall be required to cease operation immediately.

D. Penalties.

Page 104 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 13 ends

1. Any violation of this Chapter is to be punishable by Administrative Citations in accordance with Chapter 1, Article II of the municipal code.

2. Appeals of administrative citations shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures and requirements of Chapter 1, Article II, Section 1.15 of the municipal code.

3. The City may allow a person to complete community service in lieu of paying the total administrative citation, may waive the administrative citation, or may offer an alternative disposition.

4. Notwithstanding paragraphs 1 and 2, enforcement action specifically authorized by this section may be utilized in conjunction with, or in addition to, any other statutory code, administrative or regulatory procedure applicable to this Chapter, including charges of an infraction or misdemeanor. In addition, nothing in this section shall be interpreted to preclude or limit the City from seeking injunctive or other judicial relief. 5F.12 – Liability and Indemnification.

A. To the fullest extent permitted by law, any actions taken by a public officer or employee under the provisions of this Chapter shall not become the personal liability of any public officer or employee of the City.

B. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the licensee under this Chapter shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify and hold harmless the City of Fairfield, the Fairfield City Council, the Fairfield City Planning Commission, and their respective officials, officers, employees, representatives, agents and volunteers (hereafter collectively called "City") from any liability, damages, actions, claims, demands, litigation, loss (direct or indirect), causes of action, proceedings or judgment (including legal costs, attorneys' fees, expert witness or consultant fees, City Attorney or staff time, expenses or costs) (collectively called "Action") against the City to attack, set aside, void or annul, any Food Vending- related approvals and actions or implementation of such approvals and actions, including conditions of approval, if any. The City may elect, in its sole discretion, to participate in the defense of said Action and the licensee shall reimburse the City for its reasonable legal costs and attorneys' fees.

C. Within 10 calendar days of the service of the pleadings upon the City of any Action as specified in Subsection B above, the licensee shall execute a Letter of Agreement with the City, acceptable to the Office of the City Attorney, which memorializes the above obligations. These obligations and the Letter of Agreement shall survive termination, extinguishment or invalidation of the Food Vending-related approval. Failure to timely execute the Letter of Agreement does not relieve the licensee of any of the obligations contained in this Section or any other requirements or performance or operating standards that may be imposed by the City.

Page 105 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-09

Page 14 ends

SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall be effective 30 days following its adoption by the City Council. A summary of this Ordinance shall, within 15 days after passage, be published in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California with the names of the City Councilmembers voting for and against it.

INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Fairfield on the 21st day of October 2025, and
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 106 of 809 ends

Agenda Item No: K.14

AGENDA REPORT
DATE: November 18, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: David Gassaway, City Manager
SUBJECT: Ordinance 2025-12 CD to Redesignate Parkside Project in Villages 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) to Rezone the Parkside Site, a Vacant 7.99-Acre Site Located East of Passion Lane, South of Gulf Drive, and North of the Linear Park Trail (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN]: 0170- 010-052) from Public Facilities (PF) to Residential Medium (RM) Funding Source: N/A
Contact: Meily M Sheehan, (707) 428-7474

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Provide second reading and adopt Ordinance 2025-12

STATEMENT OF ISSUE
Rob White of Rancho Tolenas Corporation requests a Zone Change from Public Facilities (PF) to Residential Medium (RM) to support the development of the Parkside project (Project), a 76 single-family residential subdivision on a vacant 7.99-acre parcel east of Passion Lane, south of Gulf Drive, and north of the Fairfield Linear Park Trail (APN: 0170–010-052).

DISCUSSION
On October 8, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution PC2025-07 approving Tentative Subdivision Map (TS2025-002) and Development Review Single Family (DR2025-005) for the subdivision of a vacant 7.99-acre parcel into 76 single-family residential units and a water quality basin and pollinator garden; and recommending City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA2025-002), Zone Change (ZC2025-003), and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum (ER2025-004). Additionally, the commission approved an update to the Villages at Fairfield Master Plan’s Design Guidelines.

Page 107 of 809 ends

On November 4, 2025, the City Council passed Resolution No. 2025-212 approving the addendum to the Villages at Fairfield EIR and approving the General Plan Amendment to redesignate the Project site from PF to RM.

The proposed Zone Change will redesignate the Project site from PF to RM to support the singlefamily subdivision. A detailed description of the Project can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report included as Attachment 8. The Project is consistent with the following General Plan policies and objectives:
 Policy LU-1. Maintain Fairfield as a distinct, well-balanced, complete, and thoughtfully planned community in keeping with the city’s scale, services, and surrounding environment.
 Objective LU-1.1. Orderly Growth. Promote and prioritize orderly development and growth of Fairfield through the following: Promote infill development that makes efficient use of limited land supply, while ensuring compatibility and integration with adjacent uses. Maintain separation of urban and rural uses, including through maintaining strong urban growth boundaries; any urban development requiring basic municipal services shall occur only within the urban boundaries established by the General Plan. Ensure that new development mitigates and provides for its fair share of impacts to the environment, public facilities, services, and infrastructure.
 Policy LU-7. Enhance and improve the built environment in Fairfield through site design that emphasizes cohesive, compact, connected, and “human-scaled” development, defined as neighborhoods, places, and streetscapes focused on the needs and experience of people.
 Objective LU-7.1. Urban Design Standards. Develop and maintain urban design standards for specific areas or development types that focus on human-scale proportions to create an engaging and visually pleasing streetscape. Support community and public realm design that reflects the community’s diversity and meets the needs of persons of all ages and abilities.
 Objective LU-7.6: Pedestrian-Oriented Connections. Provide a network of safe, well maintained, interconnected streets, paseos, pathways, and bicycle routes onsite that facilitates travel through the site for pedestrians, cyclists, and other nonmotorized modes of transportation. Link these connections to amenities such as commercial corridors, parks, schools, and public transportation hubs.
 Policy LU-16. Ensure that new development is designed to optimize Fairfield’s Linear Park, making the park a central feature that enhances quality of life, connectivity, and recreational opportunities for residents.

Page 108 of 809 ends

 Objective LU-16.3. Eyes on the Trail. Avoid blank facades along the trail. Windows, doors and transparent openings are encouraged to provide “eyes on the trail” and heighten sense of security. To the extent feasible, surface and structured parking should not front onto the trail.
 Policy PFS-7. Provide an adequate supply of quality water and water infrastructure to support current and future population and employment growth, as well as focused support of the region’s agritourism goals.
 Objective PFS-7.7. New Development. Require all new development located within City limits connect to the public water system, construct all potable water lines serving such development, and provide adequate funding for the development’s use of all potable water infrastructure and facilities.
 Policy PFS-8. Ensure provision of superior wastewater collection and treatment facilities to support current and future growth.
 Objective PFS-8.4. New Development. Require that all new developments located within City limits connect to the public wastewater collection system, construct all sanitary sewer lines serving such development (including oversizing of sewers if requested by the Fairfield Suisun Sewer District or the City, and provide adequate funding for the development’s use of all wastewater infrastructure and facilities. The costs of oversizing shall be borne by the beneficiary of the oversizing.
 Policy HS-2. Prevent urban fires and protect the community from wildfire danger.  Objective HS-2.4: Fire Department Review. Ensure the Fire Department has opportunity to review and provide appropriate conditions before Project approval. Incorporate Fire Department input on longer-range plans related to water supply and water systems, transportation Projects, and utilities.

Environmental Review: An Addendum to a previously certified EIR has been prepared for the Project, as allowed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Since all potential environmental impacts were already studied in the certified EIR for the Villages at Fairfield, and no new significant impacts have been identified, a new EIR is not required. The Addendum is attached as Exhibit A of the Resolution.

FINANCIAL IMPACT
N/A

PUBLIC CONTACT/ADVISORY BODY RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Division published a public hearing notice in the Daily Republic newspaper on October 15, 2025, and mailed it to all property owners within 500 feet of the project for the City

Page 109 of 809 ends

Council meeting on November 4, 2025. The council held a public hearing for the item on November 4, 2025, and moved to approve Resolution 2025-212 and introduce Ordinance 2025- 12 for a first reading. As of the writing of this staff report, the staff has not received any subsequent correspondence on the project.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION
Council may choose not to adopt the proposed ordinance. In this case, the Zone Change would not occur, and the Parkside residential project would not be able to proceed.

COORDINATED WITH
Fire Department, Public Works Department, Solano County Airport Land Use Commission, Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District, Solano Irrigation District, Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District, and Pacific Gas & Electric Company.

STAFF CONTACT
Meily Sheehan, Planning Division Manager
(707) 428-7474
[email protected]

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 2: Proposed Ordinance
Attachment 3: Exhibit A – Sectional Zoning Map
Attachment 4: Resolution 2025-212
Attachment 5: Exhibit A – CEQA Addendum for the Villages at Fairfield Project Attachment 6: Exhibit B – General Plan Amendment
Attachment 7: Planning Commission Resolution 2025-07
Attachment 8: Planning Commission Agenda Report, dated October 8, 2025

Page 110 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-12
AMENDING CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE I, SECTION 25.12.3 OF THE FAIRFIELD CITY CODE (ALSO KNOWN AS THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD ZONING MAP) TO REZONE THE PARKSIDE SITE, A VACANT 7.99-ACRE SITE LOCATED EAST OF PASSION LANE, SOUTH OF GULF DRIVE, AND NORTH OF THE LINEAR PARK TRAIL (ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER [APN]:
0170- 010-052) FROM PUBLIC FACILITIES (PF) TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Chapter 25 is hereby modified to the Fairfield City Code, also known as the City of Fairfield Zoning Map, is hereby amended as shown on Sectional Zoning Map (ZC2025-003) attached hereto as Exhibit A.

Pursuant to Section 25.47.5 Findings of the Fairfield Zoning Ordinance, the City Council finds as follows:

A. The proposed Parkside subdivision is consistent with the proposed amendment to the City’s General Plan, which designates the area for Residential Medium (RM) development. This designation is intended for single-family housing, that is serviced by recreational activities and enhanced walkability. This subdivision fulfills this through the development of 76 single-family residential units, and its proximity to the Fairfield Linear Park trail and the proposed Village I park. The proposed subdivisions’ design and improvement provisions align with several key General Plan policies and objectives:

Objective LU-2.1 (Consistency with Density Ranges) The proposed 9.5 density development is consistent with the prescribed 9.0 to 18.0 density ranges in the General Plan. The Project’s layout and design ensure that residential density is managed effectively, complying with the medium density residential requirements; Policy LU-1 (Maintain Fairfield as a distinct, well-balanced, complete, and thoughtfully planned community in keeping with the city’s scale, services, and surrounding environment) The subdivision is part of the Villages Master Plan, a series of thoughtfully planned communities. The size and design of the subdivision are consistent with, and complementary to, adjacent residential development within the master-planned community, maintaining the intended scale, character, and cohesiveness of the neighborhood; Policy LU-2 (Promote a variety of housing types to serve the diverse needs of the community and stimulate investment) The Project builds 76 small-lot single-family homes, a less common housing type within Fairfield’s traditional single-family neighborhoods. This addition contributes to greater housing diversity and supports the City's goals for a balanced and inclusive housing mix; and Policy LU-16: (Ensure that new development is designed to optimize Fairfield’s Linear Park, making the park a central feature that enhances quality of life, connectivity, and recreational opportunities for residents) The Project is located adjacent to the Fairfield Linear Park, offering residents

Page 111 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-12

Page 2 ends

convenient access. Housing along the southern boundary of the Project site is oriented toward the trail, with windows providing natural surveillance and "eyes on the trail." This design enhances safety, encourages passive monitoring, and promotes interaction between residents and trail users, fostering a more active and welcoming public space.

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

7.99-acres of vacant land for 76 single-family residential units. The addition of more residential land will not jeopardize public interest, health, safety, convenience, or the welfare of the City in that the planned development will be subject to a collection of conditions of approval to ensure its safe and orderly development and operation. Future access to the site is provided via Passion Lane.

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 Parkside subdivision site has been thoroughly assessed and found ideal for residential development.

The site is served by existing streets and utilities such as water, sewer, electricity, and road networks, which are sufficient to support the new development's increased demand. The pre-existing infrastructure ensures that residents will have access to all essential services.

The site’s relatively flat topography requires minimal grading and thus will preserve the natural landscape. Additionally, the Projects development plan intentionally avoids impacting sensitive habitats as much as possible.

D. The proposed amendment is in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Addendum to the previously certified Villages at Fairfield EIR has been prepared for the Project, as permitted under CEQA. The Addendum determined that all potential environmental impacts associated with the Project were previously analyzed in the certified EIRs. No new significant impacts have been identified; therefore, no further environmental review is required.

SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be effective 30 days following its adoption by the City Council. A summary of this Ordinance shall, within fifteen (15) days after passage, be published in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California with the names of the City Councilmembers voting for and against it.

Page 112 of 809 ends

ORD. NO. 2025-12

Page 3 ends

INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Fairfield on the 4 th day
of November 2025, and
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

CITY CLERK

Page 113 of 809 ends

8.0± AC

GULF DR

PASSION LN

JAMBOREE DR

SPUR LN

FRIENDLY VALLEY LN

HIDEAWAY LN

CLEMENTINE LN

PASSION LN

GLEE LNMUSE WAY

BALANCE CIRCENTER DR
RM

8.0± AC

GULF DR

PASSION LN

JAMBOREE DR

SPUR LN

FRIENDLY VALLEY LN

HIDEAWAY LN

CLEMENTINE LN

PASSION LN

GLEE LNMUSE WAY

BALANCE CIRCENTER DR

FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA

BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS ONE PROJECT AT A TIME

VILLAGES AT FAIRFIELD - PARKSIDE
REZONE EXHIBIT DATE: OCTOBER 2024

EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATIONS PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

ZONING DESIGNATIONS EXISTING ACREAGE PROPOSED ACREAGE
PUBLIC FACILITY (PF) 8.0± -
TOTAL 8.0± 8.0±
RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) - 8.0±

EXHIBIT A

Page 114 of 809 ends

CITY OF FAIRFIELD
RESOLUTION NO. 2025- 212,
APPROVING ADDENDUM ( ER- 2025- 024) TO THE VILLAGES AT FAIRFIELD ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ( SCH 2O04032064) AND APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA2025- 002) TO REDESIGNATION THE PARKSIDE PROJECT SITE, A VACANT 7. 99-ACRE SITE

LOCATED EAST OF PASSION LANE, SOUTH OF GULF DRIVE, AND NORTH OF THE LINEAR PARK TRAIL ( ASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER: 0170- 010- 052) FROM PUBLIC FACILITIES TO

RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY
WHEREAS, On February 11, 2025, applications for a General Plan Amendment ( GPA2025- 002), Zone Change ( ZC2025- 003), Tentative Subdivision Map ( TS2025- 002), Development Review Single Family ( DR2025- 005), Environmental Review ( ER2025- 0024), and an amendment to the Villages at Fairfield Design Guidelines for proposed 76 single- family residential units located east of Passion Lane, south of Gulf Drive, and north of the Linear Park Trail ( Assessor' s Parcel Number APN]: 0170- 010-052) ( the Project) were properly filed with the Department of Community Development in accordance with the rules and regulations governing the official filing of such applications; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 8, 2025. City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the proposed Project in the staff reports and through oral presentations before the Commission, and the Commission considered public testimony and information presented during the public hearing regarding this application; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on November 4, 2025. City staff presented substantial factual information regarding the Parkside project in staff reports and through oral presentations before the council; and
WHEREAS, the council has reviewed the proposed revisions to the General Plan Land Use Diagram and finds these revisions beneficial and consistent with the purpose and intent of the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the EIR Addendum has been prepared for the Project that satisfies the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA); and WHEREAS, the EIR Addendum prepared for the Project applies to the City Council' s actions as well as the project actions during the public hearing of the Planning Commission on October 8, 2025.

Page 115 of 809 ends

RES. NO. 2025- 212

Page 2 ends

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

Section 1. The EIR Addendum, as contained in Exhibit A, is hereby adopted.

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

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: MEMBERS: MOY / - K-RTAM4 CARR / PANDURO / TONNESEN/ SANDHU / WILLIAMS NOES: MEMBERS: None-,
ABSENT: MEMBERS: b'Pr4a' n I
ABSTAIN: MEMBERS: ' U o hC
MAYOR
ATTEST:

YINS

Page 116 of 809 ends

CEQA Addendum for the Villages at Fairfield Project
(VAF EIR: E.R. 2003-29; 2011 Addendum; 2015 Addendum; 2018 Addendum) September 2025
On September 20, 2005, the Fairfield City Council adopted Resolution No. 2005-296 certifying an Environmental Impact Report for the Villages at Fairfield (the “EIR”). The EIR consisted of a Draft EIR and Final EIR, including Responses to Comment, bound in volumes. The Planning Commission recommended certification of the EIR and approved tentative maps in Resolution 2005-33 and the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2005-297 approving a General Plan Amendment for the Project on September 20, 2005, adopted Ordinance 2005-15 amending the Zoning Code, and adopted Ordinance No. 2005-14 approving a Development Agreement for the Villages at Fairfield. On May 3, 2011, the City adopted an Addendum to the EIR in conjunction with its approval of the Amended and Restated Development Agreement (“First Amended DA”).

On August 10, 2015, the City adopted an Addendum to the EIR in conjunction with its approval of the Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement (“Second Amended DA”). The 2011 and 2015 Addenda analyzed shifts in residential densities and minor land use revisions, all in substantial conformance with the previously approved tentative maps. On January 15, 2019, the City adopted an Addendum to the EIR in conjunction with its approval of the First Amendment to Second Amended and Restated Development Agreement (“First Amendment to Second Amended DA”), which adjusted the timing of certain infrastructure improvements described in Exhibit H of the Second Amended and Restated DA. The City is now contemplating approval of the Third Amended and Restated Development Agreement, and the necessary changes to the Project EIR associated with that amendment, which are reviewed by the 2025 (Lago Vista) Addendum.

This 2025 (Parkside) Addendum to the EIR has been prepared pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 for the Project, as described below. The proposed Villages at Fairfield Parkside project (“Parkside”) would develop up to 76 single-family detached dwelling units on a currently undeveloped parcel on the southeast corner of the Passion Lane and Gulf Drive intersection located in Village I of Villages at Fairfield. The subject parcel was originally assumed to be the site of a future elementary school in the EIR. As such, this 2025 (Parkside) Addendum considers the development of the Parkside site with up to 76 residential units instead of an elementary school. This 2025 (Parkside) Addendum also considers a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment to redesignate the approximately 7.99-acre site from Public Facility (PF) to Residential Medium (RM).

The modifications to the Project described in this 2025 (Parkside) Addendum do not cause new or substantially more severe significant impacts than previously analyzed because all of the impacts of the Parkside project have already been effectively analyzed under the VAF EIR. As documented in this Addendum, the impacts of the Parkside project related to Aesthetics, Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources & Tribal Cultural Resources, Geology & Soils, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Hydrology & Water Quality, Land Use & Planning, Noise, Population & Housing, Public Facilities & Services, Recreation, Transportation, Utilities & Service Systems, Wildfire, Energy, Agricultural & Forest Resources, and Mineral Resources have been sufficiently analyzed by the VAF EIR such that no major

EXHIBIT A

Page 117 of 809 ends

2 revisions to the VAF EIR are required. Where applicable, mitigation measures from the previously certified EIR are referenced and incorporated into this Addendum.

PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Villages at Fairfield Project site is located within the boundaries of the Peabody Walters Master Plan (“PWMP”), which the City adopted in 1994 after preparing the Peabody Walters Master Plan Focused Environmental Impact Report (“Peabody Walters EIR”). Fairfield City Council Resolution Nos. 94-173 and 94-174, September 6, 1994. In 2002, the City undertook a comprehensive review of its General Plan and certified the General Plan Environmental Impact Report for the amended 2002 City of Fairfield General Plan (Fairfield City Council Resolution No. 2002-128, June 5, 2002). The Villages at Fairfield EIR (“VAF EIR”) utilized these prior analyses in evaluating the Project’s impacts. The EIR examined the potential change from current conditions to conditions under the proposed Project and alternatives for the following resources: Land Use, Housing, and Population (Chapter 3); Transportation and Circulation (Chapter 4); Public Facilities and Services (Chapter 5); Biology and Natural Resources (Chapter 6); Air Quality (Chapter 7); Hydrology and Water Quality (Chapter 8); Agriculture (Chapter 9); Noise (Chapter 10); Other Resources (visual, cultural, geologic and seismic, fire hazards and hazardous materials) (Chapter 11); and Project Alternatives (Chapter 12). Chapters 3-12 discussed each of the primary substantive subject areas identified in the CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G. Appendices 3 through 57 were included in the EIR and consisted of the detailed reports which formed the technical basis for the environmental evaluation in the EIR.

The full VAF EIR; its set of appendices; copies of the Peabody Walters Master Plan EIR and the General Plan EIR; and the 2011, 2015 and 2018 Addenda to the VAF EIR and 2025 (Lago Vista) Addendum are all incorporated herein by reference and are available for public review together with this 2025 (Parkside) Addendum at the City’s Community Development Department (1000 Webster Street, 2nd Floor).

DETERMINATION TO PREPARE AN ADDENDUM
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency shall prepare an Addendum to a previously certified EIR if changes or additions are necessary and when none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines (which calls for the preparation of a Subsequent EIR) have occurred. Section 15162 requires preparation of a Subsequent EIR when:
“(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions to the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was

EXHIBIT A

Page 118 of 809 ends

3 certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.”
The “project” at issue for purposes of CEQA’s subsequent review provisions is the residential development of the Parkside site. In this case, all of the environmental impacts associated with Parkside have already been analyzed and accounted for under the certified VAF EIR.

Where none of the above-referenced conditions requiring the preparation of a Subsequent EIR exist, the CEQA Guidelines require a lead agency to prepare an Addendum to the previously certified EIR, including a brief explanation, supported by substantial evidence, of the decision to not prepare a Subsequent EIR (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164(a)).

This Addendum concludes that the proposed Parkside project would not result in new significant adverse impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts under the VAF EIR. Therefore, an Addendum is the appropriate form of environmental review under CEQA.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City is considering the approval of modifications to the Villages at Fairfield Development Project (the “proposed Project”) submitted by Rancho Tolenas Corp. (“RTC”). The previously approved Project includes five separate Projects located on approximately 431 acres in the northeastern area of the City of Fairfield, to the south of Cement Hill and the Putah South Canal, north of Air Base Parkway, east of the Woodlake Estates residential development, and west of the Gold Ridge residential development. The Project site is divided into five separate development projects, including four residential projects, Village I, Village II, Village III, and Village IV, and the Laurel Creek Plaza commercial center.

The original Project would have resulted in the construction of approximately 2,327 new residential units, approximately 311,000 square feet of commercial retail and mixed uses, and other public facilities that were provided to serve the development areas and the regional community consistent with City standards. The Project was amended in 2011 to reduce the number of units through reduction in density to 1,961 units and convert the Industrial Business

EXHIBIT A

Page 119 of 809 ends

4 Park Mixed Use area in Village II to residential use. The Project was amended again in 2015 to further reduce the densities of some parcels, lowering the total number of residential units from 1,961 to 1,830. The Project originally analyzed 832 residential units in Village I and 269 residential units in Village II, a total of 1,101 units. The 2011 and 2015 Addenda analyzed shifts in the residential densities for Villages I and II, and the final maps ultimately approved for Village I and II included just 432 units in Village I and 374 units in Village II, a total of 806 units, 295 less than the originally approved Village I-II total of 1,101. The proposed Lago Vista project reallocates 295 of those originally approved Village I-II units to the Lago Vista site, plus an additional 80 units, which integrates into the Village II infrastructure, for a total of 1,181 units between Villages I, II and Lago Vista. The proposed Parkside project would develop up to 76 single-family detached dwelling units on a currently undeveloped parcel on the southeast corner of the Passion Lane and Gulf Drive intersection located in Village I that was originally assumed to be the site of a future elementary school in the EIR. With the proposed Parkside project, there would be a total of 1,259 units between Villages I and II (including Lago Vista).

The Parkside site was part of a larger plan to provide a 10-acre elementary school site. Fairfield Suisun Unified School District (“FSUSD”) did not formally act to acquire the site before the January 2023 deadline required by the Development Agreement, and FSUSD has confirmed that it has no plans to acquire the site and pursue development of a school on it. Accordingly, FSUSD has released RTC from retaining the property for a school site, and the site is now proposed to be developed for residential use.

As such, the Parkside project also includes a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment to redesignate the approximately 7.99-acre site from Public Facility (PF) to Residential Medium (RM).

The Parkside site is bounded on three sides with streets or Linear Park and to the east by the FSUSD parcel. As such, the site has been continuously used for construction staging. The Parkside project’s proposed streets, sidewalks, water, sewer, and lighting would be maintained as part of the City’s existing Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District “LLMD No. 14 - Woodlake”. The storm drainage would be maintained under the Fairfield-Suisun Storm Drain maintenance program. Lot A will be a water quality basin to meet current water quality regulations for the Parkside project. Lot A is anticipated to be dedicated to the City.

The Parkside Project is immediately adjacent to the multi-use Linear Park trail, with off-street connectivity to Passion Lane to the west and the Village I park to the east.

All modifications to the Project described above result in volume-based impacts such as traffic, air quality, roadway noise, utilities, water supply, and public services that are consistent with the those addressed by the VAF EIR. The footprint of the developed area remains the same or smaller than the development already analyzed in the VAF EIR, so all land-based impacts, such as those related to agriculture, biology, cultural, geology, hydrology, and hazards, remain the same or less significant than those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Where applicable and appropriate, mitigation measures from the EIR are incorporated into this Addendum, ensuring that there are no new or substantially more severe impacts associated with the modifications to the Project. In

EXHIBIT A

Page 120 of 809 ends

5 addition, the modified Project remains less than the impacts considered in the Peabody Walters Master Plan and General Plan, which the Final EIR compared to the approved Project. Overall, the modifications to the Project do not result in any changes to the significance of previously analyzed environmental impacts identified in the Final VAF EIR. Each impact area is considered below to analyze whether the proposed Parkside project will result in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts previously identified in the VAF EIR.

On the basis of the evaluation below, the City determines that the potentially significant effects that could result from the proposed Parkside project have been addressed in the certified VAF EIR (and subsequent addenda), and that none of the conditions for preparation of a subsequent EIR set forth in the Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 have been triggered. Accordingly, an Addendum to the VAF EIR shall be prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, as set forth below. Note that the VAF EIR and previous addenda to the VAF EIR followed the organizational structure of the Peabody Walters EIR, which combined certain impact discussions into larger chapters. For clarity, this Addendum is organized by individual impact area but references the previous VAF EIR analysis by its heading in the VAF EIR where applicable.

1. Aesthetics
The VAF EIR analyzed impacts related to visual resources in Chapter 11 and determined that impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Views of the proposed Parkside development from the surrounding area would be similar to those analyzed in the VAF EIR, and the site itself contains no visual resources. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all applicable VAF EIR mitigation measures, ensuring that any aesthetics impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the aesthetics impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Aesthetic Impacts - Would the
project:

New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impact
No
Substantial
Change from
Previous VAF
EIR Analysis
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista?
 X 
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a
State‐designated scenic
highway?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 121 of 809 ends

6 c) Substantially degrade the
existing visual character or
quality of the site and its
surroundings?
 X 
d) Create a new source of
substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
 X 

2. Agricultural Resources
The VAF EIR analyzed impacts related to agricultural resources in Chapter 9 and determined that impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all applicable VAF EIR mitigation measures, ensuring that any agricultural resources impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the agricultural resources impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

3. Air Quality & Greenhouse Gases
The VAF EIR concluded that the VAF project would contribute to an exceedance of Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“BAAQMD”) significance thresholds for certain conventional pollutants and that this impact would be significant and unavoidable. With the proposed additional residential units on the Parkside site instead of the previously proposed school, there is no change in this conclusion. This impact will remain significant and unavoidable as in the VAF EIR, but the VAF EIR included mitigation measures to reduce air quality impacts to the extent feasible. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all applicable VAF EIR mitigation measures to reduce air quality impacts to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the air quality impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Air Quality - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
 X 
b) Violate an air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 122 of 809 ends

7 c) Result in cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is in
non‐attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emission
which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
 X 
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
 X 
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
 X 
With respect to GHG impacts associated with the Parkside project, the VAF GHG analysis would also apply. In the 2010 and 2015 Addenda to the VAF EIR, the City concluded that although the 2005 EIR did not evaluate the VAF project’s GHG emissions, the later adoption of AB 32 and BAAQMD GHG thresholds did not constitute new information requiring a subsequent or supplemental EIR since those regulatory developments did not reveal new sitespecific impacts, and GHG impacts were known or knowable in 2005. Since traffic is the primary driver associated with volume-based operational impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions, and the Parkside units can be accounted for in the VAF trip generation budget, the GHG analysis does not change. No GHG mitigation would be required under the VAF EIR.

Nevertheless, as a matter of regulatory compliance, the Parkside project is required to comply with Title 24 energy efficiency standards, therefore, the Parkside units will be more energy- and GHG-efficient than the units originally analyzed in the VAF EIR. The Parkside units will also be solar-ready. Accordingly, the GHG impacts associated with the Parkside project would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 151662 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Greenhouse Gas Impacts- Would the
project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
 X 
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
 X 

4. Biological Resources

EXHIBIT A

Page 123 of 809 ends

8 Potential impacts to biological resources related to development on the Parkside site were thoroughly analyzed in the VAF EIR. Existing conditions on the Parkside site have not materially changed since the VAF EIR was certified. See EIR Addendum Biological Summary Memorandum prepared by WRA, Inc., attached as Appendix A. The VAF EIR concluded that all impacts to biological resources associated with the VAF project would be less than significant with mitigation. The entire Village I site, including the Parkside Project site, has been periodically graded and disturbed since 2009 and was mass graded in 2017. Since that time, the site has been consistently and continuously used for staging, stockpiling, and general construction-related activities, thus maintaining a disturbed condition. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any biological resources impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the biological resources impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

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. Impacts to burrowing owl were evaluated in connection with the 2011 Addendum and the site was surveyed for burrowing owl in connection with the 2005 EIR and in 2009 prior to Corps and RWQCB permitting, with negative findings. Mitigation Measure BIO-20 requires that a pre-construction burrowing owl survey will be performed 30 days in advance of ground disturbance within the Project area. The Project area has been graded and does not currently support burrows of suitable size for burrowing owl. Given the ongoing disturbance and lack of suitable burrows, burrowing owl are unlikely to occupy the site for overwintering or nesting purposes. No potentially significant impacts to burrowing owl are anticipated with the Parkside project, and the pre-construction survey requirements set forth in Mitigation Measure BIO-20 will further reduce the less than significant impacts.

Environmental Issues
Biological Resources - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
 X 
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 124 of 809 ends

9 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
 X 
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
 X 
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances related to protecting
biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
 X 
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or state habitat conservation plan?
 X 

5. Cultural Resources (including Tribal Cultural Resources) The VAF EIR concluded that potential impacts of the VAF project related to cultural resources would be less-than-significant with mitigation. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any cultural resources impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the cultural resources impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Cultural Resources – Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource as defined in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5?
 X 
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 125 of 809 ends

10 c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geological feature?
 X 
d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
 X 
Specifically, regarding Tribal Cultural Resources, the VAF EIR analyzed potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources under the Cultural Resources impact category. Since the certification of the VAF EIR, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) added various provisions to the California Public Resources Code (PRC) that concern Tribal Cultural Resources, including § 21080.3.1(d). The adoption of AB 52 established the tribal cultural resources environmental factor and related thresholds for Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. On July 30, 2016, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted the final text for the tribal cultural resources update to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, which was approved by the Office of Administrative Law on September 27, 2016. The addition of Tribal Cultural Resources as a separate category from Cultural Resources does not constitute new information requiring a revision to the VAF EIR. Moreover, the requirements of PRC Section 21080.3.1 only apply to the preparation of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or EIR; they do not apply to project revisions that do not trigger subsequent environmental review pursuant to Section 21084 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and require only an addendum under CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. See PRC § 21080.3.1(b).

Environmental Issues
Tribal Cultural Resources - Would the
project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural
resource 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)?
 X 
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural
resource 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?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 126 of 809 ends

11 6. Geology & Soils
The VAF EIR concluded that potential impacts of the VAF project related to geology and soils would be less-than-significant with mitigation. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any geology and soils impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the geology and soils impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Geology and Soils - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Expose persons or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist‐Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic‐related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
 X 
b) Result in substantial erosion or loss of
topsoil?
 X 
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on‐ or off‐site
landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
 X 
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18‐1‐B of the
Uniform Building Code, creating
substantial risks to life or property?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 127 of 809 ends

12 e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewer is not available
for the disposal of waste water?
 X 

7. Hazards & Hazardous Materials
The VAF EIR concluded that potential impacts of the VAF project related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant with mitigation. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any hazards and hazardous materials impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the hazards and hazardous materials impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Hazards and Hazardous Materials - Would
the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
 X 
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
likely release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
 X 
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one‐quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
 X 
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and as a result,
would create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
 X 
e) Be located within an airport land use
plan, or where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project
area?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 128 of 809 ends

13 f) Be located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working
in the project area?
 X 
g) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
 X 
h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences
are intermixed with wildlands?
 X 

8. Hydrology & Water Quality
Potential impacts to hydrology and water quality related to development on the Parkside site were thoroughly analyzed in the VAF EIR. The VAF EIR concluded that all impacts to hydrology and water quality associated with the VAF project would be less than significant with mitigation. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any hydrology and water quality impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the hydrology and water quality impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Hydrology and Water Quality - Would the
project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements?
 X 
b) Substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering
of the local groundwater table level
(e.g., the production rate of
pre‐existing nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
 X 
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 129 of 809 ends

14 substantial erosion or siltation on‐ or
off‐site?
d) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on‐ or
off‐site?
 X 
e) Create or contribute runoff
water, which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
 X 
f) Otherwise substantially
degrade water quality?
 X 
g) Place housing/structures within
a 100‐year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
 X 
h) Place within a 100‐year flood
hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
 X 
i) Expose people or structures to
a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
 X 
j) Result in inundation by seiche,
tsunami or mudflow?
 X 

9. Land Use & Planning
The VAF EIR concluded that potential impacts of the VAF project related to land use and planning would be less-than-significant. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any land use and planning impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the land use and planning impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

EXHIBIT A

Page 130 of 809 ends

15 The proposed Parkside project includes a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment to change current land use designations for the Project site from Public Facility (PF) to Residential Medium (RM). Because the Project involves a General Plan Amendment, it will be reviewed by the Solano County Airport Land Use Commission.

Environmental Issues
Land Use - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community?
 X 
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to
the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
 X 
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
 X 

10. Noise
The VAF EIR concluded that potential impacts of the VAF project related to noise would be less-than-significant with mitigation. The Parkside Project would be required to comply with all VAF EIR mitigation measures relevant and applicable to Village I, ensuring that any noise impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible and would be consistent with those analyzed in the VAF EIR. Accordingly, the noise impacts associated with Parkside would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

The only project source of potentially increased ambient noise in the vicinity of the Parkside project (impact threshold (c)) is noise generated by vehicle trips. The number of vehicle trips generated by the project is driven by the number of residential units. The Parkside project trips would not exceed the daily trips generated by Villages I and II as studied in the VAF EIR. The combined Villages I, II, Lago Vista, and Parkside would generate 1,905 fewer daily trips, 25 more AM peak hour trips, and 163 fewer PM peak hour trips than the VAF EIR trip generation budget 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. The slight difference in PM peak hour trips

EXHIBIT A

Page 131 of 809 ends

16 means that PM traffic operations at nearby intersections would be the same or better than operations studied in the VAF EIR. The VAF EIR analyzed traffic noise associated with the Project, including Village I-II, and concluded that those impacts would be less-than-significant with mitigation. Those mitigation measures include the construction of barrier walls along Cement Hill Road and Clay Bank Road and apply to the entire VAF Project. Those mitigation measures will continue to apply to the entire VAF Project, including Parkside, and are incorporated herein by reference.

Environmental Issues
Noise - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Result in the exposure of persons to or
generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
 X 
b) Result in the exposure of persons to or
generation of, excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
 X 
c) Result in a substantial permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
 X 
d) Result in a substantial temporary or
periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
 X 
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of
a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
 X 
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise
levels?
 X 

11. Population & Housing
The potential impacts of the Parkside project related to population and housing are driven by the number of residential units and associated population. These impacts were analyzed in VAF EIR Chapter 3 (Land Use and Housing and Population), and determined to be less than significant.

As concluded in the VAF EIR, the total future housing and residential population are consistent with the housing and population growth allocated to the VAF project area and considered in the

EXHIBIT A

Page 132 of 809 ends

17 PWMP and the City’s General Plan. The addition of 76 units will not change the VAF-wide total number of units originally studied in the VAF EIR (2,327 units) and therefore, does not result in changes to impact conclusions related to Housing and Population. Accordingly, the Parkside project remains consistent with the conclusions in the VAF EIR and no revisions are required. The potential impacts of the Parkside project related to population and housing would not represent new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts and would remain below the Section 15162 thresholds.

Environmental Issues
Population - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth
in an area, either directly or indirectly?
 X 
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
 X 
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
 X 

12. Public Facilities & Services
The potential impacts of the Parkside project related to public services and facilities are driven by the number of residential units and associated population. These impacts were analyzed in VAF EIR Chapter 5 (Public Facilities and Services). The VAF EIR concluded that impacts associated with the originally-entitled 2,327 units would be less-than-significant with mitigation.

Since the Parkside project units will not change the VAF-wide total of 2,327 units originally analyzed in the VAF EIR, the impacts conclusions in the VAF EIR remain unchanged with the addition of the Parkside residential units to the Project. VAF mitigation measures related to Public Facilities and Services would continue to apply to the entire VAF Project, including Parkside. Mitigation measures include the payment of public facilities impact fees that new development within the City must pay before issuance of a building permit. Payment of fees would offset potential increases in service requests and impacts associated with public services would remain less than significant with mitigation.

EXHIBIT A

Page 133 of 809 ends

18 Environmental Issues
Public Services - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives
for: fire protection, police protection,
schools, parks, and other public
facilities?
 X 

13. Recreation
With respect to the Recreation impact threshold (a), the increase in demand for neighborhood and regional parks associated with the Parkside project is driven by the number of residential units and associated population. The VAF EIR did not specifically address Recreation, but it analyzed the Project’s potential impacts related to Park Facilities in Chapter 5 (Public Utilities and Services). The VAF EIR concluded that the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to Park Facilities with the implementation of Mitigation Measures PF-20, 21, and 22, which will apply to Parkside and which require improvement of the Linear Park adjacent to Villages I, II and III and neighborhood-serving parks in Villages I, II and III, along with Mitigation Measure PF-23, which requires payment of applicable AB 1600 development impact fees to fund park improvements.

The Project, including Parkside, will be served by the existing Laurel Creek Community Park, and the continued development of the Linear Park system which runs along and adjacent to the entire VAF master planned community, allowing for pedestrian and bicycle mobility from Clay Bank Road to Peabody Road. The Project will have access to an additional 14.2 acres of parkland within the VAF master planned community (including 5.5 acres in Village I, 0.7 acre in Village II, and 8.0 acres planned for Village III) and 11.1 acres of nearby linear parkway.

Environmental Issues
Recreation - Would the project:

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

VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 134 of 809 ends

19 accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or
require the construction, or
expansion of recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
 X 

14. Transportation
Wood Rodgers prepared a Transportation Impact Analysis Memorandum attached as Appendix B, which compares the trip generation of the proposed Parkside project with the trip generation analyzed in the VAF EIR to confirm that the Parkside project will not result in new or substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed and mitigated in the VAF EIR. Table 1 shows the approved trip generation for Villages I-III from the VAF EIR.

Table 1: VAF EIR Residential Trip Generation – Villages I and II Development Land Uses Description Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Total In Out Total In Out
Village I Residential 204 Low-Med
Density Units, 628
High Density Units
6,115 473 89 384 596 393 203
Village II Residential/
Mixed Use
270 Low-Med
Density Units, 24.3
Acres Mixed-Use
6,978 308 115 193 656 359 297
EIR Approved Total 13,093 781 204 577 1,252 752 500
Source: VAF EIR Table 4-6 and Appendix 3: Traffic Analysis for the Villages at Fairfield (TKJM, February 4, 2005), Tables IX and X (based on rates found in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition).

As noted in the project description, the final maps ultimately approved for Villages I and II included 432 units in Village I and 374 units in Village II, a total of 806 units, 295 less than the originally approved Village I-II total. Table 2 shows the trip generation for the actual built-out Village I-II units. Table 2 also includes the current proposed units for Lago Vista and Parkside.

Table 2: Current Trip Generation – Villages I, II and Proposed Lago Vista, and Parkside Units
Land Use
Category
Units Quantity Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

EXHIBIT A

Page 135 of 809 ends

20 Total In Out Total In Out
Village I –
SingleFamily
Detached
Housing
DU 432 3,878 282 71 211 393 248 145
Village II –
SingleFamily
Detached
Housing
DU 374 3,396 247 62 185 343 216 127
Lago Vista –
SingleFamily
Detached,
SingleFamily
Attached
(Duplex)
DU 375 3,130 219 55 164 276 169 107
Parkside –
SingleFamily
Detached
DU 76 784 58 15 43 77 49 28
Total 11,188 806 203 603 1,089 682 407
Notes: Trip rates based on fitted curve equations for the proposed land use consistent with information contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11
th Edition.

As detailed in Appendix B, the addition of Parkside daily trips to the built-out conditions of Villages I and II and the proposed Lago Vista conditions results in a total of 11,188 daily trips, 1,905 fewer than the 13,093 originally studied and approved in the VAF EIR for Villages I and II. Accordingly, the trips generated by the Parkside site would not exceed the trips generated by Villages I and II in the VAF EIR. The built-out conditions of Villages I and II, with Lago Vista and Parkside, are estimated to generate 25 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. The built-out conditions of Villages I and II with Lago Vista and Parkside are estimated to generate 163 fewer 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. Appendix B includes an analysis of intersection operations with the addition of Parkside units. All of the mitigation measures from the VAF EIR and subsequent addenda would continue to apply to the entire Project, including Parkside.

EXHIBIT A

Page 136 of 809 ends

21 While the CEQA Guidelines now consider VMT, addenda do not need to consider new impact areas added after the EIR was concluded. See Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1320 (adoption of new guidelines for GHG evaluation was no significant new information requiring further CEQA review because GHG emissions were known information and could have been addressed in the original EIR); Fort Mojave Indian Tribe v. Dept. of Health Servs. (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 1574, 1605 (new critical habitat regulation was not significant new information because impacts to the species had already been addressed in original EIR.) Since the trip distribution and generation of the combined current VAF Village I, Village II, and Parkside Project would be similar to and less than the values in the approved VAF EIR, the Parkside project would not be projected to result in any new transportation impacts beyond those studied in the VAF EIR.

Environmental Issues
Transportation - Would the project:

New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impact
No Substantial Change
from Previous VAF EIR
Analysis
No Impact
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system,
taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit
and non‐motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,
and mass transit?
 X 
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including but
not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures,
or other standards established by the
county congestion management
agency for designated roads or
highways?
 X 
c) Result in a change in air traffic
patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location
that results in substantial safety risks?
 X 
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
 X 
e) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 137 of 809 ends

22 f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans
or programs regarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or
otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
 X 

15. PUBLIC FACILITIES (UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS)
The potential impacts of the Parkside project related to public utilities are driven by the number of residential units and associated population. 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 Parkside. Because the Parkside 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. Accordingly, the proposed Parkside 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 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 
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
 X 

EXHIBIT A

Page 138 of 809 ends

23 commitments?
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 

16. WILDFIRE
The VAF EIR did not formally analyze potential wildfire 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 Wildfire, which are incorporated into this Addendum, and shown in the checklist below.

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 Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
 X 
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
 X 
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
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 

EXHIBIT A

Page 139 of 809 ends

24 17. ENERGY
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 Parkside will remain the same as the number of units originally analyzed in the VAF EIR, so any Energyrelated impacts associated with Parkside would be consistent with or less than those of the VAF Project. Additionally, the units in the Parkside 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 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 

18. EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
A. Mineral Resources: The VAF EIR concluded that the VAF Project would have no impacts related to mineral resources. There is no change to this conclusion with the Parkside 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 VAF EIR; the 2011, 2015 and 2018 Addenda to the VAF EIR; the 2025 (Lago Vista) Addendum; and this Addendum to the VAF EIR, adequately address the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Parkside 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 Parkside project approvals.

EXHIBIT A

Page 140 of 809 ends

25 The above referenced resolutions, ordinance, EIRs, and the 2011, 2015 and 2018 Addenda, the 2025 (Lago Vista) Addendum, and this 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.

EXHIBIT A

Page 141 of 809 ends

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
February 4, 2025
Rob White
Vice President Planned Communities
Lewis Management Corp.
9216 Kiefer Blvd.

Sacramento, CA 95826
Re: EIR Addendum Biological Summary for the Parkside Development Project This letter was prepared to support the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) addendum for Parkside Development Project (Project) located within 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 Villages at Fairfield Environmental Impact Report (EIR; City of Fairfield 2005) and the subsequent EIR Amendment (2010 Amendment; City of Fairfield, 2010), under which the Project Area was initially evaluated.

The report herein also includes a summary of site activities, existing site conditions, and applicable mitigation measures that will need to be completed prior to the initiation of Project construction.

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
The following sections address activities that have been completed on-site to date as well as outstanding items that will need to be completed prior to the initiation of any further ground disturbance. The Parkside Project is located within the larger Village 1 boundaries.

1.1 EIR Findings Summary, Previous Reports, and Current Conditions Overall, Village I impacted a total of 0.48 acres of jurisdictional aquatic resources, some of which were located with the Project boundaries. Necessary permits were acquired from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB; WDID 2 48C377696) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps; File No. 256570N). Compensation for these impacts occurred through purchase of mitigation credits.

In 2009, a Pre-Construction Survey was conducted for the larger Keswick Village Project, which includes the Project Area. This survey had negative findings for the following species within the Project Site: burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni), red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), northern harrier (Circus cyaneus), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus). During the 2009 field surveys, two raptor species (white-tailed kite and American kestrel) were found nesting immediately adjacent to and one loggerhead shrike nest was confirmed on the larger Keswick Village Project Site.

EXHIBIT A

Page 142 of 809 ends

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
2 The Village 1 site, including the Project site, has been periodically graded and disturbed since 2009 and was mass graded in 2017. Since that time, the site has been consistently and continuously used for staging, stockpiling, and general construction-related activities, thus maintaining a disturbed condition. Per the 2010 Amendment, the following mitigation measures outline preconstruction surveys which may be required ahead of Project activities.

Table 1: Applicable Mitigation Measures per the 2010 Amendment.

Mitigation Measure Trigger Timing Requirement
BIO-17 (BIO-1, 15a) Impacts to special status species
raptors. A qualified biologist shall
survey the Project Site for special status
raptors and raptor habitats and identify
any such species occurrence on the site.

The applicant shall conduct preconstruction surveys 30 days prior to construction. Permits may be required.
preconstructionRaptor habitat and
raptor species surveys
required. An additional
survey 30 days prior to
construction for all
raptor species with the
potential to occur on
site.

BIO-19 Impacts to Swainson’s hawk foraging
habitat. Preserve 0.5-acre of suitable
habitat land for each acre of urban
development on land identified as
suitable foraging habitat. Consult with
CDFW.
preconstruction
planning
phase

Swainson’s hawk
habitat surveys and
land mapping prior to
permitting
BIO-20(A-4B, BIO17-A)Impacts to Burrowing Owls. Preconstruction surveys 30 days prior to construction aligned with the CDFW
burrowing owl guidelines.
preconstruction

BUOW survey 30 days
prior to construction

BIO-23 (BIO-1, 15a)

Impacts to loggerhead shrike. Qualified
biologist shall survey the Project site for
loggerhead shrike nests and habitat.
preconstructionNesting and habitat
survey 30 days prior to
construction
*Original EIR Mitigation Measure naming is included in parentheses after the 2010 Amendment Mitigation Measure naming.

1.2 Additional Regulatory Considerations
The following section addresses any relevant regulatory changes that have occurred since the 2010 Amendment was published and evaluates implications that should be considered in the EIR addendum for the current Project.

EXHIBIT A

Page 143 of 809 ends

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
3 BALD EAGLE
Bald Eagle (BAEA; Haliaeetus leucocephalus) 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, approximately

0.6 mile southeast of the Project (CDFW 2022); no nest structures or indications of nesting has been observed to date. The Project Area itself does not provide suitable nesting or roosting habitat for this species and the disturbed nature of the site makes it unlikely to support foraging.

Although BAEA may utilize large trees in the vicinity of McCoy Pond, the distance and existing development between these areas makes it extremely unlikely that Project activities, including noise, vibration, odors, and movement of workers or equipment would result in impacts to potential nest sites. As such, no impacts to this species are anticipated as a result of the Project.

As previously noted, BIO-17 requires that a pre-construction survey for nesting raptors be conducted within the Project Area no more than 30 days prior to the onset of Project activities during the raptor nesting season (January 1 and August 31). This measure will inherently apply to BAEA, out of an extreme abundance of caution. Given that the Project Area does not provide nesting habitat for BAEA and potential nest trees do not occur in the immediate vicinity, it is WRA's opinion that this measure is sufficient to minimize any potential impacts to this species.

NORTHWESTERN POND TURTLE
At the time the 2010 Amendment was completed, northwestern pond turtle (NPT; Actinemys marmorata), formally western pond turtle, was 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 NPT will be issued by the end of 2024. If NPT are listed at that time, any subsequent take would be in violation of the ESA without take authorization from the USFWS.

No suitable habitat for NPT occurs within or immediately adjacent to the Project location. As such, no impacts to NPT are anticipated as a result of the proposed Project and the inclusion of avoidance measures is not deemed necessary.

CROTCH 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,

EXHIBIT A

Page 144 of 809 ends

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
4 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 Area. However, small mammal burrows are extremely limited within the Project Area. Additionally, existing grassland habitat is regularly disturbed by construction and other activity and therefore lacks host plants that are known to provide pollen and nectar sources for CBB. As such, it in unlikely that the Project Area supports this species. No additional avoidance measures for CBB are recommended.

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

BURROWING OWL
On October 15, 2024, burrowing owl (BUOW; Athene cunicularia) 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 BUOW were evaluated at the time the 2010 Amendment. The mitigation measure for BUOW (BIO-20) requires that a pre-construction burrowing owl survey will be performed 30 days ahead of ground-disturbance within the Project Area.

While the Project Area supports limited gopher activity, no burrows of California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi) have been observed onsite to date. As such, the Project Area does not currently support burrows of suitable size for BUOW. Given the ongoing disturbance and lack of suitable burrows, BUOW are unlikely to occupy the site for overwintering or nesting purposes.

However, given that materials are often stored onsite and may provide limited refugia, implementation of the pre-construction survey outlined in BIO-20 should be implemented out of an abundance of caution.

EXHIBIT A

Page 145 of 809 ends

WRA, Inc. | 2169 G East Francisco Blvd., San Rafael, CA 94901 www.wra-ca.com · ph: 415.454.8868
5 1.2.1 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 location were impacted during the grading of the site. These features have been appropriately mitigated for through purchase of wetland credits. No further avoidance measures are required.

1.3 Summary and Recommendations
In summary, additional surveys for BUOW, SWHA, general raptors, and nesting birds will be required prior to the initiation of the Project, as prescribed in the PDEIR. In addition, the Project will need to permanently preserve suitable habitat for impacts to SWHA foraging habitat, pursuant to mitigation measure BIO-19.

Since the PDEIR was published, the regulatory status has changed for the following species:
northwestern pond turtle, Crotch bumblebee, burrowing owl, and mountain lion. No potentially significant impacts to CBB, NPT, BUOW or mountain lion are anticipated as a result of the Project. Therefore, no additional measures are deemed necessary for these species. However, it is recommended that the Project adhere to the pre-construction survey requirements for BUOW, out of an abundance of caution.

Please contact me with any questions.

Sincerely,
Leslie Lazarotti
WRA, Inc.

[email protected]
Cc: Tommy Dryer
WRA, Inc.

[email protected]

EXHIBIT A

Page 146 of 809 ends

Villages at Fairfield Parkside Traffic Impact Analysis 1 of 17 Memorandum
To: Tina Do Machado, AICP
Garland Wong, PE, TE
Public Works Department | City of Fairfield
From: Mario Tambellini, PE, TE
Nicole Scappaticci, PE
Date: August 11, 2025
Subject: Villages at Fairfield Parkside Transportation Impact Analysis

1. INTRODUCTION
This memorandum has been prepared to present the results of a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for the Villages at Fairfield Village I School Site, also known as Parkside, Project (Project) located in the City of Fairfield (City). The Project is located on one currently undeveloped parcel on the southeast corner of the Passion Lane and Gulf Drive intersection located in Village I of Villages at Fairfield (VAF). The Project parcel was originally assumed to be the site of a future elementary school in the VAF Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

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 VAF project. The local traffic operations analysis in this study was conducted to evaluate the level of service (LOS), delay, and queueing at nearby intersections where traffic patterns may change due to construction of the proposed Project. This study also includes a safe routes to school component where the most feasible routes to the closest schools are identified.

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 LOS and Queueing 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 safe routes to school section was included in this TIA at the request of the City Traffic Engineer:

4. Safe Routes to School
A Conclusion section is also provided at the end of this memorandum.

EXHIBIT A

Page 147 of 809 ends

Villages at Fairfield Parkside Traffic Impact Analysis 2 of 17

PROJECT HISTORY
The current Project site (Parkside) was originally proposed to be a future elementary school in VAF Village I. 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 and 12.5 acres of commercial development. Subsequently, the approved final maps for Villages I and II included only 806 residential units in Villages I and II (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 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 upon 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, Lago Vista, has been proposed which is located directly east of Village II and consists of 151 compact single family residential units and 224 duplex/condominium residential units.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project would develop up to 76 single-family detached dwelling units. The Project would gain access to the existing roadway network via new local roadway connections to Passion Lane across from Hideaway Lane and Clementine Lane. The Project site plan is included at the end of this memorandum as Attachment A. A recent Illustrative Map for the overall VAF project is shown as Attachment B. The Project is shown in the attached Illustrative Map as the blue Parcel B.

TIA APPROACH
Since the Project is contained within 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 original VAF EIR studied the Project site as an elementary school which only generated internal neighborhood trips. The Project’s 76 single-family detached dwelling units would generate Project external trips. However, the Project’s trip generation is 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

EXHIBIT A

Page 148 of 809 ends

Villages at Fairfield Parkside Traffic Impact Analysis 3 of 17 traveled (VMT) per capita thresholds. Instead, this TIA compares Project impacts to the approved VAF EIR in an approach similar to that used in the recent VAF Lago Vista TIA. 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 Conditions – this scenario represents a near-term condition that includes existing conditions traffic volumes with the addition of Background traffic. Background traffic includes trips from the homes in Village I and II that are not yet occupied or constructed and trips from the proposed Lago Vista development.
• Existing PlusBackground Plus Project Conditions – this scenario represents Existing Plus Background conditions with the addition of Parkside Project trips.

The following four (4) existing intersections were included in this analysis:

1. Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway/Cement Hill Road

2. Clay Bank Road & Gulf Drive

3. Clay Bank Road & Horizon Road/Horizon Circle (South)

4. Portland Drive & Cement Hill Road/Manual Campos Parkway The locations of the above study intersections are shown in Figure 1. The study intersections were 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.

ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Level of Service Methodology
Synchro 12 software and Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition (HCM 7th Edition) methodology were used to determine intersection delay and level of service (LOS) operations under all study conditions.

For signalized intersections, the intersection delays and LOS reported are the average values for the whole intersection. The delay-based HCM 7th Edition LOS criteria for different types of intersection controls are outlined in Table 1.
95th percentile queues for all movements with turn pockets were reported using SimTraffic software. 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 was used to capture the effects of adjacent signals.

EXHIBIT A

Page 149 of 809 ends

Clay Ban
k Rd
Willow Ln
Re
bec
ca Dr
Gulf Dr
Candleberry Way
Manuel Campos Pkwy
Avery at the
Villages Sales
Office
Cement Hill Rd
Clay Bank
R
d
Bay
Tree Dr
Horizon Cir
Western St
Jamboree Dr
Renewal Ln
Air Base Pkwy Air Base Pkwy
Putah South Canal Cement Hill Rd
Gulf Dr
In
sp
iration
Dr
Passion
Ln
Muse WayGlee Ln
Center Dr
Cement Hill Rd
Manuel Campos Pkwy
Strassberger Dr
High Line Dr
H
orizon Cir
Tommy Ln
Bailey Dr
Aspire Way
Lea Ln
Nightfall Ln
Millennium Way
Air Base Pkwy
!(
!(
!(
!(
1 2
3 4
Legend
!( Study Intersections
Project Location
Project Location and Study Facilities
Villages at Fairfield Parkside TIA
Fairfield, CA
August 2025
\\woodrodgers.loc\ProductionData\Jobs\1000-s\1135-Villages_at_Faifield\VAF-OA\Traffic\GIS\Parkside\ArcGISPro\Base_File\VAF_Parkside_BaseMap\VAF_BaseMap.aprx 4/29/2025 6:18 PM nscappaticci FIGURE 1
NORTH
0 150 300 600
Feet
#

EXHIBIT A

Page 150 of 809 ends

Villages at Fairfield Parkside Traffic Impact Analysis 5 of 17 Table 1. HCM 7th Edition Intersection LOS Thresholds
Level of
Service Description
Intersection Control
Delay (seconds/vehicle)
Signalized
A Free-flow conditions with negligible to minimal delays. delay ≤ 10.0 B Good progression with slight delays. 10.0 < delay ≤ 20.0 C Relatively higher delays. 20.0 < delay ≤ 35.0
D Somewhat congested conditions with longer but tolerable delays. 35.0 < delay ≤ 55.0 E Congested conditions with significant delays. 55.0 < delay ≤ 80.0 F Jammed or grid-lock type operating conditions. delay > 80.0 Source: HCM 7th Edition Exhibit 19-8 and 20-2.

Level of Service Criteria
The City of Fairfield General Plan Update (December 3, 2024) Circulation Element states the following:
“This General Plan sets a performance target of LOS D during peak hours for both intersections and roadway segments within the Planning Area.”
Therefore, the minimum acceptable LOS for the study intersections is considered to be LOS D.

TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND GEOMETRIES
The study intersections were analyzed under Existing Plus Background conditions lane geometrics and control, which include planned improvements on Clay Bank Road and Manuel Campos Parkway/Cement Hill Road that would be constructed by VAF in the near-term future as proposed by the Village at Fairfield Village I Phase 3 master Infrastructure Improvement Plans (Wood Rodgers, September 2021). Existing Plus Background conditions lane geometrics and control are shown in Figure 2.

Existing Traffic Counts
Existing weekday AM and PM peak vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian counts were collected between 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and between 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM on March 14, 2024, at the Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway intersection. Peak hour counts were collected at the remaining three (3) study intersections on February 11, 2025. Traffic data count sheets are included in Attachment C.

Background Trip Generation
Existing Plus Background traffic volumes were developed by adding trips from surrounding developments that were in the process of being completed when counts were taken (March 14, 2024, and February 11, 2025). The number of in-progress and proposed residential dwelling units was provided by the Project applicant. The number of remainder (in-progress and proposed) units in Villages I and II was higher on March 14, 2024 than it was on February 11, 2025. Therefore, separate trip generations were prepared for the Village I and Village II Remainders for the dates when the counts took place. Trips from the remainder units as of May 14, 2024 were distributed to the Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway intersection.

Trips from the remainder units as of February 11, 2025 were distributed to the other three study intersections. Volumes between intersections were balanced up when needed between the intersections of Clay Bank Road & Gulf Drive, Clay Bank Road & Manuel Campos Parkway, and Portland Drive & Manuel Campos Parkway/Cement Hill Road.

A list of background projects is shown below:
• Village I Lot 2 Remainder (under construction): 49 Single-Family Detached Units as of May 14, 2024; 9 Single-Family Detached Units as of February 11, 2025
• Village II Lot 3 Remainder (under construction): 77 Single-Family Detached Units as of May 14, 2024; 52 Single-Family Detached Units as of February 11, 2025

EXHIBIT A

Page 151 of 809 ends

Villages at Fairfield Parkside Traffic Impact Analysis 6 of 17 • Village II Lot 4 Remainder (under construction): 58 Single-Family Detached Units as of May 14, 2024; 33 Single-Family Detached Units February 11, 2025
• Lago Vista (future): 151 Single-Family Detached Units, 224 Single-Family Attached (Condominium) Units
Locations of the background projects are labeled in the VAF Illustrative Map contained in Attachment B.

Trip generations for the above background projects are contained in Attachment D. Trip distributions for the background project trips were developed using the latest version of the 2020 City of Fairfield Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model and engineering judgement. Background project trip distributions and assignment are shown in Figure 3. Existing Plus Background conditions traffic volumes are shown in Figure

4. Project Trip Generation
The trip generation data contained in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, was used to estimate the number of trips generated by the Parkside Project. The ITE land use category of Single-Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210) was used to represent the proposed 76 single-family unit development. Table 2 shows the Parkside Project trip generation estimate.

Table 2. Parkside Project Trip Generation
Land Use
ITE
Code Quantity Units Daily1
AM Peak Hour1 PM Peak Hour1
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached Housing 210 76 DU2 784 15 43 58 49 28 77 Notes:
1Trip rates are calculated based on ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) fitted curve equations. 2DU = Dwelling Units
As shown in Table 2, the Parkside Project is anticipated to generate a total of 784 daily trips, 58 AM peak hour trips (15 inbound and 43 outbound), and 77 PM peak hour trips (49 inbound and 28 outbound).

Project trip distribution and assignment are shown in Figure 5. Project trip distribution was assumed to be the same as the Lago Vista and remaining Village I and II units. Project trips were added to Existing Plus Background volumes to obtain Existing Plus Background Plus Project traffic volumes, shown in Figure 6.

EXHIBIT A

Page 152 of 809 ends

Fairfield City CouncilNovember 18, 2025

Fairfield City Council
November 18, 2025