Fowler City Council
May 6, 2025

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, MAY 06, 2025 at 6:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER – 128 SOUTH 5TH STREET, FOWLER, CA 93625 AGENDA
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance or accommodations to access the City Council Chambers or participate in this meeting, please contact the Clerk at (559) 834-3113 x102. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.

City Council meetings are open to the public at the physical address listed above. There are numerous ways to participate in the City Council meetings: you may attend in person, you may appear by telephone as described below, or you may submit written comments via email to .

Please include your name and reference the agenda item you are commenting on, if any. Written comments received that do not specify an agenda item will be marked for the general public comment portion of the agenda. Emails received by 8:00 am on the date of the meeting will be provided to the City Council at the meeting and made part of the record of proceedings but will not be read aloud.

En cumplimiento con la Acta de Americanos con Discapacidades si necesita asistencia o adaptaciones para acceder a las Cámaras del Concejo de la Ciudad o participar en esta reunión, comuníquese con el secretario de la ciudad al (559) 834-3113 x102. También puede ponerse en contacto con el secretario si necesita servicios de traducción. La notificación al menos 48 horas antes de la reunión permitirá a la Ciudad hacer arreglos razonables para garantizar la accesibilidad.
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85645073988?pwd=Fo7gdq-Um9GlwvVMbqjsCrJ9TxdYQ.RwbLyzR469Zb5JTTelephone Number: (253) 215-8782 Meeting ID: 856 4507 3988
Passcode: 676360
Persons accessing the meeting will have an opportunity to provide comments at appropriate times during the meeting. To speak during a public comment period, press *9 on your phone to raise your hand or click “raise hand” in the webinar. At the appropriate time, you will be prompted to unmute yourself, and asked to identify yourself when providing public comment.

Any writing or document that is a public record and provided to a majority of the City Council regarding an open session item on the agenda will be made available for public inspection at City Hall, in the City Clerk's office, during normal business hours. In addition, such writings and documents may be posted on the City's website at .
1 Resolutions and Ordinances - With respect to the approval of resolutions and ordinances, the reading of the title thereto shall be deemed a motion to waive a reading of the complete resolution or ordinance and unless there is a request by a Councilmember that the resolution or ordinance be read in full, further reading of the resolution or ordinance shall be deemed waived by unanimous consent of the Council.

1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

4. INVOCATION BY PASTOR ERIK BUHL OF FOWLER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH

5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

6. CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Public Works Week Proclamation
B. Police Week Proclamation
C. Jr. Ambassador of the Year - Davian Alcaraz

7. PUBLIC COMMENT
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Council on any matter not described on this agenda. Presentations are limited to 3 minutes per person and no more than 15 minutes per topic.

8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and include a recommended action from Staff and shall be acted on by one motion of the Council. If a Councilmember requests additional information or would like to pull an item for discussion, that item shall be pulled from the Consent Calendar and acted upon separately. A Councilmember may register an action on an individual item without pulling the item from the Consent Calendar. A motion to approve the Consent Calendar is deemed to include a motion to waive the full reading of any ordinance or resolution on the Consent Calendar. For adoption of ordinances, only those which received a unanimous vote of the Councilmembers present at introduction shall be eligible for placement on the Consent Calendar.
8A RATIFY Pay Warrants for May 6, 2025.
8B APPROVE Minutes of the April 15, 2025 City Council Meeting 8C APPROVE a three-year agreement, with two (2) one-year extensions, in an amount not to exceed $766,621.00 with the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office to provide 9-1-1 dispatch services and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. 2 8D ADOPT Resolution No. 2779 to approve revised Water and Street Improvement Standards

9. CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR
Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be heard individually immediately after action is taken on the Consent Calendar.

10. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
Personnel
A APPROVE Resolution No. 2780 adopting an updated salary classification schedule Planning
B APPROVE Resolution No. 2781, adopting an addendum to the City of Fowler General Plan Environmental Impact Report and approving General Plan Amendment No. 25-11, with the land uses proposed under Alternative A.

C APPROVE Resolution No. 2782 Authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements with Pacific West Communities and Fresno County Rural Transit Authority (FCRTA) as a joint applicant for a grant application for Round 9 of the Strategic Growth Council’s (SGC) Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) grant program.

D INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2025-02, pertaining to Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471:
i. Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
ii. Prezoning Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471 to M-1 (Light Industrial) and its designated remainder to R3 (Single-Family Residential) iii. Prezoning APN 340-120-06 to R3
APPROVE Resolution No. 2783:
iv. Initiating annexation of the Property of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471 and APN 340-120-06
Public Works
E Actions pertaining to the Well 9 Drought Resiliency Project:

1. AWARD a construction contract to United Field Services Corporation in the amount of $3,356,725 and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.

2. APPROVE a professional services agreement with Vanir Construction Management, Inc. in the amount of $128,725 for construction management and 3 observation services for the Project and authorize the City Manager to negotiate the agreement.

3. AUTHORIZE a 5% project construction contingency budget of $167,836 to fund any identified environmental mitigation, testing, inspection, and unforeseen issues during construction.

F AWARD Adams Avenue Rehabilitation Stearns to SR99 [STPL 5173 (039)] to Emmett Valley Construction, Inc. in the amount of $177,957 and authorize City Manager to execute the agreement

11. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS

12. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS

13. ADJOURN
Next Ordinance No. 2025-03
Next Resolution No. 2784
CERTIFICATION: I, Angela Vasquez, City Clerk of the City of Fowler, California, hereby certify that the foregoing agenda was posted for public review on Friday May 2, 2025.

Angela Vasquez, CPMC
City Clerk
4 CHECK NUMBERS CHECK DATES AMOUNT

ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECKS
Regular checks 44532-44605 April 11 thru April 28 $ 172,538.33 TOTAL ACCOUNTS PAYABLE CHECKS $ 172,538.33

PAYROLL COSTS
Second April Bi-Weekly Payroll April 25, 2025 $ 102,395.87 TOTAL PAYROLL COSTS $ 102,395.87

TOTAL CASH DISBURSEMENTS $ 274,934.20
NOTE:

CITY OF FOWLER

WARRANTS LIST
May 6, 2025
5 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 1
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 100 - GENERAL FUND

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44533 04/16/25 13597 ADVENTIST HEALTH 6120 5310 LAB WORK -PD 0.00 200.00 1001 44534 04/16/25 15137 AILEEN ZEPEDA 6150 5300 CONF-REIM-ZEPEDA 0.00 426.50 1001 44535 04/16/25 14992 ALTA LANGUAGE SERVI 6120 5300 LANG TEST-TOBAR/YAN 0.00 287.00 1001 44536 04/16/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6400 5110 SUPPLIES-REC 0.00 231.23 1001 44536 04/16/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6120 5110 SUPPLIES EASTER-PD 0.00 208.33 1001 44536 04/16/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6120 5110 SUPPLIES-PD 0.00 177.74 1001 44536 04/16/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6400 5110 SUPPLIES-REC 0.00 100.67 1001 44536 04/16/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6400 5110 SUPPLIES-REC 0.00 62.07 1001 44536 04/16/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6200 5205 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 53.47 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 833.51
1001 44537 04/16/25 10549 AT&T MOBILITY 6170 5160 INTERSTATE 4/5-5/4/ 0.00 3,419.11 1001 44538 04/16/25 11291 THE BUSINESS JOURNA 6150 5150 NOTICE TO CONTRACTO 0.00 3,010.00 1001 44539 04/16/25 11971 CALPERS 6080 5110 2025 REPLACE CHARGE 0.00 141.39 1001 44541 04/16/25 14053 CENTRAL VALLEY GUNS 6120 5220 CLEAN/INSPECTION-PD 0.00 495.00 1001 44542 04/16/25 12654 COMCAST 6170 5160 INTERNET MAR25-PD 0.00 1,069.33 1001 44544 04/16/25 13929 FIREWORKS & STAGE F 6400 5110 DEPOSIT FOR FIREWOR 0.00 12,875.00 1001 44545 04/16/25 10488 FOWLER UNIFIED 6200 5210 FUEL MAR25-ST 0.00 737.56 1001 44545 04/16/25 10488 FOWLER UNIFIED 6260 5210 FUEL MAR25-PARKS 0.00 592.62 1001 44545 04/16/25 10488 FOWLER UNIFIED 6120 5210 FUEL MAR25-PD 0.00 95.19 1001 44545 04/16/25 10488 FOWLER UNIFIED 6120 5210 FUEL MARCH25-PD 0.00 3,730.42 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5,155.79
1001 44546 04/16/25 10104 FPOA 100 2045 EMP DED 4/11/25 0.00 250.00 1001 44547 04/16/25 10119 FRESNO COUNTY CLERK 6025 5110 NOV24 ELECTION 0.00 3,488.93 1001 44551 04/16/25 14671 HERO ALLIANCE 6400 5110 CHARACTERS EASTER-R 0.00 400.00 1001 44553 04/16/25 10445 JACOBSEN TRAILER, I 6200 5205 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 105.48 1001 44554 04/16/25 10189 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNI 6020 5250 DIVISION MTG FEE 0.00 75.00 1001 44555 04/16/25 10190 LEXIS NEXIS 6120 5230 ANNUAL LIC3/1-2/28/ 0.00 5,388.37 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 94.00 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 305.50 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 372.50 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 446.50 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 517.00 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 1,198.50 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 1,527.50 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 2,927.75 6 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 2
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 100 - GENERAL FUND

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 3,726.50 1001 44556 04/16/25 10194 LOZANO SMITH 6060 5620 LEGAL SVC MAR25 0.00 4,300.50 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 15,416.25
1001 44557 04/16/25 10197 MAINTENANCE SUPERIN 6200 5300 TRNG-WHISENHUNT-ST 0.00 65.00 1001 44557 04/16/25 10197 MAINTENANCE SUPERIN 6260 5300 TRNG-RUFF-PARKS 0.00 65.00 1001 44557 04/16/25 10197 MAINTENANCE SUPERIN 6260 5300 TRNG-MARTINEZ-PARKS 0.00 65.00 1001 44557 04/16/25 10197 MAINTENANCE SUPERIN 6200 5300 TRNG-CARRASCO-ST 0.00 65.00 1001 44557 04/16/25 10197 MAINTENANCE SUPERIN 6260 5300 TRNG-ARTIAGA-PARKS 0.00 65.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 325.00
1001 44558 04/16/25 10201 METRO UNIFORM & ACC 6120 5086 UNIFORM-ALVARADO-PD 0.00 249.95 1001 44560 04/16/25 14843 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 6200 5200 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 266.14 1001 44560 04/16/25 14843 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 6200 5200 EQUIPMENT-ST 0.00 2,467.78 1001 44560 04/16/25 14843 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 6260 5205 EQUIPMENT-PARKS 0.00 2,467.78 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5,201.70
1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 2831 E MANN 3/21/25 0.00 91.41 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 GLDNST B 3/31/25 0.00 111.15 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6080 5170 128 S 5TH 3/31/25 0.00 120.52 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 212 E MERCED 3/31/2 0.00 151.07 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6260 5170 500 E MERCED 3/31/2 0.00 342.55 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 5TH/FRESNO 3/31/25 0.00 7.47 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 4218 GLDNST B 3/31/ 0.00 87.41 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6260 5170 9TH/MERCED 3/31/25 0.00 64.98 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6080 5170 128 S 5TH 3/31/25 0.00 78.46 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 5TH/FRESNO 3/31/25 0.00 602.48 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 RETRO FIT LOAN MAR2 0.00 941.28 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 MERCED/7TH 3/31/25 0.00 10.19 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 1291 W SOUTH 3/31/2 0.00 10.19 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 MERCED 6TH 3/31/25 0.00 10.19 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 5TH/FRESNO 3/31/25 0.00 14.89 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6080 5170 MAIN/5TH 3/31/25 0.00 23.82 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 7TH/TULARE 3/31/25 0.00 25.46 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,693.52
1001 44562 04/16/25 13095 PBM SUPPLY & MFG 6200 5195 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 196.36 1001 44563 04/16/25 11179 R G EQUIPMENT 6260 5200 EQUIP MAINT-PARKS 0.00 54.43 1001 44563 04/16/25 11179 R G EQUIPMENT 6260 5200 EQUIP MAINT-PARKS 0.00 754.26 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 808.69
1001 44564 04/16/25 11489 SHOP N GO, INC. 6120 5220 CAR WASHES FEB25-PD 0.00 90.00 1001 44564 04/16/25 11489 SHOP N GO, INC. 6120 5220 CAR WASHES MAR25-PD 0.00 153.00 1001 44564 04/16/25 11489 SHOP N GO, INC. 6120 5220 CAR WASHES JAN25-PD 0.00 189.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 432.00
1001 44565 04/16/25 10518 SIGNMAX! 6200 5202 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 48.22 1001 44565 04/16/25 10518 SIGNMAX! 6200 5202 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 123.53 1001 44565 04/16/25 10518 SIGNMAX! 6200 5202 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 259.73 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 431.48
7 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 3
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 100 - GENERAL FUND

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44566 04/16/25 12443 SIMPLOT GROWER SOLU 6260 5203 SUPPLIES-PARKS 0.00 471.31 1001 44567 04/16/25 13355 SITE ONE LANDSCAPE 6260 5203 SUPPLIES-PARKS 0.00 37.39 1001 44567 04/16/25 13355 SITE ONE LANDSCAPE 6260 5203 SUPPLIES-PARKS 0.00 499.20 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 536.59
1001 44568 04/16/25 14358 SPARKLETTS 6020 5121 WTR SVC APR25-ADMIN 0.00 79.50 1001 44568 04/16/25 14358 SPARKLETTS 6150 5121 WTR SVC APR25-PLN 0.00 79.50 1001 44568 04/16/25 14358 SPARKLETTS 6120 5121 WTR SVC APR25-PD 0.00 79.50 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 238.50
1001 44569 04/16/25 15123 THE SELMA BARN 6200 5195 CONCRETE-ST 0.00 164.88 1001 44571 04/16/25 14830 WILLDAN GROUP INC 6160 5225 INSPECTION FEB25 0.00 1,821.25 1001 44575 04/23/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6120 5110 SUPPLIES-PD 0.00 131.79 1001 44575 04/23/25 14519 AMAZON CAPITAL SERV 6400 5110 SUPPLIES-REC 0.00 212.12 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 343.91
1001 44576 04/23/25 15088 AT&T MOBILITY 6170 5160 PHONES3/12-4/11/25- 0.00 1,103.26 1001 44577 04/23/25 10026 BCT CONSULTING 6170 5230 DRIVE UPGRADE-IT 0.00 446.58 1001 44579 04/23/25 15119 BOB MURRAY & ASSOCI 6020 5220 C.M. RECRUITMENT 0.00 342.95 1001 44580 04/23/25 11653 CIVICPLUS LLC 6025 5220 MEETING MAN. SUB 0.00 3,995.46 1001 44580 04/23/25 11653 CIVICPLUS LLC 6170 5230 WEBSITE SUBSCRIPTIO 0.00 4,933.31 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 8,928.77
1001 44581 04/23/25 14512 CSG CONSULTANTS 6160 5225 PLAN CHECK MAR25 0.00 4,145.94 1001 44582 04/23/25 14937 FLOCK SAFETY 6120 5220 CAMERA/POLE REP-PD 0.00 1,300.00 1001 44583 04/23/25 14473 FORTNERS TOWING 6120 5220 TOWING SERVICEU#45- 0.00 302.00 1001 44585 04/23/25 15185 JOSE FENCING 6260 5203 FENCE INSTALL-PARKS 0.00 980.00 1001 44585 04/23/25 15185 JOSE FENCING 6260 5203 FENCE INSTALL-PARKS 0.00 990.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,970.00
1001 44586 04/23/25 15107 KYLCUSTOM DESIGNS 6120 5086 SUPPLIES-PD 0.00 108.00 1001 44587 04/23/25 15180 MARLIN LEASING CORP 6170 5180 LEASE APR25-IT 0.00 1,515.43 1001 44589 04/23/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 WALTER/FRES 4/14/25 0.00 31.80 1001 44589 04/23/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 TRACT 5834 4/14/25 0.00 131.98 1001 44589 04/23/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 TRACT 5212 4/14/25 0.00 277.47 1001 44589 04/23/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 ADAMS/TEMP 4/14/25 0.00 434.70 1001 44589 04/23/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 6200 5170 SOUTH&SUNNY 4/14/25 0.00 455.63 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,331.58
1001 44590 04/23/25 10993 POLICE REGIONAL TRA 6120 5300 PSP TRAINING-YANG-P 0.00 593.00 8 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 4
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 100 - GENERAL FUND

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44590 04/23/25 10993 POLICE REGIONAL TRA 6120 5300 PSP TRAINING-OWEN-P 0.00 593.00 1001 44590 04/23/25 10993 POLICE REGIONAL TRA 6120 5300 PSP TRAINING-TOBAR- 0.00 593.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,779.00
1001 44591 04/23/25 14433 PRICE PAIGE & COMPA 6030 5220 AUDIT 23-24 0.00 920.00 1001 44592 04/23/25 10254 REDCAT TOWING 6120 5220 TOWING SERVICE-PD 0.00 150.00 1001 44593 04/23/25 10518 SIGNMAX! 6200 5202 SUPPLIES-ST 0.00 61.75 1001 44594 04/23/25 10085 STATE OF CA DEPARTM 6120 5310 ANALYSIS-PD 0.00 70.00 1001 44595 04/23/25 15083 THE CHLORINATOR POO 6260 5203 FOUNTAIN SVC APR25 0.00 250.00 1001 44597 04/23/25 13543 UNIFIRST CORPORATIO 6700 5185 JANITORIAL 4/17/25- 0.00 91.54 1001 44597 04/23/25 13543 UNIFIRST CORPORATIO 6200 5185 UNIFORM 4/17/25-ST 0.00 108.77 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 200.31
1001 44598 04/23/25 14259 VISUAL EDGE IT INC 6170 5180 COPY SVC 4/23-5/22/ 0.00 1,232.01 1001 44604 04/24/25 14803 CARLOS MACIAS 6120 5260 TRAVEL-ADV-MACIAS 0.00 315.00 1001 44605 04/24/25 15023 NICK HARO 6120 5260 TRAVEL-ADV-HARO 0.00 315.00 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 93,739.38
TOTAL FUND 0.00 93,739.38
9 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 5
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 209 - RECYCLE GRANT

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44596 04/23/25 13207 THE WORSHIP CENTRE 2090 5110 CLEAN UP EASTER 25 0.00 500.00 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 500.00
TOTAL FUND 0.00 500.00
10 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 6
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 212 - ARPA FUNDING

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44599 04/23/25 14634 DEWBERRY ARCHITECT 2120 5710 WATER TOWER 0.00 6,166.00 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 6,166.00
TOTAL FUND 0.00 6,166.00
11 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 7
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 240 - CMAQ GRANT

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44572 04/16/25 15139 JUAREZ BROTHERS GEN 2400 5710 SUMNER AVE/BIKE PED 0.00 8,293.97 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 8,293.97
TOTAL FUND 0.00 8,293.97
12 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 8
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 255 - STATE GRANT AB178

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44600 04/23/25 15170 DATAPILOT 2550 5710 DATAPILOT-PD 0.00 6,995.00 1001 44601 04/23/25 14634 DEWBERRY ARCHITECT 2550 5710 PD/SN CTR MAR25 0.00 19,899.50 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 26,894.50
TOTAL FUND 0.00 26,894.50
13 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 9
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 500 - WATER

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44532 04/16/25 15005 120 WATER AUDIT, IN 5000 5220 PROF SVCS MAR25/26 0.00 13,800.00 1001 44540 04/16/25 15197 CASTRO, REBECCA 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 100.00 1001 44543 04/16/25 15195 CORTEZ, MARCEL & ST 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 74.53 1001 44545 04/16/25 10488 FOWLER UNIFIED 5000 5210 FUEL MAR25-WTR 0.00 738.60 1001 44548 04/16/25 15198 FULFER, GLORIA 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 67.07 1001 44549 04/16/25 10759 GLASCO GENERAL ENGI 5000 5202 SVC HYDRANT 5TH&SUM 0.00 2,500.00 1001 44549 04/16/25 10759 GLASCO GENERAL ENGI 5000 5202 SVC HYDR 3RD&FRESNO 0.00 3,200.00 1001 44549 04/16/25 10759 GLASCO GENERAL ENGI 5000 5202 SVC HYDRANT 8TH&MAR 0.00 5,000.00 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 10,700.00
1001 44550 04/16/25 15194 GURWINDER SINGH 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 68.38 1001 44552 04/16/25 14238 INFOSEND, INC 5000 5621 UB BILLING MAIN MAR 0.00 658.09 1001 44559 04/16/25 10215 NELSON'S ACE HARDWA 5000 5195 SUPPLIES-WTR 0.00 64.15 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 5000 5170 SESWNW231521 3/31/2 0.00 5,688.82 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 5000 5170 ADAMS/5TH 3/31/25 0.00 55.70 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 5000 5170 TEMP/GOLDN 3/31/25 0.00 471.80 1001 44561 04/16/25 10237 P G & E - SACRAMENT 5000 5170 95 E ADAMS 3/31/25 0.00 537.07 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 6,753.39
1001 44570 04/16/25 15196 VALDEZ, JOEY & DELP 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 100.00 1001 44574 04/23/25 10007 ALERT-O-LITE, INC 5000 5202 HYDRANT REPAIRS-WTR 0.00 260.68 1001 44578 04/23/25 15199 BESS FEAVER 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 26.35 1001 44584 04/23/25 15118 INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC 5000 5206 WELL 8 GEN SVC 0.00 1,039.22 1001 44588 04/23/25 15200 OROZCO, ROBERT H 500 2050 UB REFUND 0.00 100.00 1001 44597 04/23/25 13543 UNIFIRST CORPORATIO 5000 5185 UNIFORM 4/17/25-WTR 0.00 108.78 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 34,659.24
TOTAL FUND 0.00 34,659.24
14 Section 8, Item 8A
SUPERION PAGE NUMBER: 10
DATE: 04/28/2025 CITY OF FOWLER ACCTPA21
TIME: 12:13:39 CHECK REGISTER - BY FUND
SELECTION CRITERIA: transact.check_no between '44532' and '44605' ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/25
FUND - 503 - TCP FUND

CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME DEPT ACCNT ----DESCRIPTION---- SALES TAX AMOUNT 1001 44573 04/16/25 10024 BSK ASSOCIATES 5030 5220 WATER TESTING 0.00 208.45 1001 44573 04/16/25 10024 BSK ASSOCIATES 5030 5220 TCP MITIGATION MAR2 0.00 1,134.75 TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,343.20
1001 44602 04/23/25 10024 BSK ASSOCIATES 5030 5220 WATER TESTING 0.00 280.00 1001 44603 04/23/25 15015 ZIM INDUSTRIES, INC 5030 5710 TCP WELL#7 0.00 662.04 TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 2,285.24
TOTAL FUND 0.00 2,285.24
TOTAL REPORT 0.00 172,538.33
15 Section 8, Item 8A

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2025 at 6:00 PM
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER – 128 SOUTH 5TH STREET, FOWLER, CA 93625

MINUTES

1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Mayor Mejia called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

PRESENT
Juan Mejia
Amarjeet Gill
Leonard Hammer
Karnig Kazarian
Daniel Parra
City Staff Present: City Manager Reid, City Attorney Cross, Battalion Chief Dominguez, Recreation Supervisor Hernandez, City Planner Marple, City Engineer Park, Public Works Director Rocha, and City Clerk Vasquez.

6. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR
One member of the public spoke.

Motion made by Gill, Seconded by Kazarian.

Voting Yea: Mejia, Gill, Hammer, Kazarian, Parra

9. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
City Attorney
A. APPROVE a City Manager Employment Agreement and APPOINT Michael S. Reid as City Manager effective April 15, 2025
One member of the public spoke.

Motion made by Kazarian, Seconded by Parra.

Voting Yea: Hammer, Kazarian, Parra
Voting Nay: Mejia, Gill
16 Section 8, Item 8B
Police Department
B. APPROVE Resolution No. 2778 to

1. DETERMINE that based on the Annual Report, each type of military equipment identified in the Annual Report, if any, has complied with the applicable standards for approval as set forth in Government Code section 7071, subd. (d).

2. RENEW Policy 705 of the Police Department Manual and Ordinance No. 2022-03.

Motion made by Kazarian, Seconded by Gill.

Voting Yea: Mejia, Gill, Hammer, Kazarian, Parra
Public Works
C. APPROVE Amendment No. 2 to the Well No. 9 Drought Resiliency Project Agreement for a Funding Increase of $1.25 Million and Authorize the Interim City Manager to Execute the Amendment
One member of the public spoke.

Motion made by Parra, Seconded by Kazarian.

Voting Yea: Mejia, Gill, Hammer, Kazarian, Parra

10. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Updates were provided by City Manager Reid, Public Works Director Rocha, Recreation Supervisor Hernandez, City Engineer Park, and City Clerk Vasquez.

11. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS
Updates were provided by Councilmember Hammer, Mayor Pro Tem Gill, Mayor Mejia, and Councilmember Kazarian.

12. CLOSED SESSION
Government Code Section 54957.6
Conference with Labor Negotiators
Agency designated representative: Interim City Manager
Unrepresented employees: Community & Economic Development Director and Police Chief
Government Code Section 54957
Public Employee Performance Evaluation
Title: City Attorney
One member of the public spoke.

The meeting went into closed session at 6:41 p.m.
17 Section 8, Item 8B

13. RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AND REPORT ACTION
The meeting reconvened into open session at 7:08 p.m. No reportable action was taken on either of the two closed session items.

14. ADJOURN
Having no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:08 p.m. 18 Section 8, Item 8B

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 6, 2025
FROM: MICHAEL REID, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: APPROVE a three-year agreement, with two (2) one-year extensions, in an amount not to exceed $766,621.00 with the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office to provide 9-1-1 dispatch services and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City Council approved a three-year agreement, with two (2) one-year extensions, in an amount not to exceed $715,499.00 on December 17, 2024. At the end of 2024, Fresno County adopted new Master Fee (MF) schedule rates to include dispatch services. These rates increased from $16.35 per capita to $17.74 per capita and are applied to the second half of FY 2025. This contract with the Fresno Sheriff’s Office (FSO) provides 9-1-1 dispatch services for the City of Fowler Police Department. The new agreement reflects the County’s new MF and the City’s population as determined by the California Department of Finance on January 1, 2025.

BACKGROUND
FSO provides emergency services dispatch services 24/7/365 staffed with complaint takers to answer incoming 9-1-1 calls, and with emergency services dispatchers who send out the calls by computer and radio to officers with the City of Fowler Police Department.

The service provided under contract has been very effective with the City of Fowler, Kerman, Mendota, Orange Cove, Kingsburg and other communities also contracting with Fresno County to provide emergency dispatch services.

The rate structure under the proposed contract is $17.74 per population for the last six (6) months of FY 2025. The prior agreement with Fresno County had a per capita rate of $16.35 per population which was in effect for the first six (6) months of FY 2025. Based on the population estimate from the California Department of Finance as of January 1, 2025, of 7,367 for the City of Fowler, year one (1) costs would now be $125,570.52. For subsequent years, the cost will be calculated using the FSO’s current dispatcher per capita, per hour rate, and the City’s population (as certified by the California Department of Finance), with an annual not-toexceed 10% per capita cost increase for the initial term, and first and second extensions. This 19 Section 8, Item 8C
is the same per capita cost for all contract cities utilizing the Fresno County 9-1-1 dispatch services.

PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
Goal SAF-2
Emergency management efforts are coordinated and planned.

Goal PF-1
Fowler provides reliable public facilities, utilities, and community services that meet the needs of the existing community and planned growth.

Policy PF-2
Consider providing public cost sharing of public services under certain circumstances to encourage desirable and innovative development within the city.

Policy PF-14
Maintain staffing levels of City emergency service departments, including fire and police.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of 9-1-1 emergency dispatch services was accounted for in the Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget. Future annual costs will be accounted for in the Department’s annual operating budget.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
This action is being brought forward for Council consideration in accordance with the Purchasing Policy.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Dispatch Services Agreement
- Fresno County Master Fee Schedule
20 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
1 SERVICE AGREEMENT
This Service Agreement (“Agreement”) is dated ___________________ and is between the County of Fresno, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”) and City of Fowler, a municipal corporation, whose address is 128 S. Fifth Street, Fowler, CA 93625 (“City”). County and City may be collectively referred to herein as “Parties” or in the singular as “Party.”
Recitals
A. WHEREAS, City desires to secure law enforcement dispatch services/9-1-1 answering responsibilities for City from County, through the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office, within City’s boundaries;
B. WHEREAS, County has provided these services to City through its Sheriff’s Office or its designee (“Sheriff’s Office”) since December of 1988;
C. WHEREAS, County agrees to continue to render such law enforcement dispatch services/9-1-1 answering responsibilities for City within the City’s boundaries (“Services”), and City agrees to pay County the cost of performing such services at the rates and according to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

The parties therefore agree as follows:

County’s Services

1.1 Scope of Services. County shall provide law enforcement dispatch services as described in Exhibit A, attached and incorporated by this reference.

1.2 The performance of Services for City, including the standards of performance, the discipline and control of personnel and officers, and all other matters incident to the performance of these Services shall be the right and responsibility of County. In the case of a dispute between the Parties as to the extent of the duties, functions, or the minimum level or manner of performance of such services to be rendered under this Agreement, the final and conclusive determination shall be made by the County, through its Sheriff’s Office. 21 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
2 1.3 Representation. The County represents that it is qualified, ready, willing, and able to perform all Services provided in this Agreement.

1.4 Compliance with Laws. The County shall, at its own cost, comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, including but not limited to workers compensation, labor, and confidentiality laws and regulations.

City’s Responsibilities

2.1 Obligations of the City. City agrees to convert the radios in its police vehicles to such frequencies as required by the Sheriff’s Office’s communications systems. City shall also place radios in its police vehicles that have a primary and secondary channeling ability, as determined by the Sheriff’s Office, for the purpose of ensuring reasonable communications backup.

2.2 City shall have its police personnel use such alpha-numerical identifier system as determined by the Sheriff’s Office, and City assumes responsibility for keeping the Sheriff’s office communications system secure, as required by law.

2.3 City agrees that its personnel shall comply with the Sheriff’s Office radio procedures, and that it shall hold its employees accountable for failing to comply with such radio procedures.

2.4 City shall timely pay County for the Services rendered under this Agreement, as provided in Article 3.

Compensation, Invoices, and Payments

3.1 The City agrees to pay, and the County agrees to receive, compensation for the performance of its Services under this Agreement as described in Exhibit B to this Agreement, titled “Compensation.” The Parties also recognize and agree that the monthly compensation due to County for Services rendered under this Agreement may be updated from time to time based upon changes to the “per resident charge” and “population estimate” figures in Exhibit B.

County shall provide City with written notice of any changes to the monthly compensation due to 22 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
3 County. Such notice shall be given in March of 2025, and yearly thereafter during the term of this Agreement. Upon City’s written approval of the changes to the monthly compensation due to changes to the “per resident charge” and “population estimate” figures, the new monthly compensation amount shall be effective July 1st of the same year such notice of the change was given by County.

3.2 As indicated in Exhibit B, the rate specified per resident (Dispatcher Per Capita) to be charged by County, and subsequently paid by City, are the rates set forth in the County’s Master Schedule of Fees, Charges, and Recovered Costs, Section 2609, subdivision (d) (“Master Fee Schedule”), for performing the Services. The Parties agree that if and when the Master Fee Schedule is amended, changed, or revised, in any way that changes the rates being charged for the Services, that County shall provide City with written notice of such new rate proposed to be charged by the County for Services under Exhibit B. The City shall pay such revised rate from the date of the amendment, change, or revision, going forward. The Parties further agree that if and when the Master Fee Schedule is amended changed, or revised, in any way that changes the rates being charged for the Dispatch Services under Exhibit B, such new rates shall replace any contrary or conflicting rate, from the effective date of the amendment, change, or revision in the rate(s). The parties acknowledge that the County’s Master Fees Schedule is subject to change.

3.3 Maximum Compensation. The maximum compensation payable to the County under this Agreement shall not exceed a total of $415,639 for the initial term, $582,773 for the first extension, or $766,621 for the second extension. The County acknowledges that the City is a local government entity, and does so with notice that the County’s powers are limited by the California Constitution and by State law, and with notice that County may receive compensation under this Agreement only for services performed according to the terms of this Agreement and while this Agreement is in effect, and subject to the maximum amount payable under this section. The County further acknowledges that City employees have no authority to pay the County except as expressly provided in this Agreement. The maximum total is estimated with a 10% increase, which may be less or more, depending on the approved Master of Schedule 23 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
4 Fees. As of fiscal year 2024-25, City’s population is 7,367 multiplied by the Dispatcher Per Capita rate at $16.35 for the first half of the fiscal year before the new MSF rate of $17.74 was approved by the Fresno County Board of Supervisors on December 3, 2024, which took effect thirty (30) days afterward. Thereafter, the estimated 10% increases are as follows:

FY 2024-25 (Year 1) (Population 7,367 x rate $16.35) $120,450.45 Divided in half to split a year: $120,450.45/2 = $60,225.23 FY 2024-25 (Year 1) (Population 7,367 x rate $17.74) $130,690.58 Divided in half to split a year: $130,690.58/2 = $65,345.29 Total of FY 2024-25 = $125,570.52
FY 2025-26 (Year 2) (Estimated 10% increase over prior fiscal year) Total = $138,127.57 FY 2026-27 (Year 3) (Estimated 10% increase over prior fiscal year) Total = $151,940.33 FY 2027-28 (Year 4) (Estimated 10% increase over prior fiscal year) Total = $167,134.36 FY 2028-29 (Year 5) (Estimated 10% increase over prior fiscal year) Total = $183,847.80 Total $766,620.58, rounded up to $766,621.00.

3.4 Invoices. The County shall submit monthly invoices to the City and City shall pay the County within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of any such invoice. At the end of the Fiscal Year, or the expiration or termination of this Agreement, County may, in the discretion of Sheriff or its designee, submit a final invoice for all amounts then unpaid, including, but not limited to, any remaining, unpaid hours of Services, as outlined in Article 1 and City shall pay the full amount of this final invoice within thirty (30) days of receipt thereof.

3.5 Payment. The City shall pay each correctly completed and timely submitted invoice within thirty (30) days after receipt. Any payment made more than thirty (30) days after receipt of an invoice may result in contract termination of service reduction, in the sole discretion of the Fresno County Sheriff’s Office, without any penalty or recourse against County. City shall remit payments to the County’s address specified in the invoice.

3.6 Incidental Expenses. The County is solely responsible for all of its costs and expenses that are not specified as payable by the County under this Agreement. 24 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
5 Term of Agreement

4.1 Term. This Agreement is effective retroactive to July 1, 2024 and terminates on June 30, 2027, except as provided in section 4.2, “Extension,” or Article 6, “Termination and Suspension,” below.

4.2 Extension. The term of this Agreement may be extended for no more than two (2), one-year periods upon written approval by both Parties at least thirty (30) days prior to the termination date referenced in Section 4.1, and at least thirty (30) days prior to the termination date of the first one-year extension period. The Sheriff or his or her designee is authorized to sign the written approval on behalf of the County based on the City’s satisfactory performance.

The City’s Chief of Police is authorized to sign the written approval on behalf of the City. The extension of this Agreement by the County is not a waiver or compromise of any default or breach of this Agreement by the City existing at the time of the extension whether or not known to the County.

Notices

5.1 Contact Information. The persons and their addresses having authority to give and receive notices provided for or permitted under this Agreement include the following:

For the County:

Sheriff’s Captain
Sheriff-Coroner-Public Administrator
County of Fresno
2200 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721
[email protected]
Fax: 559-600-8318
For the City:

Chief of Police
Fowler Police Department
City of Fowler
128 S. Fifth Street
Fowler, CA 93625
[email protected]
Phone No.: 559-834-2112
25 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
6 5.2 Change of Contact Information. Either Party may change the information in section

5.1 by giving notice as provided in section 5.3.

5.3 Method of Delivery. Each notice between the County and the City provided for or permitted under this Agreement must be in writing, state that it is a notice provided under this Agreement, and be delivered either by personal service, by first-class United States mail, by an overnight commercial courier service, by telephonic facsimile transmission, or by Portable Document Format (PDF) document attached to an email.
(A) A notice delivered by personal service is effective upon service to the recipient. (B) A notice delivered by first-class United States mail is effective three (3) business days after deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the recipient. (C) A notice delivered by an overnight commercial courier service is effective one (1) business day after deposit with the overnight commercial courier service, delivery fees prepaid, with delivery instructions given for next day delivery, addressed to the recipient. (D) A notice delivered by telephonic facsimile transmission or by PDF document attached to an email is effective when transmission to the recipient is completed (but, if such transmission is completed outside of County business hours, then such delivery is deemed to be effective at the next beginning of a business day), provided that the sender maintains a machine record of the completed transmission.

5.4 Claims Presentation. For all claims arising from or related to this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement establishes, waives, or modifies any claims presentation requirements or procedures provided by law, including the Government Claims Act (Division 3.6 of Title 1 of the Government Code, beginning with section 810).

Termination and Suspension

6.1 Termination for Non-Allocation of Funds. The terms of this Agreement are contingent on the approval of funds by the appropriating government agency. If sufficient funds are not allocated by the City, then the County or City, upon at least thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the other Party, may:
26 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
7 (A) Terminate this Agreement; or
(B) The Parties may modify the Services and compensation and negotiate a new agreement .

6.2 Termination for Breach.
(A) Upon County determining that a breach (as defined in paragraph (C) below) has occurred, the County shall give written notice of the breach to the City. The County may not suspend performance of Services under this Agreement without first providing written notice of the breach to the City and providing no less than thirty (30) days for City to cure the breach.
(B) If the City fails to cure the breach to the County’s satisfaction within the time stated in the written notice, the County may terminate this Agreement immediately upon City’s failure to cure.
(C) For purposes of this section, a breach occurs when, in the determination of the County, the City has failed to comply with or improperly performed any part of this Agreement.

6.3 Termination without Cause. In circumstances other than those set forth above, either Party may terminate this Agreement by giving at least thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other Party.

6.4 No Penalty or Further Obligation. Any termination of this Agreement by the City or County under this Article 6 is without penalty to, or further obligation of, the City or County.

Independent Contractor

7.1 Status. In performance of the work, duties and obligations assumed by County under this Agreement, it is mutually understood and agreed that County, including any and all of County’s officers, agents, and employees, will at all times be acting and performing as an independent contractor, and shall act in an independent capacity, and not as an officer, agent, servant, employee, joint venturer, partner, or associate of the City. Furthermore, City shall have no right to control or supervise or direct the manner or method by which County shall perform its 27 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
8 work and function. However, City shall retain the right to administer this Agreement to verify that County is performing its obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof.

7.2 Verifying Performance. City and County shall comply with all applicable provision of law and the rules and regulations, if any, of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over matters the subject thereof. The City has no right to control, supervise, or direct the manner or method by which County shall perform its work or function, but the City may verify that the County is performing according to the terms of this Agreement.

7.3 Benefits. The Parties shall be solely liable and responsible for providing to, or on behalf of, their employees all legally-required employee benefits. In addition, the Parties shall be solely responsible for all matters relating to payment of their respective employees, including compliance with Social Security withholding and all other regulations governing such matters, and hold harmless the other Party from disputes arising from such matters.

7.4 Services to Others. The Parties acknowledge that, during the term of this Agreement, the County may provide services to other entities unrelated to the City.

Indemnity and Defense

8.1 Indemnity. The City agrees to indemnify, save, hold harmless, and at County’s request, defend County, its officers, agents, and employees from any and all costs and expenses (including attorney’s fees and costs), damages, liabilities, claims, and losses occurring or resulting to County in connection with the performance, or failure to perform, by City, its officers, agents, or employees under this Agreement, and from any and all costs and expenses (including attorney’s fees and costs), damages, liabilities, claims, and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation who may be injured or damaged by the performance, or failure to perform, of City, its officers, agent, or employees under this Agreement.

The County agrees to indemnify, save, hold harmless, and at City’s request, defend City, its officers, agents, and employees from any and all costs and expenses (including attorney’s fees and costs), damages, liabilities, claims, and losses occurring or resulting to City 28 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
9 in connection with the performance, or failure to perform, by County, its officers, agents, or employees under this Agreement, and from any and all costs and expenses (including attorney’s fees and costs), damages, liabilities, claims, and losses occurring or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation who may be injured or damaged by the performance, or failure to perform, of County, its officers, agent, or employees under this Agreement.

8.2 Survival. This Article 8 shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.

Reserved
Inspections, Audits, and Public Records

10.1 Inspection of Documents. Either Party shall make available for examination at any time during regular business hours, all of the other Party’s records and data with respect to the matters covered by this Agreement, excluding attorney-client privileged communications. A Party shall, upon request by the other Party, permit the requesting Party to audit and inspect all such records and data to ensure the Party’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

10.2 State Audit Requirements. Since this Agreement exceeds $10,000, the County and City shall be subject to the examination and audit of the California State Auditor, as provided in Government Code section 8546.7, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this Agreement. This section survives the termination of this Agreement.

10.3 Public Records. The County is not limited in any manner with respect to its public disclosure of this Agreement or any record or data that the City may provide to the County. The County’s public disclosure of this Agreement or any record or data that the City may provide to the County may include but is not limited to the following:
(A) The County may voluntarily, or upon request by any member of the public or governmental agency, disclose this Agreement to the public or such governmental agency.
(B) The County may voluntarily, or upon request by any member of the public or governmental agency, disclose to the public or such governmental agency any record or 29 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
10 data that the City may provide to the County, unless such disclosure is prohibited by court order.
(C) This Agreement, and any record or data that the City may provide to the County, is subject to public disclosure under the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code, Title 5, Division 2, Part 1, Chapter 9, beginning with section 54950). (D) This Agreement, and any record or data that the City may provide to the County, is subject to public disclosure as a public record under the California Public Records Act (California Government Code, Title 1, Division 10, beginning with section 7920.000) (“CPRA”).
(E) This Agreement, and any record or data that the City may provide to the County, is subject to public disclosure as information concerning the conduct of the people’s business of the State of California under California Constitution, Article 1, section 3, subdivision (b).
(F) Any marking of confidentiality or restricted access upon or otherwise made with respect to any record or data that the City may provide to the County shall be disregarded and have no effect on the County’s right or duty to disclose to the public or governmental agency any such record or data.

10.4 Public Records Act Requests. If a Party (“Requesting Party”) receives a written or oral request under the CPRA to publicly disclose any record that is in the other Party’s (“Disclosing Party”) possession or control, and which the Requesting Party has a right, under any provision of this Agreement or applicable law, to possess or control, then the Requesting Party may demand, in writing, that the Disclosing Party deliver to the Requesting Party, for purposes of public disclosure, the requested records that may be in the possession or control of the Disclosing Party. Within five (5) business days after the Requesting Party’s demand, the Disclosing Party shall (a) deliver to the Requesting Party all of the requested records that are in the Disclosing Party’s possession or control, together with a written statement that the Disclosing Party, after conducting a diligent search, has produced all requested records that are in the Disclosing Party’s possession or control that are responsive to the CPRA request, or (b) 30 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
11 provide to Requesting Party a written statement that the Disclosing Party, after conducting a diligent search, does not possess or control any of the requested records responsive to the CPRA request.

The Disclosing Party shall cooperate with the Requesting Party with respect to any such demand for such records. If the Disclosing Party wishes to assert that any specific record or data is exempt from disclosure under the CPRA or other applicable law, it must deliver the record or data to the Requesting Party and assert the exemption by citation to specific legal authority within the written statement that it provides to the Requesting Party under this section.

The Disclosing Party’s assertion of any exemption from disclosure is not binding on the Requesting Party, but the Requesting Party will give at least ten (10) days’ advance written notice to the Disclosing Party before disclosing any record subject to the Disclosing Party’s assertion of exemption from disclosure. The Disclosing Party shall indemnify the Requesting Party for any court-ordered award of costs or attorney’s fees under the CPRA that results from the Disclosing Party’s delay, claim of exemption, failure to produce any such records, or failure to cooperate with the Requesting Party with respect to the Requesting Party’s demand for any such records.

Reserved
General Terms

12.1 Modification. Any matters of this Agreement may be modified from time to time by written consent of all Parties without, in any way, affecting the remainder. Except as provided in Article 6, “Termination and Suspension,” this Agreement may not be modified, and no waiver is effective, except by written agreement signed by both Parties. The City acknowledges that County employees have no authority to modify this Agreement except as expressly provided in this Agreement.

12.2 Non-Assignment. Neither Party may assign its rights or delegate its obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other Party. 31 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
12 12.3 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California govern all matters arising from or related to this Agreement.

12.4 Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement is signed and performed in Fresno County, California. City consents to California jurisdiction for actions arising from or related to this Agreement, and, subject to the Government Claims Act, all such actions must be brought and maintained in Fresno County.

12.5 Construction. The final form of this Agreement is the result of the Parties’ combined efforts. If anything in this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be ambiguous, that ambiguity shall not be resolved by construing the terms of this Agreement against either Party.

12.6 Days. Unless otherwise specified, “days” means calendar days.

12.7 Headings. The headings and section titles in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not part of this Agreement.

12.8 Severability. If anything in this Agreement is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unlawful or otherwise unenforceable, the remaining terms of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, and the Parties shall make their best efforts to replace the unlawful or unenforceable part(s) of this Agreement with lawful and enforceable terms intended to accomplish the Parties’ original intent.

12.9 Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this Agreement, the Contractor shall not unlawfully discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment, or recipient of services, because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, military status or veteran status pursuant to all applicable State of California and federal statutes and regulation.

12.10 No Waiver. Payment, waiver, or discharge by the County of any liability or obligation of the City under this Agreement on any one or more occasions is not a waiver of performance of any continuing or other obligation of the City and does not prohibit enforcement by the County of any obligation on any other occasion.
32 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
13 12.11 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including its exhibits, is the entire agreement between the City and the County with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and it supersedes all previous negotiations, proposals, commitments, writings, advertisements, publications, and understandings of any nature unless those things are expressly included in this Agreement. If there is any inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement without its exhibits and the terms of the exhibits, then the inconsistency will be resolved by giving precedence first to the terms of this Agreement without its exhibits, and then to the terms of the exhibits.

12.12 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement does not, and is not intended to, create any rights or obligations for any person or entity except for the Parties.

12.13 Authorized Signature. The City represents and warrants to the County that:
(A) The City is duly authorized and empowered to sign and perform its obligations under this Agreement.
(B) The individual signing this Agreement on behalf of the City is duly authorized to do so and his or her signature on this Agreement legally binds the City to the terms of this Agreement.

12.14 Electronic Signatures. The parties agree that this Agreement may be executed by electronic signature as provided in this section.
(A) An “electronic signature” means any symbol or process intended by an individual signing this Agreement to represent their signature, including but not limited to (1) a digital signature; (2) a faxed version of an original handwritten signature; or (3) an electronically scanned and transmitted (for example by PDF document) version of an original handwritten signature.
(B) Each electronic signature affixed or attached to this Agreement (1) is deemed equivalent to a valid original handwritten signature of the person signing this Agreement for all purposes, including but not limited to evidentiary proof in any administrative or judicial proceeding, and (2) has the same force and effect as the valid original handwritten signature of that person.
33 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
14 (C) The provisions of this section satisfy the requirements of Civil Code section 1633.5, subdivision (b), in the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act (Civil Code, Division 3, Part 2, Title 2.5, beginning with section 1633.1).
(D) Each Party using a digital signature represents that it has undertaken and satisfied the requirements of Government Code section 16.5, subdivision (a), paragraphs (1) through (5), and agrees that each other Party may rely upon that representation.
(E) This Agreement is not conditioned upon the parties conducting the transactions under it by electronic means and either Party may sign this Agreement with an original handwritten signature.

12.15 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which is an original, and all of which together constitute this Agreement. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]
34 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
15 The Parties are signing this Agreement on the date stated in the introductory clause.

CITY OF FOWLER
_________________________________
Michael Reid
City Manager
City of Fowler
128 S. 5th Street
Fowler, CA 93625

COUNTY OF FRESNO
_________________________________
Ernest Buddy Mendes, Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors of the County of Fresno
_________________________________
Attest:

Bernice E. Seidel
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Fresno, State of California
By: _______________________
Deputy
For accounting use only:

Org No.: 31113320
Account No.: 4975
Fund No.: 0001
Subclass No.: 10000
35 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Exhibit A
A-1
Scope of Services
Law Enforcement Dispatch Services: County agrees, through its Sheriff’s Office, to receive phone calls at the Sheriff’s Office communications center for requests to dispatch City’s police department personnel in response to such requests. The Services provided under this Agreement do not include, and the Sheriff’s Office shall not provide, any dispatch services for requests for emergency medical services or fire suppression services. If the Sheriff’s Office receives telephone calls requesting emergency medical services or fire suppression services within City boundaries, the Sheriff’s Office shall transfer those calls to the emergency medical services dispatching center. The Sheriff’s Office shall provide Services via the radio to direct City’s police department personnel to various calls for service.

The Sheriff’s Office shall also provide, within the limitations of this Agreement, training to City’s police personnel in the use of the Sheriff’s Office’s radio procedures and language as deemed necessary by the Parties. This training shall cover the computer priority systems, uniformity of dispositions, and radio language and proper radio etiquette. 36 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Exhibit B
B-1
The County will be compensated for performance of its Services under this Agreement as provided in this Exhibit B. The County is not entitled to any compensation except as expressly provided in this Exhibit B, and as described in this Agreement.

1. County agrees to perform Services for the City at the rate specified below per resident of the City (as determined by the State Department of Finance certified population estimated as of January 1st of that year) until such time as the rate is updated pursuant to Article 3 of this Agreement. Under this Agreement, the County’s cost recovery shall be 100%, at the then-current rate (i.e. the rate listed at the time the service is provided) listed in the Master Schedules of Fees Charges, and Recovered Costs, Section 2609, subdivision (a), for the Dispatcher Per Capita at the rate, per hour. City acknowledges that these rates are subject to change, as delineated in the Agreement. The total amount of the Law Enforcement Dispatch Services to be provided and paid for, and the manner of invoicing, is depicted in the Agreement.

2. Monthly Charge for FY 2024-25 (July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2025) (hereinafter the “2025- 2025 Monthly Charge”) is charged to the prior November 28, 2023 and latest December 3, 2024 approved Master Schedule of Fees (MSF) rates for the following:

A. The methodology to calculate these amounts are as follows:
• (July 1, 2024 – December 31, 2024) Per resident charge = $16.35 (100% of $16.35 per resident)
• Number of residents in City (as determined by State Department of Finance certified population estimate as of January 1, 2023 and 2024) = 7,367 • 2024-2025 Monthly Charge = ($16.35/resident x 7,367 residents)/12 = $120,450.45 divided in half to split a year: $120,450.45/2 = $60,225.23 months = $10,037.54/month
• (January 1, 2025 – June 30, 2025) Per resident charge = $17.74 (100% of $17.74 per resident)
• Number of residents in City (as determined by State Department of Finance certified population estimate as of January 1, 2023 and 2024) = 7,367 37 Section 8, Item 8C
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
Exhibit B
B-2
• 2024-2025 Monthly Charge = ($17.74/resident x 7,367 residents)/12 = $130,690.58 divided in half to split a year: $130,690.58/2 = $65,345.29 months = $10,890.88/month
38 Section 8, Item 8C
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

OF THE COUNTY OF FRESNO

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ORDINANCE NO: 24-017 ------

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MASTER SCHEDULE OF FEES, CHARGES, AND RECOVERED COSTS FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO, WHICH AMENDS SECTION 2600 - SHERIFF-CORONER-PUBLIC ADMINSTRATOR, SUBSECTION 2609 - CONTRACT SERVICE FEES.

The Board of Supervisors of the County of Fresno ordains as follows :

SECTION 1: The Master Schedule of Fees, Charges and Recovered Costs Ordinance for the County of Fresno, Section 2600 - Sheriff-Coroner, is hereby amended by amending subsection 2609 - Contract Service Fees to read in its entirety as set forth in Exhibit "A," which is attached and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 2: This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days from adoption.

THE FOREGOING was passed and adopted by the following vote of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Fresno this 3rd day of December , 2024, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

Supervisors Brandau, Magsig, Mendes, Pacheco, Quintero
None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
ATTEST:

Bernice E. Seidel
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Fresno, State of California
By: ~ V~
Deputy
- 2 ~ ~:::>
Nathan Magsig, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
of the County of Fresno
FILE# 24-1135
AGENDA #_3a...4;....._ __
ORDINANCE# 24-017
39 Section 8, Item 8C

MASTER SCHEDULE OF FEES, CHARGES, AND RECOVERED COSTS
SECTION 2600 -- SHERIFF Exhibit "A"
FEE SETTING YEAR EFFECTIVE %OF

FEE DESCRIPTION FEE AMOUNT AUTHORITY ADOPTED DATE COST REFERENCE 2609. Contract Service Fees
a. Deputy Sheriff Ill $136.96/hr (Regular) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% $78.03/hr (Overtime) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% b. Community Service Officer $83.82/hr (Regular) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% $48.15/hr (Overtime) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% c. Correctional Officer 11 $102.30/hr (Regular) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% $64.69/hr (Overtime) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% d. Dispatcher Per Capita $17.74 Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% e. Reserve Officer $38.36/hr (Regular) Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% f. Prisoner Processing with ICRP $36.12 per Inmate Board of Supervisors 2024-25 1/2/2025 100% 40 Section 8, Item 8C

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 6, 2025
FROM: SOO HO PARK, City Engineer
SUBJECT:

ADOPT Resolution No. 2779 to approve revised Water and Street Improvement Standards

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Resolution No. 2779 approves various Standard Plan revisions for constructability and conformance to building code updates.

BACKGROUND
The Fowler City Council previously approved development improvement standards for various public infrastructure facilities related to streets, water, and sewer, etc. Staff recommends updating the various standards for reasons identified:

1. Standard Plan W-2 – Fire Hydrant Installation and Location: Revise the length of the red painted to 15’ centered on the hydrant to conform to the requirements of the California Vehicle Code.

2. Standard Plan W-12 – 2-inch & Smaller Reduced Pressure Backflow Installation:

Update the backflow prevention cage specifications.

3. Standard Plan ST-17 – Street Light Electroliers: Updated specify LED luminaire for new street lights installed in the public right-of-way

PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
General Plan Policy PF-6
Prepare and maintain resources and mechanisms to adequately plan for, develop, and maintain public facilities.
41 Section 8, Item 8D

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no increase in fiscal impact to the City. Improvements included in the Standard Plans are constructed as part of a development or a capital improvement project.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
No procurement is associated with this action.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Resolution No. 2779
- Standard Plan W-2
- Standard Plan W-12
- Standard Plan ST-17
42 Section 8, Item 8D
RESOLUTION NO. 2779

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CITY OF FOWLER

ADOPTING REVISED VARIOUS STANDARD PLANS
WHEREAS, the City of Fowler has previously utilized and adopted improvement standard for construction of public infrastructure facilities; and WHEREAS, periodic revisions to the improvements standards are necessary to ensure proper, construction and function of city infrastructure and other miscellaneous facilities; and WHEREAS, standard plan W-2 provides details for construction of Fire hydrant installation and location; and
WHEREAS, standard plan W-12 provides details for construction of 2-inch and smaller reduced pressure backflow installation; and
WHEREAS, standard plan ST-17 provides details for construction of street light electroliers; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fowler that effective immediately, Standard Plans W-2, W-12, and ST-17 are hereby adopted for inclusion in the City Improvement Standards.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May 2025, at a regular meeting of the Fowler City Council by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
43 Section 8, Item 8D
REVISION DATE Std. Dwg.

W-2 FIRE HYDRANT

INSTALLATION & LOCATION

PLAN VIEW

CITY OF FOWLER

FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION
44 Section 8, Item 8D
REVISION DATE STD.DWG.

W-12

CITY OF FOWLER

ELEVATION

ISOMETRIC VIEW
SHT. 1 OF 2
2" & SMALLER REDUCED PRESSURE
BACKFLOW INSTALLATION 45
Section 8, Item 8D
REVISION DATE Std. Dwg.

STREET LIGHT ELECTROLIERS

FOUNDATION

ELEVATION
BASE

CITY OF FOWLER
ST-17 4/10/01
5/6/25 46
Section 8, Item 8D

STREET LIGHT ELECTROLIERS
REVISION DATE CITY OF FOWLER Std. Dwg.

ST-17
4/10/01
5/6/25 47
Section 8, Item 8D

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 6, 2025
FROM: ANGELA VASQUEZ, CPMC, City Clerk / Personnel Manager SUBJECT: APPROVE Resolution No. 2780 adopting an updated salary classification schedule

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This action provides a market adjustment to the Community & Economic Development Director classification to more closely reflect the local market and includes an updated Police Chief salary pay range now that the employment agreement with the Police Chief has ended with his recent appointment as City Manager. The action results in no new full-time positions and has no current fiscal impact as both positions are currently vacant.

BACKGROUND
Staff conducted a review of comparable Community & Economic Development Director salary ranges at nearby municipalities. Based on that data, staff recommend modifying the salary range for the Community & Economic Development Director with a 5% increase to match the salary range for the Fire Chief position - $9,230 - $11,218. In recruiting qualified candidates for the position, it became clear that the salary range was below market.

Including an updated Police Chief salary range to match the Finance Director salary range of $9,460 - $11,500 - which includes all cost-of-living adjustments since August 2022, when the Police Chief salary range was removed from the schedule and set by employment contract – will help establish a salary range for appointing an interim Police Chief and recruiting for a new Police Chief without requiring an employment contract.

PUBLIC NOTICE
This item does not require a public hearing and was noticed as a part of the City Council Agenda.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action does not constitute a “project” pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This action is not associated with a specific General Plan Goal, Policy, or Action Item. However, this action is consistent with the General Plan’s Community Vision and Supporting Principles.

FISCAL IMPACT
The adjustments to the Community & Economic Development Director classification and Police 48 Section , Item A
Chief classification are minimal and reflect the current market for each position. Both positions are currently vacant, but sufficient allocated funds for each position are available in the Fiscal Year 2024/25 approved budget if either or both positions are filled before June 30, 2025.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
This action is not associated with the procurement process.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Resolution No. 2780
- Exhibit A – Salary Classification Schedule
49 Section , Item A
RESOLUTION NO. 2780

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER

ADOPTING UPDATED SALARY CLASSIFICATION SCHEDULE FOR ALL EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, Government Code Section 36506 requires the City Council, by resolution or ordinance, to fix the compensation for all appointive officers and employees of the city; and WHEREAS, the Salary Classification Schedule attached as Exhibit “A” to this Resolution has been reviewed and considered by the City Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fowler as follows:

1. The Salary Classification Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is adopted.

2. All previously adopted salary classification schedules are superseded by this Resolution and the attached Salary Classification Schedule, and the attached Salary Classification Schedule shall be effective beginning on May 7, 2025.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May 2025, at a regular meeting of the Fowler City Council by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
50 Section , Item A
Effective 05/07/25 Revised 05/06/25

FULL TIME STEP STEP STEP STEP STEP

POSITION/CLASSIFICATION TITLE A BCDE
CITY MANAGER (by contract) - - - - 15,833
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER 10,704 11,238 11,801 12,390 13,010 CITY CLERK/PERSONNEL MANAGER 7,747 8,134 8,541 8,968 9,416 DEPUTY CITY CLERK 5,498 5,773 6,062 6,364 6,683
ACCOUNTANT ! 5,551 5,829 6,120 6,426 6,747
ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT ! 3,440 3,611 3,791 3,982 4,180
ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN ! 3,796 3,986 4,186 4,395 4,615
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 3,796 3,986 4,186 4,395 4,615
BUILDING INSPECTOR I @ 3,796 3,986 4,186 4,395 4,615
BUILDING INSPECTOR II @ 4,403 4,623 4,854 5,096 5,352
BUILDING OFFICIAL 5,921 6,218 6,527 6,854 7,197
CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER I # 3,525 3,701 3,886 4,081 4,286 CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER II # 3,796 3,986 4,186 4,395 4,615 PLANNING & CODE ENFORCEMENT TECHNICIAN I 3,891 4,086 4,291 4,505 4,730 PROJECTS AND COMPLIANCE ADMINISTRATOR 5,921 6,218 6,527 6,854 7,197 COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 9,230 9,691 10,176 10,684 11,218 FINANCE DIRECTOR 9,460 9,932 10,429 10,952 11,500
FINANCE DIRECTOR & TREASURER 10,952 11,500 12,075 12,679 13,313 FIRE CHIEF 9,230 9,691 10,176 10,684 11,218
FIRE CAPTAIN 6,866 7,211 7,571 7,949 8,347
FIRE ENGINEER 4,982 5,230 5,492 5,767 6,055
FIREFIGHTER 4,742 4,977 5,226 5,489 5,763
MAINTENANCE ASSISTANT $ 3,116 3,272 3,436 3,607 3,787
MAINTENANCE WORKER $ 3,613 3,794 3,984 4,183 4,393
SENIOR MAINTENANCE WORKER $ 3,988 4,188 4,398 4,618 4,848 LEAD MAINTENANCE WORKER 5,234 5,495 5,770 6,058 6,361
PERMITS & ENTITLEMENTS COORDINATOR 4,403 4,623 4,854 5,096 5,352 POLICE CHIEF 9,460 9,932 10,429 10,952 11,500
POLICE CORPORAL I 5,635 5,917 6,214 6,524 6,850
POLICE LIEUTENANT I 7,215 7,575 7,953 8,352 8,769
POLICE OFFICER I 4,861 5,102 5,359 5,626 5,907
POLICE OFFICER + 2% POST - INTERMEDIATE 4,958 5,205 5,465 5,739 6,024 POLICE OFFICER + 5% POST - ADVANCED 5,102 5,359 5,626 5,908 6,202 POLICE SERGEANT I 6,221 6,531 6,858 7,201 7,561
POLICE SERGEANT + 2% POST - INTERMEDIATE 6,345 6,663 6,996 7,345 7,713 POLICE SERGEANT + 5% POST - ADVANCED 6,531 6,858 7,201 7,561 7,940 PUBLIC WORKS & PUBLIC UTILITIES DIR 10,952 11,500 12,075 12,679 13,313 PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR 5,921 6,218 6,527 6,854 7,197
RECORDS AND PROPERTY TECHNICIAN I % 3,039 3,192 3,352 3,519 3,695 CRIME ANALYST 4,513 4,739 4,975 5,224 5,486
RECORDS AND PROPERTY TECHNICIAN II % 3,525 3,701 3,886 4,081 4,286 COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER 3,525 3,701 3,886 4,081 4,286 RECREATION AND SENIOR CENTER SUPERVISOR 5,921 6,218 6,527 6,854 7,197 WATER OPERATOR IN TRAINING ^ 3,039 3,192 3,352 3,519 3,695 WATER OPERATOR I ^ 3,525 3,701 3,886 4,081 4,286
WATER OPERATOR II ^ 3,892 4,086 4,290 4,505 4,730
LEAD WATER OPERATOR 5,498 5,773 6,062 6,364 6,683

PART TIME, INTERMITTENT, HOURLY & TEMPORARY STEP STEP STEP STEP STEP

POSITION/CLASSIFICATION TITLE A BCDE
POLICE CADET 3,988 4,188 4,398 4,618 4,848
! @ # $ % ^ Denotes a "Skill Range" pursuant to the Employee Benefits Handbook.

Denotes a market adjustment

SALARY CLASSIFICATIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025

MONTHLY PAY

MONTHLY PAY

EXHIBIT A
51 Section , Item A

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 6, 2025
FROM: DAWN E. MARPLE, City Planner
SUBJECT: APPROVE Resolution No. 2781, adopting an addendum to the City of Fowler General Plan Environmental Impact Report and
approving General Plan Amendment No. 25-11, with the land uses proposed under Alternative A.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This action would result in the amendment of land uses on the western side of the City as a result of direction from the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan (“General Plan”) to analyze the land use designations within the City’s Economic Development Focus Area (“EDFA”). Parcels under consideration for amendment include Assessor’s Parcel Number 343-020-16, -39S, - 41S, and -42S, 345-050-04, -05, -06, -18, and -19, 345-070-04, 345-110-13 and -14, and 345- 150-07.

The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 715 at the regularly scheduled April 3, 2025, Planning Commission hearing, recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 with the land uses proposed under Alternative A and approve the prepared addendum to the City’s EIR.

Given the type of development interest within the EDFA, and because it provides a net increase in both housing unit and industrial/commercial square footage potential, Alternative A is staff’s preferred alternative. The City Council may also consider approving Alternative B or denying the General Plan Amendment.

BACKGROUND
On April 18, 2023, the Fowler City Council adopted the General Plan. The General Plan set land use designations and policies in order to serve the growth of the City of Fowler through the year 2040. In developing land uses, an EDFA was established (see Attachment 1 and 2).

The intent of the EDFA is to provide an area of the City where commercial and industrial uses would be concentrated and where new businesses would create jobs for the residents of the City. The General Plan’s policy document contains an action item to consider land use alternatives for the EDFA within one year of adoption of the General Plan. 52 Section , Item B
Soon after adopting the General Plan, City staff were approached by property owners within portions of the EDFA who were interested in developing their properties. The property owners conducted preliminary investigations and presented the City with the concept of a project that would develop much of the land within the EDFA. On April 16, 2024, staff sought direction from the City Council in order to develop land use alternatives for the EDFA that would benefit both the City and the conceptual project within the EDFA.

After receiving such direction from the City Council, staff have developed two (2) land use alternatives (see Attachments 3 and 4) and have worked with the Fresno Council of Governments to understand the possible impacts of the potential land use changes to the City’s Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) generation that was originally analyzed under the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”).

ANALYSIS
Land Use Alternatives
As discussed above, staff have developed two land use alternatives for consideration. Land use changes as a result of General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 would not only change the adopted land uses within the EDFA but also land to the south of the EDFA. Importantly, it should be noted that with the two land use alternatives developed, the City achieves a “no net loss” of housing.
53 Section , Item B
Table 1 and Table 2 below describe the parcels that would be included in the land use amendments for Alternative A and Alternative B, providing a comparison between the existing land use designations and the land use designations proposed in both alternatives, along with the acreages.

Table 1: Alternative A – Parcels
Alternative A
Parcel Existing Land Use &
Acreage
Proposed Land Use &
Acreage
345-050-04 37.15 MHDR
Approximately 76.42 acres
LI, 28.65 acres GC, & 9.55
acres CC
345-050-05 19.29 MDR
343-020-41S 33.78 MHDR
343-020-41S 19.85 HDR
343-020-39S 2.19 MHDR
343-020-42S 2.32 MHDR
343-020-16 18.66 MLDR HDR
345-070-04 37.7 LDR MDR
345-050-18 1.38 MDR CC
345-050-19 12.89 MDR CC
345-050-06 5 MDR CC
345-110-14 19.28 LI 9.68 HDR & 9.6 MDR
345-110-13 13.14 LI MDR
345-150-07 66.85 LI MDR
Acreage Total1 289.48 289.52
1Acreage total may differ due to rounding.

Table 2: Alternative B – Parcels
Alternative B
Parcel Existing Land Use &
Acreage
Proposed Land Use
345-050-04 37.15 MHDR
Approximately 76.42 acres
LI & 38.2 acres GC
345-050-05 19.29 MDR
343-020-41S 33.78 MHDR
343-020-41S 19.85 HDR
343-020-39S 2.19 MHDR
343-020-42S 2.32 MHDR
343-020-16 18.66 MLDR HDR
345-070-04 37.7 LDR MDR
345-110-14 19.28 LI MDR
345-110-13 13.14 LI MDR
345-150-07 66.85 LI MDR
Acreage Total1 270.21 270.25
1Acreage total may differ due to rounding.
54 Section , Item B
Table 3 and Table 4 below provide a summary of changes for both alternatives in regard to each respective land use on an overall basis.

Table 3: Alternative A – Acreage Change Summary
Land Use Acreage Summary
Adopted Alternative A Net Change
LDR 37.7 0 -37.7
MLDR 18.66 0 -18.66
MDR 38.56 127.29 +88.73
MHDR 75.44 0 -75.44
HDR 19.85 28.34 +8.49
CC 0 28.82 +28.82
GC 0 28.65 +28.65
LI 99.27 76.42 -23.2
Total1 289.48 289.52
1Acreage total may differ due to rounding.

Table 4: Alternative B – Acreage Change Summary
Land Use Acreage Summary
Adopted Alternative B Net Change
LDR 37.7 0 -37.7
MLDR 18.66 0 -18.66
MDR 19.29 136.97 +117.68
MHDR 75.44 0 -75.44
HDR 19.85 18.66 -1.19
GC 0 38.2 +38.2
LI 99.27 76.42 -23.2
Total1 270.21 270.25
1Acreage total may differ due to rounding.

Table 5 below provides a summary of the buildout potential for each of the proposed alternatives as compared to the buildout potential of the currently adopted land uses. As demonstrated within Table 5, despite providing less industrial acreage than the adopted General Plan, Alternative A would provide both more potential housing units and more square footage for industrial and commercial uses.

Table 5: Maximum Buildout Summary
Buildout Potential Summary
Units Adopted Alternative A Alternative B Net Change (A/B) Housing Units1 1560 2043 1803 +483 / +243
Retail Area2 1,289,812 1,561,800 1,219,680 +271,988 / -70,132 1Based upon realistic capacity assumptions in the City’s adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element. 2Based upon land use assumptions in the City’s General Plan. Area amount in square footage. Includes a combination of both industrial and commercial land uses.
55 Section , Item B
Given the type of development interest within the EDFA, and because it provides a net increase in both housing unit and industrial/commercial square footage potential, Alternative A is staff’s preferred alternative. The City Council may also consider approving Alternative B or denying the General Plan Amendment.

General Plan Amendment Findings (FMC § 9.45.070):

1. The amendment is consistent with the intent of the General Plan vision statement and supporting principles, goals, and policies.

The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the overall intent of the City’s General Plan and is consistent with General Plan Goals LU-2, LU-3, and ED-4 and General Plan Policies LU-22, ED-3, and ED-6.

2. The amendment prescribes reasonable controls and standards for affected land uses to ensure compatibility and integrity of those uses with other established uses.

The properties that would undergo a land use amendment for either Alternative A or Alternative B are currently located outside of the Fowler city limits. When annexed into the City, these properties would be required to be prezoned consistent with the existing land use at that time. Prezoning the properties consistent with the underlying land use would ensure that those properties are developed in accordance with the standards that are in line with the type of development allowed for each respective land use.

3. The amendment provides for the protection of the general health, safety, and/or welfare of the community.

The proposed General Plan Amendment would result in the amendment of the General Plan land use map in a manner that would promote increased housing and would encourage economic development within the City’s EDFA. The land uses proposed in each alternative have been developed with the community’s general health, safety, and welfare in mind. The proposed General Plan Amendment protects the general health, safety, and welfare of the community through well thought out and planned land uses for the properties being affected, as well as those in the surrounding areas.

PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice of Public Hearing was published in The Business Journal on April 25, 2025, which is at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. It was also sent via US Mail to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the proposed Project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The first step in complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is to determine whether the activity in question constitutes a “project” as defined by CEQA (Pub.

Res. Code § 21000, et seq.; Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14, § 15000, et seq. [“CEQA Guidelines”].) The second step is to determine whether the project is subject to or exempt from CEQA. This proposal qualifies as a project under CEQA because it involves the issuance of a “lease, 56 Section , Item B
permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use” as described in CEQA Guidelines section 15378, subdivision (a)(3).

The proposed General Plan Amendment would result in the change of land uses originally analyzed and adopted under the City’s General Plan and General Plan EIR. In order to analyze the changes proposed under the General Plan Amendment, an addendum to the General Plan EIR has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. The analysis presented in the addendum to the EIR (see Attachment 5) did not identify any new or substantially more significant impacts to the environment as a result of the General Plan Amendment, and did not demonstrate any new information of substantial importance that was not already analyzed under the previous EIR. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15162, subd. (a)(3).)
Following the City Council’s consideration of the addendum, and if approved, the City Planner will attach the addendum to City’s General Plan EIR. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15162, subd. (c).)

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
This action is consistent with the following General Plan goals, policies, and action items:

General Plan Goal LU-2
A wide range of housing types are available to accommodate all housing needs in the community.

General Plan Goal LU-3
Thriving commercial centers are located throughout the City.

General Plan Policy LU-22
Industrial land in proximity to residential areas shall be planned for light industry.

General Plan Goal ED-4
Fowler maintains a supportive business climate that helps attract and retain new and existing businesses.

General Plan Policy ED-3
Pursue a program of tax base expansion to include both industrial and market area commercial uses, particularly within the identified Economic Development Focus Area (EDFA) as shown in Figure 10-1.

General Plan Action Item ED-3a
One year following adoption of the General Plan, consider alternative land uses within the EDFA that would be compatible with and facilitate current market trends, contribute to Fowler’s tax base, and support Fowler’s Economic Development Strategy. Additional areas may be considered based on conditions at the time of evaluation.

General Plan Policy ED-6
Encourage activities that attract participants to Fowler and promote economic development. 57 Section , Item B

FISCAL IMPACT
The Project would result in the amendment of the existing land use designations for several properties currently outside of the Fowler city limits. While amending the land use for a parcel not currently within the City limits does not have an immediate fiscal impact, the proposed amendments are in response to the City encouraging economic development within the EDFA area. If Alternative A or B is adopted, as land is annexed into the City and developed, development impact fees would be collected and the assessed land being developed would increase, generating increased property tax revenues for the City.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
No procurement is associated with this action.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Attachment 1: EDFA Map
- Attachment 2: Adopted General Plan Land Use Map
- Attachment 3: Alternative A – Land Use Map
- Attachment 4: Alternative B – Land Use Map
- Attachment 5: Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report - Attachment 6: Resolution No. 2781
58 Section , Item B
Attachment 1: EDFA Map
59 Section , Item B
Attachment 2: Adopted General Plan Land Use Map
60 Section , Item B
Attachment 3: Alternative A – Land Use Map
61 Section , Item B
Attachment 4: Alternative B – Land Use Map
62 Section , Item B
128 S. 5th Street, Fowler, California 93625 · (559) 834-3113 · www.fowlercity.org General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 – Addendum to the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report
City of Fowler
April 2025

63 Section , Item B
Introduction
Project Background
On April 18, 2023, the City Council of the City of Fowler (“City”) approved Resolution No. 2634, which adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations and certified the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) (State Clearing House No. 2021110053). The City Council also approved Resolution No. 2635 on the same date, adopting the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan (“General Plan”). The General Plan included Policy ED-3 and Action Item ED-3a, which directed City staff to review the Economic Development Focus Area (“EDFA”), established by the General Plan within a one year of adoption.

The intent of the EDFA is to provide an area of the City where commercial and industrial uses would be concentrated and where new businesses would create jobs for the residents of the City. After adopting the General Plan, City staff were approached by property owners within portions of the EDFA who were interested in developing their properties. The property owners conducted preliminary investigations and presented City staff with the concept of a project that would develop much of the land within the EDFA.

On April 16, 2024, staff sought direction from the City Council in order to develop land use alternatives for the EDFA that would benefit both the City and any future development of the EDFA area.

In response to this direction City staff have proposed General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 (“GPA 25-11” or “Project”), which proposes to change the General Plan Land Use Designations for a number of parcels within the EDFA, listed in Table 1. This table also includes a breakdown of the proposed land use amendments under GPA 25-11.

Table 1: Proposed Land Use Amendments
Land Use Changes
Parcel Existing Land Use &
Acreage
Proposed Land Use &
Acreage
345-050-04 37.15 MHDR
Approximately 76.42 acres LI,

28.65 acres GC, & 9.55 acres
CC
345-050-05 19.29 MDR
343-020-41S 33.78 MHDR
343-020-41S 19.85 HDR
343-020-39S 2.19 MHDR
343-020-42S 2.32 MHDR
343-020-16 18.66 MLDR HDR
345-070-04 37.7 LDR MDR
345-050-18 1.38 MDR CC
345-050-19 12.89 MDR CC
345-050-06 5 MDR CC
345-110-14 19.28 LI 9.68 HDR & 9.6 MDR
345-110-13 13.14 LI MDR
345-150-07 66.85 LI MDR
Acreage Total1 289.48 289.52
1Acreage total may differ due to rounding.
64 Section , Item B
Amendment of the General Plan’s land use diagram as shown in Table 1 revises the analysis adopted under the City’s certified EIR, requiring subsequent analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Statutory Background
Under section 15164, subdivision (a) of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to previously certified EIR shall be prepared if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in section 15162 calling for a subsequent EIR have occurred. Section 15164, subdivision (c) of the CEQA Guidelines states that an Addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the certified EIR. CEQA Guidelines section 15164, subdivision (d) states that the decisionmaking body shall consider the addendum with the certified EIR prior to making a decision on the revised project.

Recommendation
This Addendum to the City’s General Plan EIR determines that non-substantial changes to the environmental analysis and impact determinations are needed in order for the originally certified EIR to adequately assess the potential environmental effects of the revisions proposed as part of the Project.

This Addendum further supports the finding that the revisions as a result of the Project do not cause new or substantial changes to the original project or provide new information of substantial importance regarding new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously certified EIR.

Therefore, the City of Fowler has determined that a subsequent EIR pursuant to section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines is not required. In support of this determination, the following discussion describes the original impact assessment of the Project as well as those of the proposed Project revisions.

The certified EIR (both draft and final versions) and all appendices are provided within the webpage link contained herein as Attachment 1.

Land Use Distribution
Originally Adopted Land Use Designation Distribution
Table 2 below provides a breakdown of the adopted land uses from the City’s General Plan and EIR (Table 2-1 in the EIR). Additionally, the total planned acreage of each land use is provided. 65 Section , Item B
Table 2: Adopted Land Use Distribution
Designation Description Density/Intensity
Acreage/Percent per Land
Use Diagram

RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
LDR – Low Density
Residential
Low density residential is characterized
by larger lots for single family residential
development. Lot sizes would typically
range from 8,500 to 12,000 square feet
and larger. It is not envisioned that lots
greater than one acre in size would be
appropriate within the City limits.

This designation is typically
programmed near the edges of the
community and agricultural land to
allow for compatible transition of uses.

0.0-3.6 du/ac 790 (16.5%)
MLDR – Medium
Low Density
Residential
Medium low density residential is
characterized primarily by single family
homes. Lot sizes would typically range
from 7,000 to 10,000 square feet.

This designation is typically
programmed near the edges of the
community and agricultural land to
allow for compatible transition of uses.

3.7-5.5 du/ac 937 (18.9%)
MDR – Medium
Density Residential
Medium density residential is
characterized by detached single family
residential development, attached
dwelling units, apartments, or
townhomes. Lot sizes would typically
range from 3,500 to 7,000 square feet.

This designation is typically
programmed between the higher and
lower residential densities and serves as
a transitional land use. It is also
appropriate near neighborhood
commercial and park land use
designations.

5.6-13.5 du/ac 733 (14.7%)
MHDR – Medium
High Density
Residential
Medium high density residential is
characterized by apartments,
townhomes, or detached or attached
single family residential development.

Lot sizes for smaller lot single family
development may range from 3,500 to
5,000 square feet.

This designation is typically
programmed near commercial centers,
the downtown, and parks.

8.0-13.5 du/ac 203 (4.1%)
HDR – High Density
Residential
High density residential is characterized
by apartments or townhomes and is
intended to be located near major
community facilities, business centers,
and downtown.

13.6-21.8 du/ac 83 (1.7%)
66 Section , Item B
Designation Description Density/Intensity
Acreage/Percent per Land
Use Diagram
This designation is typically
programmed near commercial centers,
the downtown, and parks.

COMMERCIAL USES
NC – Neighborhood
Commercial
Neighborhood commercial provides for
commercial uses serving convenience
and commercial needs, but also offers
general merchandise, variety, and
specialty items and are intended to
serve the smaller market area
surrounding the site.

This designation is typically
programmed near activity centers,
homes, and the downtown.

Neighborhood Commercial uses are
most appropriate on sites of 10 acres or
smaller.

Maximum FAR 0.4 28 (0.6%)
CC – Community
Commercial
Community commercial provides an
activity center oriented towards the
downtown district. The designation is
also appropriate outside the downtown
in primary commercial districts where a
range of retail, financial, governmental,
and entertainment activities occur.

Mixed use residential uses are also
encouraged in Community Commercial
locations.

This designation is typically
programmed near major intersections
and SR 99.

13.6-21.8 du/ac
Maximum FAR 0.4 104 (2.1%)
GC – General
Commercial
General Commercial provides for
commercial areas with a wide range of
retail and service activities along major
traffic corridors and at the interchange
of major streets with Highway 99 and
Golden State Boulevard and are
intended to provide for visitor-serving
uses, including restaurants, lodging, and
gasoline service areas.

This designation is typically
programmed near major intersections
and SR 99.

Maximum FAR 0.4 210 (4.2%)

INDUSTRIAL USES
LI – Light Industrial
Light industrial provides for uses such as
business park, research and
development, low intensity
warehousing, fabricating, assembly, and
other such similar industrial uses, which
are typically conducted indoors.

Maximum FAR 0.6 598 (12%)
67 Section , Item B
Designation Description Density/Intensity
Acreage/Percent per Land
Use Diagram
This designation is typically
programmed along the SR 99 and
Golden State Boulevard corridor in
order to provide a buffer between
Heavy Industrial uses and non-industrial
designations.

HI – Heavy
Industrial
Heavy industrial provides for uses such
as manufacturing, fabricating, process,
assembling, wholesale and storage uses,
trucking terminals, and quasi-public and
utility structures and facilities. Heavy
industrial often requires exposed or
unenclosed processing and storage of
uncovered materials or equipment.

This designation is typically
programmed along the SR 99 and
Golden State Boulevard corridor.

Maximum FAR 0.6 1,105 (22.2%)

OPEN SPACE USES
P/OS – Parks
and Open Space
Parks and open space includes areas of
permanent open spaces, parks, and/or
areas precluded from major
development.

This designation is dependent on land
acquisition for determining final
location. Parks should be equally
distributed throughout the City.

Maximum FAR 0.25 55 (1.1 %)
PF – Public
Facility
Public facility includes areas owned
and/or maintained by public or
institutional agencies such as facilities
owned by the City, schools, hospitals,
and similar facilities.

Maximum FAR 0.25 123 (2.5%)
Note: Acreages are rounded to the nearest number.
68 Section , Item B
Revised Land Use Designation Distribution
Table 3 below provides the net acreage change in each affected land use proposed by the Project.

Table 3: Proposed Land Use Distribution
Land Use
Acreage Summary
Adopted Project Net Change
LDR 37.7 0 -37.7
MLDR 18.66 0 -18.66
MDR 38.56 127.29 +88.73
MHDR 75.44 0 -75.44
HDR 19.85 28.34 +8.49
CC 0 28.82 +28.82
GC 0 28.65 +28.65
LI 99.27 76.42 -23.2
Total1 289.48 289.52
1Acreage total may differ due to rounding.

Table 4 below provides a summary of the difference in buildout potential between the adopted General Plan land uses versus the as under the Project.

Table 4: Buildout Potential Summary
Buildout Potential Summary
Units Adopted Project Net Change
Housing Units1 1560 2043 +483
Retail Area2 1,289,812 1,561,800 +271,988
1Based upon realistic capacity assumptions in the City’s adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element. 2Based upon land use assumptions in the City’s General Plan. Area amount in square footage. Includes a combination of both industrial and commercial land uses.

In summary, while the Project would decrease industrial land uses within the City and would shift the residential densities, it would result in more retail floor area and an increase in potential housing units.

Figure 1 and Figure 2 below show the existing land use diagram and the proposed land use diagram with those land uses being amended shown in black outline.
69 Section , Item B
Figure 1: Adopted General Plan Land Use Diagram
70 Section , Item B
Figure 2: Proposed Land Use Changes
71 Section , Item B
Impact Analysis
Aesthetics
Development that would eventually occur under the Project would be held to the same development standards as those adopted under the existing General Plan land use diagram. Such development standards are designed to limit the impact of development on viewsheds and resources of aesthetic value. As buildout of the General Plan occurs, aesthetic impacts under the proposed land uses would not differ substantially from those associated with the currently adopted land uses. Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Agricultural and Forestry Resources
The previously certified EIR recognized that farmland, including Prime Farmland, would be converted as a result of the buildout of the General Plan. Swapping land uses as proposed as a part of the Project would not change any of the previous analysis contained in the certified EIR. Any Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmland would still eventually be converted to a nonagricultural use as the buildout of the Planning Area occurs. Likewise, as development occurs any existing Williamson Act contracts would also still be cancelled, regardless of the non-agricultural land use planned for each respective property subject to a Williamson Act contract. Impacts as a result of the Project would not create a significant change from those already analyzed within the certified EIR.

Air Quality
Table 5 below provides the estimated total emissions generated by the buildout of the adopted General Plan land use diagram as compared to the land uses proposed under the buildout of the Project’s proposed land uses. The CalEEMod output files are provided in Attachment 2 and Attachment 3, respectively. As can be seen in the table below, the Project would result in an increase in the emissions generated during buildout of the Planning Area. While the Project results in an increase in the generation of criteria air pollutants, the certified EIR found that impacts resulting from the buildout of the General Plan would be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures were provided within the certified EIR which remain applicable. No additional mitigation measures have been identified to be feasible. Additionally, as buildout of the General Plan occurs, individual projects would be required to analyze their impacts to air quality. Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR remain the same.

Table 5: Comparison of Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants

ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM2.5 PM10D PM2.5D PM10T PM2.5T
Existing Land
Uses 49.11 24.93 175.3 0.551 0.623 0.602 56.33 14.28 56.953 14.882 Project 61.21 33.83 257.8 0.837 3.045 2.931 81.65 20.7 84.695 23.631 Biological Resources
The Project proposes to change land uses originally adopted under the City’s General Plan. The changing of one land use to another would not change the potential for impacts to occur to special status species 72 Section , Item B
within the Planning Area. As buildout occurs, individual projects would be required to analyze impacts to special status species and other biological resources on a case-by-case basis. The impact analysis provided within the certified EIR would remain the same.

Cultural Resources
The parcels affected by the Project were originally analyzed for historic and cultural resources under the certified EIR. The Project would not increase the likelihood for resources to occur on any of these sites or for any new or more significant impacts to occur. The impact analysis provided within the certified EIR would remain the same.

Energy
Under the adopted General Plan land use diagram, buildout of the Planning Area is estimated to result in an energy usage total of 45,483,968 kilowatt hours/year and 58,214,948 kilo British thermal units/year (see Attachment 2). The Project is estimated to result in an energy usage total of 49,651,529 kilowatt hours/year and 48,870,168 kilo British thermal units/year (see Attachment 3). While the Project would increase electric energy, it would decrease usage of natural gas energy. Impacts resulting from the Project do not substantially increase the severity of the previously identified environmental impacts analyzed under the certified EIR. Therefore, impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Geology/Soils
The geologic setting of the Project site remains unchanged. Individual projects would continue to be required to complete a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (as applicable) and meet all applicable requirements of the California Building Code to protect structures from seismic events. The Project would continue to be required to follow all federal, State, and local laws governing the preservation of paleontological resources. The impacts analyzed under the certified EIR remain the same.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The adopted General Plan land uses would result in the generation of 60,794 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent over the buildout of the General Plan (see Attachment 2). The Project would result in a total generation of 83,381 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent over the buildout of the General Plan (see Attachment 3). While the Project results in an increase in the generation of carbon dioxide equivalent, the certified EIR found that impacts resulting from the buildout of the General Plan would be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures were provided within the certified EIR which remain applicable. No additional mitigation measures have been identified to be feasible. Additionally, as buildout of the General Plan occurs, individual projects would still be required to analyze their impacts to greenhouse gasses. Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR remain substantially the same.

Hazards & Hazardous Waste
The Project would not introduce any new hazardous material sites to the City’s Planning Area. As buildout of the affected sites occur, each individual project would be required to meet all applicable federal, State, and local laws regarding hazardous material usage, spill prevention, and spill remediation. 73 Section , Item B
Amendment of the existing land uses would not have a change on the potential for such impacts to occur. The impacts analyzed as a part of the certified EIR would remain the same.

Hydrology & Water Quality
According to the CalEEMod output files prepared as a part of this Addendum (see Attachment 2 and Attachment 3), the adopted General Plan is estimated to result in total water usage of 820,323,424 gallons/year at buildout. In comparison, the Project is estimated to result total water usage of 864,303,436. While water usage is estimated to increase under the Project, development is contingent on the availability of water to serve each individual project. The availability of water would be analyzed and confirmed through environmental analysis for each individual project as they are proposed during buildout of the Planning Area. The impact level analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Land Use and Planning
The Project would result in changes to the adopted General Plan land use diagram. The proposed changes would not result in the physical division of any established community. Additionally, the Project would amend the General Plan land use plan, but would not conflict with any other plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Mineral Resources
No significant mineral resources are known to exist within the City’s Planning Area. Additionally, the Project would not result in the conversion of any land use adopted for the purpose of mineral resource protection or extraction. Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Noise
The amendment of the General Plan land use diagram as proposed would not in itself increase noise generation within the City. Construction noise generated from buildout of the Planning Area would continue to be temporary and would not result in significant impacts. As a result of the change of land uses proposed by the Project, more residential uses would be located near to State Route 99 and less non-residential land uses would be located near to State Route 99. The highest noise contour associated with State Route 99 is 65 A-weighted decibels (dBA). 65 dBA is conditionally acceptable for single family development and individual projects would continue to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Single family development is currently planned on parcels abutting State Route 99, outside of the parcels proposed for land use changes under this Project. Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Population/Housing
As noted in Table 4, the Project would increase the development potential for housing within the General Plan buildout area by a total of 483 housing units. While the amount of potential housing units would increase in the City as a result of the Project, these units would be planned via the proposed land uses and the Project would not displace any existing housing or require replacement housing elsewhere.

Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same. 74 Section , Item B
Public Services
The Project would result in the change of land use designations form the originally adopted General Plan land use diagram. Change of land use designation would not impact the need and availability for public services as the buildout of the General Plan occurs. As individual projects occur, the service area for public services would expand and experience additional stress as a result of increased need for staff and services. The Project would not substantially increase the impacts of buildout of the General Plan on publics services within the City. Impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Recreation
The Project proposes to change land uses in the City’s Planning Area, none of which are planned for Open Space. The provision of recreational space would follow the same requirements that have previously been adopted by the City and would also comply with all other applicable laws and regulations. The Project would not result in any change to the analysis provided for recreation in the certified EIR.

Transportation/Traffic
Land use amendments under the Project could have the potential to affect future traffic volumes in a different manner than was previously analyzed and adopted under the certified EIR. As development occurs under the Project, street standards would continue to be required to be met. Projects which meet the requirement for a traffic study would still be required to provide such analysis. Additionally, as projects are reviewed and ultimately approved, conditions of approval, mitigation measures required from individual CEQA analysis, and payment of development impact fees would limit impacts to roadways within the City’s Planning Area. Furthermore, the Fresno Council of Governments was consulted to provide analysis on the potential for the Project to increase Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a result of the Project. The analysis provided by the Fresno Council of Governments indicated that the Project would result in a VMT per Capita of 11.6 and VMT per Employee of 16.4 (see Attachment 4). The existing General Plan land use distribution resulted in a VMT per Capita of 11.6 and a VMT per Employee of 16.2. While VMT per Employee would increase, the VMT generation under the Project would remain at a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would remain the same.

Tribal Cultural Resources
The parcels affected by the Project were originally analyzed for impact to tribal cultural resources under the certified EIR. Tribes within the area that could be impacted by the Project were notified of the Project on April 30, 2024, pursuant to the requirements of Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18 (see Attachment 5). No requests for consultation were received for the Project. The Project would not increase the likelihood for tribal cultural resources to be impacted. The impact analysis provided within the certified EIR would remain the same.

Utilities/Service Systems
The Project would not change the need for all development occurring under the buildout of the Planning Area to connect to public utilities and service systems such as water, sewer, solid waste, telecommunications, drainage, electric power, and natural gas connections. As development occurs 75 Section , Item B
these connections will be made by individual projects which will be analyzed on a case-by-case basis.

Individual analysis under CEQA would ensure that adequate facilities are in place for development to occur. The collection of development impact fees for future development would also help ensure that infrastructure construction occurs concurrently and as needed with development. While the Project may result in an increase in the capacity required for public utilities and service systems, any increase is not expected to be substantial in nature. Impact analysis provided in the certified EIR would remain the same.

Wildfire
The City’s Planning Area is not located within a high fire hazard severity zone, nor is it located within a State Responsibility Area. Changing the land use designations as proposed by the Project would not change the potential for wildfire to occur. The impacts analyzed under the certified EIR would not change.

Mandatory Findings of Significance
As provided in the analysis above, the Project would not result in any new potentially significant or substantially increased environmental impacts that would affect either humans, wildlife, or the physical environment. No new mitigation measures were identified that were feasible to include as a requirement for the Project, however all previously included mitigation measures of the certified EIR remain applicable and in force. The same statutory requirements will apply to the Project that applied to the certified EIR unless they have been updated, modified, or repealed. 76 Section , Item B
Summary and Findings
Based on the analysis and comparisons provided above, the revised Project will not generate any new significant impacts or cause a substantial increase in the severity of impacts previously identified in the certified EIR; therefore, no additional mitigation measures are required. The Project would not result in substantially increased impacts, either short-term or long-term related to degradation of the environment, result in substantially increased cumulative impacts, or result in increased substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

Therefore, it is the determination of this Addendum that the impacts of the Project have already been adequately analyzed in the certified EIR and that new mitigation measures are not necessary as a result of the Project, as all impacts would remain less than significant in nature or will not have been substantially increased from what was previously analyzed. The changes of the proposed land uses as a result of the Project as set forth in this Addendum, together with the certified EIR, constitute an adequate environmental document pursuant CEQA.

This Addendum determines that none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines section 15162, requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR, have occurred and thus the certified EIR as modified by this Addendum has satisfied the requirements of CEQA for the Project. All implementing General Plan goals, policies and action items also remain in full force and effect.

Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by:

Wyatt Czeshinski, AICP Dawn E. Marple
Contract Staff Planner City Planner
Attachments:

Attachment 1: City of Fowler 2040 General Plan Public Review Documents Webpage Attachment 2: CalEEMod Output Files for Existing Land Uses Attachment 3: CalEEMod Output Files for Proposed Land Uses Attachment 4: Fresno Council of Governments VMT Analysis Results Attachment 5: Tribal Outreach Letters (SB 18 & AB 52)
77 Section , Item B
Attachment 1: City of Fowler 2040 General Plan Public Review Documents Webpage https://fowlercity.org/general-plan/public-review-documents/ 78 Section , Item B
Attachment 2: CalEEMod Output Files for Existing Land Uses 79 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
1 / 25
EDFA - Existing Custom Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
80 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
2 / 25

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.2. Mitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.2. Mitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.2. Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings 81
Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
3 / 25

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.2. Mitigated

8. User Changes to Default Data
82 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
4 / 25

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name EDFA - Existing
Operational Year 2042
Lead Agency City of Fowler
Land Use Scale Plan/community
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.70
Precipitation (days) 25.4
Location 36.63651694083602, -119.70339005691184
County Fresno
City —
Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD
Air Basin San Joaquin Valley
TAZ 2489
EDFZ 5
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Single Family
Housing
1,718 Dwelling Unit 349 3,350,100 20,122,688 — 5,498 —
83 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
5 / 25
General Light 1,324 1000sqft 30.4 1,323,905 0.00 — — —
Industry
Strip Mall 406 1000sqft 9.31 405,571 — — — —
City Park 19.0 Acre 19.0 0.00 — — — —
Apartments Low
Rise
1,244 Dwelling Unit 77.8 1,318,640 — — 3,981 —
Apartments Mid
Rise
674 Dwelling Unit 17.7 647,040 — — 2,157 —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Energy E-15 Require All-Electric Development

2. Emissions Summary

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 119 111 121 1,108 3.53 1.80 362 363 1.70 91.6 93.3 — 360,497 360,497 8.41 16.2 141 365,663 Area 198 194 32.7 295 0.21 2.66 — 2.66 2.61 — 2.61 0.00 39,140 39,140 0.76 0.08 — 39,183 Energy 1.72 0.86 15.6 13.1 0.09 1.19 — 1.19 1.19 — 1.19 — 44,076 44,076 5.76 0.53 — 44,379 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 925 1,519 2,444 95.1 2.28 — 5,502 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 2,702 0.00 2,702 270 0.00 — 9,454 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 385 385
Total 319 306 170 1,416 3.83 5.66 362 367 5.50 91.6 97.1 3,627 445,232 448,859 380 19.1 527 464,566 84 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
6 / 25
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 112 103 137 895 3.23 1.81 362 363 1.71 91.6 93.3 — 329,777 329,777 9.36 17.1 3.66 335,117 Area 166 164 30.2 12.8 0.19 2.44 — 2.44 2.44 — 2.44 0.00 38,280 38,280 0.72 0.07 — 38,319 Energy 1.72 0.86 15.6 13.1 0.09 1.19 — 1.19 1.19 — 1.19 — 44,076 44,076 5.76 0.53 — 44,379 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 925 1,519 2,444 95.1 2.28 — 5,502 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 2,702 0.00 2,702 270 0.00 — 9,454 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 385 385
Total 279 268 183 921 3.51 5.43 362 367 5.33 91.6 97.0 3,627 413,652 417,279 381 20.0 389 433,156 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 98.0 90.8 113 805 2.88 1.57 309 310 1.48 78.3 79.7 — 293,893 293,893 7.72 14.4 53.0 298,445 Area 179 177 8.03 142 0.05 0.66 — 0.66 0.63 — 0.63 0.00 9,024 9,024 0.18 0.02 — 9,035 Energy 1.72 0.86 15.6 13.1 0.09 1.19 — 1.19 1.19 — 1.19 — 44,076 44,076 5.76 0.53 — 44,379 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 925 1,519 2,444 95.1 2.28 — 5,502 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 2,702 0.00 2,702 270 0.00 — 9,454 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 385 385
Total 278 269 137 960 3.02 3.42 309 312 3.30 78.3 81.6 3,627 348,513 352,140 379 17.3 438 367,200 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 17.9 16.6 20.6 147 0.52 0.29 56.3 56.6 0.27 14.3 14.6 — 48,657 48,657 1.28 2.39 8.77 49,411 Area 32.6 32.4 1.46 26.0 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 0.00 1,494 1,494 0.03 < 0.005 — 1,496 Energy 0.31 0.16 2.85 2.40 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 7,297 7,297 0.95 0.09 — 7,347 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 153 252 405 15.7 0.38 — 911 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 — 1,565 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 63.8 63.8
Total 50.8 49.1 24.9 175 0.55 0.62 56.3 57.0 0.60 14.3 14.9 601 57,700 58,301 62.7 2.86 72.5 60,794

4. Operations Emissions Details
85 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
7 / 25

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

35.6 33.3 35.0 314 0.98 0.51 101 101 0.48 25.5 26.0 — 100,568 100,568 2.45 4.58 39.3 102,034 General
Light
Industry

15.1 14.0 16.0 149 0.48 0.24 49.2 49.5 0.23 12.5 12.7 — 48,981 48,981 1.10 2.16 19.2 49,672 Strip
Mall

43.1 40.0 45.7 424 1.37 0.70 141 141 0.66 35.6 36.3 — 139,847 139,847 3.14 6.17 54.9 141,820 City
Park

0.09 0.09 0.10 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 0.08 0.08 — 308 308 0.01 0.01 0.12 312 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

18.3 17.1 18.0 161 0.51 0.26 51.8 52.0 0.25 13.1 13.4 — 51,774 51,774 1.26 2.36 20.2 52,528 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

6.74 6.30 6.62 59.3 0.19 0.10 19.0 19.1 0.09 4.82 4.91 — 19,020 19,020 0.46 0.87 7.44 19,297 Total 119 111 121 1,108 3.53 1.80 362 363 1.70 91.6 93.3 — 360,497 360,497 8.41 16.2 141 365,663 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

33.4 31.0 39.5 256 0.90 0.51 101 101 0.48 25.5 26.0 — 92,026 92,026 2.74 4.86 1.02 93,544 General
Light
Industry

14.2 13.0 18.1 119 0.44 0.24 49.2 49.5 0.23 12.5 12.7 — 44,795 44,795 1.21 2.29 0.50 45,508 86 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
8 / 25
Strip
Mall

40.4 37.2 51.6 339 1.25 0.70 141 141 0.66 35.6 36.3 — 127,894 127,894 3.47 6.54 1.42 129,930 City
Park

0.09 0.08 0.11 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 0.08 0.08 — 282 282 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 286 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

17.2 16.0 20.3 132 0.46 0.26 51.8 52.0 0.25 13.1 13.4 — 47,376 47,376 1.41 2.50 0.52 48,158 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

6.32 5.86 7.47 48.5 0.17 0.10 19.0 19.1 0.09 4.82 4.91 — 17,404 17,404 0.52 0.92 0.19 17,691 Total 112 103 137 895 3.23 1.81 362 363 1.71 91.6 93.3 — 329,777 329,777 9.36 17.1 3.66 335,117 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

6.01 5.59 6.69 47.2 0.17 0.09 17.7 17.8 0.09 4.49 4.58 — 15,343 15,343 0.42 0.77 2.76 15,584 General
Light
Industry

2.23 2.06 2.68 19.3 0.07 0.04 7.59 7.62 0.04 1.92 1.96 — 6,534 6,534 0.16 0.32 1.18 6,634 Strip
Mall

5.70 5.26 6.84 49.4 0.18 0.10 19.4 19.5 0.09 4.91 5.01 — 16,700 16,700 0.42 0.81 3.02 16,955 City
Park

0.01 0.01 0.01 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 25.1 25.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.5 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

2.81 2.62 3.13 22.1 0.08 0.04 8.30 8.34 0.04 2.10 2.14 — 7,185 7,185 0.20 0.36 1.29 7,298 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

1.12 1.04 1.25 8.83 0.03 0.02 3.31 3.33 0.02 0.84 0.86 — 2,870 2,870 0.08 0.14 0.52 2,915 Total 17.9 16.6 20.6 147 0.52 0.29 56.3 56.6 0.27 14.3 14.6 — 48,657 48,657 1.28 2.39 8.77 49,411

4.2. Energy

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 87 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
9 / 25
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 8,976 8,976 1.45 0.18 — 9,065
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — 8,778 8,778 1.42 0.17 — 8,865
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,394 2,394 0.39 0.05 — 2,417
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 3,418 3,418 0.55 0.07 — 3,451
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,854 1,854 0.30 0.04 — 1,872
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 25,419 25,419 4.11 0.50 — 25,670 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 8,976 8,976 1.45 0.18 — 9,065
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — 8,778 8,778 1.42 0.17 — 8,865
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,394 2,394 0.39 0.05 — 2,417
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
88 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
10 / 25
Apartme — — — — — — — — — — — — 3,418 3,418 0.55 0.07 — 3,451 nts
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,854 1,854 0.30 0.04 — 1,872
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 25,419 25,419 4.11 0.50 — 25,670 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,486 1,486 0.24 0.03 — 1,501
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,453 1,453 0.24 0.03 — 1,468
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 396 396 0.06 0.01 — 400
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 566 566 0.09 0.01 — 571
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 307 307 0.05 0.01 — 310
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,208 4,208 0.68 0.08 — 4,250

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 89 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
11 / 25
General
Light
Industry

1.60 0.80 14.6 12.2 0.09 1.11 — 1.11 1.11 — 1.11 — 17,384 17,384 1.54 0.03 — 17,432 Strip
Mall

0.12 0.06 1.07 0.90 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,273 1,273 0.11 < 0.005 — 1,276 City
Park

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 1.72 0.86 15.6 13.1 0.09 1.19 — 1.19 1.19 — 1.19 — 18,657 18,657 1.65 0.04 — 18,709 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Light
Industry

1.60 0.80 14.6 12.2 0.09 1.11 — 1.11 1.11 — 1.11 — 17,384 17,384 1.54 0.03 — 17,432 Strip
Mall

0.12 0.06 1.07 0.90 0.01 0.08 — 0.08 0.08 — 0.08 — 1,273 1,273 0.11 < 0.005 — 1,276 City
Park

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 1.72 0.86 15.6 13.1 0.09 1.19 — 1.19 1.19 — 1.19 — 18,657 18,657 1.65 0.04 — 18,709 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
90 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
12 / 25
Single 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Family
Housing
General
Light
Industry

0.29 0.15 2.66 2.23 0.02 0.20 — 0.20 0.20 — 0.20 — 2,878 2,878 0.25 0.01 — 2,886 Strip
Mall

0.02 0.01 0.19 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 211 211 0.02 < 0.005 — 211 City
Park

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.31 0.16 2.85 2.40 0.02 0.22 — 0.22 0.22 — 0.22 — 3,089 3,089 0.27 0.01 — 3,097

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 3.53 1.76 30.2 12.8 0.19 2.44 — 2.44 2.44 — 2.44 0.00 38,280 38,280 0.72 0.07 — 38,319 Consum
er
Product
s
151 151 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

11.3 11.3 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
91 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
13 / 25
Landsca
Equipment

32.3 30.3 2.54 283 0.01 0.23 — 0.23 0.17 — 0.17 — 861 861 0.04 0.01 — 864 Total 198 194 32.7 295 0.21 2.66 — 2.66 2.61 — 2.61 0.00 39,140 39,140 0.76 0.08 — 39,183 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 3.53 1.76 30.2 12.8 0.19 2.44 — 2.44 2.44 — 2.44 0.00 38,280 38,280 0.72 0.07 — 38,319 Consum
er
Product
s
151 151 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

11.3 11.3 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 166 164 30.2 12.8 0.19 2.44 — 2.44 2.44 — 2.44 0.00 38,280 38,280 0.72 0.07 — 38,319 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.14 0.07 1.24 0.53 0.01 0.10 — 0.10 0.10 — 0.10 0.00 1,424 1,424 0.03 < 0.005 — 1,425 Consum
er
Product
s

27.5 27.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

2.06 2.06 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent

2.91 2.72 0.23 25.4 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 70.3 70.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 70.5 Total 32.6 32.4 1.46 26.0 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.12 — 0.12 0.00 1,494 1,494 0.03 < 0.005 — 1,496

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Mitigated
92 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
14 / 25
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 133 609 742 13.7 0.34 — 1,184
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 587 674 1,261 60.3 1.44 — 3,197
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 57.6 66.1 124 5.91 0.14 — 314
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 96.1 110 206 9.87 0.24 — 523
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 52.0 59.8 112 5.35 0.13 — 284
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 925 1,519 2,444 95.1 2.28 — 5,502 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 133 609 742 13.7 0.34 — 1,184
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 587 674 1,261 60.3 1.44 — 3,197
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 57.6 66.1 124 5.91 0.14 — 314
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
93 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
15 / 25
Apartme
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 96.1 110 206 9.87 0.24 — 523
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 52.0 59.8 112 5.35 0.13 — 284
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 925 1,519 2,444 95.1 2.28 — 5,502 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 22.0 101 123 2.27 0.06 — 196
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 97.1 112 209 9.98 0.24 — 529
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 9.53 10.9 20.5 0.98 0.02 — 51.9
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 15.9 18.3 34.2 1.63 0.04 — 86.7
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 8.62 9.90 18.5 0.89 0.02 — 47.0
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 153 252 405 15.7 0.38 — 911

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
94 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
16 / 25
Single
Family
Housing
——————————— 823 0.00 823 82.2 0.00— 2,878
General
Light
Industry
——————————— 885 0.00 885 88.4 0.00— 3,095
Strip
Mall
——————————— 230 0.00 230 22.9 0.00— 803
City
Park
——————————— 0.88 0.00 0.88 0.09 0.00— 3.08
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
——————————— 496 0.00 496 49.6 0.00— 1,735
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
——————————— 269 0.00 269 26.8 0.00— 940
Total——————————— 2,702 0.00 2,702 270 0.00— 9,454
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————— 823 0.00 823 82.2 0.00— 2,878
General
Light
Industry
——————————— 885 0.00 885 88.4 0.00— 3,095
Strip
Mall
——————————— 230 0.00 230 22.9 0.00— 803
City
Park
——————————— 0.88 0.00 0.88 0.09 0.00— 3.08
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
——————————— 496 0.00 496 49.6 0.00— 1,735
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
——————————— 269 0.00 269 26.8 0.00— 940
Total——————————— 2,702 0.00 2,702 270 0.00— 9,454
95 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
17 / 25
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 136 0.00 136 13.6 0.00 — 476
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 146 0.00 146 14.6 0.00 — 512
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 38.0 0.00 38.0 3.80 0.00 — 133
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.01 0.00 — 0.51
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 82.1 0.00 82.1 8.20 0.00 — 287
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 44.5 0.00 44.5 4.45 0.00 — 156
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 447 0.00 447 44.7 0.00 — 1,565

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 24.0 24.0
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 345 345
96 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
18 / 25
Strip———————————————— 2.53 2.53
Mall
City
Park
———————————————— 0.00 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
———————————————— 9.44 9.44
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
———————————————— 4.63 4.63
Total———————————————— 385 385
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
———————————————— 24.0 24.0
General
Light
Industry
———————————————— 345 345
Strip
Mall
———————————————— 2.53 2.53
City
Park
———————————————— 0.00 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
———————————————— 9.44 9.44
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
———————————————— 4.63 4.63
Total———————————————— 385 385
Annual——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
———————————————— 3.97 3.97
97 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
19 / 25
General — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 57.1 57.1
Light
Industry
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.42 0.42
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.56 1.56
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.77 0.77
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 63.8 63.8

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
98 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
20 / 25

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipm
ent
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
99 Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
21 / 25
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

5. Activity Data

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Single Family
Housing
16,201 16,287 14,569 5,832,647 141,632 142,382 127,363 50,990,676 General Light
Industry
6,447 913 6,620 2,073,727 67,876 9,617 69,688 21,831,359 Strip Mall 15,010 18,900 7,694 5,300,019 158,021 198,967 80,996 55,796,458 City Park 14.8 37.2 41.6 7,975 156 392 438 83,960
Apartments Low
Rise
8,385 5,660 4,802 2,731,495 73,300 49,483 41,979 23,879,517 Apartments Mid
Rise
3,060 3,080 2,541 1,090,879 26,751 26,928 22,214 9,536,775

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.2. Mitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Single Family Housing —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 859
Propane Fireplaces 0 100
Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
22 / 25
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 859
Apartments Low Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 622
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 622
Apartments Mid Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 337
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 337

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
10764454.5 3,588,152 2,594,214 864,738 —

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.2. Mitigated
101
Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
23 / 25
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Single Family Housing 16,061,406 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00 General Light Industry 15,706,985 204 0.0330 0.0040 54,243,458 Strip Mall 4,282,863 204 0.0330 0.0040 3,971,490
City Park 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Apartments Low Rise 6,115,461 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Apartments Mid Rise 3,317,253 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Single Family Housing 69,228,528 337,612,470
General Light Industry 306,153,031 0.00
Strip Mall 30,041,667 0.00
City Park 0.00 0.00
Apartments Low Rise 50,128,224 0.00
Apartments Mid Rise 27,159,504 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Single Family Housing 1,526 —
General Light Industry 1,642 —
Strip Mall 426 —
City Park 1.63 — 102
Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
24 / 25
Apartments Low Rise 920 —
Apartments Mid Rise 498 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Single Family Housing Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Single Family Housing Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Light Industry Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 0.30 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freezers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
City Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
City Park Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
103
Section , Item B
EDFA - Existing Custom Report, 3/13/2025
25 / 25
Apartments Mid Rise Average room A/C & R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0 Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
Apartments Mid Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Per plan
Operations: Hearths No woodstoves
Operations: Vehicle Data Residential, light industrial, and shopping center trip rates per 11th Edition ITE 104
Section , Item B
Attachment 3: CalEEMod Output Files for Proposed Land Uses 105
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
1 / 24
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
106
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
2 / 24

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.2. Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation 107
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
3 / 24

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.2. Mitigated

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.2. Mitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.2. Mitigated

8. User Changes to Default Data
108
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
4 / 24

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name EDFA - Alternative A
Operational Year 2042
Lead Agency City of Fowler
Land Use Scale Plan/community
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.70
Precipitation (days) 25.4
Location 36.63651694083602, -119.70339005691184
County Fresno
City —
Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD
Air Basin San Joaquin Valley
TAZ 2489
EDFZ 5
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Single Family
Housing
2,113 Dwelling Unit 383 4,120,350 24,749,267 — 6,762 —
109
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
5 / 24
General Light 973 1000sqft 22.3 972,926 0.00 — — —
Industry
Strip Mall 920 1000sqft 21.1 919,814 — — — —
City Park 19.0 Acre 19.0 0.00 — — — —
Apartments Low
Rise
936 Dwelling Unit 58.5 992,160 — — 2,995 —
Apartments Mid
Rise
821 Dwelling Unit 21.6 788,160 — — 2,627 —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Energy E-15 Require All-Electric Development

2. Emissions Summary

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 175 163 180 1,651 5.28 2.70 541 544 2.55 137 140 — 539,282 539,282 12.5 24.1 211 546,977 Area 306 257 41.3 713 1.51 59.4 — 59.4 57.3 — 57.3 9,549 41,669 51,217 45.4 0.08 — 52,378 Energy 1.44 0.72 13.1 11.0 0.08 1.00 — 1.00 1.00 — 1.00 — 43,410 43,410 5.88 0.57 — 43,728 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 861 1,550 2,411 88.5 2.13 — 5,257 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 2,883 0.00 2,883 288 0.00 — 10,088 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 301 301
Total 482 421 235 2,375 6.87 63.1 541 604 60.8 137 198 13,292 625,911 639,203 440 26.9 513 658,729 110
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
6 / 24
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Mobile 164 151 203 1,329 4.82 2.70 541 544 2.55 137 140 — 493,290 493,290 13.8 25.5 5.48 501,240 Area 271 225 38.6 410 1.50 59.2 — 59.2 57.1 — 57.1 9,549 40,743 50,292 45.4 0.08 — 51,450 Energy 1.44 0.72 13.1 11.0 0.08 1.00 — 1.00 1.00 — 1.00 — 43,410 43,410 5.88 0.57 — 43,728 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 861 1,550 2,411 88.5 2.13 — 5,257 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 2,883 0.00 2,883 288 0.00 — 10,088 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 301 301
Total 437 377 255 1,751 6.40 62.9 541 604 60.6 137 198 13,292 578,993 592,286 442 28.3 307 612,064 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 139 129 162 1,160 4.16 2.27 447 450 2.14 113 116 — 425,671 425,671 11.1 20.8 76.8 432,236 Area 217 206 10.0 242 0.34 13.4 — 13.4 12.9 — 12.9 2,145 9,610 11,755 10.2 0.02 — 12,017 Energy 1.44 0.72 13.1 11.0 0.08 1.00 — 1.00 1.00 — 1.00 — 43,410 43,410 5.88 0.57 — 43,728 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 861 1,550 2,411 88.5 2.13 — 5,257 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 2,883 0.00 2,883 288 0.00 — 10,088 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 301 301
Total 358 335 185 1,413 4.59 16.7 447 464 16.1 113 129 5,889 480,241 486,130 404 23.6 378 503,627 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 25.4 23.6 29.6 212 0.76 0.41 81.6 82.1 0.39 20.7 21.1 — 70,475 70,475 1.83 3.45 12.7 71,562 Area 39.6 37.5 1.83 44.1 0.06 2.45 — 2.45 2.36 — 2.36 355 1,591 1,946 1.69 < 0.005 — 1,989 Energy 0.26 0.13 2.40 2.01 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.18 — 0.18 — 7,187 7,187 0.97 0.09 — 7,240 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 142 257 399 14.7 0.35 — 870 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 477 0.00 477 47.7 0.00 — 1,670 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 49.9 49.9
Total 65.3 61.2 33.8 258 0.84 3.05 81.6 84.7 2.93 20.7 23.6 975 79,509 80,484 66.9 3.90 62.6 83,381

4. Operations Emissions Details
111
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
7 / 24

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

43.8 40.9 43.1 386 1.21 0.62 124 124 0.59 31.4 31.9 — 123,690 123,690 3.01 5.64 48.4 125,493 General
Light
Industry

11.1 10.3 11.8 109 0.35 0.18 36.2 36.4 0.17 9.17 9.34 — 35,996 35,996 0.81 1.59 14.1 36,503 Strip
Mall

97.7 90.6 104 962 3.10 1.58 319 320 1.49 80.8 82.3 — 317,165 317,165 7.12 14.0 125 321,639 City
Park

0.09 0.09 0.10 0.93 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 0.08 0.08 — 308 308 0.01 0.01 0.12 312 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

13.8 12.9 13.6 121 0.38 0.20 39.0 39.2 0.18 9.88 10.1 — 38,955 38,955 0.95 1.77 15.2 39,523 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

8.21 7.67 8.07 72.2 0.23 0.12 23.2 23.3 0.11 5.87 5.98 — 23,168 23,168 0.56 1.06 9.06 23,506 Total 175 163 180 1,651 5.28 2.70 541 544 2.55 137 140 — 539,282 539,282 12.5 24.1 211 546,977 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

41.1 38.1 48.6 315 1.11 0.62 124 124 0.59 31.4 31.9 — 113,185 113,185 3.37 5.98 1.25 115,051 General
Light
Industry

10.4 9.59 13.3 87.1 0.32 0.18 36.2 36.4 0.17 9.17 9.34 — 32,919 32,919 0.89 1.68 0.37 33,443 112
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
8 / 24
Strip
Mall

91.7 84.5 117 768 2.84 1.58 319 320 1.50 80.8 82.3 — 290,058 290,058 7.86 14.8 3.23 294,676 City
Park

0.09 0.08 0.11 0.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 0.31 < 0.005 0.08 0.08 — 282 282 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 286 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

12.9 12.0 15.3 99.3 0.35 0.20 39.0 39.2 0.18 9.88 10.1 — 35,646 35,646 1.06 1.88 0.39 36,234 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

7.69 7.14 9.10 59.0 0.21 0.12 23.2 23.3 0.11 5.87 5.98 — 21,200 21,200 0.63 1.12 0.23 21,550 Total 164 151 203 1,329 4.82 2.70 541 544 2.55 137 140 — 493,290 493,290 13.8 25.5 5.48 501,240 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

7.39 6.87 8.23 58.1 0.20 0.11 21.8 21.9 0.11 5.52 5.63 — 18,870 18,870 0.52 0.94 3.39 19,167 General
Light
Industry

1.64 1.51 1.97 14.2 0.05 0.03 5.57 5.60 0.03 1.41 1.44 — 4,802 4,802 0.12 0.23 0.87 4,875 Strip
Mall

12.9 11.9 15.5 112 0.41 0.22 44.0 44.2 0.21 11.1 11.4 — 37,876 37,876 0.95 1.83 6.84 38,452 City
Park

0.01 0.01 0.01 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 25.1 25.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 25.5 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

2.12 1.97 2.36 16.6 0.06 0.03 6.24 6.28 0.03 1.58 1.61 — 5,406 5,406 0.15 0.27 0.97 5,491 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

1.37 1.27 1.52 10.8 0.04 0.02 4.04 4.06 0.02 1.02 1.04 — 3,495 3,495 0.10 0.17 0.63 3,550 Total 25.4 23.6 29.6 212 0.76 0.41 81.6 82.1 0.39 20.7 21.1 — 70,475 70,475 1.83 3.45 12.7 71,562

4.2. Energy

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 113 Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
9 / 24
Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 11,039 11,039 1.79 0.22 — 11,148 General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — 6,451 6,451 1.04 0.13 — 6,515
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,428 5,428 0.88 0.11 — 5,482
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,572 2,572 0.42 0.05 — 2,597
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,258 2,258 0.37 0.04 — 2,280
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 27,748 27,748 4.49 0.54 — 28,023 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 11,039 11,039 1.79 0.22 — 11,148 General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — 6,451 6,451 1.04 0.13 — 6,515
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,428 5,428 0.88 0.11 — 5,482
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
114
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
10 / 24
Apartme — — — — — — — — — — — — 2,572 2,572 0.42 0.05 — 2,597 nts
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 2,258 2,258 0.37 0.04 — 2,280
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 27,748 27,748 4.49 0.54 — 28,023 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,828 1,828 0.30 0.04 — 1,846
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — 1,068 1,068 0.17 0.02 — 1,079
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — 899 899 0.15 0.02 — 908
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 426 426 0.07 0.01 — 430
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — 374 374 0.06 0.01 — 378
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 4,594 4,594 0.74 0.09 — 4,639

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 115
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
11 / 24
General
Light
Industry

1.18 0.59 10.7 8.99 0.06 0.81— 0.81 0.81— 0.81— 12,776 12,776 1.13 0.02— 12,811 Strip
Mall

0.27 0.13 2.42 2.03 0.01 0.18— 0.18 0.18— 0.18— 2,887 2,887 0.26 0.01— 2,895 City
Park

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Total 1.44 0.72 13.1 11.0 0.08 1.00— 1.00 1.00— 1.00— 15,662 15,662 1.39 0.03— 15,706 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 General
Light
Industry

1.18 0.59 10.7 8.99 0.06 0.81— 0.81 0.81— 0.81— 12,776 12,776 1.13 0.02— 12,811 Strip
Mall

0.27 0.13 2.42 2.03 0.01 0.18— 0.18 0.18— 0.18— 2,887 2,887 0.26 0.01— 2,895 City
Park

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00— 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 Total 1.44 0.72 13.1 11.0 0.08 1.00— 1.00 1.00— 1.00— 15,662 15,662 1.39 0.03— 15,706 Annual——————————————————
116
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
12 / 24
Single 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Family
Housing
General
Light
Industry

0.21 0.11 1.95 1.64 0.01 0.15 — 0.15 0.15 — 0.15 — 2,115 2,115 0.19 < 0.005 — 2,121 Strip
Mall

0.05 0.02 0.44 0.37 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 478 478 0.04 < 0.005 — 479 City
Park

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Low Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.26 0.13 2.40 2.01 0.01 0.18 — 0.18 0.18 — 0.18 — 2,593 2,593 0.23 < 0.005 — 2,600

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 92.1 45.5 38.6 410 1.50 59.2 — 59.2 57.1 — 57.1 9,549 40,743 50,292 45.4 0.08 — 51,450 Consum
er
Product
s
167 167 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

12.5 12.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
117
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
13 / 24
Landsca
Equipment

34.8 32.6 2.72 303 0.01 0.24 — 0.24 0.18 — 0.18 — 926 926 0.04 0.01 — 929 Total 306 257 41.3 713 1.51 59.4 — 59.4 57.3 — 57.3 9,549 41,669 51,217 45.4 0.08 — 52,378 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 92.1 45.5 38.6 410 1.50 59.2 — 59.2 57.1 — 57.1 9,549 40,743 50,292 45.4 0.08 — 51,450 Consum
er
Product
s
167 167 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

12.5 12.5 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 271 225 38.6 410 1.50 59.2 — 59.2 57.1 — 57.1 9,549 40,743 50,292 45.4 0.08 — 51,450 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 3.77 1.87 1.58 16.8 0.06 2.43 — 2.43 2.34 — 2.34 355 1,515 1,871 1.69 < 0.005 — 1,914 Consum
er
Product
s

30.4 30.4 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coating
s

2.29 2.29 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipm
ent

3.13 2.93 0.24 27.3 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 75.6 75.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 75.8 Total 39.6 37.5 1.83 44.1 0.06 2.45 — 2.45 2.36 — 2.36 355 1,591 1,946 1.69 < 0.005 — 1,989

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.2. Mitigated
118
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
14 / 24
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 163 749 912 16.9 0.41 — 1,456
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 431 495 926 44.3 1.06 — 2,350
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 131 150 281 13.4 0.32 — 711
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 72.3 83.0 155 7.42 0.18 — 394
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 63.4 72.8 136 6.51 0.16 — 345
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 861 1,550 2,411 88.5 2.13 — 5,257 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 163 749 912 16.9 0.41 — 1,456
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 431 495 926 44.3 1.06 — 2,350
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 131 150 281 13.4 0.32 — 711
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
119
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
15 / 24
Apartme
Low
Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 72.3 83.0 155 7.42 0.18 — 394
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 63.4 72.8 136 6.51 0.16 — 345
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 861 1,550 2,411 88.5 2.13 — 5,257 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 27.0 124 151 2.79 0.07 — 241
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 71.4 82.0 153 7.33 0.18 — 389
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 21.6 24.8 46.4 2.22 0.05 — 118
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 12.0 13.7 25.7 1.23 0.03 — 65.2
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 10.5 12.1 22.6 1.08 0.03 — 57.2
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 142 257 399 14.7 0.35 — 870

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
120
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
16 / 24
Single
Family
Housing
——————————— 1,012 0.00 1,012 101 0.00— 3,540
General
Light
Industry
——————————— 650 0.00 650 65.0 0.00— 2,275
Strip
Mall
——————————— 521 0.00 521 52.0 0.00— 1,821
City
Park
——————————— 0.88 0.00 0.88 0.09 0.00— 3.08
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
——————————— 373 0.00 373 37.3 0.00— 1,305
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
——————————— 327 0.00 327 32.7 0.00— 1,145
Total——————————— 2,883 0.00 2,883 288 0.00— 10,088
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
——————————— 1,012 0.00 1,012 101 0.00— 3,540
General
Light
Industry
——————————— 650 0.00 650 65.0 0.00— 2,275
Strip
Mall
——————————— 521 0.00 521 52.0 0.00— 1,821
City
Park
——————————— 0.88 0.00 0.88 0.09 0.00— 3.08
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
——————————— 373 0.00 373 37.3 0.00— 1,305
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
——————————— 327 0.00 327 32.7 0.00— 1,145
Total——————————— 2,883 0.00 2,883 288 0.00— 10,088
121
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
17 / 24
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — 167 0.00 167 16.7 0.00 — 586
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — 108 0.00 108 10.8 0.00 — 377
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — 86.2 0.00 86.2 8.61 0.00 — 302
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.15 0.00 0.15 0.01 0.00 — 0.51
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 61.8 0.00 61.8 6.17 0.00 — 216
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 54.2 0.00 54.2 5.41 0.00 — 190
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 477 0.00 477 47.7 0.00 — 1,670

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.2. Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Single
Family
Housing
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 29.5
General
Light
Industry
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 253 253
122
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
18 / 24
Strip———————————————— 5.73 5.73
Mall
City
Park
———————————————— 0.00 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
———————————————— 7.11 7.11
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
———————————————— 5.64 5.64
Total———————————————— 301 301
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
———————————————— 29.5 29.5
General
Light
Industry
———————————————— 253 253
Strip
Mall
———————————————— 5.73 5.73
City
Park
———————————————— 0.00 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
———————————————— 7.11 7.11
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
———————————————— 5.64 5.64
Total———————————————— 301 301
Annual——————————————————
Single
Family
Housing
———————————————— 4.89 4.89
123
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
19 / 24
General — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 41.9 41.9
Light
Industry
Strip
Mall
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.95 0.95
City
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Apartme
nts
Low Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1.18 1.18
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.93 0.93
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 49.9 49.9

5. Activity Data

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Single Family
Housing
19,926 20,031 17,918 7,173,680 174,195 175,119 156,646 62,714,376 General Light
Industry
4,738 671 4,865 1,523,963 49,881 7,067 51,213 16,043,671 Strip Mall 34,042 42,863 17,449 12,020,169 358,384 451,248 183,695 126,543,475 City Park 14.8 37.2 41.6 7,975 156 392 438 83,960
Apartments Low
Rise
6,309 4,259 3,613 2,055,209 55,152 37,232 31,586 17,967,225 Apartments Mid
Rise
3,727 3,752 3,095 1,328,800 32,585 32,801 27,059 11,616,754 124
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
20 / 24

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.2. Mitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Single Family Housing —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 1057
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 1057
Apartments Low Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 468
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 468
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 47
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 47
Pellet Wood Stoves 0
Apartments Mid Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 411
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 411
125
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
21 / 24
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 41
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 41
Pellet Wood Stoves 0

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
11948856.75 3,982,952 2,839,110 946,370 —

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.2. Mitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Single Family Housing 19,753,306 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00 General Light Industry 11,542,923 204 0.0330 0.0040 39,863,035 Strip Mall 9,713,310 204 0.0330 0.0040 9,007,133
City Park 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Apartments Low Rise 4,601,674 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Apartments Mid Rise 4,040,316 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
126
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
22 / 24

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.2. Mitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Single Family Housing 85,145,448 415,235,836
General Light Industry 224,989,138 0.00
Strip Mall 68,132,942 0.00
City Park 0.00 0.00
Apartments Low Rise 37,717,056 0.00
Apartments Mid Rise 33,083,016 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.2. Mitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Single Family Housing 1,877 —
General Light Industry 1,206 —
Strip Mall 966 —
City Park 1.63 —
Apartments Low Rise 692 —
Apartments Mid Rise 607 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.2. Mitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced 127
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
23 / 24
Single Family Housing Average room A/C & R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0 Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
Single Family Housing Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Light Industry Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 0.30 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Strip Mall Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Strip Mall Walk-in refrigerators
and freezers
R-404A 3,922 < 0.005 7.50 7.50 20.0
City Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
City Park Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
Apartments Low Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Low Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00
Apartments Mid Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Mid Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change
128
Section , Item B
EDFA - Alternative A Custom Report, 3/13/2025
24 / 24

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.2. Mitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.2. Mitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Per plan
Operations: Hearths No woodstoves
Operations: Vehicle Data Adjusted trip rates per 11th Edition ITE 129
Section , Item B
Attachment 4: Fresno Council of Governments VMT Analysis Results 130
Section , Item B
2035 Tulare St., Ste. 201 tel 559-233-4148
Fresno, California 93721 fax 559-233-9645
www.fresnocog.org

Fresno COG Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Summary Report Date: 2/14/2025

Project
Name: City of Fowler General Plan Alternatives
Company: Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Contact: Jarred Olsen, AICP
e-mail: [email protected]

Modeled
Year Scenarios
VMT per
Capita
VMT per
Employee
2042 Fowler General Plan 11.6 16.2

2042 General Plan Alternative A 11.6 16.4

2042 General Plan Alternative B 11.6 16.3

131
Section , Item B
132
Section , Item B
Attachment 5: Tribal Outreach Letters (SB 18 & AB 52)
133
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Ed Ketchum, Vice-Chairperson
P.O. Box 5272
Galt, CA, 95632
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Ed Ketchum:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
134
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 135
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Valentin Lopez, Chairperson
P.O. Box 5272
Galt, CA, 95632
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Valentin Lopez:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
136
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 137
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government
Robert Ledger, Chairperson
2191 West Pico Ave.

Fresno, CA, 93705
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Robert Ledger:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
138
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 139
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Kitanemuk & Yowlumne Tejon Indians
Delia Dominguez, Chairperson
115 Radio Street
Bakersfield, CA, 93305
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Delia Dominguez:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
140
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 141
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Northern Valley Yokut / Ohlone Tribe
Timothy Perez, Tribal Compliance Officer
P.O. Box 717
Linden, CA, 95236
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Timothy Perez:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
142
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 143
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians
Heather Airey, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
P.O. Box 2226
Oakhurst, CA, 93644
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Heather Airey:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
144
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 145
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians
Tracey Hopkins, Chairperson
P.O. Box 2226
Oakhurst, CA, 93644
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Tracey Hopkins:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
146
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 147
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Table Mountain Rancheria
Michelle Heredia-Cordova, Chairperson
P.O. Box 410
Friant, CA, 93626
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Michelle Heredia-Cordova:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
148
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 149
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Table Mountain Rancheria
Bob Pennell, Cultural Resource Director
P.O. Box 410
Friant, CA, 93626
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Bob Pennell:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
150
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 151
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Traditional Choinumni Tribe
David Alvarez, Chairperson
2415 E. Houston Avenue
Fresno, CA, 93720
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear David Alvarez:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
152
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 153
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Tule River Indian Tribe
Neil Peyron, Chairperson
P.O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Neil Peyron:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
154
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 155
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Tule River Indian Tribe
Kerri Vera, Environmental Department
P. O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Kerri Vera:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
156
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 157
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Tule River Indian Tribe
Joey Garfield, Tribal Archaeologist
P. O. Box 589
Porterville, CA, 93258
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Joey Garfield:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
158
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 159
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band
Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson
1179 Rock Haven Ct.

Salinas, CA, 93906
Subject: Notification pursuant to Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Kenneth Woodrow:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 90 days to request formal consultation. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
160
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 161
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe
Nichole Escalon, Cultural Specialist l
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
Subject: Notification pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Nichole Escalon:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 (Assembly Bill 52) and Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 30 and 90 days, respectfully, to request formal consultation. The 30 day window under Assembly Bill 52 begins from the date that this letter is received. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
162
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 163
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe
Shana Powers, THPO
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
Subject: Notification pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Shana Powers:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 (Assembly Bill 52) and Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 30 and 90 days, respectfully, to request formal consultation. The 30 day window under Assembly Bill 52 begins from the date that this letter is received. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
164
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 165
Section , Item B
City of Fowler Planning 128 S. 5th Street Fowler CA 93625 (559) 834-3113

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
April 30, 2024
Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe
Samantha McCarty, Cultural Specialist ll
P.O. Box 8
Lemoore, CA, 93245
Subject: Notification pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18 for Fowler General Plan Amendments, City of Fowler, Fresno County, CA
Dear Samantha McCarty:

The City of Fowler is processing a package of General Plan Amendments throughout the City that are designed to promote consistency between the City’s General Plan land use map, the City’s Zoning Map, and the existing development throughout the City. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 (Assembly Bill 52) and Government Code Section 65352.3 (Senate Bill 18) the City is requesting your review to determine if formal consultation is appropriate for the project. The project would change land uses of both developed and undeveloped parcels within the City of Fowler. No ground disturbing activities would result from implementation of the project.

Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18, the tribe has 30 and 90 days, respectfully, to request formal consultation. The 30 day window under Assembly Bill 52 begins from the date that this letter is received. The 90 day window under Senate Bill 18 begins from the date on which this letter is sent.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 559.834.3113 ext 122 or at 559.449.2700 or at [email protected]. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Dawn E. Marple
City Planner
166
Section , Item B
32 33 34 35 36 31
02 01 06 05 04 03
09 10 11 12 07 08
16 15 14 13 18 17
21 22 23 24 19 20
27 26 25 30 29 28
32 33 34 35 36 31
MALAGA
CONEJO
T14S R21E
T15S R21E
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Prepared By
Legend
Planning Area
USGS Topo Maps (1:40k)
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section
G:\Fowler_City of-2619\261923050-GP Economic Development Focus Area\GIS\Map\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focus_Area\CityOfFowler_Economic_Development_Focu City of Fowler
USGS National Map, Data refreshed April 2023.

Project Elevation is approximately 270-330 feet above MSL. 167
Section , Item B
RESOLUTION NO. 2781

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER, ADOPTING A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF FOWLER 2040

GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15162 AND 15164, AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 25-11, ACCORDING TO THE LAND USES PRESENTED AS “ALTERNATIVE A”.

WHEREAS, On April 18, 2023, the Fowler City Council adopted the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan (“General Plan”) and certified the associated General Plan Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”); and
WHEREAS, Adoption of the General Plan established land uses for the lands within the City’s Planning Area; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan established an Economic Development Focus Area (“EDFA”); and
WHEREAS, General Plan Policy ED-3 and Action Item ED-3a directed the City to reevaluate the EDFA after one year from the adoption of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, within one year of adoption of the General Plan City staff have had discussions with property owners within the EDFA who have shown interest in development of said properties; and
WHEREAS, at the April 16, 2024, City Council meeting, these property owners presented a conceptual project to the City Council and staff asked for direction regarding amending the adopted General Plan land use map; and
WHEREAS, after being given direction by the City Council to develop alternatives to the adopted General Plan land uses within the EDFA, staff have developed two alternatives (“Alternative A” and “Alternative B”) which propose to amend the General Plan land use designation for several properties within the EDFA, as well as several properties outside of the EDFA; and
WHEREAS, proposed amendment of the land uses within the EDFA were made on the basis of increasing the economic development potential in this area and creating an economic hub in the western part of the City; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment of land uses outside of the EDFA were made on the basis of achieving a “no net loss” of housing units within the City and an attempt to balance the change of non-residential land uses; and
WHEREAS, staff consulted with the Fresno Council of Governments to understand the impact that both alternatives would have in regard to the City’s Vehicle Miles Traveled generation; and
168
Section , Item B
WHEREAS, after consideration of the two alternatives, staff have identified Alternative A as the preferred alternative; and
WHEREAS, under Alternative A, parcels which would be amended include Assessor’s Parcel Number 343-020-16, -39S, -41S, and -42S, 345-050-04, -05, -06, -18, and -19, 345-070-04, 345-110-13 and -14, and 345-150-07 (see “Exhibit A” attached hereto); and WHEREAS, the City has provided tribal notification in accordance with Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18, with no requests for consultation being received; and WHEREAS, an addendum to the EIR has been prepared, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines section 15162 and 15164, outlining the potential for the proposed General Plan Amendment to impact the environment in excess of what was originally analyzed and approved as a part of the City’s General Plan EIR; and WHEREAS, the analysis provided in the addendum indicates that the proposed land use amendments would not result in any new or substantially more significant impacts to the environment than what were already analyzed under the current EIR; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting of the City of Fowler Planning Commission on April 3, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 715, recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment No. 25-11, with the land uses proposed under Alternative A, and approving the prepared addendum to the City’s EIR; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was published in the April 25, 2025, edition of The Business Journal, posted at City Hall and on the City’s website, and sent to interested parties via email; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on May 6, 2025, at 6:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as could be heard, the Fowler City Council conducted a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 and its associated addendum to the City’s General Plan EIR; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the staff report, addendum to the EIR, and all evidence presented at the City Council’s regular meeting on May 6, 2025, including oral and written public testimony on General Plan Amendment No. 25- 11(“Administrative Record”), and which is herein incorporated by this reference.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fowler:

1. Adopts an addendum to the City of Fowler General Plan Environmental Impact Report, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15164.

2. Make the following findings pursuant to Fowler Municipal Code section 9.45.070 for General Plan Amendment No. 25-11:
169
Section , Item B
a. General Plan Amendment No 25-11 is consistent with the intent of the General Plan vision statement and supporting principles, goals, and policies. b. General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 prescribes reasonable controls and standards for affected land uses to ensure compatibility and integrity of those uses with other established uses
c. General Plan Amendment No. 25-11 provides for the protection of the general health, safety, and/or welfare of the community.

3. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 25-11, with the land uses proposed pursuant to “Alternative A” as depicted on “Exhibit A”, attached hereto and incorporated by this reference herein.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May 2025, at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Fowler by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, CPMC, City Clerk
170
Section , Item B
Exhibit A
Alternative A Land Use Map
171
Section , Item B

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 6, 2025
FROM: DAWN E. MARPLE, City Planner
SUBJECT: APPROVE Resolution No. 2782 Authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements with Pacific West Communities and Fresno County Rural Transit Authority (FCRTA) as a joint applicant for a grant application for Round 9 of the Strategic Growth Council’s (SGC) Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) grant program.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends the City Council approve a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute agreements with Pacific West Communities (“Applicant”) and Fresno County Rural Transit Authority (“FCRTA”) as a joint applicant for a grant application for Round 9 of the Strategic Growth Council’s (SGC) Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) grant program.

Eligible costs eligible under the AHSC grant program are broken down into five (5) categories:
affordable housing development, housing related infrastructure, sustainable transportation infrastructure, transportation related amenities, and community education and other program costs.

The City would be requesting up to $3 million dollars in public infrastructure improvements around 10th Street and the Mariposa Street alignment.

FCRTA would be requesting approximately $6 million dollars in public transit improvements in Fowler.

Pacific West Communities requesting the remaining amount to construct an affordable housing development at the northeast corner of North 10th Street and the Mariposa Street alignment.

BACKGROUND
Grant Program
The SGC through the AHSC Program provides grants for projects that aim to reduce carbon emissions through transportation and affordable housing, with a focus on disadvantaged and low-income communities. There are three types of projects that are eligible under the AHSC program: transit-oriented development projects, integrated connectivity projects, and rural 172
Section , Item C
innovation projects. This grant application is for the rural innovation project. Half of the available funds are set aside for affordable housing and related infrastructure projects.

Costs that are eligible under the AHSC are broken down into five (5) costs: affordable housing development, housing related infrastructure, sustainable transportation infrastructure, transportation related amenities, and community education and other program costs. Eligible applicants include local agencies, developers or program operators, and tribal entities. Eligible projects must include one sustainable transportation infrastructure component and one affordable housing development or housing related infrastructure component.

Pacific West Communities, the FCRTA and the City would be joint applicants on the grant application because some of the grant funds, if awarded, will be available for improvements in the City to decrease automobile use, such as additional bike lanes, sidewalks, and public transit improvements.

The Proposed Development & Benefits to the City
The AHSC Round 9 program has a total funding amount of 775 million dollars. The City, along with the FCRTA and the Applicant, as joint applicants, will be requesting up to $36.6 million dollars. As a joint applicant, the City would be eligible to receive approximately $3 million of the grant funding for the bike lanes, walkways and sidewalk improvements proposed. Receiving these funds would free up existing Fowler infrastructure fund dollars to address other improvements in the City.

Infrastructure –
 Bike trail along Golden State Boulevard between Adams and Merced Streets  Stanford Avenue trail, from Sumner Avenue to Donny Wright Park  Addressing missing sidewalks between Fresno, Tuolumne, 10th and 8th Streets  Curb, gutter, and sidewalk for the Mariposa Street extension between 10th and 9th Streets  Bicycle lanes on Tuolumne, 9th, and 10th Streets
FCRTA would be applying for funds that would benefit the city of Fowler:
 Operational funds for a new Fowler bus line for three (3) years  An on-site MicroGrid in Fowler
 Five to ten transit shelters in Fowler
Affordable Housing
As mentioned above, in order for the grant application to be submitted and eligible for an award, the Applicant must submit an approved permit for an affordable housing project. Conditional Use Permit No. 25-04, for a 116-unit multi-family housing project proposed at APN: 343-020-18, has been submitted to the City of Fowler. It is the Applicant’s intent to utilize CUP No. 25-04 as the affordable housing component of the grant. CUP No. 25-04 will be considered by the Planning Commission at a Special Meeting on May 8, 2025.

The Council’s action on this Resolution does not impact the decision of the Planning Commission, nor predetermine the Commission’s action, however the grant application cannot move forward without an approved affordable housing component. 173
Section , Item C

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Submitting the grant application is not considered a “project” as defined by Public Resources Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines section 15378. Submitting the application will not cause a direct or indirect change in the environment. However, if the grant is awarded, the City will prepare an environmental document pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed construction of street, sidewalk, and transportation related amenities is consistent with the goals and policies outlined in the City of Fowler 2040 General Plan as it pertains to transit-oriented development. In particular, this action is consistent with:

General Plan Goal CDES-1
Through community design, Fowler fosters and reinforces the City’s unique sense of place.

General Plan Goal CH-1
Opportunities for physical activity, such as walking and biking, are integrated into the built environment.

General Plan Policy CH-3
Consider pedestrian and bicyclist safety and comfort in the design and development of streets, parks, and public spaces.

General Plan Goal MOB-1
Fowler’s streets are a safe and enjoyable environment for pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, and people of all ages and abilities.

General Plan Goal MOB-5
Safe, well-designed, multi-modal connections exist across State Route 99, Golden State Boulevard, and the Union Pacific Railroad.

General Plan Policy MOB-13
Coordinate with Caltrans, Fresno Council of Governments (COG), Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA), and other responsible agencies to identify the need for additional mobility infrastructure and/or services along major commuter travel corridors.

General Plan Policy MOB-16
Support transit operator efforts to maximize return for short- and long-range transit needs.

General Plan Policy MOB-17
Incorporate the potential for public transit service expansion throughout the City.

General Plan Policy MOB-18
Improve route options and access for public transit City-wide, specifically west of State Route

99. General Plan Policy MOB-18
Seek all available means to finance improvements, including State and Federal grants. 174
Section , Item C

FISCAL IMPACT
If awarded and the City enters into an agreement with the Applicant, the City would receive approximately $3 million dollars in funds to implement the transportation infrastructure related components described above. A City match is not required for this grant.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
If awarded, the procurement processes of the City of Fowler and the SGC would be adhered to.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
- Resolution No. 2782
175
Section , Item C
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2782

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH

PACIFIC WEST COMMUNITIES AND FRESNO COUNTY RURAL TRANSIT

AUTHORITY (FCRTA) AS A JOINT APPLICANT FOR A GRANT APPLICATION FOR ROUND 9 OF THE STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL’S (SGC) AFFORDABLE

HOUSING AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES (AHSC) GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Strategic Growth Council (“SGC”) Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (“AHSC”) Round 9 (“Program”) grant applications are due on May 28, 2025; and WHEREAS, the Program aims to reduce carbon emissions through transportation and affordable housing, with a focus on disadvantaged and low-income communities; and WHEREAS, the Program has 775 million dollars of total funds available, half of which have been reserved for affordable housing and related infrastructure projects; and WHEREAS, the City Council of City of Fowler is in support of the grant application to the SGC for the AHSC Round 9 grant program; and
WHEREAS, by May 28, 2025 the City, as a joint applicant with Pacific West Communities and FCRTA intends to file an application with SGC related to the Program; and WHEREAS, the City’s portion of the application intends to fund the construction of sustainable transportation infrastructure and transportation related amenities, between State Route 99 and Golden State Boulevard, better connecting this area of the community to other areas, (“Project”); and
WHEREAS, related transportation improvements are planned to include Class I and II bike lanes, safe & accessible walkways and sidewalks, electric vehicle fleet charging, three (3) years operation of a new bus line under FCRTA, a new MicroGrid for FCRTA, and new transit shelters for FCRTA; and,
WHEREAS, the application would, if granted, provide up to approximately $3,000,000 in total funds to complete the Project; and
WHEREAS, a grant agreement and other documents may need to be executed with the SGC and Pacific West Communities before such funds can be reimbursed through the AHSC Round 9 grant program; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fowler wishes to delegate authorization to execute these agreements and any amendments thereto; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fowler hereby:
176
Section , Item C
2 1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute all grant agreements and other documents and any amendments thereto related to the SGC AHSC Round 9 grant application.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of May 2025, at a regular meeting of the Fowler City Council by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
177
Section , Item C

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 6, 2025
FROM: DAWN E. MARPLE, City Planner
SUBJECT: INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2025-02, pertaining to Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471:
i. Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
ii. Prezoning Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471 to M-1 (Light Industrial) and its designated remainder to R-3 (Single-Family Residential)
iii. Prezoning APN 340-120-06 to R-3
APPROVE Resolution No. 2783:
iv. Initiating annexation of the Property of Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471 and APN 340-120-06

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Adoption of the Ordinance and approval of the Resolution would prezone and allow for the initiation of annexation for a proposed 44-lot subdivision for light industrial uses on the north side of Fowler, providing for increased employment options within the City. The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan.

The City of Fowler Planning Commission recommended approval at its April 3, 2025 meeting.

The tentative map will be brought to the City Council for a public hearing once the Williamson Act contract has been tentatively cancelled by the County Fresno.

BACKGROUND
Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map No. 6471 is a tentative subdivision map which proposes a new industrial subdivision on a property generally located at the southeast intersection of Golden State Boulevard and Clayton Avenue (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APN] 340-120-05, - 28, and -29) (the “Project”). The Project site is approximately 45.04 acres in size bounded by Clayton Avenue to the north, Golden State Boulevard and the Union Pacific Railroad to the west, and farmland and undeveloped land to the east and south (“Property”). 178
Section , Item D
The site is designated Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential under the City of Fowler’s General Plan and is proposed to be zoned M-1 (Light Industrial) and R-3 (One-Family Residential) on the City’s official zoning map. The General Plan identifies M-1 and R-1-6 as consistent with the Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential land uses, respectively. The Zoning Ordinance translates the R-1-6 zone to the development standards of the R-3 zone district. The Project proposes to develop approximately 30.65 acres of the site into industrial lots, while the remaining 14.39 acres on the eastern portion of the Property would be designated as an undeveloped remainder. Design and layout of the lots contained on the map are reflective of this. In total, the proposed Project would result in 44 light industrial lots, with an outlot reserved for stormwater retention. Future development of these lots would be required to meet the allowed uses and objective standards of the M-1 zone district. These objective standards require screening and noise management of industrial uses when adjacent to residential uses.

Two points of access from Clayton Avenue are proposed, and a stub connection was required to allow two points of access to the property to the south. Lots abutting East Clayton Avenue would relinquish direct access rights to Clayton Avenue because of their shallow lot depths.

Designated Remainder
The subject Property is split zoned, and only the Light Industrial portion of the Property is proposed for subdivision. The 14.39-acre designated remainder of the Property is not proposed for development at this time. Should this remainder of the Property wish to develop in accordance with the General Plan, a tentative subdivision map would need to be prepared, submitted, and approved. Such subdivision would need to comply with the proposed zoning of the Property—R-3—which would allow for 6,000 square foot lots. Such lots are consistent with the Medium Low Density Residential land use designation and with the size of lots in adjacent subdivision.

Williamson Act Contract
The Property which is proposed to be subdivided is subject to a Williamson Act contract. Such contracts convey a property tax benefit to the property owner in exchange for not converting the land to non-agricultural purposes. Such contracts are for ten years and renew annually.

Contracts can be terminated upon a public hearing by the contract holding agency, which is the County of Fresno. Termination fees are twelve and one-half percent (12.5%) of the fair market value of the Property, and must be paid prior to the contract being cancelled.

Public Infrastructure
The subject Property does not have wet utilities (i.e. water and sewer) along its Clayton Avenue frontage. The nearest utilities are in Golden State Boulevard and Fowler Avenue. The Project will be required to extend sewer to the subdivision frontage, and water from Golden State Boulevard to the existing connection point in Fowler Avenue. The General Plan Program EIR requires that no natural gas infrastructure be extended to the subdivision.

There is no permanent drainage service in the area, and thus the Project is required to construct a drainage basin. The City is requiring said basin to be dedicated to the City. The City would maintain the basin and reimbursed through a Landscape and Lighting Maintenance District or Community Facilities District that the subdivision would be required in annex into.

The Norris Canal, operated by Consolidated Irrigation District (“CID”), was previously undergrounded and is located in a 20-foot easement along the property’s Clayton Avenue 179
Section , Item D
frontage from the western edge of the map boundary to a point approximately where Norris Avenue is proposed, where it switches to the north side of Clayton Avenue. This easement is proposed to be dedicated to the City for purposes of extending the right-of-way to accommodate ultimate buildout of Clayton Avenue, where asphalt, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and streetlights would be constructed. In response, CID requests that the map be conditioned to relocate the irrigation pipeline and its easement elsewhere, as they do not want asphalt and curb and gutter over their pipeline. The City is willing to work with the engineer and CID to find an appropriate location for the irrigation pipeline to reduce the amount of land encumbered by an easement.

Ditch Easement
North Thomas Avenue is proposed over a 15-foot privately-held easement for ditch and incidental purposes. The City will require that North Thomas Avenue be relocated out of that easement, or the easement be quitclaimed. If such easement were not removed, the easement holder would have the right to construct a ditch and incidental purposes where the road exists.

Adjacent Property
Because of the required utility extensions, the Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (“LAFCo”) recommends that the property adjacent to the Project site (APN 340-120-06) be annexed into the City. This property is approximately 38 acres and is planned for Medium Low Density Residential land uses. Staff recommend that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council that this area also be prezoned to R-3 and annexed into the City. Because future development of this site will require environmental analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), such analysis was not considered ripe at this time.

Flood Zone “A”
The subject Property is located in a 100-year floodplain, mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (“FEMA”). Review of the floodplain map indicates that this area is not flooded by a nearby canal or river, but rather a low spot. Subsequent buildings will be required that they are built above the base flood elevation. Water and sewer utilities will be required to be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the system, and vice-versa.

The basin would be required to be constructed such that the bank is one foot above the base flood elevation so runoff would make it into the basin even during a flood event.

Air Quality Emissions
Staff performed an air quality analysis and found that construction of the subdivision and subsequent construction and operations of subsequent development would result in a significant health impact to neighboring homes. As a result, the City proposes a mitigation measure to require that construction of the subdivision and subsequent buildings with construction equipment with cleaner engines. Such mitigation measure would result health impacts to less than significant and not impose operational restrictions on businesses in the subdivision. These requirements, in addition to other mitigation measures, will be required to be recorded on the property. Such requirements would reduce the amount of air quality mitigation fees subsequent projects would be owed to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.

Construction Noise
Construction of the subdivision improvements and subsequent buildings would generate noise from construction. Construction noise is exempt from the City’s noise ordinance. Operational 180
Section , Item D
noise however is not, and future development would be required to construct concrete masonry block walls along the property line abutting the Designated Remainder.

Transportation Impacts
Due to the potential subsequent development of the site with industrial uses, a traffic impact study was required and prepared by a licensed traffic engineer. Several intersections likely utilized by subsequent development were analyzed. The study identified several intersections that would need improvements in the future, but not at time of buildout of the subdivision.

These included the following:
 Golden State Boulevard and Jefferson
 Clovis Avenue and Lincoln Avenue
 Golden State Boulevard and Clayton Avenue
 Clovis Avenue at State Route 99
 Merced and State Route 99 Southbound
 Merced and State Route 99 Northbound
The City Engineer prepared a cost estimate of the improvements necessary at each of these intersections and assigned a fair share cost estimate to each intersection. Traffic-generating development would be required to pay an inflation-adjusted, per-trip generated impact fee rather than the City’s scheduled traffic impact fee.

Bike, Pedestrian, and Trails Plan
While the Bike, Pedestrian, and Trails (“BPT”) Plan has been adopted, it does not have a regulatory effect at this time. That being said, the BPT Plan does identify Clayton Avenue as having a Class 1 Shared Use Path, connecting Golden State Boulevard to Temperance Avenue. As there is development on the south side of Clayton Avenue between Armstrong and Temperance, the Class 1 trail should be constructed on the north side of Clayton Avenue.

Therefore, the subdivision design would not conflict with the BPT Plan.

Prezone Approval
The Fowler Zoning Ordinance requires the City to make the following findings prior to approving a zoning map amendment:

1. The Zoning Code or Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the intent of the goals and policies of the General Plan.

The proposed zoning would comply with the land use designations identified in the General Plan. The proposed area to be prezoned is located within the Priority Development Area.

Additionally, the zoning code amendment is consistent with General Plan Goals LU-4 and CH2 and General Plan Policies LU-1, LU-11, LU-20, and LU-22.

2. The Zoning Code or Zoning Map Amendment prescribes reasonable controls and standards to ensure compatibility with other established uses.

No individual uses are proposed within the subdivision at this time, however the Fowler Zoning Ordinance prescribes development standards when industrial properties are adjacent to residential zones, which includes block walls, setbacks, and vegetative screening requirements. There are also noise level standards that would apply. Additionally, subsequent 181
Section , Item D
analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act would be required for individual projects which would ensure additional review when specific developments are proposed.

Therefore, there are reasonable controls and standards to ensure compatibility with other established uses.

3. The Zoning Code or Zoning Map Amendment provides reasonable property development rights while protecting environmentally sensitive land uses and species.

Subsequent development resulting from the zoning map amendment would still be subject to discretionary approvals requiring compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.

Buildings constructed would be required to utilize a clean construction fleet and preconstruction surveys conducted prior to construction. Therefore, the zoning map amendment would protect environmentally sensitive land uses and species.

4. The Zoning Code or Zoning Map Amendment ensures protection of the general health, safety, and welfare of the community.

Subsequent development within the proposed zoning map amendment would comply with the requirements of the Fowler Zoning Ordinance, which was prepared and adopted to ensure the protection of the general health, safety, and welfare of the community.

Tentative Map
The Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code § 66474.4) requires a City to deny approval of a tentative map if the City finds that either the resulting parcels following a subdivision of that land would be too small to sustain their agricultural use, and if the legislative body finds that the land is subject to a Williamson Act contract. Land shall be conclusively presumed to be in parcels too small to sustain their agricultural use if the land is less than 10 acres in size in the case of prime agricultural land, or less than 40 acres in size in the case of land that is not prime agricultural land. The subject Property is considered prime agricultural land.

A city however is not required to deny a tentative map if the Williamson Act contract has been tentatively cancelled. As the aforementioned Williamson Act contract is held by the County of Fresno, staff recommend the City Council take no action on the tentative map until said contract has been tentatively cancelled by the County of Fresno. The applicant has agreed to toll all time limitations regarding tentative map approval until such time occurs.

PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice of Public Hearing was published in The Business Journal on April 25, 2025, which is at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. It was also sent via US Mail to all property owners within 300 feet of the proposed Project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed Project has been reviewed for compliance with CEQA. The City prepared an initial study and on this basis determined that the proposed Project will not have significant adverse effects on the environment with incorporation of recommended mitigation. The City has prepared a proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with CEQA requirements. Comments received on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and responses are attached for the 182
Section , Item D
Planning Commission’s review. Comments were received by the California Departments of Conservation and Fish and Wildlife, and were focused on potential impacts to biological resources and farmland. Staff have incorporated mitigation for biological resources, and the General Plan EIR has already determined that impacts to farmland is a significant and unavoidable impact. No additional changes are necessary.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan goals and policies:

General Plan Goal LU-4
There are continued opportunities for the expansion of industrial land uses.

General Plan Policy LU-1
Development shall occur in accordance with the planned land uses as shown on Figure 4-1:

Land Use Diagram.

General Plan Policy LU-11
Annexation of industrial land uses may be allowed, provided the property meets all applicable requirements for annexation.

General Plan Policy LU-20
The City shall reserve sufficient space for industrial and supportive uses, recognizing greater land requirements due to methods of operation and marketing needs.

General Plan Policy LU-22
Industrial land in proximity to residential areas shall be planned for light industry.

General Plan Goal CH-2
Impacts from pollution are minimized through thoughtful and deliberate land use planning.

FISCAL IMPACT
Prezone and annexation of the Project site and adjacent parcel would allow for subsequent development of these parcels at intensities and densities prescribed by the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Development impact fees would be collected to offset impacts from subsequent projects to City infrastructure. Annexation of the property would likely increase the assessed value of the property and therefore generate additional ongoing property tax revenue to the City. Annexation of the public rights-of-way would require maintenance by the City, which would be offset by additional property tax revenue received.

PROCUREMENT PROCESS
No procurement is associated with this action.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Staff is not aware of any conflicts of interest.

Attachments
183
Section , Item D
- Exhibit 1 – Aerial Photo
- Exhibit 2 – General Plan Land Use Designation
- Exhibit 3 – Proposed Zoning Map
- Exhibit 4 – Tentative Map
- Ordinance No. 2025-02
- Ordinance No. 2025-02, Exhibit A (Prezone Area)
- Ordinance No. 2025-02, Exhibit B (Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration) - Resolution No. 2783, Exhibit A (Annexation Area)
184
Section , Item D
Exhibit 1 – Aerial Photo
185
Section , Item D
Exhibit 2 – General Plan Land Use Designation
186
Section , Item D
Exhibit 3 – Proposed Zoning Map
187
Section , Item D
Exhibit 4 – Tentative Map
188
Section , Item D
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-02

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FOWLER ADOPTING

A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY TO REFLECT A CHANGE OF ZONE FOR ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBERS 340-120-05, 340-120-28, 340-120-29, AND 340-120-06.

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

SECTION 1.

The City Council hereby finds that the Amendments of the Zoning Map, as depicted in Sections 2 and 3 below have been adequately analyzed in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration as described in Exhibit “B” attached hereto and incorporated by this reference herein, and the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, including the mitigation measures identified therein and as described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, are hereby adopted.

SECTION 2.

The Official Zoning Map of the City of Fowler is hereby amended to designate Assessor’s Parcel No. 340-120-05, 340-120-28, and 340-120-29 with the M-1 (Light Industrial) and R-3 (Medium Density Residential) zone district as indicated in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.

SECTION 3.

The Official Zoning Map of the City of Fowler is hereby amended to designate Assessor’s Parcel No. 340-120-06 with the R-3 (Medium Density Residential) zone district as indicated in Exhibit “A” attached hereto.

SECTION 4.

This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days following its final passage and adoption. Within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, the ordinance, or a summary of the ordinance, shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a meeting of the City Council of Fowler held on the 6th day of May 2025 and passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ______ day of ______________ 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
___________________________________
Juan Mejia, Mayor
ATTEST:
189
Section , Item D
____________________________________
Angela Vasquez, City Clerk
190
Section , Item D
Exhibit A
191
Section , Item D
Exhibit B
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
192
Section , Item D
TENTATIVE MAP NO. 6471

DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE

DECLARATION
FEBRUARY 2025
SCH NO. 2024121188
PREPARED FOR:

City of Fowler
128 South 5th Street
Fowler, CA 93625
PREPARED BY:

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
7903
EST. 1968 PROVOST&

PRITCHARD

CONSULTING GROUP
193
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Regulatory Information......................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.2 Document Format ................................................................................................................................. 1-1 Chapter 2 Project Description......................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................................... 2-1 Project Title .................................................................................................................. 2-1 Lead Agency Name and Address................................................................................. 2-1 Contact Person and Phone Number ........................................................................... 2-1 Project Location ........................................................................................................... 2-1 General Plan Designation and Zoning......................................................................... 2-2 Description of Project.................................................................................................. 2-2 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required........................................ 2-3 Consultation with California Native American Tribes................................................ 2-3 Chapter 3 Determination ................................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.1 Potential Environmental Impacts......................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Determination ....................................................................................................................................... 3-2 Chapter 4 Environmental Impact Analysis...................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Aesthetics............................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Baseline Conditions...................................................................................................... 4-1 Impact Analysis............................................................................................................. 4-2

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources..................................................................................................... 4-4 Baseline Conditions...................................................................................................... 4-4 Impact Analysis............................................................................................................. 4-5

4.3 Air Quality .............................................................................................................................................. 4-9 Baseline Conditions...................................................................................................... 4-9 Applicable Regulations................................................................................................. 4-9 Thresholds.................................................................................................................. 4-10 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-12 Mitigation ................................................................................................................... 4-14

4.4 Biological Resources............................................................................................................................ 4-15 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-15 Applicable Regulations............................................................................................... 4-18 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-19

2.1.1 2.1.2

2.1.3 2.1.4

2.1.5 2.1.6

2.1.7 2.1.8

4.1.1 4.1.2

4.2.1 4.2.2

4.3.1 4.3.2

4.3.3 4.3.4

4.3.5 4.4.1

4.4.2 4.4.3
194
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 ii
Mitigation ................................................................................................................... 4-20

4.5 Cultural Resources............................................................................................................................... 4-21 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-21 Regulatory Setting...................................................................................................... 4-22 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-22

4.6 Energy .................................................................................................................................................. 4-23 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-23 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-23

4.7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................ 4-25 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-25 Regulatory Setting...................................................................................................... 4-27 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-27

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................................................................................. 4-30 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-30 Thresholds.................................................................................................................. 4-30 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-30 Mitigation ................................................................................................................... 4-31

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials...................................................................................................... 4-32 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-32 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-33

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ........................................................................................................... 4-36 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-36 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-37

4.11 Land Use and Planning...................................................................................................................... 4-40 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-40 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-40

4.12 Mineral Resources............................................................................................................................. 4-41 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-41 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-41

4.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................................. 4-43 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-43 Applicable Regulations............................................................................................... 4-43 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-44

4.14 Population and Housing.................................................................................................................... 4-46 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-46

4.4.4 4.5.1

4.5.2 4.5.3

4.6.1 4.6.2

4.7.1 4.7.2

4.7.3 4.8.1

4.8.2 4.8.3

4.8.4 4.9.1

4.9.2 4.10.1

4.10.2 4.11.1

4.11.2 4.12.1

4.12.2 4.13.1

4.13.2 4.13.3

4.14.1 195
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 iii
Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-46

4.15 Public Services................................................................................................................................... 4-48 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-48 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-48

4.16 Recreation.......................................................................................................................................... 4-50 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-50 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-50

4.17 Transportation................................................................................................................................... 4-52 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-52 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-52

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources.................................................................................................................. 4-54 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-54 Regulatory Setting...................................................................................................... 4-55 Impact Assessment.................................................................................................... 4-56

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................................ 4-57 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-57 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-57

4.20 Wildfire .............................................................................................................................................. 4-60 Baseline Conditions.................................................................................................... 4-60 Impact Analysis........................................................................................................... 4-60

4.21 CEQA Mandatory Findings of Significance ....................................................................................... 4-62 Statement of Findings................................................................................................ 4-62 Chapter 5 Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program.......................................................................... 5-1 Chapter 6 References...................................................................................................................................... 6-1

LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files.............................................................................................................. A-1 Appendix B: Biological Memorandum ............................................................................................................ B-1 Appendix C: Cultural Resources Information ................................................................................................. C-1 Appendix D: Traffic Impact Study....................................................................................................................D-1

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Regional Location.......................................................................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-2: Site Plan......................................................................................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-3: Proposed Subdivision Map........................................................................................................... 2-1

4.14.2 4.15.1

4.15.2 4.16.1

4.16.2 4.17.1

4.17.2 4.18.1

4.18.2 4.18.3

4.19.1 4.19.2

4.20.1 4.20.2

4.21.1 196
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 iv
Figure 2-4: Proposed Zoning Map................................................................................................................... 2-1 Figure 2-5: Topo Quad..................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Figure 2-6: General Plan Land Use Designation Map .................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-7: Zone District Map.......................................................................................................................... 2-3 Figure 4-1: Farmland Map............................................................................................................................... 4-8 Figure 4-2: FEMA Flood Map......................................................................................................................... 4-39

LIST OF TABLES
Table 4-1: Aesthetics Impacts......................................................................................................................... 4-1 Table 4-2: Agriculture and Forest Impacts..................................................................................................... 4-4 Table 4-3: Air Quality Impacts......................................................................................................................... 4-9 Table 4-4: Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants................................................................. 4-10 Table 4-5: Thresholds of Significance for Toxic Air Contaminants.............................................................. 4-10 Table 4-6: Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources.............................................................................. 4-11 Table 4-7: Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Designation............................... 4-11 Table 4-8: Unmitigated Short-Term Construction Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants.......... 4-12 Table 4-9: Maximum Daily Construction Related Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants.............................. 4-12 Table 4-10: Unmitigated Long-Term Operational Emissions....................................................................... 4-13 Table 4-11: Maximum Daily Operational Related Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants.............................. 4-13 Table 4-12: Biological Resources Impacts .................................................................................................... 4-15 Table 4-13: List of Soils Located on the Site and Their Basic Properties .................................................... 4-16 Table 4-14: Special Status Plant and Animal Species with the Potential to Occur on the Project Site ..... 4-17 Table 4-15: Cultural Resources Impacts....................................................................................................... 4-21 Table 4-16: Energy Impacts........................................................................................................................... 4-23 Table 4-17: Geology and Soils Impacts......................................................................................................... 4-25 Table 4-18: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts.......................................................................................... 4-30 Table 4-19: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts............................................................................... 4-32 Table 4-20: Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts...................................................................................... 4-36 Table 4-21: Land Use and Planning Impacts................................................................................................. 4-40 Table 4-22: Mineral Resources Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4-41 Table 4-23: Noise Impacts............................................................................................................................. 4-43 Table 4-24: Noise Level Standards................................................................................................................ 4-44 Table 4-25: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Sources Levels...................................................... 4-45 Table 4-26: Population and Housing Impacts............................................................................................... 4-46 Table 4-27: Public Services............................................................................................................................ 4-48 Table 4-28: Recreation Impacts.................................................................................................................... 4-50 Table 4-29: Transportation Impacts.............................................................................................................. 4-52 Table 4-30: Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts............................................................................................. 4-54 Table 4-31: Utilities and Service Systems Impacts....................................................................................... 4-57 Table 4-32: Wildfire Impacts......................................................................................................................... 4-60 Table 4-33: CEQA Mandatory Findings of Significance................................................................................ 4-62 Table 5-1: Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program.......................................................................... 5-2 197
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 i

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB .................................................................................................................................................Assembly Bill BMP ........................................................................................................................ Best Management Practices CalEEMod ..........................................................................California Emissions Estimator Modeling (software) CalFire............................................................................California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CBC ...............................................................................................................................California Building Code CEQA.......................................................................................................... California Environmental Quality Act CESA ..............................................................................................................California Endangered Species Act CGS ........................................................................................................................ California Geological Survey CHRIS ................................................................................. California Historical Resources Information System CIP .................................................................................................................... Capital Improvement Program City ................................................................................................................................................City of Fowler CNDDB.......................................................................................................California Natural Diversity Database CNPS .....................................................................................................................California Native Plant Society CO .......................................................................................................................................Carbone Monoxide CO2 ..............................................................................................................................................Carbon dioxide County ............................................................................................................................................Fresno County dBA .....................................................................................................................................A-weighted decibels DCP ..........................................................................................................................................Dust Control Plan DPM .............................................................................................................................Diesel Particulate Matter DTSC ................................................................................................... Department of Toxic Substances Control EIR ......................................................................................................................Environmental Impact Report EPA ...............................................................................................................Environmental Protection Agency FGC .....................................................................................................................................Fish and Game Code FMMP ...........................................................................................Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program FTA .................................................................................................................... Federal Transit Administration GHG ........................................................................................................................................... Greenhouse Gas HMBP............................................................................................................Hazardous Materials Business Plan IS ................................................................................................................................................... Initial Study IS/MND..........................................................................................Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration mgd ................................................................................................................................. million gallons per day MMRP........................................................................................Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MND ...................................................................................................................Mitigated Negative Declaration 198
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 ii
MRZ ...............................................................................................................................Mineral Resource Zones MTCO2e ................................................................................metric tons of Carbon Dioxide and its equivalents NAHC ......................................................................................................Native American Heritage Commission ND ....................................................................................................................................Negative Declaration NO2 ...........................................................................................................................................Nitrogen Dioxide NOX ............................................................................................................................................Nitrogen Oxides O3 ............................................................................................................................................................Ozone Pb ...............................................................................................................................................................Lead PM10 ..........................................................................................................particulate matter 10 microns in size PM2.5 .........................................................................................................particulate matter 2.5 microns in size ppb .............................................................................................................................................parts per billion ppm ............................................................................................................................................parts per million Project ...............................................................................................................Tentative Map No. 6471 Project ROG ................................................................................................................................Reactive Organic Gases RTP .......................................................................................................................Regional Transportation Plan SB ................................................................................................................................................. South Bound SCS ..............................................................................................................Sustainable Communities Strategy SJVAPCD................................................................................... San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SKFCSD....................................................................... Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation Department SKGSA ......................................................................................South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency SO2 ................................................................................................................................................Sulfur Dioxide SOI ...................................................................................................................................... Sphere of Influence SSJVIC......................................................................................Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center SR ................................................................................................................................................... State Route SRA ..............................................................................................................................State Responsibility Area SWPPP ................................................................................................... Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB..................................................................................................... State Water Resources Control Board TAC ................................................................................................................................ Toxic Air Contaminants USC .......................................................................................................................................United States Code USFWS ....................................................................................................United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS ..................................................................................................................United States Geological Survey UST ...........................................................................................................................underground storage tank Valley ....................................................................................................................................... San Joaquin Valley VMT ..................................................................................................................................vehicle miles travelled 199
Section , Item D
Table of Contents
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 iii
VOC .......................................................................................................................... volatile organic compound μg/m3.......................................................................................................................micrograms per cubic meter 200
Section , Item D
Chapter 1: Introduction
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 1-1
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (Provost & Pritchard) has prepared this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) on behalf of the City of Fowler (City) to address the environmental effects of the Tentative Map No. 6471 (Project). This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. The City is the CEQA lead agency for this Project.

The site and the Project are described in detail in Chapter 2 Project Description.

1.1 REGULATORY INFORMATION
An Initial Study (IS) is a document prepared by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 14 (Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.)-- also known as the CEQA Guidelines--Section 15064 (a)(1) states that an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the Project under review may have a significant effect on the environment and should be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less than significant levels. A negative declaration (ND) may be prepared instead if the lead agency finds that there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. An ND is a written statement describing the reasons why a proposed Project, not otherwise exempt from CEQA, would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why it would not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a ND or mitigated ND shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either:
a. The IS shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b. The IS identified potentially significant effects, but:

1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed MND and IS is released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur is prepared, and

2. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.

1.2 DOCUMENT FORMAT
This IS/MND contains six chapters. Chapter 1 Introduction, provides an overview of the Project and the CEQA process. Chapter 2 Project Description, provides a detailed description of proposed Project components and objectives. Chapter 3 Determination, the Lead Agency’s determination based upon this initial evaluation. Chapter 4 Environmental Impact Analysis presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analysis for all impact areas, mandatory findings of significance, and feasible mitigation measures. If the Project does not have the potential to significantly impact a given issue area, the relevant section provides a brief discussion of the reasons why no impacts are expected. If the Project could have a potentially significant impact on a resource, the issue area discussion provides a description of potential impacts, and appropriate mitigation measures and/or permit requirements that would reduce those impacts to a less than significant level. Chapter 5 Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP), provides the 201
Section , Item D
Chapter 1: Introduction
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 1-2
proposed mitigation measures, implementation timelines, and the entity/agency responsible for ensuring implementation. Chapter 6 References details the documents and reports this document relies upon to provide its analysis.

The CalEEMod Output Files, Biological Memorandum, Cultural Resources Assessment, and Traffic Impact Study are provided as technical Appendix A, Appendix B, Appendix C, and Appendix D respectively, at the end of this document.
202
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-1
CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
Project Title
Tentative Map No. 6471
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Fowler
128 South 5th Street
Fowler, CA 93625
Contact Person and Phone Number
Lead Agency Contact
Dawn E. Marple, City Planner
128 South 5th Street
Fowler, CA 93625
(559) 834-3113
CEQA Consultant
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Jarred Olsen, Senior Planner
(559) 636-1166
Project Location
The Project is currently located outside the City of Fowler in central Fresno County, approximately 270 miles south of Sacramento and 150 miles north of Bakersfield (see Figure 2-1 and Figure 2-2), on the south side of Clayton Avenue east of Golden State Boulevard. The Project site is located approximately on Assessor’s Parcel Number(s) 340-120-05, -06, -28, and -29. The centroid of the Project site is 36° 38’ 24.06” N, 119° 41’ 14.66” W. The Project site also includes the following street intersections located in the city of Fowler and unincorporated Fresno County:
• Golden State Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue
• Clovis Avenue and Lincoln Avenue
• Clayton Avenue and Golden State Boulevard
• State Route (SR) 99 Southbound Ramps and Clovis Avenue • Merced Street and SR 99 South Bound (SB) Off Ramp-Fowler Avenue • Merced Street and SR 99 SB Northbound Ramps

2.1.1 2.1.2

2.1.3 2.1.4
203
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-2
General Plan Designation and Zoning
Project Area General Plan Designation Zoning District
ONSITE Light Industrial
Medium-Low Density Residential
AE-20 (Existing)
M-1, R-1-6 (Proposed)
ADJACENT LANDS Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Medium Density Residential
AE-20
M-1
R-1-6
Description of Project
Project Description
The project proposes to annex approximately 83.04 acres of farmland into the City of Fowler and to prezone approximately 30.65 acres of the land to be annexed to the M-1 zone district with the remaining 52.39 acres prezoned to the R-1-6 zone district for future residential development (“Project”). 36.54 acres of the Project area is restricted to Williamson Act Contract No. 6340. As part of the Project, Williamson Act Contract No. 6340 would be canceled, and Ag Preserve Fowler-Selma-Kingsburg No. 27 would be diminished. The area zoned M-1 would be subdivided into 44 parcels for future Light Industrial land uses.

Streets would be constructed and designed to City of Fowler standards. A stormwater retention basin is proposed which will be designed to accommodate the increased impermeability of the subdivision. Clayton Avenue would be widened to 60 feet along the Project frontage. Approximately 0.5 miles of sewer main would be constructed to connect to Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District (SKFCSD) facilities in Golden State Boulevard. Approximately 1.3 miles of water main would be constructed to connect the subdivision to the existing mains in Golden State Boulevard and Fowler Avenue. Approximately 14.39 acres of the 52.39-acre area zoned R-1-6 would be designated as a remainder on the proposed subdivision map and would not be a part of the Project. The remaining 38 acres would be included in the annexation and prezoned R-1-6, but it would not be annotated on the proposed tentative map and would not be a part of the proposed subdivision. A lot line adjustment would be submitted to adjust the parcel lines in such a way to separate the designated remainder from the industrial subdivision. Future development for the whole R-1-6 zoned area would be subject to its own CEQA analysis.

The Project would also include improvements to several intersections that would be developed when intersection delay exceeds established parameters. They include:
• Golden State Boulevard and Jefferson Avenue (Horizon Year Without Project and Horizon Year Plus Project Conditions)
o Widen the eastbound approach to the intersection to include a left turn lane and a right turn lane (adding one right turn lane).
• Clovis Avenue and Lincoln Avenue (Horizon Year Without Project and Horizon Year Plus Project Conditions)
o Widen the westbound approach to the intersection to include a left turn lane and a right turn lane (adding one right turn lane).
• Clayton Avenue and Golden State Boulevard (Horizon Year Plus Project Conditions) o Install a traffic signal.
o Widen the westbound approach to the intersection to include a shared left-through lane and a right turn lane (adding one right turn lane).
• SR 99 SB Ramps and Clovis Avenue (Horizon Year Without Project and Horizon Year Plus Project Conditions)

2.1.5 2.1.6
204
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-3
o Install a traffic signal when warranted.
o Widen the southbound approach to the intersection to include two left turn lanes, a through lane, and a shared through-right lane (adding one left turn lane). • Merced Street and SR 99 SB Off Ramp-Fowler Avenue (Horizon Year Without Project and Horizon Year Plus Project Conditions)
o Install a traffic signal when warranted.
o Widen the northbound approach to the intersection to include a left turn lane and a right turn lane with right-turn overlap phasing (adding one right turn lane with right-turn overlap phasing).
o Widen the southbound approach to the intersection to include a left turn lane and a shared through-right lane (adding one left turn lane).
• Merced Street and SR 99 SB NB Ramps (Horizon Year Without Project and Horizon Year Plus Project Conditions)
o Install a traffic signal when warranted.
o Widen the westbound approach to the intersection to include a through lane and a right turn lane (adding one right turn lane).

Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required
• Consolidated Irrigation District
• County of Fresno
• Fresno Local Agency Formation Committee
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
• Selma-Kingsburg-Fowler County Sanitation District
Consultation with California Native American Tribes
Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, et seq. [codification of Assembly Bill (AB) 52, 2013-14)] requires that a lead agency, within fourteen (14) days of determining that it will undertake a project, must notify in writing any California Native American Tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project if that Tribe has previously requested notification about projects in that geographic area. The notice must briefly describe the project and inquire whether the Tribe wishes to initiate request formal consultation. Tribes have 30 days from receipt of notification to request formal consultation. The lead agency then has 30 days to initiate the consultation, which then continues until the parties come to an agreement regarding necessary mitigation or agree that no mitigation is needed, or one or both parties determine that negotiation occurred in good faith, but no agreement will be made.

The City has received written correspondence from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 requesting notification of proposed Project.

2.1.7 2.1.8
205
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-4
Figure 2-1: Regional Location
Rolling
1 Madera Hj||s Ranchos
Clovis
Fresno
Centerville
Minkler
| Malaga
Del Rey
Easton Project Sites
Bowles Fowler
RaisinCity
Parlier
Monmouth
o
Caruthers
Dinuba
Kingsburg
Lanare Riverdale Laton
Project Site Fresno Co.

Census Place Hardwick
City Limits (various colors)
Hanford

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
2 Regional Vicinity Map
Miles City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision 206
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-5
Figure 2-2: Site Plan
ilfjflliJ
,E Lincoln Ave
imiMi 9
W Adams Av<
199' am
Project Site (83 Acres) E Sumner Ave I Fowler City Limits Fowler Sphere of Influence

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
Aerial Map
City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision
500 1,000
Feet
207
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-1
Figure 2-3: Proposed Subdivision Map

LEGEND VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVSION MAP
TRACT MAP NO. 6471
P.ROFOSrD PARCH T Rtf P.REL.'MAARy-DlflECraV CF QCW FCF DFA'.VADl CL'.Rfi AMD' SOT’ER rX'51-AG PROPERTY TiNT EXiSTlUS SECBOV 'WE
7Xi5i'.W 'tf'US'/'iAV.V
EWSTiW SS SlEM-V OUT EllSEAC WATER WLkE
EXCTNG 8CMD /AARKinQ
FX'SWG WOOD Ff AfZ
.Of TiNV GWT VW -PfiWS

EX'ST-'N'GTREES
EXiSTWO W'JTERrVMP

EX-S-W HOSE UW
fXLsnw n rc.’RK? aox
------HU
rrtSTiw lifi'.'At'H rj; EX-SMS .'MAX
CLWiS MV
£4ST LMDLV .4'.E-VuE LS? PRQJE#
p-OS/B
\ _________• * % §
rASAws gut w pots
NOriTH O’MPfRANSE M'YE.VL
NLW.-h AR.M5iWaVC AfENL
EZiSiW W/lEH iAW (') EX.SJ-1NGELECTRICAL CABLE El EX'SBVG GMS TANK rxiSTW 6MOGHOIN9
i.'tCl.WJ CA'.Vi 4WW7 EMSTiUS CHAW LWX.ED FENCE
IN ll E CITY OF FOW-HR. FRESNO CCUK" V CALIFORNIA
FHLPARLD ON NOVLMBLR 2. 2323 SHECT 1 OF 1
-F.WGiAlJCWSTAND 'WS (I 9/
tX'STM AT&T CABLE
EttSFW CCWC9£TE rwsiiNS mwt w-ww WATER ,'.<.??'VXl FX'STW WA ROW? LWtT POLE (T,l SITE INFORMATION ASSESSOR'S PARCEL -VOUSER.340- .'20-05. -23, i -29
property /caRESs- 540 east cla*ycw avenue FCWICR. M 95625 &S7 ASMMS AiEN ■'£ EXSTiNS SEWER MANHOLE
SOUTH
rx TiNT? r.rrrar un.-p & PRonosro FiRE ,"m
EX'SBVG PCttERLiNE? PFO.KL'SED STREET L-W
exk.w? Ptf.tn? fti'.' WORDSED STOP SGMS (9)
i'.'E MCEfiASE? GROSS: ±45.04 AUr.ES ?xr w -fAff Ex-ST-nd TRAV8r osv.'£9 rule sewer maw p5' syt; EffiWS: AT-20 I'EXC'j'.S'tE 4SWU5.WI'. Z9.VE 29 ACRE kWiWiX'? TCOUNTf; PRiSPOSECt tiC.'.T .Wpl.'.TiRML A- 0-1 .W4E tAMEY RE.5CE.N7Wl fClJY;. SHE zcwwc- TZiS-W PONYR PtJ!.' i I.Ch' <1,1 •TA.'tR M-HN (6’ .'TrE,! PUNNED iA’tf? uSE.' I'A v-OSci
ii-GHT WBUS7H.WE.WECiUWbOW SEiVSTT RESIDENTIAL
.W CHAVSE EUSBVG .'-WILDGX FHCTDSD ScWER MAW BASIS OF BEARINGS PRGVOSEO VATER EXISTING L'5f.- AOTCLV1!.W.i, WlVi 7 S’AK'F-.'/MVr R., 5ill. r N0.t 5 EX'SBVG .‘Mil'KWI ,'RACKS Rtf *£$.’ 1W GT Otf .Va?R<lt£S7 A r SfE.W 7. '5 £. H. 2! C HS1W7 £«!!•£) S*A_ X7tf M7>?£iW. PER .RGJXJ®GT j-.JHiTY W £Y.W 'S 47 PASS’27, FtKSXO CGiNrr SKtfiDS. JAX.GV 79 X 4JOP7W i'.xVMa?’>7 NUMBER O r LOTS' AVRtMttTE lOCA7iO.N C>

0.309 ZCNE a
44 ®W F;1A9 SKNS f<' PROPOSED USE i Cn’l (Wi-Cra-H .7Sr CW lO.'S ’ .’0 44 WiS.Oh 'ML '.'it W i Hi 5c.UAW4.tr IWi ■NfttAiES R£L.WCuiynVE.N7 U c O',SECT ACCESS RiCMS A"*
e-cX-1 IR-
saf
tX.'SJ.YiG 4U‘ rL'ELlC r>L'Hi CF WYr' CT» 1/4 SCR. SEC 5 75/2? EAST TZIVT'.W LTiAND I'.'.'l
*'* %
VJK rAHMMff a.C rxrsp M - 7G’ Rrio'nav raoiT of wmy
rjfCFFTOfc £5 - 20' R'ATK? R.’iIh.' Dr WAY
DRCF05ED 20' R'CfiT OF W'MYDEDOTCN- LA'S.VNG COUNTY R.GH,' Gt 4AVWEST 0U4FT9 CO ER SECTCW 70 1 5/2i-i FOUND 7 r iR0V P.’PF, i .S 24fi4, DOWN' 6.3' PER kXCORD OF SOVIET 8‘i. 4J, PS. 78 CTBliNS HAUKKES (J,l ., ______ S'WFR LTDAAfCWN EX'SWtC. 59' PUBEiC R'SnT CF WMr CLAYTON AVENUE -?e
-2UU1’ r
•..'.>05-9.5
85 w’'? -NTi
i
’■ T'S.iJo'’ X.y ’*■?<>' Ip-
/ 70 i . 75
1*
'95 01 i .'.l.iU' •19/.'!; EZCEmW MS W7ED ,W A T?BE adpsRT gr PLACE" WLE CMW, (MXR W P-60>505, a*T£D MY !7, 252J- FRQRJ.VE TAW-x ■EZiSFW ST4*a9 >-\°E 2 ft 0.46 ACRES --
ft 38
.9.41
6C.49 ACRES
7 77.49 ACRES
ft
ft 3

0.49 ACRES
□

0.49 ACRES
?0

6.45 ACRES
4 ft 043 < A5RES “
ft r75 4’ ft 6.47 •; ACRES '•
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft 4CRf5
AV t'SLME.Vi U'rtH IM' L.4NU 4CR WNUitWJ ,%W4L6LS 47,U .NCttiVIAL PURPOSES ,W tAWW Ct SUU.'HEMV .•’ACl't' RAtPOAO CCMRAVf. >N SEED REL'CRDED .W>RT 2 ’. 1887, BOOK 54, EMCf 236, Qf DEEDS ;AGTTEl. “EREO AV EMSEVE.VT&ER SAD TMfiD W AW 59 W ft'CPR.'S D'TCh ANO .WWEHTAL WPCSES' W MWv OF ..'. C. K.'MKt. >N nrro PTcarairii wjivs. 1333, onav 76. pat ew7, or o’-fps. fuo.- «’., iiTMiir,i AV EASLME.Vi C7c.V SAd TAftO tCfr .WiLWMG .'WY5ES AM.' .NCttiVlAL UM'YlicS ,W tAWW Ct SCO'HEMt 'MCit.W RAuRatf- CCWWrr, in DEED RECORDED CCTCbER 7382, SX* '0?, PAGE J04. Cr DEEDS. ;PLCVED PERE'Mj AV E4SEWEN7 U>ER SA'O DA,'O FCF A PU.PD.C RtMD MW MLKEATAL PURPOSES .W PAVUR GF TR'E C0LW7V .y rprc, w ._ w arra pooiro-.i aucwst e, *502, book 274. past zis. cf deeds fwcrrp ‘oton;' AV t4SLMr.Vi C'rt.R Will UM) ftM fiffCtt AN® JWflflEMStt ftJfiftlSES flV . l AlVR OF MARGAH.1 .' t. I»0fiM5fiE A\t? FRAW LTMAN COMPANY . .N DEED REfXROED .WNUARr 2'7. IS05. 3DLW ’28. RASE 'J9, CF DEEDS. ir'.OTTED nERECN.I AV E4SEVE.V7 VER SAD CA,'D FCE PCtES AW MXE.V7AL PURPOSES W Fm'A’R CF THE PAC.FiC TlEPHOVE MW TTCEGWU CC.WVW. IN Q£lT Rl'CCFSED JUNE 5, ISO?. GDOK 395. FACE 55'. O’ MTD5. |'W T PLDTWTtr; AV USLMt.Vf <7rt.R WiU (MW FCft CWMl A'.O .WC10EN7AL,’W©S£S IN MlOrt CF CaV50i.tMiLD WMCA.'iON D1SDA1C.'. W DEED RECCRitD M>T 8. .’33 1. £CCK 1758. PAGE 3D?. CFr.tJAL RECCRDS. | WT PlDTTMat: AV EASEME.VT07ER SAD UW FCF A PF’El.NE AND iN0DE>tT4 PLFP0SE3 .’A r Ri'CR D r CCnSCl'LMTED .FR.CA’XW
SVSTPIST, W DEtd RECORDED .rrR MRY 15. '577. 99CM 6747. PACE 44. cmSMi RECORDS fPLCTTCD LOTOV) AV AGRcLMtiVI FLfflSUAN.' .'0 LW C-HFCWWI TMiW CCNSERVAOaV AC7 CF .'965. I'WCW? <K- ritRf in SiSCRSED ORCPERTY WW< AGRKaARFWl PREEERrE DESIGNATED AS W FOWLER SELMA KinSSSLWG ND. 27, ExESuTED fir faE CCvNTr GF OTSNO AVD ,VO0UO rt?5AW. MFA MOfiW R 20. AVD TEMA rtOSAW , RE9CFDE9 rEfiFUARY 75, 197?. EQCM 6972. FAST 1 7D OTTCW prpORDS. iSiLAVZiT .W UAR.'.<£j <Ht LttfC.' O' A MA” "UM-'ORi.ftV .'0 SnCW LW 7.4NL' AVD OTHLtt PlMM:Ri v , F.ltu .U'WUn 7. 2007 .V<EtCK 5.'. PACE £0 CF RECORD CF SCFVErS. .fa.ANR£F IN ,V4Pj.RE; EASiWO' ft UChT. POLE

0.43 ACRES- Ci ft ACRES
'53C2-, , .’- Z3./4 EZEFW HOUSE
A -17OX. IfXMTWW ar', JMM.WfY SEWER Ltf".'iC 'ANK >2'5/jS-' . "‘5

85.05 •t JWOV.-D W4TER ■glL-T Z 1 "’■

1./.95 — 00 i .'S.iy | 95 69' A- -2-. 78'
'fi a;-' 12’ CUE'AzftT AW WMlL EAST DEAN 41OWE ___
-t _________ -.-i. . — 1 __
ft 37 ft: 0.42 ACRES
Ex'ST.V.G EMW
76L.GO 7.19.IO' £.'.•.Ill f'A.ii'?' >79.50 9s. SO- A- -EX'SBMG W/TER TANK EfiSTiNS SW PfPE 44

0.86 LZ-fT
\ GAS .'AW
POWER POLE W/ElECTR'94*. METER . : 430.43
•OES
47 0.40 ACRES
13 ft 9.55 ft ARRES v<
42 0.43 ACRES
J4

9.55 ACRES
ft
ft
ft
ft ?29.55 ACRES
ft
ft
ft V
ft 6.54
’•■ ACITTS
ftft 0.55 ACRES S; ft 36
ft 0.42 E1E0WK JM.VtE- ft /CHES - 73 f J ;c‘i.L'7' X'£.lL' • : i .*.■? ,r ' r? CO T9 SO TS.09' EX.S.’iHG kWh’tr ,CX1EH' * WATERL.NE EC 40

1.?f AS-PCs
50' ft
ft ft 35 ft V. >TA2 ft MCHES * 20

5.54 ALLRcS
’6
ACRES
.’7

0.55 .■1URL5
18 ft 9.55 ft AOT5 ’■■’ 9

9.55 AO.’ES
ft ft PhWAWDr.7?
■4J? ACRES RRa°CSED USE- .REflffiNTiAL
3 To
| ;'5.u7
•2:.?5 1(9 (XT T9 SO 3960
5 4 PARCa 1 Tiw.’ PART O
r P.'.r CART ,tfJ| r ,Or Utf ATOF’.'.'CASt QIWRTlP Or i?l r SOUThWCST AMPLER 0 r STWN .1 .TCWV5".'F 7.5 SO'.'Di, RAXGC ?1 EAST .'.I1? u AM. (Y-Nl WRTi,' AVD

E-IST U
l rrTO’rii C¥ WMY(I 1 CtiVi.'ML ".'Ci"L' HALHOVi!? COMl'AVY. : J4 ;
; 0 42 .-
- 4n?.rs •
ja

0.37 ACrti
’9 | '33 01 | !79.G9‘ ■25/4 A159, 5EGWMS 47 A F0W7 40 <~ET SCvT" CPOM .‘OTVHE57 SCtfnEW Cv RT EST (JUARTEk •>’ R.'E 5X'7H£4Sr 3LW7ER w SECTOR 9 TOAVjS. '5 SCtON. rAwCt ■ j31W 71 EASr AVG .RGWWlK? .'j CEE.' EAST. I.W.HOE irl.WW.Wb 501'Tri WML1EI fO fllSi MME Ct SUP MW.'HWfSr Cu-W.’r.? !0 A PCW.' HWffiE S*iiJ .’>W .WiTPScCTS '..Wt Cf M t'EM-RAL HAS'.P'C RAtROAO RESERtXriiW, 7h£uCE .VCrWflESTERir AlOWS SVD RE3£tWEG« 70 A Eaw7 lPi£f?£ 7ht WEST hh£ Sf SAC •ACWWKEST OUARiS? Cr SOUTHEAST OW-TD? INTERSECTS SAC RESERVaTKw: JhEMSE NORTH A\YJ ALCWC SAC WEST h'ftE Of SA'S NORTHWEST QUARTER CE SCvWEAST (WTER 5? P»W7 Cf gEWiNQ, ft 22 ft
E2CEP7ION ?: * /•• - 709' P'SnT Cf WAY FOR

PAWKMD PUWSES
ft ’-T.7? 24 ’S
.1.56
ft ft £0.44 ACRES'0.44 ACRES 1153 5, AC.W5 ” 0-50 SECT'W J’JE ASWS 0 42 ACHES' & (20.69' ?20.S0 W7CEI 2 <HA.' Fovrav OF Tnl NURi.HWl.5.’ OUARfW CY ,'W SaUTH'/S? QUCRI'R Ct SYCTCtf 9 ’DWN5HI'' !!> .‘.fJU.'n, W?K7f 71 .‘AST. .UCUN.' I.Wil (.' fiASf MiViJ M'NLW.V, i WS .NURlh MAD EAST CF THE CEN1R4L p/CTO RALRjYD EXCEPRAG ThErt£t9-0y A FORTY FOOT RCMDWAY CN TtiE NORlm h'AE WE.RECF /W MlSD EACEPft% TnEPEFrtOM Th/ 7 PGFTCA Tn'EEEGFKSEUEED AS FQLLCW5 %MMEnE.WG AT A FGiNT 40 rTT SOVIP GF r n'E WRThWEST CUR-VER 0 r SAID NORfUWEST QUARTER CF THE StHRHEMST QUARTER O
r FJ.'G STCVOfi; R.Y.Wr MS.’ 75 -r F.r7. P'.r NO r SOL'Tli TC A PGLN7 OL ,?<TOirc.’iCN .fTh ,NO?L". r AW?.’ Y nN' OF Utf Cl’A'PW PACina RAYROAO RrsrRU/raV, T'OTF NURi.HWlS.'tALY AACW SA'D H.NE ,'G ,'nl 'W Cr .WitrcStC'UUV DL SAID NUR-'tiL Ttr.Lr LINE Wl'n’ .'HE WES' HAE Gt MlU WR.’nWtS.' GuflRTtr CF '.HE SOL'-'nEMo.' 0U4RTP? Cf SJ)£| s£D7iON. ’HENCE .XCF’HE.RlY ALONG SM'D WEST nW TD THE PUW’ 0 r COMMENCEMENT. ;35.dJ' 'JdSt' 'J3.LQi?5.f.i;- 27
. 9.43 ft 3 =1 28
0*4
fYSirs
'2;. 7$' 'C: ft5
cXCLi'OO.N <>9 TA'Ch LAYEMtAI 26

6.67 ACRES
L 78.54
1JO.90
32 0.56 ACRES
■ .= 74
r 57.59- I >-L.1.19.19' r'LTOM
ft. BK&u“io G'JILO! .4
12' 75' l-Z'74
iMWcGCAW 5N®£Xf KOT CW M5 TEATAffltf .W” AY -TO' KLt.'SrJWWW WTOOT GM.r Z<.\? iL' u'97 TC40 HHJ'.'i? Wi' X lAS-Y.W.'WtfT? M5 fftf ZStflJWRS fXWW>IA.V? .’'? ......................................... -4'A'?.:C4 WW. •■?«• IM4*Xtf.':' .:VM'i •>’ .:U9W.7»TO-TO 7.W /pp. Tciit ator to .'SJUixi't o' jwifxvj- PTwr.

AC.9E5 .-W.WV Mf -WfWtf AIM CffXPiKEVL ,*W
JO
•S.56 A?.<rs
3 J C52
4T.7TS
0 60
f/’Yu’.Y.- T4W 'aV i’Z tfNfr,',M?-?r .WaV>YAaXW»S.W tWtfC' LV.'‘ Ji’RES AWirt- a«j- iWHfsm/oao *• s&to
357 ?246tf.raMf'tf'W
HtfTF :Ctf7H9?'.' TMStftf .94WMP AXL? flXGSV STATOailicm? 5J3Wrl' W5CEA7ML MAP PcSW'AJV
ZTL L'l.Ty A?C AKIRML3 79 ST AMD Sr TX .TO’.C*Xtf MSCtttfS. f r V.'jr. 1,'.' iaV wz
5909' StC.48'
i’i? CP .__47?.tl8-_
.4?
Fi’ 1 tf
(TT/f----
iAMWffr sstEF? -Krau
.i’GVJ? i’.W4aVi’ f.V»S’lr M?‘> c?-.':'<ll -37C AWTOC7W. C.T' C.r .TOHltl? 1M5T reS-TOTO/L CTOr Ctf DML£8
«S’ TGK
.■-'.Jx EtfST.NQ 6 SLOCK WMlL
5:>ic ’■ - W
>N'.i
'.Y.iAvr p.wi i& AWM wj.w.r .'• S .•■tf •■»•'.'al. 1,-.' w ffiESMO -.•.v?.t m wSw SMB? aw FftcaMwr awiflHwr .v ® Awr.w.w 'mw av;- wzwws fou i?tf WOStem'.' 6? .TOCtf ,<>A?55tf9 .■Y.T.tLFTUlAl ATCiSiVTS. .TDlVtf.'/TY GT FUGXSTX X? CF W<‘? DtfTOOT 3tfU.O Dtf ■-'iC'-'ATO TO /CCCF.r Rtf etTOVIEVtfTtfCS t'.'G C WZtfT Mi5U(7MTOD *7W AWWL LW ACnWSLS CTONStfTONr*’W M5 <\Y<t MUTOffltfi CAY COS’ :<K pA- ,7 ,.ff rfHU .'Alt. »WS iW AH .4tf.Y.7.C.'i.W4' AWSW A: O.’AV.V HAVANA? ,HW t'-ifttf {.-ax swvi '.fir .«■ ,tf PtitMtf ,1 AWJwcf atf rd a iMHca hwqtxv? * .1 LGii-Dh- ,Y7iP SL.W ,45Rtfli TOFY FWftlAT ?M$ L£DN W CFSc-ITCX.TOR"tfCC -DFS I'CMP.37-5TO. i i, ‘3??; OUTLOT NOTES
.y.vor A 79 6t CCT.-.4TE9 rcw STCffWATTP EMSW,
CMER/SL.EDWDER- «MMK9 p£f. * fjQREEN TRUSTEES
5497 EAST QA'Ci9W AVENUE
fUW'ittf, 9AE2t EWwEE/M PR£PARMBOV; PRECLSOV C/l £«K»&Wl8. 9K rT»"’A9, CM 55727 Rft .955-44.9-4. 7 THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO: (APN 340-120-05 , -23 , -29) s. e.
fl

9. 76
?2.
5 W.' 9CW3
.'4.

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
7W .
jt> liLH.t

3.T. J4C-iiC-2ft. J*3-|iB-29
A'C: J4S 1-; 29-f.ei NOTES
AU iWFTOteMfN-TO-SHAU St Af WflCWD -YR CT' 5M’.O4‘TO5;AW SWCL W.Wtf fAWXffr .'±MF‘-?tf H«?f.-4 I.WAl ffiaK'.WJ WHfrf, -L-L*WAV .VZ f.TAV5*. ,> ,7.'.WV '.WffR. LWWVXX FfiWttWVK Sfeir fiiWMWi ®77 i®NK ™
7 'I’tWN.'V 1FE5 SWOT AY MOT A tfAK..' .WW-WW -TOCVOOWVTr GT ■Wil WARS5L8SW5W MV5 AW S?« NiSW WtS. 2. ‘Z’j7V<. M.fZ i.tiL? AW AhaXV .'tfAsV VCi.'.VS' .-Mft’ hV.V !MII r?.YV LITOCSW.WLVUilT.YLV A-.9 SWVL6 ST CC.VJtftf.7D?MQ-MMWl L.’;t .XLD HEtftfi? Sr Rtf lMAVTO.7 07 ■•WTOOT W-5.lt i-'R-.TtfJ A7tf 5WWN .TOF PEfLYtf'.Ltf .RVAL 7tfS«X LCOL’iW ,4>.9 2Zt 4X2 ftf A’tfLUKi? -X' r Y C.W. TWW3f4GW CWWWtOfW lWW.W:, .'Z
.Vl'cW CW(tC'.tfiA >
5tf LtfltfiCtf.rp R£$£i?rfS 7X XM7 TO 705 LUMft’Cr .cxW.Xtf SPxCPJ A - HTXC' tW.Vtf lVSW
A'Mftf. CCVWC7 7.<->aV7 SPAlYS Ml fiT ,4Lt6>C 45 AiliNK, p.r 4>. PW.Y? iJA’.'.’tfS 7S'.‘PhW. rxvt. IM.'VWA’tf VAVV.I .W1 ; m. .fti,'* Alt MWGKWW5 RWWSro T5OER S477P, STOW CG&J, GSRlR G lTL .ts. 4W r-fW.'tf.vr R/tfMtWj SHALL fiS CYWSWJCJE!?70 C'T SW Wf ESSPftW? .S-7RQT AWCWWK SW? A< XVS7.CH.Q)W OWERWNCE *75 CTr 57/.W.WS. <V '4.
ii. CA rFff/H/E.WF
'l-.'MT'.E .'A” PP5WY5 75W SLttiWJ *7e SJUPtfff.V fMFWf fCW <MTW?< <4.W*5 W AXV.'XAur.ww Ifi'A 4«Ht X' 1'.? Af.W <S'.WZ.W.Y VM'.F TW.Y ,v..'«.' f.Y.VtfW. UWW'- W SLUWCR 4C».'i7tf;
rL?.'M7'.Y .’A” XfW Pi.tixxtzr t«7 $TXTW?(V few <MW41 4W*5

5. 5x5 /WCTl .5 4WhW AM TlF GT jCCTCEP’.'PCTC JSQftH?.
..V-lfnWX W.VWW5 'A1 ■I. AY.H> >V-•Alf i’V «► .WfJ.tr.'.' W W«A>5. 5.c jL&«rr .5 ,'.cr wr-.w .i lAKCsaw watcvwt 208
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-1
Figure 2-4: Proposed Zoning Map
] Project Site
| Fowler City Limits Fowler Sphere of Influence ProposedZoning R-l-6 M-l Fowler Zoning R-l-12 R-l-10 E Jefferson Ave
R-l-7 R-l-6
E Lincoln Ave RM-2-A RM-2 RM-3 R-MP
AE20 %
SClovis Ave
SSunnyside Ave
E Clayton Ave
C-2 C-3 C-H
FBC M-l M-2 R-2/P1 RCO
FresnoCounty Zoning
_| AE20- Exclusive Agriculture
3 AL20- Limited Agricultural
| C6- General Commercial Ml- Light Manufacturing M2- General Industrial M3- Heavy Industrial I*
Z.

W Adams Ave
AE20 AL20
ESumner Ave
0 500
Feet
Proposed Zoning Designation Map
City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
209
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-1
Figure 2-5: Topo Quad
Project Elevation,is'approximately 300 feet above MSL.
34 f AMERICAN AVE
33 T15S R21E

S FOWLER AVE
E JEFFERSON AVE Q4

S ARMSTRONG AVE

E LINCOLN AVE

FOWLER AVE
i
10 ARETHA AVE

PETER AVE HEIDI AVE
.AQAMS AVE \
Fowler

E ADAMS AVE

E SUMNER AVE
E SOUTH AVE USGS Topo Maps (1:24k)

S BURGAN AVE
Quad Name
Township/Range
Section USGSNational Map.

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
Topographic Map
City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision
0 750 1,500
Feet
210
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-2
Figure 2-6: General Plan Land Use Designation Map
I
I I '>.

JR \
1 '’’I ■ |
\ ’
■ ;
J
lli
V '•
99'
1 . .’ Fowler City Limits
Fowler Sphere of Influence
Fowler General Plan Land Use
Low Density Residential
Medium Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Medium High Density Residential
High Density Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
General Commercial
Light Industrial
Heavy Industrial
Parksand Open Space
Public Facilities
General Plan Land Use Map
City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
0 500 1,000
Feet
211
Section , Item D
Chapter 2: Project Description
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 2-3
Figure 2-7: Zone District Map
EJefferson Ave ] Project Site
J J Fowler City Limits Fowler Sphere of Influence
C-3 C-H
FBC M-l Fowler Zoning
R-2/P1 RCO
Fresno County Zoning AE20- Exclusive Agricultural AL20- Limited Agricultural C6- General Commercial Ml- Light Manufacturing M2- General Industrial M3- Heavy Industrial R-l-5 RM-2-A RM-2 RM-3 R-MP
AE20
S Clovis Ave
$ Sunnyside
E Clayton Ave
AE20
E Carter Ave "
\I 4 1 X LJ AL20
AL20
W Adams Ave
AE20
E Sumner Ave
0 500
Feet Zoning Designation Map
City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
212
Section , Item D
Chapter 3: Determination
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 3-1
CHAPTER 3 DETERMINATION

3.1 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
As indicated by the discussions of existing and baseline conditions, and impact analyses that follow in this Chapter, environmental factors not checked below would have no impacts or less than significant impacts resulting from the project. Environmental factors that are checked below would have potentially significant impacts resulting from the project. Mitigation measures are recommended for each of the potentially significant impacts that would reduce the impact to less than significant.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology / Water Quality Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
The analyses of environmental impacts in Chapter 4 Impact Analysis result in an impact statement, which shall have the following meanings.

Potentially Significant Impact. This category is applicable if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant, and no feasible mitigation measures can be identified to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. This category applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures would reduce an effect from a “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measure(s), and briefly explain how they would reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced).

Less than Significant Impact. This category is identified when the proposed Project would result in impacts below the threshold of significance, and no mitigation measures are required.

No Impact. This category applies when a project would not create an impact in the specific environmental issue area. “No Impact” answers do not require a detailed explanation if they are adequately supported by the information sources cited by the lead agency, which show that the impact does not apply to the specific project (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 213
Section , Item D
Chapter 3: Determination
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 3-2

3.2 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation (to be completed by the Lead Agency):

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.

An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. _______________________________________ _____________________________ Signature Date
_______________________________________
Printed Name/Position
February 24, 2025
214
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-1
CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

ANALYSIS

4.1 AESTHETICS
Table 4-1: Aesthetics Impacts
Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Baseline Conditions
The Project site is located along the floor of the San Joaquin Valley (Valley) just north of the city of Fowler, which lies along SR 99. The predominant landscape feature of the San Joaquin Valley is a wide variety of agricultural land. Regional views from the Valley floor are generally limited due to the flatness of the region; however, on clear days the Sierra Nevada Mountains are visible to the east. Fowler is characterized as a freestanding city with small town atmosphere surrounded by agricultural land. As one of the cities along the Fresno County Blossom Trail, Fowler offers scenic views of blossoming orchards from February to March.

The Project site consists primarily of row crops; however, there are two existing homes on the property.

The site would be visible from the adjacent Golden State Boulevard and from the residential neighborhood to the south. Excluding the neighborhood to the south, the surrounding area is generally considered rural and low density, with agricultural land scattered with farming residencesto the north, east, and west. There are no scenic vistas on the Project site or in the vicinity. There are no designated State Scenic Highways within the City or surrounding area. In Fresno County, a portion of SR 180 has been officially identified by

4.1.1 215
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-2
Caltrans as a “designated State Scenic Highway,” however, that segment is approximately 13 miles northeast of the Project site.1
Impact Analysis
a) Have substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. Scenic features in the vicinity may include the vast expanse of agricultural land; however, neither Fresno County nor Fowler have designated any scenic vistas in the Project vicinity. The Project site is not within the viewshed of any water features or scenic vistas. Therefore, there would be no impact.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. In Fresno County, a portion of SR 180 has been officially identified by Caltrans as a “designated State Scenic Highway.” However, Project activities would take place approximately 13 miles southwest and would not have the potential to affect the highway. There would be no impact. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact. The existing visual character of the Project site and its surroundings consist of urban development and agricultural land. To the north, west, and east, the Project site is surrounded by agricultural land and scattered farming residences, and to the south contains a residential neighborhood. It could be argued that the development of an industrialsubdivision could visually degrade the visual character of the surrounding agricultural land. However, the City has designated the site as Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential in the General Plan and associated with adoption of the General Plan and certification of the General Plan EIR, adopted a statement of overriding considerations determining that the benefits of placing industrial uses at the site outweighed the impacts of the loss of farmland and all the impacts, such as aesthetic impacts associated with it. With the City’s adoption of the overriding findings, no further analysis of the loss of farmland is necessary. The General Plan EIR determined that any development that is consistent with the General Plan would be subject to applicable design guidelines found in the Fowler Municipal Code (FMC). The applicable development standards for the industrial subdivision are included in Section 9-5.1402 of the FMC.2Furthermore, the industrial development would offer attractive landscaping and architectural design to reduce any visual effect to the surrounding properties pursuant to Section 9–5.1406 of the FMC. 3 The Project also includes the construction of traffic improvements to several intersections that would be developed when warranted. These improvements all occur within the existing right-of-way that are improved with pavement at minimum. Implementation of these improvements would not substantially 1 (California Department of Transportation 2023)
2 (Municode Codification 2024)
3 (Municode Codification 2024)

4.1.2 216
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-3
deviate from the existing visual setting as the roadways already exist and additional traffic improvements would not be peculiar. Any impacts would be less than significant. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Implementation of the Project would create new sources of light typical of industrial development and traffic improvements. Nighttime lighting levels would increase over current levels, as sources of new and nighttime lighting and illumination would include, but are not necessarily limited to, lighting from the new industrial use, lights associated with vehicular travel (i.e., car headlights), and street lighting. Increased nighttime lighting and illumination could result in adverse effects to adjacent land uses through the “spilling over” of light into these areas and “sky glow” conditions.

However, all future development under the Project would have to comply with Title 9 of the City of Fowler Zoning Ordinance, which ensures that proposed lighting is so arranged as to deflect the light away from adjoining properties. This would assist in reducing potential impacts associated with daytime glare and nighttime light. As such, any potential light and glare would be reduced to a less than significant impact. 217
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-4

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Table 4-2: Agriculture and Forest Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
Baseline Conditions
The Project is located in California’s Central Valley in Fresno County and more specifically within the City of Fowler planning area. Fresno County is located within California’s agricultural heartland. In 2023, Fresno County ranked as one of the top agricultural counties in the State in the annual market value of farm products.4
A wide range of commodities are grown in the county, with major production of grapes, almonds, pistachios, and milk.
5 Rich soil; irrigation water; Mediterranean climate; and steady access to local, national, and global markets make this possible.

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program: The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) produces maps and statistical data used for analyzing impacts to California’s agricultural resources.

Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status; the best quality land is called Prime Farmland. The maps are updated every two years with the use of a computer mapping system, aerial imagery, public review, and field reconnaissance. The California Department of Conservation’s 2020 FMMP 4 (The County of Fresno Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures 2024) 5 Ibid.
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.2.1 218
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-5
is a non-regulatory program that produces “Important Farmland” maps and statistical data used for analyzing impacts on California’s agricultural resources. The Important Farmland maps identify eight land use categories, five of which are agriculture related: prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland, farmland of local importance, and grazing land — rated according to soil quality and irrigation status. Each is summarized below:
• PRIME FARMLAND: Farmland with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. • FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE: Farmland similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
• UNIQUE FARMLAND: Farmland of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state’s leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but may include non- irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
• FARMLAND OF LOCAL IMPORTANCE: Land of importance to the local agricultural economy as determined by each county’s board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. • GRAZING LAND: Land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. The minimum mapping unit for Grazing Land is 40 acres.
• URBAN AND BUILT-UP LAND: Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10-acre parcel. This land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, institutional, public administrative purposes, railroad and other transportation yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, water control structures, and other developed purposes.
• OTHER LAND (X): Land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry, or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than 40 acres. Vacant and disturbed land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other Land.

As demonstrated in Figure 4-1, the FMMP for the subdivision area is designated as Prime Farmland.6The traffic signal areas are indicated as Urban and Built-Up Land and Prime Farmland, however these locations consist of paving and exist road infrastructure, therefore the analysis below does not discuss agricultural impacts were existing road infrastructure is located.

Impact Analysis
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site consists of prime farmland. However, the City has designated the site as Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential in the General Plan and, 6 (Calfornia Department of Conservation 2020)

4.2.2 219
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-6
associated with adoption of the General Plan and certification of the General Plan EIR, adopted a statement of overriding considerations determining that the benefits of placing industrial uses at the site outweighed the impacts of the loss of prime farmland. With the City’s adoption of the overriding findings, no further analysis of the loss of prime farmland is necessary.

Traffic improvements associated with the Project would be located within existing improved ROW and would not impact agricultural land. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently located in Fresno County with a zoning designation of AE-20 (Agricultural, 20-acre minimum parcel size). The Project is also located within the City of Fowler’s planning area and has a general plan land use designation of Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential. As part of the Project, the Project site would be prezoned to the M-1 and R-1-6 zone districts. The proposed prezones would be consistent with the underlying City of Fowler Land Use Diagram as found in the 2040 General Plan and mentioned above (see Figure 2-4). 7 Therefore, pursuant
to the proposed prezone, the Project would not conflict with an existing zoning for an agricultural use.

The Project site is encumbered by a Williamson Act contract. The Williamson Act enables local governments to contract with private landowners to restrict land to agricultural or related open space uses. In return, landowners receive reduced property taxes. Since the Project site would eventually be developed into an industrial use, it would no longer comply with the requirements of the Williamson Act.

As a regulatory requirement, prior to tentative map approval, the applicant would be required to secure a cancellation of its Williamson Act contract. Once the contract is canceled, implementation of the Project would not conflict with the Williamson Act as the site would no longer be encumbered by such contract.

Traffic improvements associated with the Project would be located within existing improved ROW and would not impact agricultural land. Overall, impacts would be less than significant. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? c and d) No Impact. There are no forest lands or timberlands within the Project site or vicinity. There would be no impact.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is prime farmland and is adjacent to active prime farmland to the north, west, and east. The farmland to the north, west, and east is designated for Light Industrial, Heavy Industrial, Medium Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, and Medium Low Density Residential by the Fowler General Plan. The traffic signals would be located in existing disturbed areas and would not cause the conversion of farmland to be a non-agricultural use. Therefore, the potential conversion of this adjacent agricultural land to non-agricultural use has been evaluated by the 7 (Provost and Pritchard 2023)
220
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-7
City’s General Plan EIR and the General Plan anticipates its conversion to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, the Project would not involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use. Impacts would be less than significant.
221
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-8
Figure 4-1: Farmland Map
Fowler Sphere of Influence
Prime Farmland
Farmland of Statewide Importance
Farmland of Local Importance
Unique Farmland
Confined Animal Agriculture
Semi-Ag
Rural Residential
Vacant or Disturbed Land
Urban and Built-Up Land

PROVOST&

PRITCHARD
500 1,000
Feet City of Fowler -
222
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-9

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Table 4-3: Air Quality Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
Baseline Conditions
Current air emissions on the site come from the activities associated with the farming of the existing vineyard. Cultivation requires the use of vehicles to transport workers and to haul harvested grapes offsite. Small off-road vehicles are often used to inspect and treat the vineyards.

Applicable Regulations
Regulation VIII—Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions
Regulation VIII is a control measure that is one main strategies from the 2006 PM10 Plan for reducing the particulate matter 10 microns in size (PM10)emissions that are part of fugitive dust. Projects over 10 acres are required to file a Dust Control Plan (DCP) containing dust control practices sufficient to comply with Regulation VIII. The Project is required to prepare a DCP to comply with Regulation VIII.

Rule 4002—National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants The purpose of the rule is to incorporate the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Part 61, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories from Part 63, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations to protect the health and safety of the public from hazardous air pollutants, such as asbestos.

Rule 4102—Nuisance
The purpose of this rule is to protect the health and safety of the public and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants or other materials. Agricultural activities are exempt from the nuisance rule.

Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review
The purpose of this rule is to ensure that land use development projects reduce their construction/operational Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) and PM10 emissions by 20%/40% and 33.3%/50%, respectively. Operational emissions are required to be reduced over a period of 10 years. Emission □ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.3.1 4.3.2
223
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-10
reductions can be obtained either by implementing on-site improvements, such as using more efficient construction equipment, improved land use design, electrical vehicle chargers, photovoltaic panels, or by simply paying an in-lieu fee that goes towards emission-reducing projects elsewhere in the Air District’s region. This project is required to submit an Air Impact Assessment and address its emissions prior to commencement of both construction and operation.

Other Measures
Other control measures that apply to the Project are Rule 4641—Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operation that requires reductions in volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions during paving and Rule 4601—Architectural Coatings that limits the VOC content of all types of paints and coatings sold in the San Joaquin Valley. These measures apply at the point of sale of the asphalt and coatings, so Project compliance is ensured.

Thresholds
Mass Emissions
The District’s annual mass emission significance thresholds used for the Project define the substantial contribution for both operational and construction emissions as follows:

Table 4-4: Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants Criteria
Pollutant
Emissions (in tons per year)
Construction Operations
ROG 10 10
CO 100 100
NOX 10 10
SOX 27 27
PM10 15 15
PM2.5 15 15
Toxic Air Contaminants
The District’s current thresholds of significance for toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions from the operations of both permitted and non-permitted sources are combined and presented in Table 4-5 below.

Table 4-5: Thresholds of Significance for Toxic Air Contaminants Toxic Air Contaminant Type Threshold
Carcinogens Maximally Exposed Individual risk equals or exceeds 20 in one million Non-Carcinogen, Acute Effects Hazard Index equals or exceeds 1 for the Maximally Exposed Individual Non-Carcinogen, Chronic Effects Hazard Index equals or exceeds 1 for the Maximally Exposed Individual Odors
Odor impacts on residential areas and other sensitive receptors, such as hospitals, day‐care centers, schools, etc. warrant the closest scrutiny, but consideration should also be given to other land uses where people may congregate, such as recreational facilities, worksites, and commercial areas. The District has determined the common land use types that are known to produce odors in the Air Basin. These types are shown in Table 4-6.

4.3.3 224
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-11
Table 4-6: Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources
Odor Generator Screening Distance
Wastewater Treatment Facilities 2 miles
Sanitary Landfills 1 mile
Transfer Stations 1 mile
Composting Facilities 1 mile
Petroleum Refineries 2 miles
Asphalt Batch Plants 1 mile
Chemical Manufacturers 1 mile
Fiberglass Manufacturers 1 mile
Painting/Coating Operations 1 mile
Food Processors 1 mile
Feed Lots and Dairies 1 mile
Rendering Plants 1 mile
Table 4-7: Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Designation Pollutant
Averaging
Time
California Standards* National Standards*
Concentration*
Attainment
Status
Primary
Attainment
Status
Ozone
(O3)
1-hour 0.09 ppm Nonattainment/
Severe
– No Federal
Standard
8-hour 0.070 ppm Nonattainment 0.075 ppm Nonattainment
(Extreme)**
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
AAM 20 μg/m3 Nonattainment – Attainment
24-hour 50 μg/m3 150 μg/m3
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
AAM 12 μg/m3 Nonattainment 12 μg/m3 Nonattainment
24-hour No Standard 35 μg/m3
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
1-hour 20 ppm Attainment/
Unclassified
35 ppm Attainment/
8-hour 9 ppm 9 ppm Unclassified
8-hour
(Lake Tahoe)
6 ppm –
Nitrogen
Dioxide
(NO2)
AAM 0.030 ppm Attainment 53 ppb Attainment/
1-hour 0.18 ppm 100 ppb Unclassified
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
AAM – Attainment -- Attainment/
24-hour 0.04 ppm -- Unclassified
3-hour – 0.5 ppm
1-hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb
Lead (Pb) 30-day Average 1.5 μg/m3 Attainment – No
Designation/
Classification
Calendar Quarter –
--
Rolling 3-Month
Average
– 0.15 μg/m3
Sulfates (SO4) 24-hour 25 μg/m3 Attainment No Federal Standards Hydrogen
Sulfide (H2S)
1-hour 0.03 ppm
(42 μg/m3)
Unclassified
Vinyl Chloride
(C2H3Cl)
24-hour 0.01 ppm
(26 μg/m3)
Attainment
225
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-12
Pollutant
Averaging
Time
California Standards* National Standards*
Concentration*
Attainment
Status
Primary
Attainment
Status
VisibilityReducing
Particle Matter
8-hour Extinction coefficient:

0.23/km-visibility of
10 miles or more due
to particles when the
relative humidity is
less than 70%.

Unclassified
Note: ppm – parts per million; ppb – parts per billion; μg/m3 – micrograms per cubic meter * For more information on standards visit: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf ** No Federal 1-hour standard. Reclassified extreme nonattainment for the Federal 8-hour standard. ***Secondary Standard
Source: http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm.

Impact Analysis
Short-Term Construction-Generated Emissions
Estimated construction-generated emissions are summarized in Table 4-8 and Table 4-9, also in Appendix A. Emissions resulting from the addition of traffic signals to existing streets would be minimal.

Table 4-8: Unmitigated Short-Term Construction Generated Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants Source Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5

MAXIMUM ANNUAL PROJECT

CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS

1.21 2.00 2.68 <0.005 0.23 0.09
SJVAPCD THRESHOLD 10 10 100 27 15 15
THRESHOLD EXCEEDED? No No No No No No
Table 4-9: Maximum Daily Construction Related Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants Source Daily Emissions Maximum (in pounds)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
CONSTRUCTION – SUMMER 104 12.2 19.8 0.06 1.55 0.68
CONSTRUCTION – WINTER 3.38 31.7 30.7 0.06 9.13 5.22
SJVAPCD THRESHOLD 100 100 100 100 100 100
THRESHOLD EXCEEDED? Yes No No No No No
Long-Term Operational Emissions
Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), energy sources (e.g., electricity and natural gas), and area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment) related to the Project. Operational emissions of the proposed Project would be considered negligible due to the type of use proposed on-site. Emissions are weighed against thresholds designated by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Table 4-10 and Table 4-11 summarizes estimated operational emissions. No operational emissions exceed SJVAPCD thresholds.
226
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-13
Table 4-10: Unmitigated Long-Term Operational Emissions Source Annual Emissions (Tons per Year)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5

MAXIMUM ANNUAL PROJECT

CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS

2.83 2.24 10.4 0.03 1.88 0.53
SJVAPCD THRESHOLD 10 10 100 27 15 15
THRESHOLD EXCEEDED? No No No No No No
Table 4-11: Maximum Daily Operational Related Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants Source Daily Emissions Maximum (in pounds)
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
CONSTRUCTION – SUMMER 17.5 11.8 76.4 0.16 10.5 2.98
CONSTRUCTION – WINTER 14.0 12.7 47.5 0.14 10.5 2.96
SJVAPCD THRESHOLD 100 100 100 100 100 100
THRESHOLD EXCEEDED? No No No No No No
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of applicable air quality plans if the Project exceeded established thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants or violate adopted Air District rules. As described above in Table 4-8, Table 4-9, Table 4-10, and Table 4-11, the Project, for the most part, would not exceed thresholds for criteria air pollutants. While the analysis depicts a construction daily emissions of 104 pounds per day for reactive organic gases (ROG), the calculation assumes that 100% of the buildings would be painted all at once, and given the individual development nature of the Project, would be highly unlikely. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less than Significant Impact. Excluding daily emissions for ROG, Project-generated emissions are below the SJVAPCD’s regional significance thresholds, and the Project is consistent with current air quality attainment plans including control measures and regulations. The SJVAPCD through its Guidelines for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts has determined that projects that exceed regional thresholds would have a cumulatively considerable health impact. As described above, calculation assumes that 100% of the buildings would be painted all at once, and given the individual development nature of the Project, would be highly unlikely. Therefore, its cumulatively considerable impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction of the Project will most likely utilize diesel-powered off-road equipment, spanning the course of over two (2) years cumulatively. Each building would be developed as desired. Construction in subsequent years are anticipated to generate fewer emissions due to the eventual replacement of old diesel construction equipment fleets with equipment compliant with current regulations. Cancer health risks associated with Project construction would equate to a 10.99 in a million risk of cancer. Chronic and acute health risks associated with the Project would be minimal and less than significant. Construction of traffic signals is not anticipated to generate significant emissions, and given their distance to sensitive receptors, would result in a less than significant impact.
227
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-14
Project operations would also involve the use of diesel-powered trucks, which too would generate Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM). These trucks would most likely leave and enter the site by way of Golden State Boulevard, to either Clovis Avenue to the north or Adams Avenue to the south. Cancer health risks associated with Project operations would equate to 10.61 in a million risk of cancer. Chronic and acute health risks associated with the Project would be minimal and less than significant.

Together, without mitigation, cancer health risks would exceed the Air District threshold of 20 in a million and would result in a significant impact. To mitigate the impact to less than significant, subdivision construction and its buildings would be required to use Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 3 engines with Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters or EPA Tier 4 Final engines, or better. The use of Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters would reduce construction DPM emissions by approximately 75%, and presumably the cancer risk associated with construction would too fall by 75%, which would be sufficient to comply with Air District thresholds. This has been memorialized as AIR-1. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the Project would utilize diesel-powered equipment, which would likely generate odors. These odors, however, are not generally found to adversely affect people, and due to the proximity of the site to sensitive receptors, would not affect a substantial number of people. Project operations would also utilize diesel-powered equipment, however the number of truck trips generated would be minimal and their distance sufficiently away from sensitive receptors. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation
AIR-1 Construction of the subdivision and the buildings within shall utilize EPA Tier 4 Final engines or EPA Tier 3 engines with Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters.

4.3.5 228
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-15

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Table 4-12: Biological Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
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?
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?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
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?
Baseline Conditions
Study Methodology
A Biological Memorandum has been prepared for the Project (see Appendix B). Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group environmental specialist conducted a desktop analysis of potential Project-related impacts to biological resources based on the resources known to occur, or with potential to occur, within the Project site. Sources of information used in preparation of this analysis included: CDFW’s California Natural Diversity Database [(CNDDB); see Appendix A of Appendix B for the species list] and California Wildlife Habitat Relationships database; California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California; CalFlora’s online database of California native plants; Jepson Herbarium’s online database (i.e., Jepson eFlora); United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) □ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.4.1 229
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-16
Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS), Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC; see Appendix C of Appendix B for the species list) system, and National Wetlands Inventory; iNaturalist; NatureServe Explorer’s online database; United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service’s Web Soil Survey, California Herps website; and various manuals, reports, and references related to plants and animals of the San Joaquin Valley region.

General
The Project site is located in the San Joaquin Valley within the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Malaga 7.5-minute quadrangle. The topography within the site is relatively flat with elevations of approximately 300 feet above mean sea level. Like most of California, the site experiences a Mediterranean climate. Warm, dry summers are followed by cool, moist winters. In the summer, average high temperatures range between 85- and 98-degrees Fahrenheit (°F), but do not often exceed 105 °F, and the humidity is generally low. Winter temperatures are often below 60°F during the day and rarely exceed 65°F.

On average, the City of Fresno receives approximately 13 inches of precipitation in the form of rain yearly, most of which occurs between October and April, and the site would be expected to receive similar amounts of precipitation.

Waters
The nearest surface water features are the basins located east of the site. The Malaga Canal and Biggs Canal are located approximately 2 miles northeast of the site.

Soils
Four soil mapping units representing three soil types were identified within the site and are listed in Table 4-13 (see Attachment D of Appendix B for the Web Soil Survey Report). The soils are displayed with their core properties in the table below, according to the Major Land Resource Area of California. These soils are primarily used for growing a range of crops including grapes, peaches, truck crops, alfalfa and for homesites.

Table 4-13: List of Soils Located on the Site and Their Basic Properties Soil Soil Map Unit Percent
of Site
Hydric Soil
Category
Drainage Permeability Runoff
Delhi Loamy sand, 0 to 3
percent slopes
MLRA 17

0.1 % Predominantly
nonhydric
Somewhat
excessively
drained
High to very high Very low
Hanford Sandy loam 6.8% Nonhydric Very well
drained
High Very low
Hesperia Sandy loam, very
deep

59.7% Nonhydric Well drained Moderately low Negligible
Fine sandy loam,
very deep

33.4% Nonhydric Well drained Moderately low Negligible
Hydric soils are defined as soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions such that under sufficiently wet conditions, hydrophytic vegetation can be supported. None of the major units were identified as hydric, though one minor component of Delhi was noted as hydric.

Biotic Habitat
The majority of the Project site appears to consist of a vineyard and a residential single-family home. It is expected that the vineyard onsite could be used as foraging and nesting area for tree-nesting and ground230 Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-17
nesting species such as killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), or song sparrow (Melospiza melodia). The soil texture of most of the site is reported to be sandy loam, in general, and may be loose enough for burrowing by small mammals, such as California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi). Discing is not anticipated frequently through the vineyard, so ground disturbance may be minimal. This may further allow for and encourage nesting activities. Large, non-agricultural trees are visible on aerial imagery near the residential homes within the site and in the surrounding area, which could serve as suitable nesting habitat for raptors.

The Project site is surrounded by existing agricultural fields to the west, north, and east. Abutting the west boundary is the Golden State Boulevard. To the south is an existing residential subdivision. Heavy traffic associated with the adjacent highway could deter more elusive species from traveling to or through the area. Some species more habituated to human disturbance and activities, such as San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), may be tolerant of the disturbances and could use the site for foraging.

Sensitive Resources
As follows are details on the special status species, migratory birds, designated habitat and communities, and wildlife movement corridors and native wildlife nursery sites that could be impacted by Project-related activities.

Special Status Species
A query of the CNDDB for occurrences of special status plant and animal species was conducted for the Malaga USGS 7.5-Minute quadrangle and the eight surrounding quadrangles: Sanger, Selma, Conejo, Caruthers, Fresno North, Fresno South, Clovis, and Round Mountain. A query of the IPaC was also completed for the site. Species which were observed within two miles of the Project site were evaluated for their potential to occur within the Project site. These species are listed in Table 4-14 below.

Table 4-14: Special Status Plant and Animal Species with the Potential to Occur on the Project Site Species Status* Habitat Occurrence within the Site
Pallid bat
(Antrozous pallidus)
CSSC Found in grasslands, chaparral,
and woodlands, where it feeds on
ground- and vegetation-dwelling
arthropods, and occasionally
takes insects in flight. Prefers to
roost in rock crevices, but may
also use tree cavities, caves,
bridges, and other human-made
structures.

Unlikely. The vineyard habitat could
provide foraging opportunities for
this species, but roosting habitat
appears to be absent from the
Project site and adjacent habitats.

Swainson’s hawk
(Buteo swainsoni)
CT Nests in large trees in open areas
adjacent to grasslands, grain or
alfalfa fields, or livestock pastures
suitable for supporting rodent
populations.

Possible. The nearest recorded
observation of this species is
approximately four miles northwest
of the site in the 1980s. However,
trees large enough for nesting are
present within 0.5 miles of the
Project site. Additionally, this species
would be expected to forage within
the fallow field and surrounding
areas.

Western mastiff bat
(Eumops perotis
californicus)
CSSC Found in open, arid to semi-arid
habitats, including dry desert
washes, flood plains, chaparral,
oak woodland, open ponderosa
Unlikely. The vineyard habitat could
provide foraging opportunities for
this species, but there do not seem
to be any resources for roosting.
231
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-18
Species Status* Habitat Occurrence within the Site
pine forest, grassland, and
agricultural areas, where it feeds
on insects in flight. Roosts most
commonly in crevices in cliff
faces but may also use high
buildings and tunnels.

*EXPLANATION OF OCCURRENCE DESIGNATIONS AND STATUS CODES

Present: Species observed on the site at time of field surveys or during recent past.

Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis.

Possible: Species not observed on the site, but it could occur there from time to time.

Unlikely: Species not observed on the site, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient.

Absent: Species not observed on the site and precluded from occurring there due to absence of suitable habitat.

STATUS CODES
FE Federally Endangered CE California Endangered
FT Federally Threatened CSSC California Species of Special Concern FPT Federally Threatened (Proposed) CCE California Endangered (Candidate)

CNPS LISTING
1B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in
California and elsewhere.
2B Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in
California, but more common elsewhere.

Applicable Regulations
Federal
Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act, passed in 1973, defines an endangered species as any species or subspecies that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is defined as any species or subspecies that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Once a species is listed, it is fully protected from a “take” unless a take permit is issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. A take is defined as the harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing, or collecting wildlife species or any attempt to engage in such conduct, including modification of its habitat ((16 USC (United States Code) 1532, 50 Code of Federal Regulations 17.3)). Proposed endangered or threatened species are those species for which a proposed regulation, but not a final rule, has been published in the Federal Register.

State
California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA), codified at Fish and Game Code (FGC) Section 2050, et seq., protects certain plant and animal species when they are of special ecological, educational, historical, recreational, aesthetic, economic, and scientific value to the people of the State. CESA established that it is State policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance endangered species and their habitats. CESA was expanded upon the original Native Plant Protection Act and enhanced legal protection for plants. To be consistent with federal regulations, CESA created the categories of "threatened" and "endangered" species.

It converted all "rare" animals into the Act as threatened species but did not do so for rare plants. Thus, there are three listing categories for plants in California: rare, threatened, and endangered. Under State

4.4.2 232
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-19
law, plant and animal species may be formally designated by official listing by the California Fish and Game Commission.

Predatory Birds – Fish and Game Code Section 3503, 3503.5, 3800 Under FGC Sections, 3503, 3503.5, and 3800, all predatory birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes in California, generally called “raptors,” are protected. The law indicates that it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird unless it is in accordance with the code. Any activity that would cause a nest to be abandoned or cause a reduction or loss in a reproductive effort is considered a take. This generally includes construction activities.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. There were no recorded observations of any special status species within two miles of the Project site, and there were no plant species with potential to occur on or near the site. However, suitable habitat for nesting birds, Swainson’s Hawk, and San Joaquin kit fox appears to be present. These special status species could occur on the site prior to or during Project activities. In order to comply with General Plan policies and state and federal laws protecting special status species, Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, and BIO-3 will be implemented to reduce potential Project-related impacts to biological resources within and around the site. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. Riparian habitat is absent from the Project site. The San Joaquin River Ecological reserve, located approximately 18 miles northwest in Fresno, includes a largely undisturbed riparian corridor.8 The only water bodies present within the planning area and surrounding region are irrigation canals, which are highly maintained and used primarily for agricultural water. Additionally, there are no CNDDBdesignated “natural communities of special concern” recorded within the Project site or surrounding lands. There would be no impact.
c) Would the project 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? No Impact. The Project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands. Runoff from the Project site would be directed to proposed stormwater basins. There would be no impact. 8 (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2024)

4.4.3 233
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-20
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?
No Impact. Wildlife movement corridors are routes that wild animals regularly and predictably follow during seasonal migration, dispersal from native ranges, daily travel within home ranges, and interpopulation movements. Movement corridors in California are typically associated with valleys, ridgelines, and rivers and creeks supporting riparian vegetation. The Project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands. Runoff from the Project site would be directed to proposed stormwater basins.

There would be no impact.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. There are no applicable local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. As such, there would be no impact.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. There are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans applicable to the planning area. Therefore, there would be no impact.

Mitigation
Nesting Bird Avoidance: Project activities should occur, if feasible, between September 16 and January 31 (outside of the nesting bird season) to avoid impacts to nesting birds.

Migratory Nesting Bird Pre-Activity Survey: If Project activities must occur within the migratory bird nesting season (February 1 to September 15), a qualified biologist should complete a pre-activity survey for active nests within five (5) calendar days prior to the start of Project activities. The survey should be completed within the Project site, and all accessible lands up to 100 feet outside of the Project site for nesting migratory birds and up to 500 feet outside of the Project site for nesting raptors. Raptor nests would be considered “active” upon the nest-building stage. If no active nests are observed, the Project may proceed. The biologist should also conduct a one-time take avoidance preconstruction survey for Swainson’s hawk nests onsite and within a 0.5-mile radius. This one time take avoidance survey will be conducted in accordance with the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys in California's Central Valley (Swainson's Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000), or current guidance.

Nesting Bird Avoidance Buffers: On discovery of any active nests or breeding colonies near work areas, a qualified biologist should determine appropriate avoidance buffer distances based on applicable CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines, the biology of the species, conditions of the nest(s), and the level of Project disturbance. If needed, avoidance buffers should be identified with flagging, fencing, or other easily visible means, and should be maintained until the biologist has determined that the nestlings have fledged.

4.4.4 BIO-1
BIO-2
BIO-3
234
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-21

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Table 4-15: Cultural Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
Baseline Conditions
Following the completion of the transcontinental railroad in 1869, the Central Pacific Railroad, predecessor to the Southern Pacific Railroad, began construction of a Central Valley route to connect southern California with the commerce center of the San Francisco Bay. The segment through Fowler was laid around 1872.

Thomas Fowler, a State Senator from 1869–1872, owned the ranch where a railroad switch was built by the Central Pacific Railroad. The town developed around the railroad switch and became known as Fowler’s Switch. The Valley branch of the historic Southern Pacific Railroad is presently owned and operated by the Union Pacific Railroad. A post office branch was established in Fowler in 1882, the name was eventually shortened, and the City of Fowler was incorporated in 1908. In May 1973, Fowler’s Switch was registered as a California Point of Interest for its local significance to Fowler. The marker for the Fowler Switch is located at the intersection of East Merced Street and South 7th Street and is not visible from the Project site.

The Project site is located on a previously farmed piece of land. Throughout the years of farming the site, it has been heavily disturbed through planting, harvesting, and discing. The traffic improvement areas are located in disturbed areas that have been developed with roadway infrastructure.

Records Search
A records search from the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), located at California State University, Bakersfield was conducted in September 2024. The SSJVIC records search includes a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest, the California Historical Landmarks, the California Register of Historical Resources, the National Register of Historic Places, and the California State Built Environment Resources Directory listings were reviewed for the Project site and an additional ½-mile radius. According to the search, no cultural resource studies have been previously completed within the Project area, but four have been completed within the ½-mile radius. Furthermore, no recorded cultural resources have been discovered within the Project site; however, three have been discovered within the ½-mile radius. See Appendix C for the CHRIS records search results letter. □ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.5.1 235
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-22
Regulatory Setting
The following Fowler General Policies would apply to the Project:
o Policy CDES-12: All construction shall cease, and the Community Development Director and City Engineer shall be notified immediately if any prehistoric, archaeological, or fossil artifact or resource is uncovered during construction. All construction shall immediately stop and an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in prehistoric or historical archaeology shall be retained, at the applicant’s and/or successors-ininterest’s expense, to evaluate the find(s) and recommend appropriate action according to Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures would be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project subject to direction of the archaeologist while assessment of historic resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.
o Policy CDES-13: All construction shall cease if any human remains are uncovered, and the Community Development Director, City Engineer and Fresno County Medical Examiner and Coroner shall be notified in accordance to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.

If human remains are determined to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted, and the procedures outlined in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15064.5(e) shall be followed.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to in § 15064.5?
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
a and b) Less than Significant Impact. A CHRIS records search, from SSJVIC, was conducted in September 2024 and confirmed there have been no previous cultural resource studies conducted within the Project area. There have been four previous cultural resource studies within the ½-mile mile radius: FR-00135, 02287, 02452, 02642. The search also confirmed there are no recorded resources within the Project area, but three within the ½-mile mile radius: P-10-002962, 003930, 004423. It is unlikely that the Project has the potential to result in significant impacts or adverse effects to cultural or historical resources, such as archaeological remains, artifacts, or historic properties. Conformance with General Plan Policies CDES12 and CDES-13 would reduce impacts to less than significant. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact. There is no evidence that the Project site has the potential to be an unknown burial site, or the site of buried human remains. In the unlikely event of such a discovery, General Plan Policies CDES-12 and CDES-13 identify the procedures that are required to be taken. mitigation will be implemented. Impacts resulting from the discovery of remains interred in the Project site would be less than significant.

4.5.2 4.5.3
236
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-23

4.6 ENERGY
Table 4-16: Energy Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
Baseline Conditions
The Project site consists of farmland and a rural residential dwelling. Energy consumption from the dwelling and farmland would consist of electricity (pumps, dwelling), natural gas (dwelling), gasoline (automobiles), and diesel (dwelling, harvesting).

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact. Fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource expended over the course of Project construction. For heavy-duty construction equipment, horsepower and load factor were assumed using default data from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Fuel use associated with construction vehicle trips generated by the Project was also estimated; trips include construction worker trips, haul trucks trips for material transport, and vendor trips for construction material deliveries. Fuel use from these vehicles traveling to the Project was based on (1) the projected number of trips the Project would generate (CalEEMod default values), (2) default average trip distance by land use in CalEEMod, and (3) fuel efficiencies estimated in the California Air Resources Board 2017 Emissions Factors model (EMFAC2017) mobile source emission model.

Construction is estimated to consume a total of 99,178.75 gallons of diesel fuel and 19,533.25 gallons of gasoline fuel.9 California Code of Regulations Title 13, Motor Vehicles, Section 2449(d)(2), Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than five (5) minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel because of unproductive idling of construction equipment. In addition, the energy consumption for construction activities would not be ongoing as they would be limited to the duration of Project construction.
9 Emissions for the Project were quantified using CalEEMod Output Files Version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for modeling results and assumptions.
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.6.1 4.6.2
237
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-24
The development’s anticipated annual energy consumption is approximately 590,073 kilowatt-hours and 17,792 therms of natural gas.10 Energy consumption of residential uses is currently governed by the 2019 California Building Code, Part 6 for the structure itself, and Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations for appliances. Energy consumption is anticipated to decrease over time as more energy efficient standards take effect and energy-consuming equipment reach their end-of-life and necessitates replacement. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less than Significant Impact. State and local authorities regulate energy use and consumption. These regulations at the State level are intended to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

These include, among others, AB 1493 – Light-Duty Vehicle Standards; California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6 – Energy Efficiency Standards; and California Code of Regulations Title 24, Parts 6 and 11 – California Energy Code and Green Building Standards. The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
10 Emissions for the Project were quantified using CalEEMod Output Files Version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for modeling results and assumptions.
238
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-25

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Table 4-17: Geology and Soils Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo 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?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994) creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of wastewater?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
Baseline Conditions
Geology and Soils
The proposed Project is located in Fresno County, in the southern section of California’s Great Valley Geomorphic Province, or Central Valley. The Sacramento Valley makes up the northern third and the San Joaquin Valley makes up the southern two-thirds of the geomorphic province. Both valleys are watered by large rivers flowing west from the Sierra Nevada Range, with smaller tributaries flowing east from the Coast Ranges. Most of the surface of the Great Valley is covered by Quaternary (present day to 1.6 million years ago) alluvium. The sedimentary formations are steeply upturned along the western margin due to the □ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.7.1 239
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-26
uplifted Sierra Nevada Range.11 From the time the Valley first began to form, sediments derived from erosion of igneous and metamorphic rocks and consolidated marine sediments in the surrounding mountains have been transported into the Valley by streams.

As seen in Table 4-13, soils present on the Project site consist of Delhi loamy sand, Hanford sandy loam, Hesperia sandy loam, and Hesperia fine sandy loam.12
Faults and Seismicity
The Project is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and there are no known active faults within the City. The nearest major fault is the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 66 miles southwest of the Project site. The San Andreas fault is the dominant active tectonic feature of the Coast Ranges and represents the boundary of the North American and Pacific plates. The Nunez Fault is approximately 51 miles southwest and the Poso Fault is approximately 51 miles southwest. 13 Liquefaction
The potential for liquefaction, which is the loss of soil strength due to seismic forces, is dependent on soil types and density, the groundwater table, and the duration and intensity of ground shaking. Although no specific liquefaction hazard areas have been identified in the county, this potential is recognized throughout the San Joaquin Valley where unconsolidated sediments and a high-water table coincide. according to the California State Geoportal, Fowler is not located in or near a zone that has been designated as an area that has experienced soil liquefaction.14 Furthermore, the average depth to groundwater within the planning area is approximately 85 to 95 feet, which also minimizes liquefaction potential.15 Soil Subsidence
There are two types of Subsidence: Land subsidence and hydrocompaction subsidence. Hydrocompaction subsidence occurs when a large land area settles due to over-saturation. These areas are typically composed of open-textured soils that become saturated, high in silt or clay content. Land subsidence occurs when an extensive amount of ground water, oil, or natural gas is withdrawn from below the ground surface. The San Joaquin Valley has become an area that has increasingly experienced subsidence due to excessive groundwater pumping activities lowering the water table. The Project site consists of Atwater loam, Atwater loamy sand, and Greenfield Sandy loam. These soil types have a low to moderate risk of subsidence.

Landslides
Landslides usually occur in locations with steep slopes and unstable soils. Fowler is located on the Central Valley floor where no major geologic landforms exist, and the topography is essentially flat and level. The nearest foothills are approximately 15 miles northeast of the Project site. Therefore, the Project site has minimal-to-no landslide susceptibility.
11 (Harden 1998)
12 (United States Department of Agriculture 2024)
13 (California Department of Conservation 2023)
14 (California State Geoportal 2022)
15 (City of Fowler 2023)
240
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-27
Regulatory Setting
The following Fowler General Policies would apply to the Project:
o Policy CDES-12: All construction shall cease, and the Community Development Director and City Engineer shall be notified immediately if any prehistoric, archaeological, or fossil artifact or resource is uncovered during construction. All construction shall immediately stop and an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in prehistoric or historical archaeology shall be retained, at the applicant’s and/or successors-ininterest’s expense, to evaluate the find(s) and recommend appropriate action according to Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures would be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project subject to direction of the archaeologist while assessment of historic resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.

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

No Impact. There are no known active earthquake faults in Fresno County, inclusive of the City of Fowler and the Project site, nor is Fresno County within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone as established by the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act. Thus, the Project would not cause rupture of a known earthquake fault and therefore, would have no impact.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located in an area traditionally characterized by high levels of seismic activity. Future development would be required to comply with current seismic protection standards in the California Building Code (CBC) which would significantly limit potential damage to structures and thereby reduce potential impacts including the risk of loss, injury, or death.

Compliance with the CBC would ensure impacts to be less than significant. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. As mentioned above, there are no known active earthquake faults in Fresno County and Fresno County has historically been subject to low to moderate ground shaking. The Project site is in an area with low susceptibility to liquefaction with no known geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions. Due to the distance from an active fault, there is low potential for ground rupture. Further, the Project site is primarily made up of loamy sand and sandy loam that are well drained, which are less susceptible to liquefaction than silt or sands. In addition, development would be required to comply with CBC, the City’s grading and drainage standards, and specific requirements that address liquefaction. For these reasons, the Project would not result in seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction.

Impacts would be less than significant impact.

M2

4.7.3 241
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-28
iv. Landslides?
No Impact. Characteristic of the Central Valley, the topography of the Project site is relatively flat. Soils on the Project site are native and stable. No large slopes deriving from rivers or streams are found within the Project site that would be susceptible to landslides. Therefore, there would be no impact. b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. Soil erosion and loss of topsoil can be caused by natural factors, such as wind and flowing water, and human activity. Construction of the Project site would require typical site preparation activities such as grading and trenching which may result in the potential for short-term soil disturbance or erosion impacts. Construction would also involve the use of water that may cause further soil disturbance. Such impacts would be addressed through compliance with regulations set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Namely, the SWRCB requires sites larger than one (1) acre to comply with the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity. The General Permit Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer prior to the start of construction activities. The SWPPP estimates the sediment risk associated with construction activities and Soil erosion and loss of topsoil can be caused by natural factors, such as wind and flowing water, and human activity. includes best management practices (BMP) to control erosion. BMPs specific to erosion control cover erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management controls. Implementation of the SWPPP minimizes the potential for the Project to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Furthermore, development of the Project site would comply with Section 8-14.08 Grading of the Fowler Municipal Code to control soil erosion and erosion potential during Project operations. With these provisions in place, impacts to soil and topsoil by the Project would be considered less than significant. c) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant Impact. Land subsidence is the settling or sinking of surface soil deposits with little or no horizontal motion. Soils with high silt or clay content are subject to subsidence. Subsidence typically occurs in areas with groundwater withdrawal or oil or natural gas extraction. The site is not within an identified California Department of Conservation – Geologic Energy Management Division oil/gas field.16 The topography of the site is relatively flat with stable, native soils and no apparent unique or significant landforms. Furthermore, the Project is in an area of low significance for seismic activity due to its distance from faults. Such factors minimize the potential for other geologic hazards such as landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Therefore, any development on the native, stable soils is unlikely to become unstable and result in geologic hazards. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with current seismic protection standards in the CBC which would significantly limit potential seismic-related hazards such as landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.

Compliance with the CBC would ensure a less than significant impact. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is relatively flat with native soils of fine sandy loam, which is not expansive. Sandy loam soils are not classified as expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the 16 (California Department of Conservation 2024)
242
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-29
Uniform Building Code and would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. Thus, no impact would occur because of the Project.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. Once annexed, the Project site would be located within the Fowler city limits and would connect to the City’s wastewater services. Thus, no permanent septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be installed. There would be no impact. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
Less than Significant Impact. No known paleontological resources have been identified at the Project site.

However, if a paleontological resource is found General Plan Policy CDES-12 describes the procedures necessary during construction activities to reduce impacts. All construction would be required to immediately stop and an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in prehistoric or historical archaeology would be retained, at the applicant’s and/or successors-in-interest’s expense, to evaluate the find(s) and recommend appropriate action according to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures would be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project subject to direction of the archaeologist while assessment of historic resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out. Implementation of this General Plan policy would reduce impacts to less than significant. 243
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-30

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Table 4-18: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
Baseline Conditions
The subject property is developed with vineyards. Cultivation requires the use of vehicles to transport workers and to haul harvested grapes off-site. Small off-road vehicles are often used to inspect and treat the vineyards.

Thresholds
As the Project proposes to develop consistent with the 2040 Fowler General Plan, the Project would exceed thresholds of significance if the Project proposes not to implement the GHG mitigation measures of the 2040 Fowler General Plan Program EIR.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
a) and b) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction of the Project would generate approximately 855.1 metric tons of Carbon Dioxide and its equivalents (MTCO2e). Operation of the Project would generate approximately 4,263 MTCO2e.The City of Fowler has not adopted an applicable plan, policy, or regulation for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Therefore, the significance of the Project’s consistency with an applicable plan was evaluated in comparison to the GHGreduction strategies contained in the 2022 Fresno Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS); as well as State’s 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan.

The Project is consistent with the General Plan, which was found to be consistent with the 2022 RTP/SCS.

In order for subsequent projects to comply with the 2022 Scoping Plan, the Program EIR adopted mitigation measures GHG-1 and GHG-2, described below, which would apply the Project’s fair share of greenhouse gas impacts. With implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts would be less than significant.
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.8.1 4.8.2

4.8.3 244
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-31
Mitigation
GHG-1 Buildings in the subdivision shall be constructed with electrically-powered appliances and building mechanical equipment in place of natural-gas fueled equipment.

GHG-2 Off-street parking in the subdivision shall exceed the California Green Building Standard Code Tier 2 requirements for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

4.8.4 245
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-32

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Table 4-19: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?
Baseline Conditions
Hazardous Materials
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies, and developers to comply with CEQA requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other State and local government agencies are required to provide additional hazardous material release information for the Cortese List. DTSC's EnviroStor database provides DTSC's component of Cortese List data. In addition to the EnviroStor database, the SWRCB Geotracker database provides information on □ □ K □
□ □ K □
□ □ K □
□ □ □ KI
□ □ □ K
□ □ KI □
□ □ □ K

4.9.1 246
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-33
regulated hazardous waste facilities in California, including underground storage tank (UST) cases and nonUST cleanup programs, including Spills-Leaks-Investigations-Cleanups sites, Department of Defense sites, and Land Disposal program. A search of the DTSC EnviroStor database and the SWRCB Geotracker performed on October 7, 2024, determined that there are no known active hazardous waste generators or hazardous material spill sites within the Project site or immediate surrounding vicinity.17 Airports
The Fresno Yosemite International Airport is located approximately nine miles north-northwest, and the Selma Municipal Airport is located approximately four miles south-southeast of the Project.

Emergency Response Plan
The Fresno County Office of Emergency Services coordinates the development and maintenance of the Fresno County Operational area Master Plan.

Sensitive Receptors
The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site is the residential subdivision to the south. Additionally, the Project site is roughly a quarter mile from John Fremont Elementary School.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
a) and b) Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities for the Project site would include typical site preparation, grading, paving, and trenching, all of which would require the transportation of building materials and equipment. Demolition would not be required. The site includes a single-family residence; however, it would remain in the portion of the Project site that would be designated for residential uses.

Generally, hazardous materials associated with construction include, but are not limited to, motor oil, gasoline, diesel, solvents, acids, fugitive dust, and stormwater runoff. Potential hazardous materials associated with construction could result from the use of fuels and lubricants for construction equipment (i.e., motor oil, gasoline and diesel), in addition to grading and drainage activities (i.e., fugitive dust and stormwater runoff). The Project’s grading and drainage plans are subject to City approval and would determine the limits of grading and disturbance. Compliance with these regulations would limit visible dust and ensure that disturbed surfaces or soils remain stable. Workers would be trained to properly identify and handle all hazardous materials, and hazardous waste would either be recycled or disposed of at a permitted and licensed treatment and/or disposal facility. All hazardous waste shipped off-site for recycling or disposal would be transported by a licensed and permitted hazardous waste hauler and disposed of at an approved location. During construction, nonhazardous construction debris would be generated and disposed of at the American Avenue Landfill, pursuant to applicable laws and regulations.

Sanitary waste would be managed using portable toilets located at a reasonably accessible on-site location. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations would ensure that construction of the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the 17 (California Department of Toxic Substances Control 2024); (State of California 2024)

4.9.2 247
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-34
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Overall, the relatively limited use and small quantities of typical hazardous materials, and subsequent transport and disposal of such materials, during construction would be controlled through compliance with applicable laws and regulations pursuant to a comprehensive regulatory framework administered by the DTSC and other relevant public agencies.

The Project proposes an industrial subdivision with light industrial uses unknown at this time. It is assumed that the future use of the Project site would be industrial with specifics complying with the permitted uses found in the Fowler Zoning Ordinance. The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) oversees the Statewide implementation of the Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP), which aims to prevent or minimize harm to public health and safety, and the environment from the release or threatened release of hazardous material. The minimum reporting quantities for hazardous materials is 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pounds for solids, or 200 cubic feet for compress gas.18 If a business handles hazardous materials at or in excess of the minimum thresholds, a HMBP is required to be prepared and approved by the State and local jurisdictions. The project tenants/operator will be required to submit information to the California Environmental Reporting System, Fresno County Department of Public Health, and the City regarding the use and storage of hazardous materials. Both the proposed gas station/mini-mart and future industrial uses would be subject to the HMBP requirements if they handle hazardous materials in excess of minimum reporting quantities Based on known operations, it is not expected that the Project would involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Nevertheless, if future uses would involve transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, then the Fresno County Department of Public Health would require that the Project and future uses on the site submit an HMBP in order to provide for safe storage and use of chemicals. Therefore, if the facility does handle hazardous materials and/or hazardous waste, compliance with the HMBP as approved by the County would reduce any impacts to less than significant. Some appliances and electronics used or stored within buildings may contain hazardous components (e.g., refrigerants, oils, etc.); however, these hazardous components are regulated by the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act and Clean Air Act and transport of such components are regulated by the United States Department of Transportation, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety as implemented in California by California Code of Regulations Title 13, California Building Code, and Uniform Fire Code. Through compliance with the aforementioned regulations, the Project is not expected to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

In addition, stormwater runoff resulting from the anticipated buildout of the Project would be managed by the City in compliance with the regulatory requirements pursuant to NPDES General Permit Requirements, as discussed in Section 4.7). This includes runoff consisting of any hazardous materials, including fuels and lubricants used for construction equipment. In addition, the quality of stormwater runoff would be maintained by design components specific to the Project including the required preparation of a SWPPP, and the City’s approval of the Project’s grading and drainage plans. Together, compliance with the aforementioned plans, policies, and regulatory requirements in addition to Project design components, would reduce potential impacts related to stormwater quality to a less than significant level.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site, including the proposed traffic improvements, is roughly a quarter mile from John Fremont Elementary School, located in the City of Fowler. As discussed above, the Project would comply with regulatory requirements such as potential Hazardous Materials 18 (County of Fresno Department of Public Health 2024)
248
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-35
Management Plans and a SWPPP during construction. With the implementation of said regulatory compliance measures, impacts would be less than significant. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The Project does not involve land that is listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and is not included on a list compiled by the Department of Toxic Substances Control. A search of the DTSC EnviroStor database and the SWRCB Geotracker determined that there are no known active hazardous waste generators or known hazardous material spill sites within the Project site. There would be no impact.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The Project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two (2) miles of an airport.

The Fresno Yosemite International Airport is located approximately nine (9) miles north-northwest, and the Selma Municipal Airport is located approximately four (4) miles south-southeast of the Project.

Construction and implementation of the Project would not be a safety hazard for people working in the area. There would be no impact.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and would not cause any road closures that could interfere with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. The construction contractor would be required to work with the City and County (public works, police/fire, etc.) if and when roadway diversions are required to ensure that adequate access is maintained for residents and emergency vehicles. The Project would also include traffic improvements; however, these improvements are necessary to maintain efficient levels of service and to support the existing circulation system. Accordingly, any impacts would be less than significant. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. According to California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire), the Project is not located within a State Responsibility Area (SRA), meaning CalFire does not assume responsibility for wildfire prevention and protection but is managed at the local level.19 Furthermore, according to CalFire, the proposed Project area is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone, nor is the Project located within a high or moderate fire hazard severity zone.20 Given the absence of wildlands in the vicinity, implementation of the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. There would be no impact. 19 (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2022) 20 (ArcGIS 2023)
249
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-36

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Table 4-20: Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i. result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;
ii. substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
off-site;
iii. create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Baseline Conditions
The San Joaquin River and the Kings River are the two principal drainages within the San Joaquin Valley, and Fowler is generally located approximately 18 miles south of the San Joaquin River and nine miles west of the Kings River.

Fowler lies entirely within the Kings Groundwater Subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin.21 Due to groundwater overdraft and contamination from agricultural chemicals, provision of reliable sources of groundwater in both quantity and quality have been a challenge throughout most of the Central Valley. 21 (California Department of Water Resources 2018)
□ □ K □
□ □ K □
□ □ K □
□ □ K □
□ □ K □
□ □ KI □
□ □ K □
□ □ K □

4.10.1 250
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-37
Water supply is produced from six groundwater wells located throughout the City and distribution is provided by the Water Division of the City’s Public Works Department through a system in which pumps deliver water from beneath the ground to a network of water mains, pipelines, and laterals, which distribute water to residents and businesses. Municipal water is tested monthly to ensure quality.

According to the Annual Water Quality Report (2023), the average depth to groundwater is 85 to 95 feet.22 Fowler is also a member city of South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SKGSA). SKGSA comprises five (5) cities and two (2) community services districts. These public entities formed a joint-powers authority in May 2017 to take on the responsibility of sustainable groundwater management in the portion of the Kings Subbasin underlying the GSA’s boundary. In 2019, Fowler along with the other members of the SKGSA adopted the SKGSA Groundwater Sustainability Plan.

The Project site is located within a 100-year flood zone (see Figure 4-2).

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. Since the Project site is greater than one (1) acre in size, the Project is required to prepare a SWPPP in compliance with the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (i.e., General Permit Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ). The SWPPP estimates the sediment risk associated with construction activities and includes BMPs to control erosion.

BMPs specific to erosion control cover erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management controls.

Implementation of the SWPPP minimizes the potential for the Project to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. These provisions minimize the potential for the Project to violate any waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Further, runoff resulting from the Project would be managed in compliance with the approved grading and drainage plans. Thus, compliance with existing regulations including the General Construction Permit, BMPs, and the Fowler Municipal Code, in addition to approved plans, would reduce potential impacts related to water quality and waste discharge to less than significant levels. b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less than Significant Impact. Groundwater is pumped from the Kings River Basin underground aquifer through six groundwater wells operated by the City of Fowler. As per the Schematic Design Technical Memorandum prepared by for an unrelated Fowler project, the six wells can produce an estimated maximum of 5,735 gpm with maximum production of all six existing wells at about 8.2 million gallons per day (mgd).23 As of the 2020 Census the City had 6,700 residents and pumped an average of 205 gallons per day/per person for all municipal uses, or about 1.4 mgd. That leaves 6.8 mgd remaining well capacity.

As a result, adequate groundwater resources are available to meet the long-term water demand of the City; no surface water would need to be imported. The Project includes the development of industrial uses, consistent with the General Plan. The amount of water required from the Project to serve the site with industrial uses would be less than the amount of water required to serve the site as it exists today with agricultural uses. This would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with 22 (City of Fowler 2023)
23 (Provost and Pritchard 2023)

4.10.2 251
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-38
groundwater recharge. Furthermore, the Project in and of itself would not promote or increase population growth in the area and current water demand would not be substantially increased. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
c) (i - iv) Less than Significant Impact. The Project includes changes to the existing stormwater drainage pattern of the area through the backfilling of the site and installation of impermeable (concrete/asphalt) surfaces and/or structures associated with the future industrial facilities. A stormwater retention basin is proposed and would be designed to adequately handle the amount of runoff generated and would be designed to be above the 100-year base flood elevation. It is not expected that the increase in impermeable surface will substantially alter the drainage pattern of the area. Standard construction practices and compliance with State and federal regulations, City ordinances and regulations, the California Building Code, and adherence to professional engineering design approved by the City of Fowler would reduce or eliminate potential drainage impacts from the Project. Therefore, any impacts resulting from drainage patterns would be less than significant. d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundations?
Less than Significant Impact. As seen in Figure 4-2, a portion of the Project site is located in flood zone.

In order to avoid any impacts related to the release of pollutants, implementation of the aforementioned SWPPP and compliance with the City’s Floodplain Management regulations (Chapter 8 of Title 8 of the Fowler Municipal Code) would ensure that the proper management of potential pollutants is enforced.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project complies with the Fowler General Plan and therefore is not anticipated to conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The Project would not obstruct the implementation of projects adopted in the South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Impacts would be less than significant. 252
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-39
Figure 4-2: FEMA Flood Map
5019C2140H
2/18/2009, 06019C2145H2/18/2009
E Clayton Ave
j "Xt
m™
06019C2143H
2/18/2009
4 Project Site
l Fowler City Limits
Fowler Sphere of Influence
Flood Zone
E Sumner Ave DFIRM Panel Number/Date
100 Year Flood Zone (FEMA DFIRM)
0 500 1,000 FEMAMap PROVOST&
Qi) Feet City of Fowler - Clayton Ave Industrial Subdivision PRITCHARD 253
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-40

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Table 4-21: Land Use and Planning Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
f) Physically divide an established
community?
g) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Baseline Conditions
The Project site is currently located in Fresno County with a zoning designation of AE-20 (Agricultural, 20- acre minimum parcel size). The Project is also located within the City of Fowler’s planning area and has a general plan land use designation of Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential. Fresno County is currently the land use authority for the Project site.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The Project includes annexation of the site from Fresno County to the City of Fowler. The site is located in the northeastern region of the Fowler planning area and once annexed, would be located at the edge of the Fowler city limits. No new barriers would be constructed, and no ROW is proposed to be abandoned. While construction of the Project would require work in the existing ROW for utility lines; it is anticipated that only minor detours to allow vehicles to maneuver around active construction areas would be implemented. Impacts to the ROW would be temporary. Furthermore, construction of the proposed traffic improvements would not result in any impacts to related to this impact question.

Therefore, the Project would have no impact associated with the physical division of established land uses in the community. There would be no impact.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. As part of the Project, the Project site would be prezoned to the M-1 and R-1-6 zone districts.

The proposed prezones would be consistent with the underlying City of Fowler Land Use Diagram as found in the 2040 General Plan.24 Therefore, pursuant to the proposed prezone, the Project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. There would be no impact.

24 (Provost and Pritchard 2023)

4.1 1.1

4.11.2 254
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-41

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Table 4-22: Mineral Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
Baseline Conditions
Fresno County has been a leading producer of minerals because of the abundance and wide variety of mineral resources that are present in the County. These resources include aggregate products (sand and gravel), fossil fuels (oil and coal), metals (chromite, copper, gold, mercury, and tungsten), and other minerals used in construction or industrial applications (asbestos, high-grade clay, diatomite, granite, gypsum, and limestone).25 No active or inactive mines are mapped in the City of Fowler planning area, which includes the Project stie, according to the California Department of Conservation’s Mines Online website.26 The Project lies within a large region that has been classified by California Geological Survey (CGS) as Mineral Resource Zone-3 (MRZ-3), representing an area containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data.

According to the CGS’s Aggregate Sustainability Map, the Project is not within the vicinity of a site being used for aggregate production.27 In addition, California’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources has no record of active or inactive oil or gas wells or petroleum resources on the Project site or in the vicinity.28 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a and b) No Impact. As mentioned, the Project is not within the vicinity of a site being used for aggregate production, nor are there any active or inactive mines in the vicinity. In addition, California’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources has no record of active or inactive oil or gas wells or petroleum resources on the Project site or in the vicinity. The Project lies within a large region that has been classified by CGS as MRZ-3, representing an area containing mineral deposits the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data. However, there are no known current or historic mineral 25 (Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group 2022)
26 (California Department of Conservation 2016)
27 (California Department of Conservation 2018)
28 (California Department of Conservation 2024)
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.12.1 4.12.2
255
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-42
resource extraction or recovery operations in the Project vicinity nor are there any known significant mineral resources onsite. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource since no known mineral resources occur in this area.

Furthermore, the Project area has not been designated as a locally important mineral resource recovery site by a general plan, specific plan, or land use plan. There would be no impact. 256
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-43

4.13 NOISE
Table 4-23: Noise Impacts
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive ground borne
vibration or ground borne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Baseline Conditions
Noise is most often described as unwanted sound. Although sound can be easily measured, the perception of noise and the physical response to sound complicate the analysis of its impact on people. The City of Fowler is impacted by a multitude of noise sources. Principal noise sources include traffic on roadways, agricultural noise, and industrial noise. Mobile sources of noise, especially cars and trucks, are the most common and significant sources of noise in most communities, and they are predominant sources of noise in the City. The Project is located in an area consisting of residential and agricultural uses. The predominant noise sources in the Project site include traffic on local roadways and noise associated with active agriculture surrounding the Project site to the north, east, and west. Sensitive receptors (residences) abut the site to the south.

Applicable Regulations
City of Fowler Noise Ordinance: In addition to General Plan requirements, the City has established a Noise Ordinance in its municipal code. Noise ordinances establish noise limits for which penalties may be imposed or enforcement action may be taken. Therefore, while General Plan limits are to be taken into consideration during the development of a project and may or may not be strictly applied depending on the particular circumstances of the project, a noise ordinance generally must not be exceeded. In preparing a noise element, a city or county must identify local noise sources and analyze and quantify, to the extent practicable, current and projected noise levels for various sources, including highways and freeways; passenger and freight railroad operations; ground rapid transit systems; commercial, general, and military aviation and airport operations; and other ground stationary noise sources.

The Project is subject to the City of Fowler Noise Ordinance, which is covered in Chapter 21, Article 6 of the Municipal Code. It prohibits continued loud noise or noise which disturbs others by placing time constraints on noise producing activities and volume limits on noise amplification devices. □ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.13.1 4.13.2
257
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-44
Construction is specifically addressed in Chapter 21, Article 6, Section 5-21.601(d):

The erection (including excavating), demolition, alteration or repair of any building other than between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., except by special permit issued by the City Manager, Building Official, or City Engineer upon a determination that the public health and safety will not be impaired thereby. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to alter construction hours beyond those set forth in the conditions of approval for a development project.

Furthermore, noise level standards by receiving land use category have been established by the City of Fowler Municipal Code, as illustrated in Table 4-24, below.

Table 4-24: Noise Level Standards
Receiving Land Use Category Time Period Noise Level (dBA) Residential 10:00 p.m.—7:00 a.m. 50
7:00 a.m.—10:00 p.m. 60
Public Uses * 10:00 p.m.—7:00 a.m. 55
7:00 a.m.—10:00 p.m. 60
Commercial 10:00 p.m.—7:00 a.m. 60
7:00 a.m.—10:00 p.m. 65
Industrial Any time 70
* Public uses include schools, libraries, hospitals, churches, and parks.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would involve the construction of traffic control improvements and future industrial uses. The site is located in an area that is dominated by agricultural uses; however, there are single-family residences to the south of the site. The City of Fowler General Plan and the City municipal code establish a range of 50 dBA (A-weighted decibels) to 60 dBA as the normally acceptable exterior noise criteria for urban residential and noise sensitive receptors or public uses.

Activities associated with construction would result in temporary elevated noise levels, with maximum construction noise levels ranging between 74 dBA to 89 dBA at 50 feet distance. Typical construction equipment would include backhoes, tractors, air compressors, scrapers, drills, concrete mixers, and numerous other miscellaneous tools and equipment. Construction of the Project would result in temporary increased noise levels in the immediate vicinity.

As illustrated in Table 4-24 above, typical construction noise levels could range between 74 to 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source, according to criteria from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).29 Implementation of feasible noise control measures, such as the installation of mufflers or engine casing, would result in noise reduction of 5-10 dBA per source. Generally, in accordance with the Fowler Municipal Code, construction would occur between the hours of 7am and 8pm, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Additionally, as required by Section 9-5.1406 of the Fowler Municipal Code, a solid wall or screen six feet in height would be required to be built to buffer any adjoining non-industrial lands. 29 (Federal Highway Administration 2017)

4.13.3 258
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-45
Because of these project features and the fact that construction noise will be temporary in nature, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. The FTA publication concerning noise and vibration impact assessment from transit activities has vibration standards suggestions. Although the FTA guidelines are to be applied to transit activities and construction, they may be reasonably applied to the assessment of the potential for annoyance or structural damage resulting from other activities. To prevent vibration annoyance in residences, a level of 80 VdB (vibration velocity level in dB) or less is suggested when there are fewer than 70 vibration events per day. A level of 100 VdB or less is suggested by the FTA guidelines to prevent damage to fragile buildings. Table 4-25 describes the typical construction equipment vibration levels.

While these construction-related activities would result in ground borne vibration, such ground borne noise or vibration would attenuate rapidly from the source and would not be generally perceptible outside of the construction-related areas. In addition, there would not be any vibrational impacts from operation and maintenance activities.

Table 4-25: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Sources Levels Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Sources
Levels
Equipment PPV at 25 ft, in/sec Approximate Lv* at 25 ft Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drilling 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
*RMS velocity in decibels, VdB re 1 micro-in/sec
Source: (John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 2018) Construction-related activities in general can have the potential to create ground borne vibrations.

However, based on the soil types found in the general Project vicinity, there would not be any blasting or pile-driving in connection with construction of the Project. Therefore, the potential for ground borne vibrations to occur as part of construction-related activities of the Project would not be significant.

Additionally, operation of the Project would not contain any activities that would create excessive ground borne vibrations. The Project would not result in exposure of persons to, or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport.

The Fresno Yosemite International Airport is located approximately nine miles north-northwest and the Selma Municipal Airport is located approximately four miles south-southeast of the Project. There would be no impact.
259
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-46

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Table 4-26: Population and Housing Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Baseline Conditions
The Project is located in Fresno County, within the planning area of the City of Fowler and unincorporated Fresno County. The City of Fowler planning area contains all the lands located in the Fowler’s city limits, it’s sphere of influence (SOI), and additional lands beyond Fowler’s SOI. As of 2022, Fresno County, which includes both unincorporated and incorporated areas, had a total population of 1,011,499.30 The unincorporated area makes up for 158,846 of the total population in Fresno County.31 As of 2022, the City of Fowler had a total population of 7,168.32 Unincorporated Fresno County maintains an average of 3.0 persons per household and 57,924 total housing units, while the City of Fowler maintains an average of 3.1 persons per household and 2,237 total housing units.33
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. The Project would not increase population or propose new homes. The Project would develop an industrial subdivision that would be developed internally with new roads that would connect to Clayton Avenue for access (see Figure 2-2). In addition to the development of new roads, wet and dry utility infrastructure would be constructed in the right of way of the new roads and would ultimately connect to the existing infrastructure surrounding the site. While the Project would propose the extension of roads and other infrastructure, they would not support residential development. Therefore, the Project would not induce population growth directly or indirectly. There would be no impact. 30 (Fresno Council of Governments 2023)
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid.
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.14.1 4.14.2
260
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-47
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Project site is primarily farmland; however, there is one single-family residence located at the northeastern corner of the Project site. As part of the Project, a 14.39-acre portion of the Project site, which includes the residence, would be prezoned to the R-1-6 zone district, which allows one dwelling unit per 7,000 square feet of land. In addition, this 14.39-acre area would be designated as a remainder on the proposed subdivision map and therefore would not be a part of the proposed subdivision and would be further analyzed in the future if and when an additional tentative map is placed on the property. Additionally, the residence would not be removed, and the site is being prezoned as residential in order for it to remain with a legal, conforming status with the City of Fowler. Therefore, the Project would not displace existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. There would be no impact.
261
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-48

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Table 4-27: Public Services
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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 any of the public services:
i. Fire protection?
ii. Police protection?
iii. Schools?
iv. Parks?
v. Other public facilities?
Baseline Conditions
Fire Protection: The City of Fowler contracts with the Fresno County Fire Protection District for primary fire protection within the city limits. The nearest Fresno County Fire Protection District station, Fresno County Fire Station 89 is located approximately 4.9 miles west-northwest of the Project site.

Police Protection: The Fowler Police Department, located 0.6 miles southeast of the Project site, provides 24-hour policing services within the city limits.

Schools: John Fremont Elementary School is the nearest school to the Project site, located approximately a quarter-mile south.

Parks: The City of Fowler has four designated City Parks, all of which are managed by the City’s Department of Recreation. Panzak Park is the nearest park to the Project site, located approximately 0.5 miles southeast.

Library: The Fowler branch of the Fresno County Public Library is located 0.8 miles south of the Project site.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire Protection:

Less than Significant Impact. The Project would be served by the City of Fowler by way of the Fresno County Fire Protection District. The Project would be subject to the development impact fees for

4.15.2 262
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-49
construction and acquisition costs for improvements to fire protection services and facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project can be served by existing facilities and would not result in the need for new or altered facilities Impacts would be less than significant. ii. Police Protection:

Less than Significant Impact. The Project would be served by the Fowler Police Department. The Project would be subject to the development impact fees for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to police protection services and facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project can be served by existing facilities and would not result in the need for new or altered facilities Impacts would be less than significant.
iii. Schools:

No Impact. The Project proposes an industrial subdivision and would not result in a net increase in the area population. The Project would include land pre-zoned for residential development; however, this area would not be included as a part of the proposed subdivision and would be subject to its own environmental analysis once/if it is further subdivided in the future. Thus, because of the nature of the Project and the characteristics of the area (i.e., industrial), there would be no increased demand for existing schools and the Project would thereby not result in adverse physical impacts or the need for altered or new facilities. Therefore, there would be no impact. iv. Parks:

No Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from proposed residential development. As mentioned above, the portion of the Project site proposed to be pre-zoned to the R-1-6 zone district would require its own environmental analysis upon future subdivision unrelated to the Project. As the Project proposes industrial use, it can be presumed that it would not result in a net increase in the area population. Thus, because of the nature of the Project and the characteristics of the area (i.e., industrial), there would be no increased demand for existing neighborhood and regional parks, or other associated with the Project and the Project would thereby not result in adverse physical impacts or the need for altered or new facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project. v. Other public facilities:

No Impact. As discussed throughout this section, the Project would not result in an increase in residents that would require other public services such as libraries or post offices. Therefore, the Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities to provide other public services and no impact would occur as a result of the Project.
263
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-50

4.16 RECREATION
Table 4-28: Recreation Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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 accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Baseline Conditions
There are currently four City Parks in Fowler, all of which are administered by the Department of Parks and Recreation. Panzak Park covers an area of approximately 2.5 acres and includes a covered picnic area, large shade trees, playground equipment, and tennis courts. The recently developed Donny Wright Park covers an area of approximately six acres and includes an expanse of irrigated lawn and trails for recreation.

Margaret Cowings Park is an approximate 0.05-acre pocket park comprised of irrigated lawn and shade trees on the corner of Merced Street and Sixth Street in downtown Fowler. Also considered a City Park, the Fowler Veteran’s Monument covers an area of approximately 0.10 acres and includes benches on paved surfaces, a scenic fountain, several flag poles, ornamental hedges, and rose gardens. There are no State or regional parks within the planning area.

In addition to the four City Parks mentioned above, the City of Fowler also operates the Edwin Blayney Senior Center, which offers a meeting place and specialized recreation opportunities for senior citizens.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. As the Project proposes to develop a 44-unit industrial subdivision, there is no anticipation that the Project would result in the increase in use of existing parks or other recreational facilities.

Therefore, the Project would not result in the physical deterioration of any such facilities. There would be no impact.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The Project would not include or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. As mentioned, the Project would develop an industrial subdivision. The subdivision would not include any temporary or permanent residences that would accommodate inhabitants that could require additional facilities. While the Project would also include the annexation of land planned for residential □ □ □
□ □ □

4.16.1 4.16.2
264
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-51
use, there would not be residential development proposed as part of the Project. Development of the proposed residential land would be carried out at a later time and would warrant its own environmental review separate from the Project. Therefore, there would be no impact. 265
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-52

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4-29: Transportation Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Baseline Conditions
The Project is located in Fresno County just north of the City of Fowler. The Project site is bordered to the north by East Clayton Avenue, to the west by Golden State Boulevard, and to the east by North Fowler Avenue. The southern end of the Project site fronts a residential neighborhood. Access to the Project site would be provided at East Clayton Avenue between Golden State Boulevard and North Fowler Avenue. At the south end of the Project, Lynn Avenue dead ends at the south property line.

A Traffic Impact Study was prepared for the Project and can be found at the end of this document as Appendix D.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with a plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. A Traffic Study was prepared for the Project and recommended that several street intersections be upgraded in the future to satisfy the street circulation flow requirements of the 2040 Fowler General Plan, which are included in the project and can be seen in more detail in Section

2.1.6. These improvements include widening roads, adding turning lanes, and developing traffic signals to reduce any impacts that the Project may have on the existing circulation system. The Project would also be required to construct its fair share of Clayton Avenue right-of-way and provide for connections to the adjacent undeveloped land to the south. The Project would not conflict with plans, ordinances, and policies addressing the circulation system. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. The City has designated the site as Light Industrial and Medium Low Density Residential in the recently adopted General Plan and, associated with adoption of the General Plan and certification of the General Plan EIR, determined that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) would not result in a significant impact. According to the General Plan EIR, neither VMT per capita or per employee would □ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.17.1 4.17.2
266
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-53
exceed the adopted thresholds. Therefore, as identified in the General Plan, the Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 subdivision (b). No further analysis is necessary.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project will introduce six new local streets which will connect onto the City’s existing collector street system at Armstrong Avenue on the west border of the subdivision. The Project will introduce additional local streets consistent with the City’s Circulation Element. All roads will be built according to City of Fowler Street Design Standards. All rights-of-way proposed within the subdivision will be designed and constructed to meet City of Fowler Standard Specifications. The Project would not increase hazards due to Project design features or through the introduction of incompatible land uses into the existing community. There would be a less than significant impact d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. The Project shall comply with all emergency access laws determined by federal, State, and local regulations. The proposed street layouts within the subdivision and all right-ofway improvements along major street frontages would be constructed to provide adequate emergency access. The Project would comply with the City of Fowler General Plan. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact on emergency access.
267
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-54

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Table 4-30: Tribal Cultural Resources Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in the local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
ii. 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.

Baseline Conditions
Penutian-speaking Yokuts tribal groups occupied the southern San Joaquin Valley region and much of the nearby Sierra Nevada. For a variety of historical reasons, existing research information emphasizes the central Yokuts tribes who occupied both the valley and particularly the foothills of the Sierra. The northernmost tribes suffered from the influx of Euro-Americans during the Gold Rush and their populations were in substantial decline by the time ethnographic studies began in the early twentieth century. In contrast, the southernmost tribes were partially removed by the Spanish to missions and eventually absorbed into multi-tribal communities on the Sebastian Indian Reservation (on Tejon Ranch), and later the Tule River Reservation and Santa Rosa Rancheria to the north, as well as other reservations in the foothills and Sierras. The result is an unfortunate scarcity of ethnographic detail on valley tribes, especially in relation to the rich information collected from the central foothills tribes where native speakers of the Yokuts dialects are still found. Regardless, the general details of indigenous life-ways were similar across the broad expanse of Yokuts territory, particularly in terms of environmentally influenced subsistence and adaptation and with regard to religion and belief, which were similar everywhere. □ □ □
□ □ □

4.18.1 268
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-55
Although population estimates vary and population size was greatly affected by the introduction of EuroAmerican diseases and social disruption, the Yokuts were one of the largest, most successful groups in Native California. It is estimated that the Yokuts region contained 27 percent of the aboriginal population in the state at the time of contact; other estimates are even higher. Many Yokut descendants continue to live in Fresno County, either on tribal reservations, or in local towns and communities.

Records Search
An archival records search was conducted at the California State University, Bakersfield, SSJVIC, in September 2024, to determine: (i) if prehistoric or historical cultural resources had previously been recorded within the area of potential effect; (ii) if the Project area had been systematically surveyed by archaeologists prior to the initiation of this field study; and/or (iii) whether the region of the Project was known to contain archaeological sites and to thereby be archaeologically sensitive. (Appendix C) According to the records search results, no previous studies have been conducted in the Project area, and no resources of any kind are known to exist within it. (Appendix C).

Assembly Bill 52
Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, et seq. [codification of Assembly Bill (AB) 52, 2013-14)] requires that a lead agency, within fourteen (14) days of determining that it will undertake a project, must notify in writing any California Native American Tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the project if that Tribe has previously requested notification about projects in that geographic area. The notice must briefly describe the project and inquire whether the Tribe wishes to initiate request formal consultation. Tribes have 30 days from receipt of notification to request formal consultation. The lead agency then has 30 days to initiate the consultation, which then continues until the parties come to an agreement regarding necessary mitigation or agree that no mitigation is needed, or one or both parties determine that negotiation occurred in good faith, but no agreement will be made.

The City has received written correspondence from the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1 requesting notification of proposed projects. On October 24, 2024, the City sent a letter, via certified mail, to the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe notifying them of the Project. To date, a response has not been received by the Santa Rosa Rancheria Tachi Yokut Tribe.

Regulatory Setting
The following Fowler General Policies would apply to the Project:
o Policy CDES-12: All construction shall cease, and the Community Development Director and City Engineer shall be notified immediately if any prehistoric, archaeological, or fossil artifact or resource is uncovered during construction. All construction shall immediately stop and an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in prehistoric or historical archaeology shall be retained, at the applicant’s and/or successors-ininterest’s expense, to evaluate the find(s) and recommend appropriate action according to Section 15064.5 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. If avoidance is infeasible, other appropriate measures would be instituted. Work may proceed on other parts of the project subject to direction of the archaeologist while assessment of historic resources or unique archaeological resources is being carried out.
o Policy CDES-13: All construction shall cease if any human remains are uncovered, and the Community Development Director, City Engineer and Fresno County Medical Examiner and Coroner shall be notified in accordance to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.

4.18.2 269
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-56
If human remains are determined to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted, and the procedures outlined in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15064.5(e) shall be followed.

Impact Assessment
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in the local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant Impact. No requests for tribal consultation for the Project have been received. In addition, the NAHC Sacred Lands File search results confirmed there were no recorded tribal cultural resources in the Project area. In the unlikely event that an archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, tribal in relation or not, all construction would cease, and a qualified archaeologist would be contacted to assess the resource. The Project would adhere to all applicable federal, State, and local requirements in regard to tribal cultural resources. General Plan Policies CDES-12 and CDES-13 described above, which are imposed as general conditions of approval, would ensure that potential impacts related to historic resources are less than significant.

4.18.3 270
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-57

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Table 4-31: Utilities and Service Systems Impacts
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Baseline Conditions
The Project is located in Fresno County just north and adjacent to the City of Fowler. Lands within the unincorporated part of Fresno County rely on private wells for water and individual septic systems for sewage services. The subdivision area is planted with vineyards that are generally irrigated by drip, which is assumed to have a water consumption rate of 2.4 acre-feet per acre.34 The City of Fowler relies on groundwater pumped by City-owned wells to serve its residents. Sanitary sewer service is provided by SKFCSD and solid waste services are provided by Waste Management. Solid waste within Fresno County is transferred to the American Avenue Landfill in Kerman, CA, approximately 25 miles northwest of the Project site.

Impact Analysis
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? 34 (United States Department of Agriculture 2023)
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.19.1 4.19.2
271
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-58
Less than Significant Impact. Upon development, the Project would connect to the City’s sanitary sewer system. According to District staff, the SKFCSD Treatment Plant has a capacity of 8.0 (mgd) with existing flows of 4.2 mgd (52.5% of capacity). By 2025, the SKFCSD Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects total flow at 5.71 mgd (71% of capacity). The Project is anticipated to generate approximately 1,290 gallons per day per acre, or approximately 0.04 mgd.35 Thus it is anticipated that the Project can be served by the SKFCSD Treatment Plant, and no new facilities would be needed.

Sewer infrastructure plans must be submitted to the District, including detailed floor and plumbing plans.

All sewer system facilities must be designed and constructed in accordance with the District’s Collection System Construction Standards, the District’s Sewer System Master Plan, and other requirements as may be specified by the District.

Expansion plans for a wastewater treatment plant are generally required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board when 70% of design capacity is reached. This threshold is not expected at the SKFCSD plant until after 2025. The District, however, is currently updating its Master Plan to include provisions for longterm expansion of the plant and will make interim improvements (such as refurbishing aerators, basin improvements, fleet replacements, etc.) in conformance with the 10-year CIP.

In accordance with Policy PF-17 of the City, the developer would be responsible for planning and installing wastewater collection and water delivery facilities as determined by the City Engineer. In addition, the developer would pay current development fees to off-set potential impacts to these facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

The Fowler General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan may require new or expanded water facilities to serve development within the SOI. The Project site is proposed for industrial and residential uses, consistent with the General Plan designation. Based on this consistency, the Project would not result in the need for new or expanded water facilities as a result of its development. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? No Impact. As discussed in Impact Analysis “b” of Section 4.10, the City has 6.8 mgd of remaining well capacity. As a result, adequate groundwater resources are available to meet the long-term water demand of the City; no surface water would need to be imported. The Project includes the development of industrial uses, consistent with the General Plan. The amount of water required from the Project to serve the site with industrial uses would be less than the amount of water required to serve the site as it exists today with agricultural uses, as typical industrial uses consume approximately 2.07 acre-feet per acre. 36 Since the City of Fowler has the same water source as the existing site, and would use less water than the existing on-site use, the Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. The Project would have sufficient water supplies to be served, including reasonably foreseeable future development, during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. There would be no impact.
35 (Akel Engineering 2020)
36 Ibid.
272
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-59
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed above in Impact Analysis “a”, the SKF County Sanitation District Treatment Plant has a capacity of 8.0 mgd with existing flows of 4.2 mgd (52.5% of capacity). By 2025, the SKFCSD CIP projects total flow at 5.71 mgd (71% of capacity). The Treatment Plant can adequately handle the Project’s wastewater generation. It is anticipated that the Project can be served by the SKFCSD Treatment Plant, and no new facilities would be needed. Furthermore, the developer would pay current development fees to off-set potential impacts to these facilities. These fees would go towards future facility upgrades that may be needed as development occurs throughout the City. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
d) and e) Less than Significant Impact. Project construction would generate minimal amounts of solid waste, which has to comply with construction debris recycling requirements. Operation of subsequent industrial developments would generate solid waste, and comply with state and local regulations regarding recycling, composting, and solid waste diversion requirements. The proposed road improvements would not generate any solid waste during operation. Therefore, the Project would comply with all federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste during construction. Any impact would be less than significant. 273
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-60

4.20 WILDFIRE
Table 4-32: Wildfire Impacts
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified
as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
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 uncontrollable spread of wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
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?
Baseline Conditions
The Project site is located in Fresno County, inside the planning area of the City of Fowler. As mentioned in Section 4.15, the Project site would be served by Fresno County Fire Protection District for its fire protection needs. The site itself is in a agriculturally area with various row crops planted throughout the 45 acres it encompasses. Lands surrounding the site are similar in development.

According to CalFire, the Project is not located within an SRA, meaning CalFire does not assume responsibility for wildfire prevention and protection but is managed at the local level.37 Furthermore, according to CalFire, the proposed Project area is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone, nor is the proposed Project located within a high or moderate fire hazard severity zone.38 Impact Analysis
a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and 37 (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2022) 38 (ArcGIS 2023)
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □
□ □ □

4.20.1 4.20.2
274
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-61
thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project 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? d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project 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? a) - d) No Impact. The Project area is located in a section of Fresno County that has not been designated as either a very high fire hazard severity zone or an SRA. Therefore, further analysis is not required and there would be no impact.
275
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-62

4.21 CEQA MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Table 4-33: CEQA Mandatory Findings of Significance
Does the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Statement of Findings
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The analysis conducted in this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration results in a determination that the Project, with incorporation of mitigation measures, will have a less than significant effect on the environment. The potential for impacts related to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions from the implementation of the Project will be less than significant with the incorporation of the mitigation measures discussed in Chapter 5 Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program. One mitigation measure related to Air Quality is annotated as AIR1, which requires that construction of the subdivision and the buildings within shall utilize EPA Tier 4 Final engines or EPA Tier 3 engines with Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filter. The use of Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters would reduce construction DPM emissions by approximately 75%, and presumably the cancer risk associated with construction would too fall by 75%, which would be sufficient to comply with Air District thresholds. Mitigation measures related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions include GHG-1 and GHG-2. GHG1 requires that buildings in the subdivision shall be constructed with electrically-powered appliances and building mechanical equipment in place of natural-gas fueled equipment. □ KI □ □
1 1 K □ 1 |

4.21.1 276
Section , Item D
Chapter 4: Environmental Impact Analysis
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 4-63
GHG-2 requires that off-street parking in the subdivision shall exceed the California Green Building Standard Code Tier 2 requirements for electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Accordingly, with the inclusion of said mitigation measures, the Project would involve no potential for significant impacts through the degradation of the quality of the environment, the reduction in the habitat or population of fish or wildlife, including endangered plants or animals, the elimination of a plant or animal community or example of a major period of California history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) States that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. The Project would not result in direct or indirect unplanned population growth. Furthermore, potentially significant impacts of the Project would be reduced to a less than significant level following implementation of mitigation measures AIR-1, GHG-1, and GHG-2. Presumably, previously completed projects have also implemented mitigation as necessary.

Accordingly, the Project would not otherwise combine with impacts of related development to add considerably to any cumulative impacts in the Project region. With the inclusion of said mitigation, the Project would not have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the Project would have a less than cumulatively considerable impact with implementation of mitigation measures.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes an industrial subdivision, traffic signal improvements, and the annexation of the Project property into the City of Fowler. The Project in and of itself would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Construction-related air quality/dust exposure impacts could occur temporarily as a result of Project construction. Industrial facilities may handle hazardous materials but would require to prepare and implement a Hazard Material Business Plan, the implementation of which is monitored by the County of Fresno. However, implementation of basic regulatory requirements identified in this IS/MND and mitigation measures referenced above would ensure that impacts are less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not have any direct or indirect adverse impacts on humans. This impact would be less than significant.

277
Section , Item D
Chapter 5: Mitigation, Monitoring, & Reporting Program
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 5-1
CHAPTER 5 MITIGATION,

MONITORING, AND REPORTING

PROGRAM
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been formulated based upon the findings of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Project. The MMRP lists mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND for the Project and identifies monitoring and reporting requirements.

Table 5-1: Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program presents the mitigation measures identified for the Project. Each mitigation measure is numbered with a symbol indicating the topical section to which it pertains, a hyphen, and the impact number. For example, AIR-2 would be the second mitigation measure identified in the Air Quality analysis of the IS/MND.

The first column of Table 5-1: Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program identifies the mitigation measure. The second column, entitled “When Monitoring is to Occur,” identifies the time the mitigation measure should be initiated. The third column, “Frequency of Monitoring,” identifies the frequency of the monitoring of the mitigation measure. The fourth column, “Agency Responsible for Monitoring,” names the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. The last columns will be used by the Lead and Responsible Agencies to ensure that individual mitigation measures have been complied with and monitored
278
Section , Item D
Chapter 5: Mitigation, Monitoring, & Reporting Program
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 5-2
Table 5-1: Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
Item Mitigation Measure When Monitoring is
to Occur
Frequency of
Monitoring
Agency
Responsible for
Monitoring
Method to
Verify
Compliance
Verification of
Compliance
Air Quality
AIR-1 Construction of the subdivision and the buildings within shall utilize EPA Tier 4 Final engines or EPA
Tier 3 engines with Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters.

During construction During
construction Subdivider Rule 9510 Application
Biological Resources
BIO-1 Nesting Bird Avoidance: Project activities should occur, if feasible, between September 16 and
January 31 (outside of the nesting bird season) to
avoid impacts to nesting birds.

During construction During
construction Subdivider Report
BIO-2 Migratory Nesting Bird Pre-Activity Survey: If Project activities must occur within the migratory bird
nesting season (February 1 to September 15), a
qualified biologist should complete a pre-activity
survey for active nests within five (5) calendar days
prior to the start of Project activities. The survey
should be completed within the Project site, and all
accessible lands up to 100 feet outside of the Project
site for nesting migratory birds and up to 500 feet
outside of the Project site for nesting raptors. Raptor nests would be considered “active” upon the nestbuilding stage. If no active nests are observed, the Project may proceed. The biologist should also
conduct a one-time take avoid-ance preconstruction survey for Swainson’s hawk nests onsite and within a 0.5-mile radius. This one time
take avoidance survey will be conducted in
accordance with the Recommended Timing and
Meth-odology for Swainson's Hawk Nesting Surveys
in California's Central Valley (Swainson's Hawk
Technical Advisory Committee 2000), or current
guidance.

Within five calendar
days prior to the start
of construction
Once Subdivider Report
BIO-3 Nesting Bird Avoidance Buffers: On discovery of any active nests or breeding colonies near work areas, a
qualified biologist should determine appropriate
avoidance buffer distances based on applicable
Upon discovery of any
active nests or
breeding colonies
During
construction Subdivider Report
279
Section , Item D
Chapter 5: Mitigation, Monitoring, & Reporting Program
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 5-3
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
Item Mitigation Measure When Monitoring is
to Occur
Frequency of
Monitoring
Agency
Responsible for
Monitoring
Method to
Verify
Compliance
Verification of
Compliance
CDFW and/or USFWS guidelines, the biology of the
species, conditions of the nest(s), and the level of
Project disturbance. If needed, avoidance buffers
should be identified with flagging, fencing, or other
easily visible means, and should be maintained until
the biologist has determined that the nestlings have
fledged.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1 Buildings in the subdivision shall be
constructed with electrically-powered
appliances and building mechanical equipment
in place of natural-gas fueled equipment.

During construction During
construction Subdivider Building plans
GHG-2 Off-street parking in the subdivision shall
exceed the California Green Building Standard
Code Tier 2 requirements for electric vehicle
charging infrastructure.

During construction During
construction Subdivider Building plans
280
Section , Item D
Chapter 6: References
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 6-1
CHAPTER 6 REFERENCES
Akel Engineering. 2020. "Water and Wastewater Unit Factor Update for Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan Update."
ArcGIS. 2023. Is Your Home in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone? https://www.arcgis.com/apps/Styler/index.html?appid=5e96315793d445419b6c96f89ce5d153.

Calfornia Department of Conservation. 2020. Important Farmland Categories. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx.

California Department of Conservation. 2018. "California Geological Survey - Aggregate Sustainability in California." https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/MapSheets/MS_052_California_Aggregates_Map_201807.pdf. —. 2023. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. —. 2016. Mines Online. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html. —. 2024. Oil & Gas Well Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/. —. 2024. Well Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2024. California Natural Diversity Database. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2022. California State Responsibility Areas. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=5ac1dae3cb2544629a845d9a19e83 991.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2024. California Department of Toxic Substances Control EnviroStor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/.

California Department of Transportation. 2023. California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2e921695c43643b1aaf7000dfcc199

83. California Department of Water Resources. 2018. DWR Groundwater Basin Boundary Assessment Tool. https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bbat/.

California State Geoportal. 2022. CGS Seismic Hazards Program: Liquefaction Zones. February 11. https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/cadoc::cgs-seismic-hazards-program-liquefaction-zones1/explore?location=36.619171%2C-119.721226%2C9.55.

City of Fowler. 2023. "Annual Water Quality Report." Fowler. https://fowlercity.org/wpcontent/uploads/2024/06/Annual-Water-Quality-Report-2023.pdf.

County of Fresno Department of Public Health. 2024. "Hazardous Materials Business Plans." https://www.fresnocountyca.gov/Departments/Public-Health/Environmental-Health/HazardousMaterials-Business-Plans. 281
Section , Item D
Chapter 6: References
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 6-2
Federal Highway Administration . 2017. Construction Noise Handbook. Accessed April 2023. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook09.cfm.

Fresno Council of Governments. 2023. "Fresno Multi-Jurisdictional 2023-2031 Housing Element HCD Review Draft." https://www.fresnocountyca.gov/files/assets/county/v/1/2023- 2031_mjhe_regional_fresnocounty.pdf.

Harden, D.R. 1998. California Geology. Prentice Hall.

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. 2018. "FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual ." https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf.

Municode Codification. 2024. Fowler, CA Municipal Code Section 9-5.1402. https://library.municode.com/ca/fowler/codes/zoning?nodeId=ZONING_ORDINANCE_ART14- LINDI_9-5.1402SPPRDEST.
—. 2024. Fowler, CA Municipal Code Section 9-5.1406.
https://library.municode.com/ca/fowler/codes/zoning?nodeId=ZONING_ORDINANCE_ART14- LINDI_9-5.1402SPPRDEST.

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group. 2022. "City of Fowler 2040 General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report." Draft Environmental Impact Report, Fowler. https://fowlercity.org/wpcontent/uploads/2022/12/Fowler-General-Plan-DEIR_Combined-II.pdf.

Provost and Pritchard. 2023. "City of Fowler, Well No. 9 Schematic Design Technical Memorandum." 49.

Accessed July 2023.

State of California. 2024. State Water Resources Control Board Geo Tracker. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.

The County of Fresno Department of Agriculture and Weights and Measures. 2024. "2023 Crop Report." https://www.fresnocountyca.gov/files/sharedassets/county/v/1/agricultural-commissioner/agcrop-reports/2023-ag-crop-report.pdf.

United States Department of Agriculture. 2023. "2022 Census of Agriculture, 2023 Irrigation and Water Management Survey."
—. 2024. Web Soil Survey. Accessed January 29, 2024.
https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.

United States Fish & Wildlife Service. 2022. Environmental Conservation Online System. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/.
282
Section , Item D
Appendices
Tentative Map No. 6471
February 2025 A-1
Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files
283
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
1 / 57
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.2. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
284
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
2 / 57

3.4. Grading (2025) - Mitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.6. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.8. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated

3.10. Paving (2026) - Mitigated

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

3.12. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.1.2. Mitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated 285 Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
3 / 57

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.3.2. Mitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.4.2. Mitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.5.2. Mitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.6.2. Mitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.7.2. Mitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment 286
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
4 / 57

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.2.2. Mitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.3.2. Mitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.9.2. Mitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths 287
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
5 / 57

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.1.2. Mitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.10.4. Landscape Equipment - Mitigated

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.11.2. Mitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.12.2. Mitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.13.2. Mitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.14.2. Mitigated

8. User Changes to Default Data 288
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
6 / 57

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Clayton Avenue Tentative Map
Construction Start Date 1/1/2025
Operational Year 2025
Lead Agency City of Fowler
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.70
Precipitation (days) 25.4
Location 36.640257631018144, -119.68908606371927
County Fresno
City Unincorporated
Air District San Joaquin Valley APCD
Air Basin San Joaquin Valley
TAZ 2535
EDFZ 5
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.29

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Industrial Park 392 1000sqft 9.00 392,000 0.00 — — —
289
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
7 / 57
Parking Lot 22.0 Acre 22.0 0.00 143,487 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector Sector # Measure Title
Construction C-6 Use Diesel Particulate Filters

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 104 104 12.2 19.8 0.03 0.44 1.11 1.55 0.41 0.27 0.68 — 4,241 4,241 0.15 0.19 5.93 4,306 Mit. 104 104 12.2 19.8 0.03 0.08 1.11 1.19 0.07 0.27 0.34 — 4,241 4,241 0.15 0.19 5.93 4,306 %
Reduced
— — — — — 83% — 24% 83% — 50% — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.01 3.38 31.7 30.7 0.06 1.37 7.76 9.13 1.26 3.96 5.22 — 6,706 6,706 0.27 0.19 0.15 6,731 Mit. 4.01 3.38 31.7 30.7 0.06 0.20 7.76 7.97 0.19 3.96 4.15 — 6,706 6,706 0.27 0.19 0.15 6,731 %
Reduced
— — — — — 85% — 13% 85% — 20% — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 6.77 6.65 11.0 14.7 0.02 0.42 1.21 1.63 0.38 0.40 0.79 — 3,250 3,250 0.12 0.12 1.54 3,290 Mit. 6.77 6.65 11.0 14.7 0.02 0.07 1.21 1.28 0.06 0.40 0.47 — 3,250 3,250 0.12 0.12 1.54 3,290 290
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
8 / 57
%
Reduced
— — — — — 84% — 21% 84% — 41% — — — — — — —
Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.24 1.21 2.00 2.68 < 0.005 0.08 0.22 0.30 0.07 0.07 0.14 — 538 538 0.02 0.02 0.25 545 Mit. 1.24 1.21 2.00 2.68 < 0.005 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.07 0.09 — 538 538 0.02 0.02 0.25 545 %
Reduced
— — — — — 84% — 21% 84% — 41% — — — — — — —

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.16 1.88 12.2 19.8 0.03 0.44 1.11 1.55 0.41 0.27 0.68 — 4,241 4,241 0.15 0.19 5.93 4,306 2026 104 104 11.5 19.2 0.03 0.39 1.11 1.50 0.36 0.27 0.63 — 4,204 4,204 0.15 0.19 5.33 4,268 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 4.01 3.38 31.7 30.7 0.06 1.37 7.76 9.13 1.26 3.96 5.22 — 6,706 6,706 0.27 0.19 0.15 6,731 2026 1.94 1.69 11.7 18.1 0.03 0.39 1.11 1.50 0.36 0.27 0.63 — 4,096 4,096 0.15 0.19 0.14 4,155 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.71 1.47 11.0 14.7 0.02 0.42 1.21 1.63 0.38 0.40 0.79 — 3,250 3,250 0.12 0.12 1.54 3,290 2026 6.77 6.65 5.34 8.38 0.01 0.18 0.48 0.66 0.17 0.12 0.28 — 1,848 1,848 0.07 0.08 0.99 1,875 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.31 0.27 2.00 2.68 < 0.005 0.08 0.22 0.30 0.07 0.07 0.14 — 538 538 0.02 0.02 0.25 545 2026 1.24 1.21 0.98 1.53 < 0.005 0.03 0.09 0.12 0.03 0.02 0.05 — 306 306 0.01 0.01 0.16 310 291
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
9 / 57

2.3. Construction Emissions by Year, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 2.16 1.88 12.2 19.8 0.03 0.08 1.11 1.19 0.07 0.27 0.34 — 4,241 4,241 0.15 0.19 5.93 4,306 2026 104 104 11.5 19.2 0.03 0.07 1.11 1.18 0.06 0.27 0.33 — 4,204 4,204 0.15 0.19 5.33 4,268 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 4.01 3.38 31.7 30.7 0.06 0.20 7.76 7.97 0.19 3.96 4.15 — 6,706 6,706 0.27 0.19 0.15 6,731 2026 1.94 1.69 11.7 18.1 0.03 0.07 1.11 1.18 0.06 0.27 0.33 — 4,096 4,096 0.15 0.19 0.14 4,155 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 1.71 1.47 11.0 14.7 0.02 0.07 1.21 1.28 0.06 0.40 0.47 — 3,250 3,250 0.12 0.12 1.54 3,290 2026 6.77 6.65 5.34 8.38 0.01 0.03 0.48 0.51 0.03 0.12 0.14 — 1,848 1,848 0.07 0.08 0.99 1,875 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.31 0.27 2.00 2.68 < 0.005 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.07 0.09 — 538 538 0.02 0.02 0.25 545 2026 1.24 1.21 0.98 1.53 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.03 — 306 306 0.01 0.01 0.16 310

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 18.4 17.5 11.8 76.4 0.16 0.45 10.0 10.5 0.44 2.54 2.98 436 24,206 24,642 45.8 1.32 147 26,329 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
292
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
10 / 57
Unmit. 14.7 14.0 12.7 47.5 0.14 0.42 10.0 10.5 0.42 2.54 2.96 436 22,981 23,417 45.9 1.37 103 25,075 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 16.3 15.5 12.3 57.2 0.15 0.44 9.87 10.3 0.43 2.50 2.93 436 23,342 23,777 45.8 1.35 122 25,446 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.97 2.83 2.24 10.4 0.03 0.08 1.80 1.88 0.08 0.46 0.53 72.1 3,864 3,937 7.59 0.22 20.1 4,213

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.86 5.44 7.43 55.8 0.13 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 13,312 13,312 0.43 0.78 45.2 13,599 Area 12.1 11.8 0.14 17.0 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 70.1 70.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 70.4 Energy 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 10,622 10,622 1.35 0.12 — 10,692 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 174 202 376 17.8 0.43 — 949 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 262 0.00 262 26.2 0.00 — 917 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 102 102
Total 18.4 17.5 11.8 76.4 0.16 0.45 10.0 10.5 0.44 2.54 2.98 436 24,206 24,642 45.8 1.32 147 26,329 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.19 4.75 8.48 44.0 0.12 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 12,156 12,156 0.50 0.82 1.17 12,416 Area 9.03 9.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 10,622 10,622 1.35 0.12 — 10,692 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 174 202 376 17.8 0.43 — 949 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 262 0.00 262 26.2 0.00 — 917 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 102 102
293
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
11 / 57
Total 14.7 14.0 12.7 47.5 0.14 0.42 10.0 10.5 0.42 2.54 2.96 436 22,981 23,417 45.9 1.37 103 25,075 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.27 4.85 7.97 45.3 0.12 0.10 9.87 9.97 0.10 2.50 2.60 — 12,483 12,483 0.46 0.80 19.5 12,752 Area 10.5 10.4 0.07 8.41 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 34.6 34.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.7 Energy 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 10,622 10,622 1.35 0.12 — 10,692 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 174 202 376 17.8 0.43 — 949 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 262 0.00 262 26.2 0.00 — 917 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 102 102
Total 16.3 15.5 12.3 57.2 0.15 0.44 9.87 10.3 0.43 2.50 2.93 436 23,342 23,777 45.8 1.35 122 25,446 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.96 0.88 1.46 8.27 0.02 0.02 1.80 1.82 0.02 0.46 0.47 — 2,067 2,067 0.08 0.13 3.23 2,111 Area 1.92 1.90 0.01 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.72 5.72 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.74 Energy 0.08 0.04 0.77 0.64 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,759 1,759 0.22 0.02 — 1,770 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 28.8 33.5 62.2 2.95 0.07 — 157 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 43.4 0.00 43.4 4.33 0.00 — 152 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 16.9 16.9
Total 2.97 2.83 2.24 10.4 0.03 0.08 1.80 1.88 0.08 0.46 0.53 72.1 3,864 3,937 7.59 0.22 20.1 4,213

2.6. Operations Emissions by Sector, Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.86 5.44 7.43 55.8 0.13 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 13,312 13,312 0.43 0.78 45.2 13,599 Area 12.1 11.8 0.14 17.0 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 70.1 70.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 70.4 Energy 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 10,622 10,622 1.35 0.12 — 10,692 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 174 202 376 17.8 0.43 — 949 294 Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
12 / 57
Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 262 0.00 262 26.2 0.00 — 917 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 102 102
Total 18.4 17.5 11.8 76.4 0.16 0.45 10.0 10.5 0.44 2.54 2.98 436 24,206 24,642 45.8 1.32 147 26,329 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.19 4.75 8.48 44.0 0.12 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 12,156 12,156 0.50 0.82 1.17 12,416 Area 9.03 9.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 10,622 10,622 1.35 0.12 — 10,692 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 174 202 376 17.8 0.43 — 949 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 262 0.00 262 26.2 0.00 — 917 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 102 102
Total 14.7 14.0 12.7 47.5 0.14 0.42 10.0 10.5 0.42 2.54 2.96 436 22,981 23,417 45.9 1.37 103 25,075 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 5.27 4.85 7.97 45.3 0.12 0.10 9.87 9.97 0.10 2.50 2.60 — 12,483 12,483 0.46 0.80 19.5 12,752 Area 10.5 10.4 0.07 8.41 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 34.6 34.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.7 Energy 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 10,622 10,622 1.35 0.12 — 10,692 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 174 202 376 17.8 0.43 — 949 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 262 0.00 262 26.2 0.00 — 917 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 102 102
Total 16.3 15.5 12.3 57.2 0.15 0.44 9.87 10.3 0.43 2.50 2.93 436 23,342 23,777 45.8 1.35 122 25,446 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.96 0.88 1.46 8.27 0.02 0.02 1.80 1.82 0.02 0.46 0.47 — 2,067 2,067 0.08 0.13 3.23 2,111 Area 1.92 1.90 0.01 1.53 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 5.72 5.72 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.74 Energy 0.08 0.04 0.77 0.64 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 1,759 1,759 0.22 0.02 — 1,770 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 28.8 33.5 62.2 2.95 0.07 — 157 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 43.4 0.00 43.4 4.33 0.00 — 152 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 16.9 16.9
295
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
13 / 57
Total 2.97 2.83 2.24 10.4 0.03 0.08 1.80 1.88 0.08 0.46 0.53 72.1 3,864 3,937 7.59 0.22 20.1 4,213

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.11 0.09 0.87 0.83 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 145 145 0.01 < 0.005 — 146 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.21 0.21 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
296
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
14 / 57
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.02 0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.1 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 94.2 94.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 95.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.67 2.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.72 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.44 0.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.45 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 297
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
15 / 57

3.2. Site Preparation (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

3.94 3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 0.20 — 0.20 0.19 — 0.19 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 7.67 7.67 — 3.94 3.94 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.11 0.09 0.87 0.83 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 145 145 0.01 < 0.005 — 146 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.21 0.21 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
298
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
16 / 57
Off-Roa 0.02 0.02 0.16 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 24.0 24.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 24.1 d
Equipm
ent
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 94.2 94.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 95.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.67 2.67 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.72 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.44 0.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.45 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.3. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 299
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
17 / 57
Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 1.23 — 1.23 1.14 — 1.14 — 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 — 6,622 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 3.59 3.59 — 1.42 1.42 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.36 0.31 2.85 2.71 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 — 633 633 0.03 0.01 — 635 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.34 0.34 — 0.14 0.14 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.07 0.06 0.52 0.50 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 105 105 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 105 300
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
18 / 57
Dust — — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
From
Material
Movement
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 108 108 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 109 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.7 10.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.77 1.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.80 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.4. Grading (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
301
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
19 / 57
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

3.80 3.20 29.7 28.3 0.06 0.19 — 0.19 0.17 — 0.17 — 6,599 6,599 0.27 0.05 — 6,622 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 3.59 3.59 — 1.42 1.42 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.36 0.31 2.85 2.71 0.01 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 633 633 0.03 0.01 — 635 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.34 0.34 — 0.14 0.14 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.07 0.06 0.52 0.50 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 105 105 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 105 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — — 0.06 0.06 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
302
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
20 / 57
Onsite 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 truck
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 108 108 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 109 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.7 10.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.77 1.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.80 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
303
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
21 / 57
Off-Roa 1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 d
Equipm
ent
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.80 0.67 6.17 7.71 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.23 — 0.23 — 1,417 1,417 0.06 0.01 — 1,422 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 1.13 1.41 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 235 235 0.01 < 0.005 — 235 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.75 0.71 0.37 6.13 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 998 998 0.03 0.04 3.74 1,015 Vendor 0.07 0.05 1.36 0.60 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 845 845 0.02 0.12 2.20 885 304 Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
22 / 57
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.67 0.62 0.45 4.97 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 886 886 0.04 0.04 0.10 900 Vendor 0.06 0.04 1.45 0.63 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 847 847 0.02 0.12 0.06 884 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.40 0.37 0.24 2.98 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.12 0.12 — 542 542 0.02 0.03 0.95 551 Vendor 0.04 0.03 0.83 0.36 < 0.005 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 500 500 0.01 0.07 0.56 523 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 89.8 89.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 91.3 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 86.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.6. Building Construction (2025) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 305
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
23 / 57
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.35 1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.80 0.67 6.17 7.71 0.01 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 1,417 1,417 0.06 0.01 — 1,422 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 1.13 1.41 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 235 235 0.01 < 0.005 — 235 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.75 0.71 0.37 6.13 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 998 998 0.03 0.04 3.74 1,015 Vendor 0.07 0.05 1.36 0.60 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 845 845 0.02 0.12 2.20 885 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.67 0.62 0.45 4.97 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 886 886 0.04 0.04 0.10 900 306
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
24 / 57
Vendor 0.06 0.04 1.45 0.63 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 847 847 0.02 0.12 0.06 884 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.40 0.37 0.24 2.98 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.12 0.12 — 542 542 0.02 0.03 0.95 551 Vendor 0.04 0.03 0.83 0.36 < 0.005 0.01 0.13 0.13 0.01 0.03 0.04 — 500 500 0.01 0.07 0.56 523 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 89.8 89.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 91.3 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.09 86.5 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 307
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
25 / 57
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.54 0.45 4.17 5.48 0.01 0.16 — 0.16 0.15 — 0.15 — 1,013 1,013 0.04 0.01 — 1,017 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.10 0.08 0.76 1.00 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 168 168 0.01 < 0.005 — 168 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.70 0.65 0.34 5.64 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 977 977 0.03 0.04 3.39 994 Vendor 0.07 0.05 1.32 0.59 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 829 829 0.02 0.12 1.94 869 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.60 0.58 0.42 4.56 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 868 868 0.04 0.04 0.09 881 Vendor 0.06 0.04 1.40 0.61 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 831 831 0.02 0.12 0.05 869 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.27 0.25 0.16 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.09 0.09 — 380 380 0.01 0.02 0.62 386 Vendor 0.03 0.02 0.58 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 351 351 0.01 0.05 0.35 367 308 Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
26 / 57
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 62.9 62.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 63.9 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.11 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 58.1 58.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 60.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.8. Building Construction (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

1.28 1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.06 — 0.06 0.05 — 0.05 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.54 0.45 4.17 5.48 0.01 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 1,013 1,013 0.04 0.01 — 1,017 309
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
27 / 57
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.10 0.08 0.76 1.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 168 168 0.01 < 0.005 — 168 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.70 0.65 0.34 5.64 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 977 977 0.03 0.04 3.39 994 Vendor 0.07 0.05 1.32 0.59 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 829 829 0.02 0.12 1.94 869 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.60 0.58 0.42 4.56 0.00 0.00 0.90 0.90 0.00 0.21 0.21 — 868 868 0.04 0.04 0.09 881 Vendor 0.06 0.04 1.40 0.61 0.01 0.01 0.22 0.23 0.01 0.06 0.07 — 831 831 0.02 0.12 0.05 869 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.27 0.25 0.16 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.09 0.09 — 380 380 0.01 0.02 0.62 386 Vendor 0.03 0.02 0.58 0.25 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.09 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 351 351 0.01 0.05 0.35 367 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.36 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 62.9 62.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.10 63.9 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.11 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 — 58.1 58.1 < 0.005 0.01 0.06 60.8 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 310
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
28 / 57

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.91 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.32 — 0.32 0.29 — 0.29 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,516 Paving 2.88 2.88 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.05 0.04 0.39 0.54 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 83.1 Paving 0.16 0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.8 Paving 0.03 0.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 311
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
29 / 57
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 89.0 89.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 90.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.49 4.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.56 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.74 0.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.76 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.10. Paving (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.91 0.76 7.12 9.94 0.01 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 1,511 1,511 0.06 0.01 — 1,516 Paving 2.88 2.88 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
312
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
30 / 57
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.05 0.04 0.39 0.54 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 82.8 82.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 83.1 Paving 0.16 0.16 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.07 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 13.7 13.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.8 Paving 0.03 0.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 89.0 89.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.31 90.6 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.49 4.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.56 313 Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
31 / 57
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.74 0.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.76 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coating
s
104 104 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.34 314
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
32 / 57
Architect 5.71 5.71 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
ural
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22 Architect
ural
Coating
s

1.04 1.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.14 0.13 0.07 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 195 195 0.01 0.01 0.68 199 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.85 9.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10.0 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.63 1.63 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.66 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 315
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
33 / 57

3.12. Architectural Coating (2026) - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.15 0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coating
s
104 104 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Roa
d
Equipm
ent

0.01 0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.32 7.32 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.34 Architect
ural
Coating
s

5.71 5.71 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
316
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
34 / 57
Off-Roa < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.21 1.21 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.22 d
Equipm
ent
Architect
ural
Coating
s

1.04 1.04 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.14 0.13 0.07 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 195 195 0.01 0.01 0.68 199 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.85 9.85 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10.0 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.63 1.63 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.66 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details
317
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
35 / 57

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

5.86 5.44 7.43 55.8 0.13 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 13,312 13,312 0.43 0.78 45.2 13,599 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 5.86 5.44 7.43 55.8 0.13 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 13,312 13,312 0.43 0.78 45.2 13,599 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

5.19 4.75 8.48 44.0 0.12 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 12,156 12,156 0.50 0.82 1.17 12,416 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 5.19 4.75 8.48 44.0 0.12 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 12,156 12,156 0.50 0.82 1.17 12,416 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

0.96 0.88 1.46 8.27 0.02 0.02 1.80 1.82 0.02 0.46 0.47 — 2,067 2,067 0.08 0.13 3.23 2,111 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.96 0.88 1.46 8.27 0.02 0.02 1.80 1.82 0.02 0.46 0.47 — 2,067 2,067 0.08 0.13 3.23 2,111

4.1.2. Mitigated
318
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
36 / 57
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

5.86 5.44 7.43 55.8 0.13 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 13,312 13,312 0.43 0.78 45.2 13,599 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 5.86 5.44 7.43 55.8 0.13 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 13,312 13,312 0.43 0.78 45.2 13,599 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

5.19 4.75 8.48 44.0 0.12 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 12,156 12,156 0.50 0.82 1.17 12,416 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 5.19 4.75 8.48 44.0 0.12 0.10 10.0 10.1 0.10 2.54 2.64 — 12,156 12,156 0.50 0.82 1.17 12,416 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

0.96 0.88 1.46 8.27 0.02 0.02 1.80 1.82 0.02 0.46 0.47 — 2,067 2,067 0.08 0.13 3.23 2,111 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.96 0.88 1.46 8.27 0.02 0.02 1.80 1.82 0.02 0.46 0.47 — 2,067 2,067 0.08 0.13 3.23 2,111

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 319
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
37 / 57
Land TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,136 5,136 0.83 0.10 — 5,187
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 468 468 0.08 0.01 — 473
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,605 5,605 0.91 0.11 — 5,660 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,136 5,136 0.83 0.10 — 5,187
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 468 468 0.08 0.01 — 473
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,605 5,605 0.91 0.11 — 5,660 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 850 850 0.14 0.02 — 859
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 77.5 77.5 0.01 < 0.005 — 78.3
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 928 928 0.15 0.02 — 937

4.2.2. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 320
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
38 / 57
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Industria
l
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,136 5,136 0.83 0.10 — 5,187
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 468 468 0.08 0.01 — 473
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,605 5,605 0.91 0.11 — 5,660 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 5,136 5,136 0.83 0.10 — 5,187
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 468 468 0.08 0.01 — 473
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 5,605 5,605 0.91 0.11 — 5,660 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park
— — — — — — — — — — — — 850 850 0.14 0.02 — 859
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — — 77.5 77.5 0.01 < 0.005 — 78.3
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 928 928 0.15 0.02 — 937

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
321
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
39 / 57
Industria 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 5,018 5,018 0.44 0.01 — 5,031 l
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 5,018 5,018 0.44 0.01 — 5,031 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 5,018 5,018 0.44 0.01 — 5,031 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 5,018 5,018 0.44 0.01 — 5,031 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

0.08 0.04 0.77 0.64 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 831 831 0.07 < 0.005 — 833 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.08 0.04 0.77 0.64 < 0.005 0.06 — 0.06 0.06 — 0.06 — 831 831 0.07 < 0.005 — 833

4.2.4. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Mitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park

0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 5,018 5,018 0.44 0.01 — 5,031 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 322
Section , Item D
Clayton Avenue Tentative Map Custom Report, 12/2/2024
40 / 57
Total 0.46 0.23 4.21 3.53 0.03 0.32 — 0.32 0.32 — 0.32 — 5,018 5,018 0.44 0.01 — 5,031 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Industria
l
Park