Agenda packet, regular meeting — Fremont City Council, May 6, 2025 (part 1 of 4)

City Council Chambers
3300 Capitol Avenue
Fremont, CA

Fremont City Council

Raj Salwan, Mayor
Teresa Keng, Vice Mayor
Desrie Campbell, District 2
Kathy Kimberlin, District 3
Yang Shao, District 4
Yajing Zhang, District 5
Raymond Liu, District 6

City Staff

Karena Shackelford, City Manager
Rafael E. Alvarado, Jr., City Attorney
Christina Briggs, Assistant City Manager
Brian Stott, Assistant City Manager
Allen DeMers, Deputy City Manager

Kim Beranek, Community Services Director
Geneva Bosques, Communications and
Legislative Affairs Director
Arquimides Caldera, Human Services Director
Zoraida Diaz, Fire Chief
Tina Gallegos, Human Resources Director
Susan Gauthier, City Clerk
Kelly King, Maintenance Operations Director
Hans Larsen, Public Works Director
Donovan Lazaro, Economic Development Director
David Persselin, Finance Director
Dan Schoenholz, Community Dev. Director
Sanford Taylor, Information Technology Director
Sean Washington, Chief of Police
Fremont City Council Agenda and
Report
May 06, 2025

General Order of Business

1. Preliminary
• Call to Order
• Salute to the Flag
• Roll Call
• Announcements-Mayor and/or City Manager
• Report Out of Closed Session (if applicable)

2. Consent Calendar

3. Ceremonial Items

4. Public Communications

5. Scheduled Items
• Public Hearings
• Appeals
• Reports from Commissions, Boards and
Committees

6. Other Business

7. Items Referred by Councilmembers
• Council Referrals
• Appointments to Boards, Commissions,
Committees
• Legislative Actions
• Report on Committee Assignments

8. Adjournment

Order of Discussion
Generally, the order of discussion after introduction of an item by the Mayor will include comments and
information by staff followed by City Council questions and inquiries. The applicant, or their authorized
representative, or interested citizens, may they speak
on the item; each speaker may only speak once to each
item. At the close of public discussion, the item will be considered by the City Council and action taken. Items
on the agenda may be moved from the order listed.

Consent Calendar
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be
routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one
motion and one vote. There will be no separate
discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or
citizen so requests, in which case the item will be
removed from the Consent Calendar and considered
separately. Additionally, other items without a “Request to Speak – Speaker Card” card in opposition may be
added to the consent calendar. The City Attorney will
read the title of ordinances to be adopted.

Spoken Public Communications and/or
Public Comment is limited to speakers
attending the meeting in-person in
City Council Chambers.

Agenda and Report - Fremont City Council Meeting - May 06, 2025

May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 2
IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

The live stream of the meeting may be viewed on the City of Fremont’s website at www.Fremont.gov/Channel27, which provides a link to the live stream; or, via Comcast Channel 27.

Please note at this time, Channel 27 is only available to Comcast cable subscribers. The public may also view the meeting via Zoom, or attend in-person in the Council Chamber. The lobby doors open approximately 15 minutes prior to the start of the meeting. The public is strongly encouraged but not required to wear masks.

Attending May 6, 2025, City Council meeting online via Zoom https://us06web.zoom.us/j/86524148656 Webinar ID: 865 2414 8656

Addressing the Council

Spoken Public Communications / Public Comment is limited to persons attending the Council Meeting in the City Council Chambers.

How to submit Public Communications / Public Comment by email prior to the meeting:

Send an email to [email protected] before 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. Please identify the agenda item number & letter, and meeting date in the subject line of your email or specify that it is not related to an agenda item. Emails will be compiled into files by agenda item number/letter, distributed to the City Council and staff, and published in the City's Agenda Center on www.fremont.gov. If you wish to share an attachment/exhibit, submit the pdf formatted document(s) to the email above by the noted deadline.

Electronic comments on agenda items for the City Council meeting may only be submitted by email. Comments via text and social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) will not be accepted.

How to provide Spoken Public Comment during the meeting for items on the agenda:

Attend meeting in-person in the Council Chamber, fill out a “Request to Speak – Speaker Card” with the agenda item number & letter, and submit to the City Clerk. When the Mayor calls for the item on which you wish to speak, step to the podium to address the City Council. Please limit your remarks on matters related to the agency and to the time limit allotted.

How to provide Spoken Public Comment during the meeting for items not on the agenda (Oral Communications):

Any person desiring to speak on a matter which is not scheduled on this agenda may do so under the Oral Communications section of Public Communications. Attend the meeting in-person in the Council Chamber and submit your speaker card to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of Oral communications. Only those who have submitted cards prior to the beginning of Oral Communications will be permitted to speak. Please be aware the California Government Code prohibits the City Council from taking any immediate action on an item which does not appear on the agenda, unless the item meets stringent statutory requirements. The Mayor may limit the time allotted for public speakers, and each speaker may only address the Council once on each agenda item.

The City Council Agendas may be accessed online: https://www.fremont.gov/government/agenda-center

Availability of Public Records
All disclosable public records relating to an open session item on this agenda that are distributed by the City to all or a majority of the City Council less than 72 hours prior to the meeting will be available for public inspection in specifically labeled binders located in the lobby of Fremont City Hall, 3300 Capitol Avenue during normal business hours, at the time the records are distributed to the City Council.

Information about the City or items scheduled on the Agenda and Report may be referred to:

Address: City Clerk
City of Fremont
3300 Capitol Avenue, Bldg. A
Fremont, California 94538
Telephone: (510) 284-4060

If you are an individual with a disability and need a reasonable modification or accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, or if you do not have access to email or the internet, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 284-4060 or [email protected] at least two working days prior to the meeting for assistance.

Your interest in the conduct of our City’s business is appreciated.

May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 3
Agenda
Fremont City Council Regular Meeting
May 06, 2025
City Council Chambers, 3300 Capitol Avenue, Building A
7:00 PM

1. Preliminary
A. Call to Order
B. Salute the Flag
C. Roll Call
D. Announcements-Mayor and/or City Manager
E. Report Out of Closed Session (if applicable)

2. Consent Calendar
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion and one vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered separately. Additionally, other items without a “Request to Address Council” card in opposition may be added to the consent calendar. The City Attorney will read the title of ordinances to be adopted.

A. Motion To: Waive Further Reading of Proposed Ordinances (This permits reading the title only in lieu of reciting the entire text.) B. Approval of Minutes - None.

C. MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT – Annual Review and adopt a resolution approving the military equipment possessed and utilized by the Fremont Police Department (FPD) for the reporting period of April 2024 to March 2025; Approve Additional Unmanned Aerial Systems Contact Persons:

Name: Matthew Snelson Sean Washington
Title: Police Captain Police Chief
Dept: Police Department Police Department
Phone: 510-790-6874 510-790-6969
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATIONS: Adopt a resolution approving the Military Equipment Use Policy, the Department’s April 2024 to March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report, and purchase of three UAS increasing the authorized total UAS from 14 to 17.

D. ACCEPTANCE OF COPS GRANT - Adopt a Resolution and Spending Plan of the 2024/25 State of California Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Grant; Appropriation Actions
Contact Persons:

Name: Diane Brasil Sean Washington
Title: Police Business Manager Police Chief
Dept: Police Department Police Department
May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 4
Phone: 510-790-6816 510-790-6969
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt a resolution accepting the 2024/25 California Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) grant in the amount of $725,822 as allocated in the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA) for the Fremont Police Department and approving the spending plan set forth in the resolution to purchase items supporting front line law enforcement services.

2. Increase the revenue estimate and appropriate $67,584 in the COPS Grant Fund (Fund 151) for the purchase of UAVs and ballistic vests.

E. ANNUAL APPROVAL OF INVESTMENT POLICY - Annual Approval of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to City Treasurer to Manage Investments
Contact Persons:

Name: Lauren Chu David Persselin
Title: Management Analyst Finance Director
Dept: Finance Department Finance Department
Phone: (510) 494-4635 510-494-4631
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the City’s Investment Policy for FY 2025/26 and delegating the City Council’s authority to invest and reinvest public funds, and to sell or exchange securities so purchased, to the Finance Director/Treasurer for one year or until earlier revoked by the City Council.

F. CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES – Consider Introduction of Ordinances Amending Chapter 8.70 of Fremont Municipal Code to Expand the Definition of a Residential Unit that Qualifies for Tenant Relocation Assistance as Defined by State Law, Amending Chapter 8.75 to Clarify Tobacco Retail License Ordinance Enforcement, and Adding Chapter 8.85 of the Fremont Municipal Code, to create an Elevated Exterior Elements Ordinance and to Consider a Finding that the Ordinances are Exempt from the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per, Each as a Separate and Independent Basis, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5).

Contact Persons:

Name: David Wage Dan Schoenholz
Title: Code Enforcement
Manager/Senior Planner
Community Development Director
Dept: Code Enforcement Community Development
Phone: 510-494-4447 510-494-4438
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance, attached as Exhibit A, amending Chapter 8.70 (Tenant Relocation) of the Fremont Municipal Code.

2. Waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance, attached as Exhibit B, amending Chapter 8.75 (Tobacco Retailers Licensing) of the Fremont Municipal Code.

3. Waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance, attached as Exhibit C, adopting Chapter 8.85 (Exterior Elevated Elements) of the Fremont Municipal Code.

4. Find that ordinances are exempt from and not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because, without limitation, it is May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 5
not a “project” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(2) and/or 15378(b)(5) as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA Guidelines Section 15601(b)(3), each as a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

G. ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK - Consideration and Adoption of Legislative Framework
Contact Persons:

Name: Geneva Bosques
Title: Director of Communications
and Legislative Affairs

Dept: City Manager's Office
Phone: 510-284-4094
E-Mail: [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt the Legislative Framework.

2. Authorize the City Manager to implement the City's legislative work plan.

3. Authorize the City Manager, Mayor, or designee to transmit documents that are consistent with the City's legislative priorities.

H. COST ALLOCATION SERVICES - Authorization to Execute Agreement for a Citywide Cost Allocation Plan and a Grant Cost Allocation Plan with Capital Accounting Partners, LLC
Contact Persons:

Name: Hein Hein Myat David Persselin
Title: Accounting Manager Finance Director
Dept: Finance Department Finance Department
Phone: 510-494-4602 510-494-4631
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Manager or her designee to execute an agreement with CAP to prepare and support the Citywide and Grant Cost Allocation Plans for a fixed fee of $22,550 per fiscal year and a total amount not to exceed $112,750 over the five-year term of the agreement.

I. VACATION OF EASEMENT AT FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE HOUSE TERRACE - Adopt a Resolution Summarily Vacating a Public Utility Easement at Fremont Boulevard and Ice House Terrace in the South Fremont Community Plan Area (PLN2024-00080) and Make Findings of CEQA Exemption.

Contact Persons:

Name: Homira Shafaq Hans Larsen
Title: Associate Civil Engineer Public Works Director
Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: (510) 494-4780 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution to vacate a Public Utility Easement at Fremont Boulevard and Ice House Terrace on grounds the easement is no longer needed.

May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 6
J. FREMONT CENTRAL PARK RESTROOMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT - Approval of Plans and Specifications; Award of Contract to Alex Kushner General, Inc. in the amount of $793,500 (including 15% Contingency) for the Fremont Central Park Restroom Replacements Project (PWC9089); Make Findings of CEQA Exemption
Contact Persons:

Name: Martha Martinez Hans Larsen
Title: Facilities Project Manager Public Works Director Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4750 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the following actions related to the Fremont Central Park Restrooms Replacement Project (PWC9089):

1. Approve Plans and Specifications for the Fremont Central Park Restrooms Replacement (Phase I) Project.

2. Accept the bid and award the construction contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Alex Kushner General Inc. in the amount of $690,000 and allocate a 15% contingency in the amount of $103,500 for a total construction contract amount of $793,500 and authorize the City Manager, or her designee, to execute the contract.

3. Find the project is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guideline pertaining to replacement of the park restroom involving negligible or no expansion of capacity.

K. WALNUT AVENUE BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS - Approval of Plans and Specifications; Award Contract to Radius Earthwork Inc. in the Amount of $3,327,642.60 (includes 10% Contingency) for the Walnut Avenue Bikeway Phase 2 Improvement Project (PWC9100A); Appropriation Actions; and Make Findings of CEQA Exemption
Contact Persons:

Name: Edelzar Garcia Hans Larsen
Title: Senior Civil Engineer Public Works Director
Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4781 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the following actions related to the Walnut Avenue Bikeway Phase 2 Improvement Project (PWC9100A):

1. Approve the plans and specifications for the project.

2. Accept the bid and award the construction contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Radius Earthwork Inc., Inc. in the amount of $3,025,129.60 and allocate a 10% construction contingency in the amount of $302,513.00 for a total construction contract amount of $3,327,642.60 and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the contract.

3. Reallocate $675,000 from PWC8677-136 and appropriate it to PWC9110- 136.

4. Reallocate $1,500,000 from PWC8932-531 and appropriate it to PWC9110- 531.

5. Reallocate $97,000 from PWC9041-531 and appropriate it to PWC9110-531.

6. Reallocate $30,000 from PWC9041-515 and appropriate it to PWC9110-515.

7. Find that this project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Section 21080.25 of the California Public Resources Code as a sustainable transportation project that implements pedestrian and bicycle facilities and improves multimodal safety and access for current and potential transit riders and is further exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 as the repair, maintenance or minor May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 7
alteration of existing facilities involving no or negligible expansion of use beyond that presently existing.

L. FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER TENANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - Approval of Plans; Award of Contract to Ron Paris Construction Company inc. in the amount of $150,970 (including 20% Contingency) for the Department of Rehabilitation Tenant Improvements Project (PWC8393) located at the Family Resource Center; Appropriation Action: Make Findings of CEQA Exemption
Contact Persons:

Name: Gurshran (Gigi) Gill Hans Larsen
Title: Facilities Design Construction
Project Supervisor
Public Works Director
Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4558 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the following actions related to the Department of Rehabilitation Tenant Improvement Project (PWC8393):

1. Approve project plans.

2. Accept the bid and award the construction contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, Ron Paris Construction Company Inc. in the amount of $125,808 and allocate a 20% contingency in the amount of $25,162 for a total construction contract amount of $150,970 and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the contract.

3. Appropriate $176,551 from the Family Resource Center Fund (Fund 108) to PWC8393-108 to pay for the project costs.

4. Find the project is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guideline pertaining to modifications of existing facilities involving no expansion of use.

3. Ceremonial Items
A. Proclamation: Fremont Bike Month (May 2025)
B. Proclamation: Fix Your Bike Day (May 15, 2025)
C. Resolution: Twenty Years of Service – Officer Paul Richards D. Proclamation: National Children’s Mental Health Awareness Day (May 8, 2025)

4. Public Communications
A. Oral and Written Communications

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - None.

PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY - None.

CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM

CONSENT CALENDAR

May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 8

5. Scheduled Items
A. ARDENWOOD AT PASEO APPEAL – – Public Hearing (Published Notice) to consider a third-party Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial action of a separate third-party Appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval action of a Discretionary Design Review Permit and Floor Area Ratio increase (under PLN2022-00466) to allow a proposed five-building light-industrial/R&D development consisting of 407,250 square feet of new floor area, plus renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot light- industrial/R&D building, on the site bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive in the North Fremont Community Plan Area; and to consider an exemption from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per, without limitation, CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, as the project is consistent with the General Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified, and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, as none of the circumstances requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred. Each of the foregoing provides a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

Contact Persons:

Name: Marc Cleveland Dan Schoenholz
Title: Planner II Community Development Director
Dept: Planning Community Development
Phone: 510-494-4543 510-494-4438
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Hold public hearing.

2. Find that the proposed project is in conformance with the relevant provisions of the City’s General Plan, including the goals and objectives set forth in the Land Use, Community Plans, and Safety Chapters of the General Plan.

3. Adopt a Resolution denying the Appeal, adopting findings, and approving the project’s Discretionary Design Review Permit and FAR increase, as shown in Exhibit “A,” based on findings and subject to the conditions of approval provided in Exhibit “B.”

4. Approve the proposed removal and mitigation of three hundred and seventy- two (372) private protected trees pursuant to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

6. Other Business
A. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN - Receive Presentation and Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Fremont Active Transportation Plan Highlighting Priority Projects and Programs for the Next Five Years to Support Walking and Bicycling in Fremont. Find the Action is Exempt from CEQA.

Contact Persons:

Name: Noe Veloso Hans Larsen
Title: Assistant City Engineer Public Works Director
Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4774 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Adopt a resolution adopting the Fremont Active Transportation Plan.

May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 9

2. Find that approval of the Fremont Active Transportation Plan is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines pertaining to: Section 15061(b)(3), Review for Exemption; Section 15004, Time of Preparation; Section 15378(b), Not a Project; and Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a General Plan.

7. Items Referred by Councilmembers
A. Councilmember Referrals - None.

B. Appointments to Boards, Commissions, Committees

1. MAYOR SALWAN REFERRAL: Appointments to Advisory Bodies Contact Persons:

Name: Raj Salwan
Title: Mayor
Dept: City Council
Phone: 510-284-4082
E-Mail: [email protected]

APPOINTMENTS:

Advisory Body Appointee Term Expires

Library Advisory Commission Leslie Rice 12/31/2025
Friends of the Library Representative

Mobility Commission Ahsan Baig 12/31/2025
Transit Representative 1

Rent Review Board Sundari Yanamanran Sankaran
Neutral Third Party 12/31/2027

RECOMMENDATION: Approve appointments.

C. Legislative Actions - None.

D. Report on Committee Assignments

8. Adjournment
May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 10
May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 11

ACRONYMS

ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments GIS Geographic Information System ACE Altamont Commuter Express GPA General Plan Amendment ACFCD Alameda County Flood Control District HARB Historical Architectural Review Board ACTC Alameda County Transportation
Commission
HBA Home Builders Association
HRC Human Relations Commission
ACWD Alameda County Water District ICMA International City/County Management Association ARB Art Review Board
BAAQMD

BART
Bay Area Air Quality Management
District
Bay Area Rapid Transit District
JPA Joint Powers Authority
LLMD Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance
District
BCDC Bay Conservation & Development
Commission
LOCC League of California Cities
LOS Level of Service
BMPs Best Management Practices MOU Memorandum of Understanding BMR Below Market Rate MTC Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
CALPERS California Public Employees’ Retirement
System
NEPA
NLC
National Environmental Policy Act
National League of Cities
CBC
CDD
California Building Code
Community Development Department
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System
CC & R’s Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions NPO Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance CDBG Community Development Block Grant PC Planning Commission CEQA California Environmental Quality Act PD Planned District CERT Community Emergency Response Team PDA Priority Development Area CIP Capital Improvement Program PUC Public Utilities Commission CNG Compressed Natural Gas PVAW Private Vehicle Accessway COF City of Fremont PWC Public Works Contract
COPPS Community Oriented Policing and Public
Safety
RFP Request for Proposals
RFQ Request for Qualifications
CSAC California State Association of Counties RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation CTC California Transportation Commission ROP Regional Occupational Program dB Decibel RRIDRO Residential Rent Increase Dispute
Resolution Ordinance DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report DU/AC Dwelling Units per Acre RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board EBRPD East Bay Regional Park District SACNET

Southern Alameda County Narcotics
Enforcement Task Force EDAC Economic Development Advisory Commission (City)
EIR
EIS
Environmental Impact Report (CEQA)
Environmental Impact Statement
STIP State Transportation Improvement
Program

ERAF
(NEPA)
Education Revenue Augmentation Fund
TCRDF Tri-Cities Recycling and Disposal Facility
TOD Transit Oriented Development
EVAW
FAR
Emergency Vehicle Accessway
Floor Area Ratio
TS/MRF Transfer Station/Materials Recovery
Facility
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency UBC See CBC
FFD Fremont Fire Department VTA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
FMC Fremont Municipal Code WMA Waste Management Authority FPD Fremont Police Department
FRC Family Resource Center ZA Zoning Administrator
FUSD Fremont Unified School District ZTA Zoning Text Amendment

May 6, 2025 Fremont City Council Page 12

UPCOMING MEETING AND CHANNEL 27

BROADCAST SCHEDULE
Date Time Meeting Type Location
Cable
Channel
27 Monday,
May 5, 2025 5:30 p.m. CC/FUSD Joint Meeting FUSD Hosts Live May 6, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
May 13, 2025 5:30 p.m. City Council Closed Session Council Chambers Live
May 13, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
May 20, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
May 27, 2025 5:30 p.m. CC/FUSD Liaison
Committee Meeting City Hosts Live
June 3, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
June 10, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
June 17, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
June 24, 2025 5:30 p.m. CC/FUSD Liaison
Committee Meeting FUSD Hosts Live
July 1, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
July 8, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
July 15, 2025 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Council
Chambers Live
July 22, 2025 CANCELLED: CC/FUSD
Liaison Committee Meeting
July 29, 2025 No 7PM City Council Meeting
(5th Tuesday)

August Recess Council in Recess until
September

Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Police Department
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Plans, Policies and Studies

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5380) DOC ID: 5380
Updated: 4/30/2025 6:13 AM by Dina Lewis Page 1
MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT – Annual Review and adopt a resolution approving the military equipment possessed and utilized by the Fremont Police Department (FPD) for the reporting period of April 2024 to March 2025; Approve Additional Unmanned Aerial Systems
Contact Persons:

Name: Matthew Snelson Sean Washington
Title: Police Captain Police Chief
Div/Dept: Police Department Police Department
Phone: 510-790-6874 510-790-6969
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The Fremont Municipal Code Chapter 8.80, known as the Military Equipment Use Ordinance, requires the Fremont Police Department (FPD) to produce an annual military equipment use report. The Fremont City Council utilizes the annual report as a mechanism to ensure FPD's compliance with the Military Equipment Policy, and to help it determine whether to approve, revise, or revoke components of the Military Equipment Policy for the subsequent year.

FPD has submitted the required annual report covering the reporting period of April 2024-March 2025, held a required community engagement event, and now seeks City Council review and approval for continued use of the approved equipment. FPD is also seeking approval to purchase three additional Unmanned Arial Systems.

BACKGROUND: Government Code sections 7070 through 7075 require law enforcement agencies to obtain approval of the applicable governing body (City Council) for funding, acquiring, or using military equipment by an ordinance adopting a “military equipment” use policy. On May 3, 2022, the Fremont City Council adopted Ordinance No. 04-2022 establishing Fremont Municipal Code (FMC) Title 8 Health and Safety, Chapter 8.80 Military Equipment Use. FMC Section 8.80.050 requires that the Police Department annually submit a report to the City Council providing the following:

• A summary of how the Military Equipment was used and the purpose of its use. • A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the Military Equipment.
• The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the Military Equipment Use Policy, and any actions taken in response. • The total annual cost for each type of Military Equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the Military Equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual Military Equipment Report.
• The quantity possessed for each type of Military Equipment. • If the Police Department intends to acquire additional Military Equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of Military Equipment.

2.C
Packet Pg. 13
Council Staff Report (ID # 5380) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:13 AM by Dina Lewis Page 2
In addition, FPD must make the annual Military Equipment Report available on its internet website and hold a community engagement meeting where the public can discuss and ask questions regarding the report and the military equipment used by FPD. Once the report is submitted, the City Council shall determine, based on the annual Military Equipment Report, whether each type of Military Equipment identified in that report has complied with the standards for approval set forth in the FMC and the Military Equipment Use Policy. If the City Council determines that a type of Military Equipment identified in that annual Military Equipment Report has not complied with the standards for approval, the City Council shall either disapprove a renewal of the authorization for that type of Military Equipment or require modifications to the Military Equipment Use Policy in a manner that will resolve the lack of compliance.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Annual Report
With this report, FPD has submitted the required annual report documenting all required information for the reporting period of April 2024 to March 2025. In compliance with the ordinance, the report was posted publicly on March 25, 2025, on the transparency section of FPD’s website as well as an updated draft of Exhibit 1 with the requested authorization to add three additional UAS to the authorized fleet. A well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement event was held on March 26, 2025, from 5-7 PM, where all approved military equipment was available for public viewing and discussion. The public event was held in the front parking lot and front lobby of FPD. Approximately 100 community members attended the event. No significant community concerns were noted during or after the event regarding any of the equipment on display.

FPD is seeking City Council review and approval for the continued use of all authorized military equipment identified in the annual report as well as the equipment listed in Exhibit 1 of FPD’s Military Use Policy (708). As shown in the annual report, FPD used some but not all of the listed equipment and received no complaints or concerns associated with the use of the listed military equipment. In addition, FPD had no policy violations associated with deployment or use of the military equipment. Consequently, the FPD has complied with the requirements of FMC Chapter 8.80 and the Military Use policy for the period covered in the annual report.

In order to approve the continued use of the currently authorized military equipment by FPD, the ordinance and AB 481 require the City Council to find that the military equipment listed in the policy is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of community and officer safety and that the proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties. All of the equipment listed in the policy was designed to enhance law enforcement’s ability to ensure public safety and welfare and was not obtained from the military. The policy ensures that there are safeguards, including transparency, oversight, and accountability measures in place for the use of the listed equipment. Members of the public are provided direction per the policy on how to register complaints for violations. All items which result in a use of force will be investigated, as is already required by existing FPD policy.

Based on ongoing equipment evaluation and deployment history, FPD has not discovered alternative items that can achieve the same objectives of community and officer safety.

2.C
Packet Pg. 14
Council Staff Report (ID # 5380) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:13 AM by Dina Lewis Page 3
Below is information pertaining to items Fremont Police has acquired, utilized and assessed as being necessary to achieve and support public safety objectives:

Government Code § 7070(c)(1)- Unmanned remotely piloted powered aerial or ground vehicles:

Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) are necessary as they provide real-time situational awareness to responding and/or on scene first responders. UAS are utilized in Fremont for both Drone as First Responder (DFR) deployments and field deployments. Without the use of a UAS, police officers would have limited overhead observation of high-risk areas, decreased effectiveness of detecting missing persons, reduced visual assistance during rescue operations and be unable to assess suspicious / dangerous objects from a safe distance. In addition to crime and rescue operations, UAS equipment is utilized to memorialize and document crimes scenes and locations of traffic accidents. The UAS system can enter small spaces, such as enclosed structures, as well as provide overhead observations of high-risk situations within business districts, residential sections, open land/wooded areas and other crowded spaces. Without this equipment safety risks to the public and law enforcement personnel would increase in the circumstances described.

Therefore, we have found no reasonable alternatives which would allow FPD to achieve public safety objectives.

Unmanned remotely controlled ground vehicle (robots) are used to gather images and/or video during high-risk operations and critical incidents. The equipment provides visibility in areas where it would be unsafe to send a police officer. This system can also be used to observe potentially hazardous items, such as explosive devices or suspicious chemicals. Not having access to this item would require the use of police officers or other emergency responders to engage in high-risk tasks and would potentially lengthen the mitigation process during dangerous operations. There is no known alternative to this system.

Government Code § 7070(c)(2) and (3) – Armored personnel carriers:

The FPD utilizes two armored vehicles. The armored vehicles are built on commercial truck chassis and have an armored body/shell. Our armored vehicles are equipped with an attachment which allows breaching of structures to conduct rescue operations or apprehend persons who are violent and pose a significant risk to the community and officers. Armored vehicles are used to provide ballistic protection to officers and members of our community during rescue operations, critical incidents and other hazardous situations. These vehicles allow officers closer access to high-risk situations (gun violence, dangerous objects, etc.) while substantially reducing the physical risk to community members and officers. As such, there are no reasonable alternatives to providing the same level of ballistic protection to community members or police officers during incidents involving gun violence.

Government Code § 7070(c)(5) – Command and control vehicles:

The Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV) is a vehicle similar to a commercial recreational vehicle (RV). It is equipped with emergency dispatching communication, monitors and command systems to assist in command and control of a critical incident. This vehicle allows for mobile incident command and use of the Incident Command Systems facilitating the best possible on-scene decision-making by key leaders. It provides operational, administrative and logistical support as well as restroom facilities and mobile generated power. A critical function of the MCV is to serve as an emergency backup dispatching system in case there is a failure in our main system within the police building. As a result, to the criticality of

2.C
Packet Pg. 15
Council Staff Report (ID # 5380) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:13 AM by Dina Lewis Page 4
continuity of emergency calls for service, there is no known alternative for the MCV as this vehicle directly supports public safety efforts during critical incidents.

The Hostage Negotiations Team Van (HNT Van) is a standard Ford Transit (350) van equipped with audio/visual devices intended to communicate with violent and dangerous persons who are not complying with a lawful order to surrender to arrest. The vehicle is utilized to aid the command and control element in facilitating the safe surrender of subjects who refuse to submit to arrest. This vehicle’s link to the MCV makes it necessary for public safety objectives and no known alternative has been identified.

Government Code § 7070(c)(7) - Breaching apparatuses and slugs:

FPD utilizes breaching shotguns used to defeat locked, barricaded or fortified locations allowing officers to conduct rescue operations or high-risk forceable entries necessary to apprehend a suspect unwilling to submit to a lawful arrest. The equipment is also used during rescue operations to defeat locked doors and swiftly render aid to those in need of immediate medical attention. These items allow police officers rapid entry into a structure when a delay in time could result in severe injury or loss of life to members of our community and/or law enforcement personnel. Examples include active shooter situations, hostage/kidnapping incidents, downed persons inside of the dwelling or high -risk arrest operations. In such situations, time is of the essence and it would not be feasible to wait for alternatives access options to become available. Handheld battering rams and lock picks can be alternatives in non-fortified, lower level, low risk situations. When rapid entry is necessary to save lives or prevent injury, the breaching shotgun is necessary. As such there is no reasonable alternative to these items.

Government Code § 7070(c)(10) – Specialized firearms and ammunition:

When in compliance with FPD’s De-escalation and Use of Force Policy, the currently approved rifles allow officers to address medium to long distance violent and dangerous threats. This may include persons who are heavily armed or are actively harming or killing others. Further, this equipment allows officers precision shot placement, minimizing the risk to members of our community and officers. There are no known alternatives to these types of weapons, which offer a similar level of effectiveness to prevent harm or loss of life.

Government Code § 7070(c)(12) – Flashbangs, tear gas, pepper balls:

Flashbangs are used as a distraction device in order to divert the suspect’s attention away from officers during high-risk arrest or rescue operations. The distraction enables officers to gain safer access and provides extra time to assess and analyze existing threats. The intent of utilizing this device is to prevent injury to community members, officers and suspects.

The intended outcome is to achieve a safe resolution and enable officers to conduct high risk and dangerous arrest operations, utilizing minimal force. Fremont Police have utilized these devices successfully in the past and are unaware of reasonable alternatives that will achieve the same objectives.

Tear gas and pepper ball are less lethal methods used to address violent or riotous crowds when there is a risk of physical safety. They are also used to safely extract a violent, dangerous or uncooperative/resisting suspect from a fixed location or safely detain a suspect who poses a risk to our community or police officers. Tear gas allows officers to deploy a chemical agent (irritant) into a structure where the use of other tools may be impractical or inappropriate. These tools afford law enforcement an added option to help

2.C
Packet Pg. 16
Council Staff Report (ID # 5380) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:13 AM by Dina Lewis Page 5
avoid officers resorting to using a higher level of force to affect an arrest. Based on ongoing reevaluation of these tools and experience, we have found no reasonable alternative.

Government Code § 7070(c)(14) – 40mm projectile launchers:

The use of 40mm projectile launchers is necessary to offer another alternative to lethal force. The projectile, made from a material similar to foam, is less likely to result in death or serious physical injury when used on a suspect who is violently resisting or refusing to comply with a lawful order to surrender to arrest. The kinetic energy of the device is intended to be utilized in accordance with FPD policy and only used when no other alternative is appropriate. As another less lethal tool, this equipment is necessary, and no reasonable alternative identified based on ongoing assessment and experience.

For the above-listed reasons and based on the annual report, staff recommends that the City Council approve the continued use of the currently authorized military equipment.

Request for authorization to purchase additional UAS

FPD is seeking City Council approval to purchase two additional UAS DJI Mavic 4s and a DJI Matric 350 increasing the authorized number of UAS from 14 to 17. The DJI Mavic 4 is the next generation of UAS the department primarily utilizes for field deployments. The latest version provides a safer, more reliable platform utilizing enhanced sensing capabilities to aid in collision avoidance and consistent connectivity between the UAS and controller. The system utilizes integrated color and infrared thermal cameras to provide situational awareness as well as an integrated laser range finder to determine distance and location.

The system can also be fitted with an auxiliary light to aid in providing visible light to a scene during night deployments.

The DJI Matrice 350 (M350) is the newest generation of UAS platform with enhanced connectivity between the drone and remote, providing increased safety and more stable video transmission. The system has improved battery efficiency, increasing max flight time up to 55 minutes and carries a weather rating of IP55, allowing flight during inclement weather. The system integrates 6-directional sensing and positioning sensors, increasing safety during flight and has the ability to carry up to 2.7KG allowing the mounting of third party cameras enhancing situational awareness. This system can be utilized for both field deployments and/or as a Drone as First Responder (DFR). Without this equipment, safety risks to the public, fire and police personnel would increase in the circumstances described and no other reasonable alternatives have been identified in place of the requested purchases.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Annual Military Equipment Discussion:

In compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 8.80, FPD’s annual military equipment report details the total annual cost for each type of Military Equipment. This includes costs for acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the Military Equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual Military Equipment Report.

2.C
Packet Pg. 17
Council Staff Report (ID # 5380) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:13 AM by Dina Lewis Page 6
During this reporting period, FPD spent approximately $43,704.29 for equipment and training specified in AB 481. The total expenditures represent 0.035% of FPD’s operational budget ($123,512,885 for FY2024/25).

Requested UAS purchases:

- Two DJI Mavic 4– $7,299 each; total of $14,598
o 10 regular batteries - $1,790
o 2 Intelligent batteries - $118
o 2 DJI AS1 Speaker for M4 - $430
o 2 DJI AL1 Spotlight for DJI M4 - $678
o Sourcewell Contract discount (#67757) - ($880.70)

Grand Total for the above listed UASs and equipment: $18,448.48 with tax

Funding source: 2024 CA State COPS Grant Funding (allocation request also agendized for council review on 05/06/25)

- One DJI Matrice 350
o DJI Matrice 350 - $11,729
o DJI Zenmuse H30T Five-Module Camera - $9,460
o 8 DJI Matrice 350 flight battery - $5,600
o Sourcewell Contract discount (#67757) - ($1,339.45)

Grand Total for the above listed UAS and equipment: $19,389 with tax

Funding source: 2024 CA State COPS Grant Funding (allocation request also agendized for Council review on 05/06/25)

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Receiving and approving the Annual Military Equipment Use Report and Exhibit 1 of FPD’s Military Use Policy is an administrative government activity that is exempt from and not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because, without limitation, it is not a “project” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(2) and/or 15378(b)(5) and as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), each as a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution- Military Equipment Use Policy 2025
• Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy
• FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report • Ex. A Military Equipment Use policy

2.C
Packet Pg. 18
Resolution 2025-XX Page 1 of 2

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT

APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE
POLICY

WHEREAS, on September 30, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill (“AB”) 480, relating to the use of military equipment by law enforcement agencies, codified in Government Code sections 7070 through 7075; and

WHEREAS, on May 3, 2022, the City Council of the City of Fremont (“City Council”) adopted Ordinance No. 04-2022 establishing Fremont Municipal Code (“FMC”) Chapter 8.80 Military Equipment Use, which requires City Council to approve and make certain findings during a regular meeting held pursuant to open meeting laws for funding, acquisition, use of military equipment or changes to the Military Equipment Use Policy approved by City Council; and

WHEREAS, FMC Chapter 8.80 and state law authorizes the governing body of a city to approve the funding, acquisition, use of military equipment or changes to the Military Equipment Use Policy only if it makes specified determinations. The findings are that (1) the military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety; (2) the proposed Military Equipment Use Policy will safeguard the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties; and (3) if purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety; and

WHEREAS, Government Code section 7070 and FMC section 8.80.020 define military equipment to include Unmanned Aerial Systems (“UAS”); and

WHEREAS, the Fremont Police and Fire Departments utilize UAS technology deployed from a fixed location enabling a response to qualifying calls for service soon after a call is received, called Drone as First Responder (“DFR”). The DFR Program utilizes the same technology and is functionally identical to equipment used for deployments in the field from emergency vehicles; and

WHEREAS, UAS are utilized to enhance the Police and Fire Departments’ mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are unavailable or are less effective.

UAS are necessary to ensure officer safety and public welfare as they provide visibility to high-risk locations. Without the use of a UAS, police officers and fire fighters would have limited overhead observation of high-risk areas, decreased effectiveness of detecting missing persons, reduced visual assistance during rescue operations, and be unable to assess suspicious/dangerous objects from a safe distance. In addition to crime and rescue operations, UAS equipment is utilized to memorialize and document crime scenes and to conduct natural disaster assessments; and

WHEREAS, UAS can enter small spaces, such as enclosed structures, and provide overhead observations of high-risk situations within business districts, residential sections, open land/wooded areas, and other crowded spaces. When deploying through DFR, UAS will usually arrive on-scene before responding public safety personnel. The early arrival of UAS provides real-time information and situational awareness allowing public safety personnel to make better decisions utilizing real- time information, increasing safety for the public and responding public safety personnel; and

2.C.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Draft Resolution- Military Equipment Use Policy 2025 (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Resolution 2025-XX Page 2 of 2

WHEREAS, on May 6, 2025, the City Council held a duly-noticed meeting where members of the public had the opportunity to be heard on this subject, and the City Council considered the information set forth in the staff report and information submitted to the City Council prior to and during the meeting.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Fremont finds that each type of military equipment identified in the Fremont Police Department April 2024 to March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (“Report”) has complied with the standards for approval set forth in FMC Chapter 8.80 and the Military Equipment Use Policy and approves the Report.

SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Fremont approves the amendments to Exhibit 1 of the Military Equipment Use Policy, the continued use of the currently authorized military equipment by Fremont Police Department as identified in Exhibit 1 of the Fremont Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy and the purchase of the two UAS, finding that: (1) there are no reasonable alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety, (2) the existing Military Equipment Use Policy attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution safeguards the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties; (3) the requested UAS are reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of police, fire and public safety; and (4) the prior military equipment use complied with the Military Equipment Use Policy that was in effect at the time.

ADOPTED _______________, 2025 by the City Council of the City of Fremont by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
City Attorney

2.C.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Draft Resolution- Military Equipment Use Policy 2025 (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 1 Council Approval Date:

EXHIBIT 1
Qualifying Equipment Owned/Utilized by the Fremont Police Department

Equipment Name: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS/Drones) – CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(1) Quantity Owned/Sought: 1417 Lifespan: 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: Remotely piloted aerial vehicle capable of providing live and recorded video images captured from aerial positions, including images enhanced by Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR), thermal, and optical zoom lenses.

Manufacture Product Description:

DJI Matrice 350: The DJI Matrice 350 (M350) is the newest generation of UAS platform with enhanced connectivity between the drone and remote providing increased safety and more stable video transmission. The system has improved battery efficiency increasing max flight time up to 55 minutes and carries a weather rating of IP55 allowing flight during inclimate weather. The system integrates 6- directional sensing and positioning sensors increasing safety during flight and has the ability to carry up to 2.7KG allowing the mounting of 3rd party cameras enhancing situational awareness. This system can be utilized for both field deployments and/or as a Drone as First Responder (DFR).

DJI Matrice 30T: The DJI Matrice 30T (M30T) feature 54 km/h wind resistance and the ability to fly in snow, heavy rain (IP55 rating), and temperature as low as -20°C (4°F). The M30T comes with a 48MP 1/2″ CMOS sensor optical zoom camera (5-16×) optical and 200× digital zoom, a 12MP wide-angle camera, 8K photo 4K@30fps video resolution, 1920×1080@30fps FPV camera, and a laser rangefinder which can give the precise coordinates of objects up to 1,200 meters away. Additionally, the M30T features a 640×512 pixel radiometric thermal camera. Designed for harsh flight conditions, the DJI M30T comes with built-in advanced redundancy systems to help keep critical missions going even in unexpected scenarios. The M30T features three-propeller Emergency Landing. In the unlikely case of a motor malfunction during flight, the M30T can make an emergency landing with just three propellers/motors. In addition to DJI’s four-antenna OcuSYnc 3 communication system, the M30T features an LTE GSM link for backup transmission that allows it to maintain connection in complex terrains. While in FCC mode the range is up to 15KM, in CE/SRRC/MIC modes is 8Km. The TB30 intelligent flight 6S battery has a total power of 131.6 Wh and provides up to 41 minutes of flight time.

The expected hovering time is about 36 minutes. The smart battery pack has the following built-in safety features: Anti-Backflow, Short Circuit, Over Voltage, Over Current, and Temperature.

DJI Avata: The DJI Avata makes it easy to film ultra-wide 4K stabilized video indoors or outside, in and around objects. Sporting what some call a "cinewhoop" design, the Avata comes in a palm-sized form factor with all four propellers protected with attached guards. This allows for close-up filming indoors, near people, and through small openings without risking damage or injury to people and property. If the Avata does come in contact, it can just bounce off and keep flying. For a more immersive experience with intuitive controls, you can opt to pair the Avata with optional Goggles 2, FPV Goggles V2, and the DJI Motion Controller.

DJI Mavic Mini 3 Pro: The tiny and lightweight DJI Mini 3 Pro is sub-250g and is a member of DJI’s “Mini Series”. The Mini 3 Pro has the addition of a tri-directional obstacle avoidance system which is a significant improvement over its predecessors. The drone has many improved features from previous versions to include a bigger sensor – now a 1/1.3-inch CMOS chip; its lens's maximum aperture has been increased to a bright f/1.7; its video capabilities have been vastly improved; and the camera can be rotated 90 degrees, enabling the ability to capture stills and video in both landscape and portrait format.

Formatted: Superscript

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 2 Council Approval Date:

DJI Mavic 4 (M4): Mavic 4 is the next generation of UAS the department primarily utilizes for field deployments. The latest version provides a safer, more reliable platform utilizing enhanced sensing capabilities to aid in collision avoidance and consistent connectivity between the UAS and controller.The system utilizes integrated color and infrared thermal cameras to provide situational awareness as well as an integrated laser range finder to determine distance and location. The system can also be fitted with an auxiliary light to aid in providing visible light to a scene during night deployments.

DJI Mavic 3/3TD: Mavic 3 offers significantly improved imaging performance thanks to its 4/3 CMOS Hasselblad camera and 24mm-equivalent lightweight lens. It can record up to 5.1K/50fps or 4K/120fps videos. Mavic 3 Cine supports Apple ProRes 422 HQ, Apple ProRes 422, and Apple ProRes 422 LT encoding. The tele lens of the dual-camera system supports explore mode for 28x hybrid zoom, allowing to see more of the environment with ease. The flight experience has also been comprehensively improved with the flight time extended to 46 minutes and a hover time of 40 minutes. The incredibly stable O3+ technology, video transmission can reach up to 15 km and supports 1080p/60fps real-time transmission. DJI Mavic 3 is equipped with an omnidirectional obstacle sensing system, which is multiple wide-angle vision sensors onboard work together seamlessly with a high-performance vision computing engine to sense obstacles in all directions precisely and plan a safe flight route that avoids obstacles.

The Mavic 3TD is capable of being integrated with the DJI Box 2, providing a secure housing for the UAS, wireless charging, and the ability to launch from a fixed location utilizing DFR.

DJI Phantom 4 Pro: The Phantom 4 Pro’s camera shoots 4K/60fps at a bitrate of 100Mbps and stills up to 20-megapixels. The Flight Autonomy system adds dual rear vision sensors and two Time of Flight range imaging cameras for a total of 5 directions of obstacle sensing with a range of up to 30m in all directions. The Lightbridge HD video transmission system offers an extended maximum transmission range of 4.3mi (7km) with the ability to switch between 2.4GHz and 5.8GHz. The aircraft’s Intelligent Flight Battery also have increased capacity by 520mAh to enable an extended flight time of 30 minutes.

DJI Mavic 2 Enterprise: The Mavic 2 Enterprise Dual features a 24mm camera with a 1/2.3" 12MP sensor and FLIR thermal imaging sensor. The cameras can capture up to UHD 4K resolution video at 30 fps, or thermal imaging images and temperature data. The Mavic 2 Enterprise can achieve speeds of up to 44.7 mph, and the four-cell LiPo battery provides up to 31 minutes of flight time. The Mavic 2 Enterprise Dual also supports OcuSync 2.0 video transmission system. Additionally, there are three modular accessories to include a spotlight, speaker, and beacon. The Mavic 2 Enterprise also has omnidirectional obstacle sensing.

DJI Mavic 2 Zoom: The Mavic 2 Zoom features a 24-48mm 2x optical zoom camera with 1/2.3" 12MP sensor and a 4x lossless zoom (including 2x optical zoom). The Mavic 2 Zoom utilizes a low-drag aerodynamic body design for achieving speeds up to 44.7 mph, a four-cell LiPo battery for up to 31 minutes of flight time, and low-noise propellers for filming without being distracting. The Mavic 2 Zoom also supports OcuSync 2.0 video transmission system. Additionally, there are three modular accessories to include a spotlight, speaker, and beacon. The Mavic 2 Enterprise also has omnidirectional obstacle sensing.

DJI Mavic Mini: The Mavic Mini from DJI is a compact drone weighing in at under 9 oz. The Mavic Mini has 3-axis gimbal and sophisticated flight modes that can achieve up to 12MP images, 2.7K Quad HD videos, and complex cinematic shots with access to the DJI Fly app. The Mini drone features up to 30 minutes of flight time on a full battery charge.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 3 Council Approval Date:

DJI Mavic Enterprise 2 Advanced: The Mavic 2 Enterprise Advanced features a 35 mm format camera with a 48 MP visual camera and high resolution 640 x 512 Thermal Resolution. The cameras can capture up to UHD 4K resolution video at 30 fps, or thermal imaging images and temperature data.

The Mavic 2 Enterprise can achieve speeds of up to 44.7 mph, and the four-cell LiPo battery provides up to 31 minutes of flight time. Additionally, there are three modular accessories to include a spotlight, speaker, and beacon. The Mavic 2 Enterprise also has omnidirectional obstacle sensing.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 4 Council Approval Date:

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Unmanned aerial systems may be utilized through field deployment and Drone as First Responder (DFR) operations to enhance the department’s mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective. Field deployed UAS are deployed “in the field” at or near the scene of incidents while DFR utilizes UAS deployed from a fixed location enabling a faster UAS response to qualifying calls. Since the development of the City of Fremont Public Safety UAS program in 2017, the Fremont Fire Department and the Fremont Police Department have supported each other in UAS operations and will continue to do so. Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations.

Fiscal Impacts: Costs associated with replacement/repair of equipment ~ $5,000; the price of the UAV is based upon each specific model. The most expensive UAV is the Matrice 30T with a $14,000 price for the UAV. The allotted annual fiscal budget is $50,000 which includes software, UAVs, Training budget, and built-in overtime budget.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the UAV is in accordance with Fremont Police Department Unmanned Ariel Systems (UAS) Policy (614) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Regulations.

Training Required: Basic in-house training course of 16 hours, bi-annual training for 8 hours, mandatory 1 hour of flight time per month to stay current for proficiencies.

Other: UAVs consistently improve and advance from year to year. There may be times when equipment becomes available that are imperative for successfully operating the fleet while old technology becomes obsolete.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 5 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: City of Fremont- Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV) CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(5) Quantity Owned/Sought: 1 Lifespan: ~15 years
Equipment Capabilities: The vehicle provides mobile, remote access to radio, internet planning and operational resources to assist with the command and control of major incidents and other planned operations. The vehicle also has the capability to dispatch officers and firefighters, as well as receive 9-1-1 calls.

Manufacture Product Description: The City of Fremont- Mobile Command Vehicle was built in conjunction with the Fremont Fire and Fremont Police Departments as a unified command vehicle but can also alternate between fire specific and police specific missions. The vehicle was custom built by Pierce Manufacturing in Appleton Wisconsin in 2013. The vehicle has a fire truck chassis.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The MCV can be deployed for any fire and/or police incidents which it would be deemed beneficial to do so.

Fiscal Impacts: The initial costs of the MCV was approximately $1.2 million which was subsidized by UASI (Urban Areas Security Initiatives)- US Department of Homeland Security grants. The annual upkeep for the vehicle is approximately $5000.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: Fremont Police Department Lexipol policy 802.8.1 allows the use of the MCV as means of restoring 9-1-1 call processing. A Class B license is required to drive the vehicle.

Training Required: A Class B license is required to drive the vehicle. There are 2 Special Response Team (SRT) members who are assigned to the vehicle during operations to facilitate its operation.

Other: The MCV is not a tactical vehicle but rather a multi-purpose vehicle to help facilitate command and control during field incidents by both the Fremont Fire Department as well as the Fremont Police Department by providing intelligence assets. The vehicle does not have any armor nor is it deployed in such a manner as it to be used in such a way. The vehicle is to be deployed at the periphery of a tactical incident if one such arises.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 6 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Lenco BearCat G2-CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(3) Quantity Owned/Sought: 1 Lifespan: ~15 years
Equipment Capabilities: The vehicle is equipped with emergency lights/sires, rotating roof hatch, electric winches, running boards, protection against chemical agents, back-up camera, battering ram attachment, CS (tear gas) deployment nozzle, Thermographic cameras, and spot/flood lights. The vehicle is armored with a 0.5 – 1.5” thick steel and ballistic windows rated to stop a 0.50 caliber bullet.

Manufacture Product Description: The Lenco BearCat G2 is the standard tactical armored vehicle for special operations units within the US Law Enforcement community. Since the early 2000s, agencies such as LAPD, LASD SEB, NYPD ESU, Boston PD and hundreds of Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement agencies have made the BearCat G2 part of their standard operating procedure. The G2 has excellent on-road driving characteristics and maneuverability in tight urban settings. The large floor plan seats 10 – 12 fully equipped officers.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The Bearcat is primarily used for Special Weapons and Tactics Team (SWAT) incidents, safe transport of SWAT personnel to and from critical incidents, high risk warrant service operations, dangerous high risk tactical operations, high risk rescue operations, training, community engagement efforts and any other applications deemed appropriate and approved by the SWAT Commander, Division Commander or Chief of Police.

Fiscal Impacts: The cost of the Bearcat was approximately $323,726, which was purchased through a UASI (Urban Areas Security Initiative)- US Department of Homeland Security grant.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the Lenco bearcat G2 is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 704
Training Required: Officers are to be trained in the operation of the Bearcat and MedEvac prior to use. Training requirements will be set by the SWAT Commander in cooperation with the Emergency Vehicle Operations (EVOC) Training Manager. Training will include knowledge of this policy, rules of the road and basic knowledge of electronic/mechanical functions on the vehicle. The training will also include a driving exercise. SWAT personnel will receive advanced training and are expected to maintain a higher level of operational knowledge and expertise.

Only FPD personnel who have completed training and possess a valid California Driver’s License will be authorized to drive/operate the Bearcat or MedEvac, unless a delayed deployment of an ARV would result in serious bodily injury or death.

The SWAT Commander or his/her designee is responsible for training officers on proper use, driving techniques and ensuring the vehicle is properly serviced and maintained.

Other: The vehicle is designed to meet the tactical needs of law enforcement agencies tasked with responding to acts of violence and/or terrorism. The purpose is to enhance law enforcement’s ability to serve and protect the community.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 7 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Lenco BearCat/MedEvac- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(3) Quantity Owned/Sought: 1 Lifespan: 15 years
Equipment Capabilities: The BearCat/MedEvac is also referred to as the MedCat . The vehicle is equipped with two medical litters, oxygen tanks, a lighted work station, and compartments for medical supplies and gear storage. The vehicle has 0.5 to 1.5” steel and bullet resistant windows.

There is also a nozzle with a water connector in case it is needed for fire suppression.

Manufacture Product Description: The Lenco BearCat Medevac, also known as the MedCat, was designed to meet the combined requirements of SWAT & Tactical EMS Teams. This BearCat model can be used as an armored Response & Rescue SWAT truck for dangerous call-outs and is equipped to provide Tactical EMS with a safe & effective environment to deal with trauma cases.

The Law Enforcement variant of the MedCat comes standard with (2) tactical litters secured to extended bench seating. There are on-board Oxygen tanks with a lighted work station, a radio compartment work station and ample interior compartments for medical supplies & gear storage.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The MedEvac is primarily used by the Tactical Emergency Medicine (TEMS) component of the Special Weapons and Tactics Team (SWAT) to provide emergency medical staff, equipment, and other rescue capabilities during high-risk operations. The MedEvac may also be utilized in a manner consistent with authorized use of the Bearcat. The MedEvac may be used in other situations deemed appropriate and approved by the SWAT Commander, Division Commander or Chief of Police.

The purpose and intent of the acquisition and deployment of this vehicle is to enhance and sustain regional preparedness for first responders in major urban areas by allowing for delivery of emergency medical services into on-going hazardous situations. This will allow law enforcement, fire service staff, and medical personnel the ability to safely enter unsecured and unstable areas (warm or hot zone).

This vehicle will assist with providing immediate medical assistance, enhancing the ability of first responders to rescue persons in need and help protect first responders at the scene of an emergency situation.

Fiscal Impacts: The MedEvac is a Bay Area regional asset and was acquired through a joint cooperative effort between the Fremont Police Department and the San Leandro Police Department with financial assistance from Cal OES Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Homeland Security Grant Program). The approximate price is $300,000.

Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the MedEvac is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 704.

Training Required: Officers are to be trained in the operation of the Bearcat and MedEvac prior to use. Training requirements will be set by the SWAT Commander in cooperation with the Emergency Vehicle Operations (EVOC) Training Manager. Training will include knowledge of this policy, rules of the road and basic knowledge of electronic/mechanical functions on the vehicle. The training will also include a driving exercise. SWAT personnel will receive advanced training and are expected to maintain a higher level of operational knowledge and expertise.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 8 Council Approval Date:

The SWAT Commander or his/her designee is responsible for training officers on proper use, driving techniques and ensuring the vehicle is properly serviced and maintained.

Other: The City of Fremont Police Department shares responsibility for the MedEvac with the City of San Leandro Police Department. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been established between the two agencies. The MOU outlines deployment responsibilities, ongoing maintenance and repair obligations, notification procedures and conflict resolution options. Both agencies jointly and separately agreed to abide by the terms and provisions of the MOU and respective department policies during the existence of the MOU. The MedEvac is by default, housed at the San Leandro Police Department.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 9 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Ford Transit-350 Crew - CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(5) Quantity Owned/Sought: 1 Lifespan: 5 – 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Ford Van has storage space for the Hostage Negotiations Team (HNT) including battery storage and the throw phone. There is a large battery and a power inverter to assist with maintaining electronic equipment pertinent to establishing and maintaining communications with tactical operations and/or tactical negotiations.

Manufacture Product Description: There are no manufacture product description as this was a unique vehicle made specifically for HNT on a Ford Transit 350 chassis.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: The HNT vehicle can be deployed for any or police incidents which it would be deemed beneficial to do so.

Fiscal Impacts: Approximately $50,000
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the vehicle is reserved for HNT personnel (governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 407.8) as well as the department fleet guidelines (Lexipol Policy 705).

Training Required: The training for this vehicle is governed by Lexipol Policy 407.8.2.

Other: Not Applicable

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 10 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Icor Caliber T5 Robot- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(1) Quantity Owned/Sought: 1 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: Command and Control Unit (CCU) with multi-function control and variable- speed joystick, Two-way communication (talk/listen), lifts up to 45 lbs (20kg) arm retracted and 18 (8kg) arm extended, 360 degree rotating robotic claw with color charge-coupled device camera on telescoping arm, 36x optical zoom pan-tilt-zoom color camera.

Manufacture Product Description: The Icor Caliber T5 Robot is a medium-sized robot designed for remote handling and Render Safe Procedures of IEDDs and other explosive ordnances, reconnaissance missions, two-way communication and deliver/retrieval tasks.

The T5 is uniquely equipped with two robotic arms (a heavy-duty robotic claw and twin-disruptor turret).

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Used to assist Fremont Police Department SRT Operators with inspecting suspicious packages thus rendering them safe, clearing residences and/or businesses during tactical operations, assisting officers and the community by clearing potentially dangerous building during tactical situations.

Fiscal Impacts: Initial purchase of $67000
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the robot is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 407.7.2(b).

Training Required: One-day course in Robot Operation and Maintenance as well as access to a virtual training portal.

Other: Recognizing that the missions of the SRT are performed in a hazardous environment, and recognizing that the safety of innocent persons, officers, and suspects is often jeopardized by the hazardous conditions, it shall be the intent of SRT to utilize special equipment in an attempt to lessen the risk of injury or death to all involved during the performance of a SRT operation. The SRT Commander will ensure that only those team members properly trained and certified in the use of the special equipment will utilize the equipment.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 11 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Defense Technologies Low Roll 12 gram non reloadable distraction device with safety clip (model: 8902NR)- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(12) Quantity Owned/Sought: 75+ Lifespan: 5 years
Equipment Capabilities: The use of this device is to create a diversion during critical incidents. The device exploded with a loud bang and emits a bright light made to disorient the suspect(s).

Manufacture Product Description: The Tactical Diversionary Device utilizes a M201A1 type fuse with a single use aluminum body. This compact unit is designed around a 6.5-gram water resistant charge, capable of producing an effective, yet reduced 162dB stimuli. Its size and shape are industry familiar and allow it to fit in standard tactical pouches. The device should only be deployed in areas that have been visually observed to be clear of potential hazards. It is recommended that the immediate area for deployment be visually affirmed to be clear of personnel and that the device is delivered so that the ports are free from obstruction. If the bottom ports are obstructed by an object or wall, the device body may move. The cleared area for deployment should be 5 - 6 feet around which the device is expected to come to rest.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Used during critical incidents as a diversionary device to disorient suspects.

Fiscal Impacts: $51 each
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of flashbangs is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 407.7.2(b).

Training Required: specialized training as deemed by the SRT Commander Other: Recognizing that the missions of the SRT are performed in a hazardous environment, and recognizing that the safety of innocent persons, officers, and suspects is often jeopardized by the hazardous conditions, it shall be the intent of SRT to utilize special equipment in an attempt to lessen the risk of injury or death to all involved during the performance of a SRT operation. The SRT Commander will ensure that only those team members properly trained and certified in the use of the special equipment will utilize the equipment.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 12 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Deftech LMT 40 mm kinetic energy projectiles with 40mm projectiles- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(14)
Quantity Owned/Sought: 110 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: This department is committed to reducing the potential for violent confrontations. Kinetic energy projectiles, when used properly, are less likely to result in death or serious physical injury and can be used in an attempt to de-escalate a potentially deadly situation.

Department approved kinetic energy projectiles are fired from 40 mm launchers.

Manufacture Product Description: The 40LMTS is a tactical single shot launcher that features an expandable ROGERS Super Stoc and an adjustable Integrated Front Grip (IFG) with light rail. The ambidextrous Lateral Sling Mount (LSM) and QD mounting systems allow both a single- and two-point sling attachment. The 40LMTS will fire standard 40mm less lethal ammunition, up to 4.8 inches in cartridge length. The Picatinny Rail Mounting System will accept a wide array of enhanced optics/sighting systems.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: A sworn peace officer may utilize the Kinetic Energy Projectile in the discharge of his/her duties when other options have been exhausted, are ineffective, or are inappropriate during attempts to control or subdue combative or violent individuals and the use of deadly force can be forestalled.

The Kinetic Energy Projectile shall be used with discretion and care in circumstances which permit the lawful use of lethal or less lethal force.

Fiscal Impacts: $809.75 per 40mm launcher and $18.35 per 40mm projectile Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of 40mm kinetic energy projectile is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 305.9.

Training Required: The Training Sergeant shall ensure that all personnel who are authorized to carry a control device have been properly trained and certified to carry the specific control device and are retrained or recertified as necessary.

Proficiency training shall be monitored and documented by a certified, control-device weapons instructor.

All training and proficiency for control devices will be documented in the officer's training file.

Other: The SWAT Unit vehicles, each patrol supervisor's vehicle, and most patrol vehicles are equipped with a launcher for delivery of the Kinetic Energy Projectile. The Kinetic Energy Projectile will only be used by a supervisor or officer who has been trained in the use of the appropriate delivery system.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 13 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Tippmann FTC Pepper ball launchers- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(12) Quantity Owned/Sought: 14 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The pepper ball launcher is semi-automatic, firing rate of 10-12 RPS, 13 Cubic inch high pressure air system using CO2. The launcher deploys a hard-plastic frangible sphere that is designed to burst upon impact.

Manufacture Product Description: FTC is a high-capacity, semi-automatic launcher that is perfect for crowd management and mobile field force operations. Reliable and accurate, it features a hopper that can hold up to 180 rounds and a flexible air source configuration.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Pepper projectiles are plastic spheres that are filled with a derivative of OC powder. Because the compressed gas launcher delivers the projectiles with enough force to burst the projectiles on impact and release the OC powder, the potential exists for the projectiles to inflict injury if they strike the head, neck, spine or groin. Therefore, personnel using a pepper projectile system should not intentionally target those areas, except when the officer reasonably believes the suspect poses an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death to the officer or others.

The effective operational distance for departmentally-approved pepper projectiles is from 5 feet to 120 feet. In an effort to lower the probability of serious bodily injury or death to the suspect, any discharge of less than 10 feet should be intentionally aimed at the arms or legs only.

Fiscal Impacts: $394.44 per launcher
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the pepper ball launcher is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 305.7.2.

Training Required: The training for the use of the pepper ball launcher is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 305.10 which states: The Training Sergeant shall ensure that all personnel who are authorized to carry a control device have been properly trained and certified to carry the specific control device and are retrained or recertified as necessary. a. Proficiency training shall be monitored and documented by a certified, control-device weapons instructor.
b. All training and proficiency for control devices will be documented in the officer's training file. c. Officers who fail to demonstrate proficiency with the control device or knowledge of this agency's Use of Force Policy will be provided remedial training. If an officer cannot demonstrate proficiency with a control device or knowledge of this agency's Use of Force Policy after remedial training, the officer will be restricted from carrying the control device.

Other: Not Applicable

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 14 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Remington Breaching Shotgun (Model 870, 12 Gauge)- - CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(8)
Quantity Owned/Sought: 25 Lifespan: 15-20 years
Equipment Capabilities: To quickly force entry through locked and/or barricaded doors, the Department authorizes the use of the breaching shotgun. The use of the breaching shotgun allows officers to defeat doors that mechanical breaching tools would normally be unable to open. The primary function of the breaching shotgun is for forcing entry. Although the breaching shotgun is a firearm, it has been modified for breaching purposes. Additionally, the selected ammunition is frangible and designed to defeat door locks and hinges.

Manufacture Product Description: From Remington Arms: Starting with a receiver machined from an 81/2-pound billet of steel might not be the easiest way to build a shotgun, but the end result is well worth the extra effort. No other pump shotgun can match the Model 870's strength and smooth, effortless operation.

Its legendary reliability is the heart of its popularity, as evidenced by the more than 13 million outdoorsmen, law enforcement officers, competitive shooters and home defenders who have chosen the never-say-die pump gun since its introduction in 1950. That same reliability has made the Model 870 one of the most adaptable shotgun designs ever, and the best-selling shotgun of all time.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: When a decision has been made to conduct an emergency entry, the breaching shotgun may only be used when it appears reasonably necessary to prevent death or great bodily injury. Officers are also required to obtain the approval of a supervisor unless the circumstances make it impractical to obtain authorization and/or delayed response would jeopardize the safety of citizens, officers or suspect(s).

Fiscal Impacts: $500 each
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the breaching shotgun is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 301.

Training Required: The training for the use of the breaching shotgun is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 301.2.2 which states: Only officers trained and having shown adequate proficiency in the use of the breaching shotgun and the Use of Force policy are authorized to carry the device. Training for the breaching shotgun shall occur annually. All training and proficiency for the breaching shotgun will be documented in the officer's training record. Officers failing to demonstrate proficiency with the weapon or knowledge of the Use of Force policy will be provided remedial training.

Other: Breaching shotguns will be stored in the locked trunks or locked storage cabinets of all patrol supervisor and School Resource Officer vehicles. They may be stored in the same case as the less- lethal weapons; however, the breaching shotgun shall be placed under the less-lethal weapons and be separated by a partition which must be specifically removed in order to retrieve the breaching shotgun.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 15 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Sig Sauer MCX Virtus multi-caliber 223/556/300 black-out Rifle and Ammunition- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(10)
Quantity Owned/Sought: 11 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Sig Sauer MCX Virtus Rifle is a semi-automatic rifle and has an interchangeable caliber assembly allowing it to fire 223/556/300 blackout caliber projectiles.

Manufacture Product Description: The SIG MCX is a magazine fed, gas operated rifle available in

5.56x45mm NATO, and 7.62x35mm (.300 AAC Blackout), and 7.62 x 39mm calibers. The SIG MCX fires from a rotating locking closed bolt.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Officers may deploy the rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the rifle may include, but are not limited to:
a. Situations where the officer reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. b. When an officer is faced with a situation that may require the delivery of accurate and effective shot placement at long range.
c. Situations where an officer reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's weaponry.
d. When an officer reasonably believes that there may be a need to deliver accurate shot placement on a barricaded suspect or a suspect with a hostage. e. When an officer reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. f. When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
g. When needed to euthanize an animal.

Fiscal Impacts: $1720 per rifle
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force. Various Fremont Police Department Policies on Use of Force and Firearms.

Training Required: Officers must successfully complete a CA POST certified 24-hour patrol rifle course as well as regular department firearms training and qualifications as required by law and policy.

Other: These specific rifles are assigned to Fremont Police Department Detectives

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 16 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Sig Sauer MCX multi-caliber modular rifle, 300 BLK 5.75" duty barrel, a 5.56 caliber 11" barrel, with an optional Sig Sauer 7.62 titanium suppressor and "safe/semi" selector switch- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(10)
Quantity Owned/Sought: 27 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Sig Sauer MCX Sig Sauer MCX multi-caliber modular rifle, 300 BLK 5.75" duty barrel, a 5.56 caliber 11" barrel, with an optional Sig Sauer 7.62 titanium suppressor and "safe/semi" selector switch rifle and has an interchangeable caliber assembly allowing it to fire 223/556/300 blackout caliber projectiles.

Manufacture Product Description: The SIG MCX is a magazine fed, gas operated rifle available in

5.56x45mm NATO, and 7.62x35mm (.300 AAC Blackout), and 7.62 x 39mm calibers. The SIG MCX fires from a rotating locking closed bolt.

Other: These specific rifles are assigned to Fremont Police Department- Special Response Team.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 17 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Rock River Arms, LAR-15- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(10) Quantity Owned/Sought: 11 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The Rock River Arms, LAR-15 , is a .223 caliber, 10.5" barrel rifle with a "safe/semi" selector switch.

Manufacture Product Description: The Rock River Rams is a magazine fed, gas operated rifle available in .223 Caliber.

Other: These specific rifles are assigned to Fremont Police Department- Detectives.

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 18 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: PepperBall VKS launcher- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(12) Quantity Owned/Sought: 24 Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The VKS Pepper Ball launder is semi-automatic and has 10-15 pepper balls at a time in one magazine. Utilizing a Variable Kinetic System (VKS) and compressed air, it can launch non-lethal Pepper Ball projectiles up to 66 feet with regular rounds and up to 150 feet away with the VXR long distance projectiles. Upon impact the exploding ball release a 12-foot cloud of pepper spray irritant.

Manufacture Product Description: The VKS™ Launcher is strongest non-lethal consumer device available from PepperBall. It requires no license to own and shoots powerful pepper irritant projectiles. With the same look, feel and fire control system as an AR-15/M-4 carbine, when used with VXR projectiles (not included) it has an effective accurate distance of up to 150 feet.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Pepper projectiles are plastic spheres that are filled with a derivative of OC powder. Because the compressed gas launcher delivers the projectiles with enough force to burst the projectiles on impact and release the OC powder, the potential exists for the projectiles to inflict injury if they strike the head, neck, spine, or groin. Therefore, personnel using a pepper projectile system should not intentionally target those areas, except when the officer reasonably believes the suspect poses an imminent threat of serious bodily injury or death to the officer or others.

Fiscal Impacts: Approximately $1,200 per unit
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of the pepper ball launcher is governed by Fremont Police Department Control Devices and Techniques Policy 305.7.2.

Training Required: The training for the use of the pepper ball launcher is governed by Fremont Police Department Control Devices and Techniques Policy 305.10 which states: The Training Sergeant shall ensure that all personnel who are authorized to carry a control device have been properly trained and certified to carry the specific control device and are retrained or recertified as necessary. a. Proficiency training shall be monitored and documented by a certified, control-device weapons instructor.
b. All training and proficiency for control devices will be documented in the officer's training file. c. Officers who fail to demonstrate proficiency with the control device or knowledge of this agency's Use of Force Policy will be provided remedial training. If an officer cannot demonstrate proficiency with a control device or knowledge of this agency's Use of Force Policy after remedial training, the officer will be restricted from carrying the control device.

Other: Not Applicable

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 19 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Defense Technologies CS Gas systems- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(12) Quantity Owned/Sought:

Pocket Tactical CS (part #1016)- 23
Spede Heat CS (part #1072)- 20
40mm Ferret Round CS (part #2262)- 50
Tri-chamber flameless CS (part #1032)- 20
Triple Chaser CS (part #1026)- 44
Han-ball CS (part #1092)- 8
75 yard 40mm Spede heat (part #6282)- 4
Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The use of OC/CS gas causes mucous membranes and exposed skin to become inflamed resulting in a burning sensation. It provides a temporary respiratory effect and induces discomfort on exposed skin.

Manufacture Product Description:

The Pocket Tactical CS Grenade: small, and lightweight. The 0.9 oz. of active agent will burn approximately 20-40 seconds. At 4.75 in. by 1.4 inches in size, it easily fits in most tactical pouches.

This is a launchable grenade; however it is normally used as a signaling or covering device. Though this device is slightly over four inches in length, it produces a smoke cloud so fast it appears to be an enveloping screen produced by a full size tactical grenade.

The Spede-Heat™ CS Grenade: a high volume, continuous burn it expels its payload in approximately 20-40 seconds. The payload is discharged through four gas ports on top of the canister, three on the side and one on the bottom. This launchable grenade is 6.12 in. by 2.62 in. and holds approximately

2.9 oz. of active agent.

The Ferret® 40mm Round: non-burning and suitable for indoor use. Used primarily by tactical teams, it is designed to penetrate barriers, such as windows, hollow core doors, wallboard and thin plywood.

Upon impacting the barrier, the nose cone ruptures and instantaneously delivers a small chemical payload inside of a structure or vehicle.

In a tactical deployment situation, the 40mm Ferret is primarily used to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas. Its purpose is to minimize the risks to all parties through pain compliance, temporary discomfort and/or incapacitation of potentially violent or dangerous subjects.

Tri-Chamber Flameless CS Grenade: allows the contents to burn within an internal can and disperse the agent safely with reduced risk of fire. The grenade is designed primarily for indoor tactical situations to detect and/or dislodge a barricaded subject. This grenade will deliver approximately .70 oz. of agent during its 20-25 seconds burn time. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade can be used in crowd control as well as tactical deployment situations by Law Enforcement and Corrections, but was designed with the barricade situation in mind. Its applications in tactical situations are primarily to detect and/or dislodge barricaded subjects. The purpose of the Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade is to minimize the risks to all parties through pain compliance, temporary discomfort, and/or

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 20 Council Approval Date:

incapacitation of potentially violent or dangerous subjects. The Tri-Chamber Flameless Grenade provides the option of delivering a pyrotechnic chemical device indoors, maximizing the chemicals’ effectiveness via heat and vaporization, while minimizing or negating the chance of fire to the structure.

The Triple-Chaser® CS: consists of three separate canisters pressed together with separating charges between each. When deployed, the canisters separate and land approximately 20 feet apart allowing increased area coverage in a short period of time. This grenade can be hand thrown or launched from a fired delivery system. The grenade is 6.5 in. by 2.7 in. and holds an approximately 3.2 oz. of active agent payload. It has an approximate burn time of 20-30 seconds.

The Han-Ball™ CS Grenade: an outdoor use grenade expelling its payload in approximately 15-20 seconds. The rubber ball round has an over all size of 4.8 in. tall, including the fuze head, and 3.1 in. diameter. This launchable grenade holds approximately 1.6 oz. of active agent which is expelled through three ports around the equator of the ball. Due the intense heat generated by this grenade, it should not be used inside a building or near flammable material.

The Spede-Heat™ 40mm Short Range CS Round: incorporates an aluminum shell and utilizes black powder as the propellant. The Spede-Heat™ 40mm Short Range Round is designed to deliver one dual-ported chemical canister from a 40mm launcher 75 yards to the intended target zone.

The Spede-Heat™ 40mm Short Range CS Round is most widely used as a crowd management tool by Law Enforcement and Corrections for the rapid deployment of chemical agent from a 40mm launcher.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Utilized during confrontations with violent or potentially violent suspects as a less lethal option to assist with the dispersal of violent crowds and/or arrest of suspects.

Fiscal Impacts: approximately $7500
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of this equipment is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 407.7.2(b).

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) 21 Council Approval Date:

Equipment Name: Defense Technologies flashbang systems- CA Gov’t Code § 7070 (c)(12) Quantity Owned/Sought:
100 Meter 40mm Aerial Flashbang- 24
75 Meter 40mm Aerial Flashbang- 6
Lifespan: 10 years
Equipment Capabilities: The use of this device is to create a diversion during critical incidents. The device exploded with a loud bang and emits a bright light made to disorient the suspect(s). These particular variants can be deployed from a 40mm launcher.

Manufacture Product Description: The 40 mm Warning/Signaling Munition will produce 170 dB of sound and 5 million candelas of light. This munition has an operational range of 100 and 75 meters.

Launched from a 40 mm platform, this munition gives the operator the ability to engage people, vehicles or vessels from a safe stand-off position. In open waters, the flash and sound are easily observable at great distances.

Purpose/Authorized Uses: Used during critical incidents as a diversionary device to disorient and illuminate suspects.

Fiscal Impacts: approximately $700
Legal/Procedural Rules Governing Use: The use of flashbangs is governed by Fremont Police Department Lexipol Policy 407.7.2(b).

2.C.b
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Exhibit 1 for Military Equipment Policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont Police Department
April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment Use Report

INSIDE THIS REPORT

• Our Mission, Vision, and Values ..………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 • Preface ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 3 • Background: Assembly Bill 481 ……………….…………………………………………………………………………………… 4 • Summary and Quantity of Military Equipment ………………………………………………………………..…………… 5 • Military Equipment Use ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 6-8 • Summary of Complaints ...………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….. 9 • Summary and Responses to Military Equipment Policy Use Violations ….……………...………………..…. 10 • Fiscal Impact ..…..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…… 11 • Training Summary and Costs ……………………………………………………………………………….…………………….. 12 • Equipment Costs ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 • Projected Acquisitions ………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………….14 • Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………….. 15 2000 Stevenson Blvd.

Fremont, CA 94538
www.fremontpolice.gov

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 2 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

OUR MISSION, VISION, AND VALUES
• Our Mission is to provide "Public Safety through Professional Law Enforcement" • Our Vision is "A continuing Tradition of Excellence"
• Our Values are:
 Dedication - Fremont Police employees are loyal to the community, profession, and organization. We fulfill our mission by constantly improving and acting in a selfless manner.
 Integrity - Fremont Police employees are fully forthcoming and honest. We do not hide our mistakes. We derive our authority from the community. Integrity, truthfulness, and justice are the cornerstones of our interaction with each other, with our community, and our profession.
 Professionalism - Fremont Police employees strive to do the right thing all the time, based on our skills and knowledge. We subscribe to a rigorous code of conduct and continued self-development. We represent the organization and the profession in a positive way.
 Community Partnership – Fremont Police employees value our relationship with the community. Effective policing requires public trust and support. We work to build trust, cooperation, and communication with all members of our public.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont Police Department
April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

Page 3 ends

PREFACE

Fremont Police Department (FPD) is committed to maintaining public trust, community partnership, transparency, accountability, best practices and compliance with the law. As such, the Department has developed and published this Military Equipment Use Report in accordance with Assembly Bill 481, Government Code 7072 and FPD Military Equipment Use Policy. This document reports on information covering the period of April 2024—March 2025. The following information is included in this report (Government Code 7072(a)):

1. A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use.

2. A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment.

3. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and/or any actions taken in response.

4. The total annual costs for each type of military equipment, including acquisitions, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report.

5. The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment.

6. The additional military equipment FPD intends to acquire in the next year, and the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.

EQUIPMENT OVERVIEW:

Fremont Police Department does not possess any tactical equipment that it has obtained from the military, nor does it possess any equipment that was designed for military use. FPD does not participate in the Law Enforcement Support Officer (LESO) 10-33 program. The Department does not currently receive or utilize surplus military equipment from the Federal government. It is the policy of Fremont Police Department to acquire and use equipment designed to enhance municipal law enforcement's ability to ensure public safety and welfare.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 4 ends

BACKGROUND: ASSEMBLY BILL 481
On September 30, 2021, Governor Newsom approved AB-481 requiring law enforcement agencies to obtain approval of the applicable governing body (City Council), by adoption of a military equipment use policy. The Department is required to seek City Council approval of their military equipment use procedure by ordinance at a regular open meeting prior to taking certain actions relating to the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment, as defined.

Effective January 1, 2022, AB 481 allows the governing body to approve the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment within its jurisdiction only if it determines that the military equipment meets specified standards. The ordinance is subject to annual City Council review to determine whether, based on an annual military equipment use report, the standards set forth in the approving ordinance have been met. The City Council may renew the authorizing ordinance, disapprove authorization for particular military equipment where standards have not been met, or require modifications to the military equipment use policy to address any non-compliance with standards.

Finally, the bill requires publication of the military equipment use policy and the annual military equipment use report on the Department’s website. The military equipment use procedure must be posted on the website at least 30 days prior to the Council meeting.

The full text of AB 481 is available at https://www.fremontpolice.gov/ab481.

Fremont Police Department
April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report
The term "military equipment," as used in Government Code § 7070, in fact does not necessarily indi- cate equipment that has been used by the military. Pursuant to AB 481, items deemed to be "military equipment" include, but are not limited to, unmanned aerial or ground vehicles, armored vehicles, command and control vehicles, pepper-ball launchers, less lethal shotguns, less lethal 40mm projectile launchers, long range acoustic devices, and distraction devices.

It is the policy of FPD to acquire and use equipment designed to enhance law enforcement's ability to ensure public safety and welfare. It is the policy of FPD that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code § 7071 and Fremont Municipal Code Chapter 8.80 with respect to military equipment use. California Government Code § 7070 provides a list of equipment types that are considered to be "military equipment" for purposes of this report, and FPD Military Equipment Use Pol- icy includes information for any such equipment types that are utilized by Fremont Police Department.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 5 ends

SUMMARY AND QUANTITY OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT
The following constitutes a list of military equipment utilized by the Department that meets the statutory definition of military equipment:

1. Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS/Drones) (Current Quantity: 14)

2. City of Fremont Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV) (Current Quantity: 1)

3. Lenco BearCat G2 (Current Quantity: 1)

4. Lenco BearCat/MedEvac (Current Quantity: 1) - Shared with San Leandro

5. Ford Transit – 350 Crew (Current Quantity: 1 )

6. Icor Caliber T5 Robot (Current Quantity: 1)

7. Defense Technologies Low Roll 12 gram non reloadable distraction device with safety clip (Current Quantity: NFDD (part #8902NRSC/8902NR-HH) – 27, Training Fuze (part #1697TSC) – 28)

8. Deftech LMT 40 mm kinetic energy projectiles with 40 mm projectiles (Current Quantity: 110)

9. Remington Breaching Shotgun (Model 870, 12 Gauge) (Current Quantity: 25)

10. Sig Sauer MCX Virtus multi-caliber 223/556/300 black-out rifle and ammunition (Current Quantity: 11)

11. Sig Sauer MCX multi-caliber modular rifle, 300 BLK 5.75" duty barrel, a 5/56 caliber 11" barrel (Current Quantity: 27)

12. Rock River Arms, LAR -15 (Current Quantity: 11)

13. Pepper-ball VKS Launcher (Current Quantity: 24)

14. Defense Technologies CS Gas systems (Current Quantity: Pocket Tactical CS (part #1016) - 21, Spede Heat CS (part #1072) - 20, 40mm Ferret Round CS (part #2262) - 69, Tri-chamber flameless CS (part #1032) - 21, Triple Chaser CS (part #1026) - 44, Han-ball CS (part #1092) - 0, 75 yard 40mm Spede heat (part #6282) - 24)

15. Defense Technologies flashbang systems (Current Quantity: 100-Meter 40mm Aerial Flashbang - 30, 75-Meter 40mm Aerial Flashbang - 0)
It should be noted, the numerical inventory of military equipment may fluctuate based upon a variety of reasons. Factors suc h as operational usage, operational deterioration, training, maintenance, and expiration and replenishment guidelines or schedules may change the quantity of inventory. Fremont Police Department is committed to providing the most accurate military equipment inventory and information at the time of the publication of this report. The current inventory list of FPD military equipment can be found at https://www.fremontpolice.gov/ab481.

Fremont Police Department
April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 6 ends

MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE
Fremont Police Department
April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report
This section outlines the military equipment usage for April 2024 - March 2025 by Fremont Police Department. Certain items of military equipment, particularly consumables (ammunition, diversionary devices, pepper balls, chemical agents, etc.) are used throughout the year on a regular basis for training in order to maintain proficiency. Training usage is NOT captured in this section. This section only provides data for the OPERATIONAL USE of military equipment listed within this annual report.

The mere possession of the equipment does not warrant its use for every incident.

The following is the data for military equipment usage by category for this reporting period:

1. UNMANNED AERIAL S YSTEMS (UAS/DRONES)

Unmanned Aerial Systems, also commonly referred to as “drones” were utilized a total of 1,005 times during this reporting period. These deployments include:

• UAS was deployed to conducting overwatch and intelligence gathering for investigative, specialty units, and Special Response Team (SRT) during critical incidents and investigations. • Assisting patrol with establishing overwatch during perimeters, search and rescue for missing at-risk persons.
• Conducted aerial evidence collection for the traffic unit at the scene of major collisions. • Assisting Crime Scene Investigators (CSIs) with the documentation of major investigations

More information can be found at: https://fremontpolice.gov/UAV

2. MOBILE COMMAND VE HICLE (MCV)

The Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV) was deployed a total of 5 times during this reporting period.

These deployments include:

• Support for SRT preplanned operations
• Special Events

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 7 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

3. LENCO BEARCAT G2

The Bearcat was deployed 18 times during this reporting period. These deployments include:

• SRT deployment for a pre-planned operations

• Patrol deployments during critical incidents where there is imminent threat to life.

• Special events

4. LENCO BEARCAT/MED EVAC

The Bearcat/Medevac was deployed 1 time during this reporting period. This deployment was in support of an SRT operation.

5. FORD TRANSIT - 350 CREW (HOSTAGE NEGOT IATOR TEAM)

The Ford Transit van is deployed exclusively with the Hostage Negotiator Team (HNT). The van was deployed 3 times during this reporting period. Some of the deployments include:

• Support for SRT preplanned operations

• Callout operations

6. ICOR CALIBER T5 R OBOT

The ICOR Caliber T5 Robot was deployed 4 times during this reporting period. These deployments were all for SRT operations.

7. DEFENSE TECHNOLOG IES LOW ROLL 12 GRAM NON-RELOADABLE DIST RACTION DEVICE WITH SAFETY CLIP (MODEL: 8902NR)

The Defense Technologies Low Roll 12 Gram Non-Reloadable Distraction Device with Safety Clip has been deployed 0 times during this reporting period.

8. DEFENSE TECHNOLOG IES LMT 40 MM KINETIC ENERGY PROJECTILES WITH 40MM

PROJECTILES

The Defense Technologies LMT 40 MM Kinetic Energy Projectiles was deployed/discharged 10 times during this reporting period. The 40 MM launcher was deployed in to assist in the de-escalation process in the pursuit and apprehension of violent suspects.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 8 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

9. TIPPMANN FTC PEPP ER BALL LAUNCHERS

The Tippmann FTC Pepper Ball Launchers were deployed/discharged 0 times during this reporting period. These systems are no longer being deployed in the field and have been replaced by the Pepper Ball VKS launchers. The department is working on properly decommissioning this equipment and will remove these items from reporting once they are no longer in inventory.

10. REMINGTON BREACH ING SHOTGUN (MODEL 8 70, 12 GAUGE)

Remington Breaching Shotguns was deployed/discharged 0 times during this reporting period.

11. SIG SAUER MCX VI RTUS MULTI -CALIBER 2 23/556/300 BLACK -OUT RIFLE AND AMMUNITIO N

Sig Sauer MCX Virtus Multi-Caliber 223/556/300 Black-out rifles were deployed/discharged 0 times during this reporting period.

12. SIG SAUER MCX MULTI-CALIBER MODULAR RIFLE, 300 BLK 5.75" DUTY BARREL, A 5/56 CALIBER 11" BARREL

Sig Sauer MCX multi-caliber modular rifle were deployed/discharged 0 times during this reporting period.

13. ROCK RIVER ARMS, LAR-15

Rock River Arms LAR-15s were deployed/discharged 0 times during this reporting period.

14. PEPPER BALL VKS LAUNCHER

Pepper ball VKS Launchers were deployed/discharged 6 times during this reporting period. The Pepper Ball VKS Launcher was deployed as a less lethal force option in incidents that included: the arrest of carjacking suspects, during the arrest of an attempt homicide suspect, and during an outside assist for a neighboring agency regarding a suspect who was prowling in a resident’s yard and was non-compliant with police.

15. DEFENSE TECHNOLO GIES CS GAS SYSTEMS

Defense technologies CS gas systems which include: Pocket Tactical CS, Spede Heat CS, 40mm Ferret Round CS, Tri-chamber flameless CS, Triple Chaser CS, Han-ball CS, and 75-yard 40mm Spede heat CS; were deployed 0 times during this reporting period.

16. DEFENSE TECHNOLO GIES FLASHBANG SYSTEMS

Defense technologies flashbang systems which include the 100 Meter 40mm Aerial Flashbang and the 75 Meter 40mm Aerial Flashbang; were deployed 0 times during this reporting period.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 9 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINTS OR CONCERNS

Fremont Police Department is committed to responding to complaints, concerns and/or questions received through any of the above methods in a timely manner.

There were 0 formal complaints, or officer involved shootings related to the use of military equipment as investigated by Fremont Police Department’s Internal Affairs Unit during this reporting period.

Pursuant to California Government Code §7070(d)(7), members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment in this policy by any of the following means:

1. Via email to: [email protected]

2. Via phone call to: 510-790-6900

3. Via mail sent to: Fremont Police Department, 2000 Stevenson Blvd, Fremont, CA 94538

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 10 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

SUMMARY AND RESPONSES TO MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE

POLICY VIOLATIONS

FPD did not have any policy violations with the deployment or use of military equipment; therefore, it did not need to conduct any internal audits.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 11 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

FISCAL IMPACT

Fremont Police Department is budgeted for 205 sworn officers, 18 Community Service Officers (CSOs), 33 dispatchers, and 74 professional staff. The operating budget for the department for the 2024-2025 fiscal year is $123,512,885.00
The City of Fremont adopts an operating budget on a fiscal year basis (beginning July 1). The equipment owned and possessed by the department was approved in May of 2024 by the City of Fremont City Council. The cost of equipment purchases and expenditures is reflected in this report for April 2024 to March 2025 pursuant to Assembly Bill 481.

During this reporting period, Fremont Police Department spent approximately $43,704.29 for equipment and training specified in AB 481. The total expenditures represent 0.035% of Fremont Police Department’s operational budget. No grant funding was utilized for training or equipment acquisition during this reporting period.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 12 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

TRAINING SUMMARY
The safe and proficient use of the equipment outlined by AB481 requires countless hours of initial and on-going training as well as required certifications. Most training for department personnel is conducted internally by department personnel to ensure adherence to law and policy. There are times when department personnel are sent to external training courses to enhance and supplement internal trainings and to obtain train the trainer certifications. Consumable and non-consumable equipment are used during training to ensure proficiency and competency during real-life emergencies. Funding sources for all internal and external training are reflected in the Fremont Police Department’s operations budget. https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/finance/financial-reports

TRAINING COSTS
The following is a breakdown of training costs associated with each piece of authorized military equipment. The quantity captured within the “consumable equipment” column indicates equipment that was expended during training. The personnel cost of training is captured in the department’s general operating budget to include line-items in the Training Unit budget as well as individual department units who train to utilize authorized military equipment. # Equipment Consumable
Equipment Used
External Train-
ing
Total
Cost

1. Unmanned Aerial System (UAS/Drones) $0 $4,336.22 $4,336.22

2. City of Fremont Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV) $0 $0 $0

3. Lenco BearCat G2 $0 $0 $0

4. Lenco BearCat/MedEvac $0 $0 $0

5. Ford Transit—350 Crew $0 $0 $0

6. Icor Caliber T5 Robot $2,765.11 $0 $2,765.11

7. Defense Technologies Low Roll 12 Gram with Safety Clip $0 $0 $0

8. Deftech LMT 40 MM Kinetic Energy Projectiles $0 $0 $0

9. Remington Breaching Shotgun (Model 870, 12 Gauge) $0 $0 $0

10. Sig Sauer MCX Virtus Multi-Caliber 223/556/300 $0 $0 $0

11. Sig Sauer MCX Multi-Caliber Modular Rifle, 300 BLK 5.75 $25,397.80 $0 $25,397.80

12. Rock River Arms, LAR—15 $0 $0 $0

13. Pepperball VKS Launcher $0 $0 $0

14. Defense Technologies CS Gas Systems $0 $6,679.90 $6,679.90

15. Defense Technologies Flashbang Systems $0 $0 $0
Total: $28,162.91 $11,016.12 $39,179.03

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 13 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

EQUIPMENT COSTS

The following were the equipment related expenditures for April 2024 to March 2025. Also listed is the projection of expenses in calendar year 2025/26. Equipment expenditures include the acquisition of new equipment, the replacement or repair of damaged equipment, and the ongoing maintenance of our AB 481 military equipment which are captured in our Annual Maintenance/Replacement column.

# Equipment Type Acquisitions Annual Maintenance/
Replacement
Projections

1. Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) $10,219.69 $331.57 $46,506.62

2. Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV) $0 $2,651.43 $0

3. Lenco BearCat G2 $0 $807.83 $0

4. Lenco BearCat/MedEvac $0 $0 (San Leandro PD pays) $0

5. Ford Transit—350 Crew $0 $104.43 $0

6. I-Cor T5 Robot $0 $0 $0

7. Defense Technologies Low Roll 12
*Training Devices Included*
$0 $0 $0

8. Deftech LMT 40mm Kinetic Energy $0 $0 $0

9. Remington Breaching Shotgun (870) $0 $0 $0

10. Sig Sauer MCX Virtus Multi-Caliber 223/556/300 $0 $0 $0

11. Sig Sauer MCX Multi-Caliber Modular Rifle, 300
BLK 5.75
$0 $0 $60,000

12. Rock River Arms, LAR—15 $0 $0 $0

13. Pepperball VKS Launcher $0 $0 $0

14. Defense Technologies CS Gas Systems $0 $0 $0

15. Defense Technologies Flashbang Systems $0 $0 $0
TOTAL: $10,219.69 $3,895.26 $106,506.62

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 14 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report
PROJECTED ACQUISITIONS FOR 2025-26

While some purchases and acquisitions can be anticipated, the unanticipated replacement of existing AB 481 equipment may be necessary due to damage beyond that of repair. Replacement of these items will be handled on a case-by-case basis dependent on operational and departmental need.

These unexpected needs-based acquisitions will be in accordance with department policy and AB 481.

CONSUMABLE MILITARY EQUIPMENT
Consumable AB 481 military equipment acquisitions in the next 12 months will remain consistent with current department replenishment schedules and policies. Acquisitions and purchasing of these consumables will replenish quantities previously approved by the department.

Categories of consumables are as follows:
• Ammunition- all calibers
• Diversionary Devices
• Chemical Agents and Smoke Canisters
• Specialty Munitions (40mm and Less Lethal Munitions)
• VKS Rounds
Non-consumables are as follows:
• The department anticipates seeking council authorization to purchase three additional UAS during the 2025/26 reporting period.

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT)

Page 15 ends

April 2024 - March 2025
Annual Military Equipment
Use Report

CONCLUSION

This Annual Military Equipment Use Report is intended to not only adhere to the law and FPD policy, it also demonstrates our commitment to transparency with information provided to our community and elected officials. The equipment, resources, and training outlined in this report support Fremont Police Officers’ efforts to protect our communities, and enhance the safety of the public and officers. Our police department firmly believes responsible use of the equipment described in this report enhance our ability to deliver the highest level of professional, efficient and effective service when faced with incidents requiring a thoughtful law enforcement response.

Understanding law enforcement is a partnership between the police and community, we will continue to serve and do all we can to guard against harmful actions of a few individuals. FPD prides itself on providing “Public Safety through Professional Law Enforcement.” General Contact information:

Office of Professional Standards and Accountability

1. Via email to: [email protected]

2. Via phone call to: 510-790-6900

For more information on FPD Military Equipment visit: https://www.fremontpolice.gov/ab481

fremontpolice.gov

2.C.c
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: FINAL April 2024 - March 2025 Annual Military Equipment Use Report (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Policy
708
Fremont Police Department
Fremont PD CA Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/04/17, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Fremont Police Department
Military Equipment - 1
Military Equipment
708.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the approval, acquisition, and reporting requirements of military equipment, (Government Code § 7070; Government Code § 7071; Government Code § 7072).
708.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Definitions related to this policy include (Government Code § 7070):

Exigent Circumstances - a good faith belief by the Police Chief or designee that an emergency involving the danger of, or imminent threat of death or serious physical injury to any person is occurring, has occurred, or is about to occur.

Military Equipment – a variety of items defined by California Government Code section 7070(c).

Type – each item that shares the same manufacturer model number. 708.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Fremont Police Department to acquire and use equipment designed to enhance law enforcement's ability to ensure public safety and welfare. It is the policy of the Fremont Police Department that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code § 7071 and Fremont Municipal Code Chapter 8.80 with respect to military equipment. California Government Code § 7070 provides a list of equipment types that are considered to be "military equipment" for purposes of this policy requirement, and this Military Equipment Policy includes information for any such equipment types that are utilized by the Fremont Police Department.

Items deemed to be "military equipment" by Government Code § 7070 are used as a component of overall best practices for law enforcement agencies throughout the country. These tools have been tested in the field and are used by law enforcement agencies to enhance citizen safety, officer safety. Loss of these items would jeopardize the welfare of citizens and peace officers within the Fremont Police Department. The term "military equipment", as used in Government Code § 7070, in fact does not necessarily indicate equipment that has been used by the military. Pursuant to AB 481, items deemed to be "military equipment" include, but are not limited to, unmanned aerial or ground vehicles, armored vehicles, command and control vehicles, pepper- ball launchers, less lethal shotguns, less lethal 40mm projectile launchers, long range acoustic devices, and distraction devices.

The Fremont Police Department does not possess any tactical equipment that it has obtained from the military, nor does it possess any equipment that was designed for military use. The Fremont Police Department does not participate in the Law Enforcement Support Officer (LESO) 10-33 program. The department does not currently receive or utilize surplus military equipment from

2.C.d
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Ex. A Military Equipment Use policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont Police Department
Fremont PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/04/17, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Fremont Police Department
Military Equipment - 2
the Federal government. It is the policy of the Fremont Police Department to acquire and use equipment designed to enhance law enforcement's ability to ensure public safety and welfare. 708.3 MILITARY EQUIPMENT COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police should designate a member of this department to act as the military equipment coordinator. The responsibilities of the military equipment coordinator include but are not limited to:
(a) Acting as liaison to the City Council for matters related to the requirements of this policy.
(b) Identifying currently utilized department equipment that qualifies as military equipment, or the equipment the Department intends to acquire that requires approval by the City Council.
(c) Conducting an inventory or audit of all military equipment at least annually. (d) Collaborating with any allied agency that may use military equipment within the jurisdiction of Fremont Police Department (Government Code § 7071). (e) Preparing for, scheduling, and coordinating the annual community engagement meeting to include:
(a) Publicizing the agenda of the meeting.
(b) Preparing for public questions regarding the department's funding, acquisition, and use of equipment.
(f) Preparing the annual military equipment report for submission to the Chief of Police and ensuring that the report is made available on the department website (Government Code § 7072).
(g) Establishing the procedure for a person to register a complaint or concern, or how that person may submit a question about the use of a type of military equipment, and how the Department will respond in a timely manner.
(h) Ensuring this policy is publicly available on the Department's website. 708.4 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
The following constitutes a list of qualifying equipment that is utilized bythe Department:
• Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS/Drones)
• City of Fremont Mobile Command Vehicle (MCV)
• Lenco BearCat G2
• Lenco BearCat/MedEvac
• Ford Transit – 350 Crew
• Icor Caliber T5 Robot
• Defense Technologies Low Roll 12 gram non reloadable distraction device with safety clip

2.C.d
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Ex. A Military Equipment Use policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont Police Department
Fremont PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/04/17, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Fremont Police Department
Military Equipment - 3
• Deftech LMT 40 mm kinetic energy projectiles with 40 mm projectiles • Tippmann FTC Pepper-ball launchers
• Remington Breaching Shotgun (Model 870, 12 Gauge)
• Sig Sauer MCX Virtus multi-caliber 223/556/300 black-out rifle and ammunition • Sig Sauer MCX multi-caliber modular rifle, 300 BLK 5.75" duty barrel, a 5/56 caliber 11" barrel,
• Rock River Arms, LAR -15
• Pepper-ball VKS Launcher
• Defense Technologies CS Gas systems
• Defense Technologies flashbang systems
Exhibit 1 to this policy further describes the qualifying equipment that is utilized by the Fremont Police Department, along with additional information about the qualifying equipment. 708.5 APPROVAL
The City Council has approval by way of an ordinance adopting this policy. As part of the approval process, the Chief of Police submitted this policy to the City Council and made this policy available on the department website at least 30 days prior to the public meeting by the City Council concerning the military equipment at issue (Government Code § 7071). The military equipment policy was approved by the City Council prior to engaging in any of the following (Government Code § 7071):
(a) Requesting military equipment made available pursuant to 10 USC § 2576a; (b) Seeking funds for military equipment, including but not limited to applying for a grant, soliciting or accepting private, local, state, or federal funds, in-kind donations, or other donations or transfers;
(c) Acquiring military equipment either permanently or temporarily, including by borrowing or leasing;
(d) Collaborating with another law enforcement agency in the deployment or other use of military equipment within the jurisdiction of this department; (e) Using any new or existing military equipment for a purpose, in a manner, or by a person not previously approved by the City Council;
(f) Soliciting or responding to a proposal for, or entering into an agreement with, any other person or entity to seek funds for, apply to receive, acquire, use, or collaborate in the use of military equipment; and
(g) Acquiring military equipment through any means not provided above.

In approving this policy, the City Council determined the following:
(a) The Military Equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.

2.C.d
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Ex. A Military Equipment Use policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont Police Department
Fremont PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/04/17, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Fremont Police Department
Military Equipment - 4
(b) The Military Equipment use policy will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
708.6 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Military equipment should not be used by any other law enforcement agency or member in this jurisdiction unless the military equipment is approved for use in accordance with this policy and FMC Chapter 8.80.

Military equipment used by any member of this jurisdiction shall be approved for use and in accordance with the policy and FMC Chapter 8.80. Military equipment used by other jurisdictions that are providing mutual aid to this jurisdiction shall comply with their respective military equipment policies when rendering assistance.
708.7 TRAINING
An officer or employee must complete training requirements set by the department prior to deploying or using military equipment listed in this policy and Exhibit 1 to this policy. 708.8 USE IN EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
In exigent circumstances and with the approval of the Chief of Police or designee, the department may acquire, borrow and/or use military equipment that is not included in the military equipment inventory section of this policy.

In accordance with this section, if the department acquires, borrows, and/or uses military equipment in exigent circumstances, it must take all of the following actions. • Provide written notice of the acquisition or use to the City Council within 30 days following commencement of such exigent circumstance, unless such information is confidential or privileged under local, state or federal law. • If it is anticipated that the use will continue beyond the exigent circumstance, submit a proposed amended military equipment policy to the City Council within 90 days following the borrowing, acquisition and / or use, and receive approval for continued use.
• Include the equipment in the department's next annual military equipment report. 708.9 ANNUAL REPORT
The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall submit a military equipment report to the City Council for each type of military equipment approved annually for as long as the military equipment is available for use (Government Code § 7072).The Annual Military Equipment Report will include the following information for the immediately preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment:

1. A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use.

2. A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment.

2.C.d
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Ex. A Military Equipment Use policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont Police Department
Fremont PD CA Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/04/17, All Rights Reserved.

Published with permission by Fremont Police Department
Military Equipment - 5

3. The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response.

4. The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in thecalendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report.

5. The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment.

6. If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.

The Fremont City Council will use the Annual Report as a mechanism to ensure the Fremont Police Department's compliance with this Military Equipment Policy, and to help it determine whether to approve, revise, or revoke components of the Military Equipment Policy for the subsequent year.

The Chief of Police or the authorized designee shall also make each annual military equipment report publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment in department inventory. 708.10 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the Department should discuss the report and respond to public questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
708.11 PUBLIC COMPLAINTS
Pursuant to California Government Code §7070(d)(7), members of the public may register complaints or concerns or submit questions about the use of each specific type of military equipment in this policy by any of the following means:
(a) Via email to: [email protected]
(b) Via phone call to: 510-790-6900
(c) Via mail sent to: Fremont Police Department, 2000 Stevenson Blvd, Fremont, CA 94538
The Fremont Police Department is committed to responding to complaints, concerns and/or questions received through any of the above methods in a timely manner.

2.C.d
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Ex. A Military Equipment Use policy (5380 : MILITARY EQUIPMENT ANNUAL REPORT) Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Police Department
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Grants

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5406) DOC ID: 5406
Updated: 4/22/2025 2:49 PM by Dina Lewis Page 1
ACCEPTANCE OF COPS GRANT - Adopt a Resolution and Spending Plan of the 2024/25 State of California Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Grant; Appropriation Actions
Contact Persons:

Name: Diane Brasil Sean Washington
Title: Police Business Manager Police Chief
Div/Dept: Police Department Police Department
Phone: 510-790-6816 510-790-6969
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The State of California has provided supplemental funding to local law enforcement agencies through the continuation of funding for the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) grant program through the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA). These funds are distributed by the State to the County, which passes through the funding to local agencies proportionally based on population, to be allocated at a minimum of $100,000.

In order to make use of the COPS funds, the City Council must authorize the acceptance and use of the funds. The FY 2024/25 COPS grant allocation to the City of Fremont is $725,822, which will be spent on items supporting frontline law enforcement services. A portion of the grant funds are requested to be utilized to purchase additional Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) which qualify as military equipment under FPD’s Military Equipment Use Policy (708) and therefore require City Council approval to utilize allocated grant funds for this specific purchase.

BACKGROUND: Since 1997, the California State Budget Act has included allocations to counties and cities for the COPS program. This funding is intended to fill the need for additional resources at the local level to ensure public safety. Under the provisions of Government Code Section 30061-30063, a percentage of the funds are allocated to counties and cities, based upon population, for law enforcement services.

The COPS funds must be used for front line municipal police services and must supplement and not supplant existing funding. The City Council shall appropriate existing and anticipated moneys exclusively to fund frontline municipal police services in accordance with written requests submitted by the Chief of Police.

Each city must create a Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA) for the COPS grant money. The funds cannot be used for administrative overhead costs in excess of

0.5 percent of the total allocation. The allocation may not be used to fund the costs of any capital project or construction project that does not directly support front line law enforcement.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: In FY 2024/25 the Fremont Police Department expects to receive $725,822 from the COPS grant into the SLESA and the funds will need to be spent by June 30, 2026. In accordance with the Military Equipment Use Policy (708) and California

2.D
Packet Pg. 62
Council Staff Report (ID # 5406) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/22/2025 2:49 PM by Dina Lewis Page 2
law, the Fremont Police Department specifically seeks City Council approval to allocate some of these grant funds to the purchase of UAVs as outlined in the separate agenda item also appearing before City Council on May 6, 2025. UAVs are considered military equipment in California, and grant funds allocated to purchase military equipment are required to receive City Council approval. The funds are requested to be spent as follows:

Description Cost
Police Safety Gear
• New, improved or replacement police safety gear for use by front line police personnel such as, but not limited to:
o PAPR Safety Respirators
$88,000
Police Field Supplies and Equipment
• New, improved or replacement field equipment for use by front line police personnel such as, but not limited to:
o Ballistic helmets and vests
o Vehicle accessories and/or equipment
o Items such as computers, monitors, printers, software, mobile devices or other miscellaneous Police equipment in need of an upgrade or replacement

$166,077
Police Capital Equipment
• New, improved or replacement capital equipment for use by front line police personnel such as, but limited to:
o Additional Police vehicles and outfitting of equipment o Cell Site Simulator
o Purchase of additional Unmanned Aerial Vehicle/Drone for use in critical events, fugitive apprehension and rescue operations as part of existing program
$471,745
Total Costs $725,822

FISCAL IMPACT: The FY 2024/25 funds must be spent or encumbered by June 30, 2026.

There are no matching requirements for this grant and no direct impact on City resources for the fiscal years associated with the action in this staff report. Purchases will be made in accordance with the City’s adopted policies. Staff is requesting an appropriation of $67,584 in the COPS Grant Fund (Fund 151) in FY 2024/25.

Certain equipment and/or software procured with these funds could have ongoing service/maintenance costs, such as annual software licenses and monthly cloud storage fees. Depending on the purchase and the amount supported, the costs will vary. If the Police Department continues to receive the COPS grant annually, equipment/software related service/maintenance costs may continue to be funded by this program. However, should COPS grant money become unavailable, these service costs may be accommodated in the Police Department General Fund budget to the extent new funding becomes available.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The recommended action is exempt from and not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because, without limitation, it is not a “project” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(2) and/or 15378(b)(5)

2.D
Packet Pg. 63
Council Staff Report (ID # 5406) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/22/2025 2:49 PM by Dina Lewis Page 3
and as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), each as a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution COPS state grant 2025 in MT

RECOMMENDATION:

2. Increase the revenue estimate and appropriate $67,584 in the COPS Grant Fund (Fund 151) for the purchase of UAVs and ballistic vests.

2.D
Packet Pg. 64
Resolution 2025-XX Page 1 of 3

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT

ACCEPTING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITIZENS OPTION FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY (COPS) GRANT 2024-25 AND APPROVING THE

SPENDING PLAN

WHEREAS, the State of California has provided supplemental funding to local law enforcement agencies through the continuation of funding for the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) grant program through the Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA); and

WHEREAS, under the provisions of Government Code Sections 30061-30063, a percentage of the funds are allocated to counties and cities, based upon population, for law enforcement services to be allocated at a minimum of $100,000; and

WHEREAS, the 2024/25 State Budget includes funding COPS/SLESA program, which includes approximately $725,822 allocated to the City of Fremont Police Department; and

WHEREAS, the Legislature mandates this money be spent for front line law enforcement purposes and may not be used to supplant any existing law enforcement services provided by the City; and

WHEREAS, on ________, 2025, the City Council held a hearing to consider the expenditure of the COPS/SLEA funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized to accept the COPS/SLESA Grant from the State of California in the amount of $725,822. The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized to execute and submit all documents, including, without limitation, agreements, amendments with the granting agency, and payment requests in compliance with COPS/SLESA Grant requirements.

SECTION 2. The City of Fremont hereby approves the spending plan for the COPS/SLESA funds attached hereto as Exhibit A and finds that the proposed expenditures will be for supplemental police services as authorized by the grant and will not supplant existing funding.

ADOPTED _________, 2025 by the City Council of the City of Fremont by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

2.D.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Draft Resolution COPS state grant 2025 in MT (5406 : ACCEPTANCE OF COPS GRANT) Resolution 2025-XX Page 2 of 3

_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
City Attorney

2.D.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Draft Resolution COPS state grant 2025 in MT (5406 : ACCEPTANCE OF COPS GRANT) Resolution 2025-XX Page 3 of 3

Exhibit A
Spending Plan

Description Cost

Police Safety Gear
• New/replacement police safety gear for use by front line police personnel such as:
o PAPR Safety Respirators

$88,000
Police Field Supplies and Equipment
• New, improved or replacement field equipment for use by front line police personnel such as, but not limited to:
o Ballistic Helmets and vests
o Vehicle accessories and/or equipment
o Items such as computers, monitors, printers, software, mobile devices or other miscellaneous Police equipment in need of an upgrade or replacement

$166,077

Police Capital Equipment
• New, improved or replacement capital equipment for use by front line police personnel such as, but not limited to:
o Additional Police vehicles and outfitting of equipment o Cell Site Simulator
o Purchase of additional Unmanned Aerial Vehicle/Drone for use in critical events, fugitive apprehension and rescue operations as part of existing program

$471,745

Total Costs

$725,822

2.D.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Draft Resolution COPS state grant 2025 in MT (5406 : ACCEPTANCE OF COPS GRANT) Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Finance Department
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Plans, Policies and Studies

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5420) DOC ID: 5420
Updated: 4/28/2025 11:47 AM by Dina Lewis Page 1
ANNUAL APPROVAL OF INVESTMENT POLICY - Annual Approval of Investment Policy and Delegation of Authority to City Treasurer to Manage Investments Contact Persons:

Name: Lauren Chu David Persselin
Title: Management Analyst Finance Director
Div/Dept: Finance Department Finance Department
Phone: (510) 494-4635 510-494-4631
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In accordance with California Government Code Section 53646(a)(2), the City Treasurer presents the City’s Annual Investment Policy for the City Council’s consideration and approval at a public meeting. Additionally, the City Council may elect to delegate its authority to invest and reinvest City funds to the City Treasurer for up to one year pursuant to Government Code Section 53607.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the City’s investment policy for FY 2025/26 and delegate the City Council’s authority to invest and reinvest public funds, and to sell or exchange securities so purchased, to the Finance Director/Treasurer for one year or until earlier revoked by the City Council.

BACKGROUND: California Government Code section 53601 et seq. allows the City Council to invest money in its treasury not required for its immediate needs. The investments must be made in accordance with the City’s Annual Investment Policy, approved by the City Council during a public meeting (Gov. Code section 53646(a)(2)). The City Council may delegate its authority for conducting investment transactions to the City Treasurer annually, for up to one year (Gov. Code section 53607). On June 11, 2024, the City Council approved the City’s current Investment Policy and delegated investment authority to the City Treasurer for FY 2024/25.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

City Investment Policy

Once adopted by Council, the Investment Policy sets portfolio management objectives and practices, specifies allowable investment instruments, states the criteria for purchasing those securities, prohibits certain types of security purchases, and fixes the maximum investment horizon (generally five years). The Treasurer uses these guidelines to manage and safeguard the investment of all public funds held by the City, except for bond proceeds.

Bond proceeds are invested in accordance with financing documents approved by the City Council when bonds are first issued. These investment transactions are executed by the trustees of the respective bond issues under the direction of City staff.

On April 1, 2025, the City Council approved the appointment of PFM Asset Management LLC (“PFM”) to provide investment advisory services to the City. Although PFM actively manages the portion of the City’s cash portfolio not needed to meet near-term obligations, fiduciary

2.E
Packet Pg. 68
Council Staff Report (ID # 5420) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/28/2025 11:47 AM by Dina Lewis Page 2
responsibility for investments remains with the City. The Treasurer and Finance Department staff ensure that all investments are consistent with the Investment Policy approved by the Council and provide oversight with appropriate checks and balances over the investment process.

Delegation of Authority to the City Treasurer

Staff recommends that the City Council delegate its authority to invest and reinvest public funds, and to sell or exchange securities so purchased, to the Finance Director/Treasurer for one year or until earlier revoked by the City Council, in accordance with Government Code Section 53607.

Under the delegated authority, the City Treasurer will continue to make a monthly report of investment transactions to the City Council. Each monthly Cash and Investments Report (“Treasurer’s Report”) describes the portfolio’s composition and recent performance and reports the month’s investment transactions. Within each Treasurer’s Report, the Treasurer certifies that all investments were made in compliance with the Investment Policy and that there are adequate funds to pay City obligations for at least six months.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Action on this item represents a fiscal, organizational and administrative governmental activity that will not result in physical changes in the environment. Therefore, it is not a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378.

ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy

2.E
Packet Pg. 69
Resolution 2025-XX Page 1 of 15
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT APPROVING A STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY (FY 2025/26)

WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code section 53646, the Treasurer of the City of Fremont has proposed a Statement of Investment Policy (FY 2025/26) for consideration by the City Council, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, and incorporated herein by reference; and

WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to delegate the authority to invest all public funds held by the City to the City Treasurer for a period of one year effective July 1, 2025 as authorized by California Government Code Section 53607;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fremont, as follows:

SECTION 1. The Fremont City Council approves and adopts the City of Fremont Statement of Investment Policy for FY 2025/26.

SECTION 2. The Fremont City Council hereby delegates to the City Treasurer the authority to invest and reinvest all public funds held by the City of Fremont, and to sell or exchange the securities so purchased, in compliance with the terms of the approved Statement of Investment Policy (FY 2025/26), for a period of one year effective July 1, 2025, or until earlier revoked by the City Council.

ADOPTED May 6, 2025, by the City Council of the City of Fremont by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

________________________________
Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

___________________________ ________________________________ City Clerk City Attorney

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 2 of 15 EXHIBIT A to RESOLUTION 2025-XX

CITY OF FREMONT
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY (FY 2025/26)
Effective July 1, 2025

POLICY
It is the policy of the City of Fremont to invest public funds in a prudent manner which will provide the highest yield consistent with the maximum security and preservation of invested principal, while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City, and conforming to all applicable federal, state and local statutes governing the investment of public funds.

SCOPE
This investment policy applies to all financial assets of the City and excludes retirement and deferred compensation funds. Financial assets are reported in the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report and are accounted for in the following funds:
• General Fund
• Special Revenue Funds
• Capital Projects Funds
• Debt Service Funds
• Internal Service Funds
• Trust and Custodial Funds
• Any new fund created by the City Council unless specifically exempted The provisions of the related bond indentures or resolutions shall govern investments of bond proceeds. A glossary of terms is attached hereto as Attachment “1” and is incorporated herein by reference.

PRUDENCE
The City shall manage its temporarily idle cash investments under the “prudent investor” standard, as defined by California Government Code Section 53600.3, which shall be applied in the context of an overall portfolio. Investment officers shall manage the City’s funds with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency.

Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 3 of 15

OBJECTIVES
The objectives for investing and managing public funds and the order of priority are as follows:
• Safety: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments of the City shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain this objective, the City will diversify its investments by investing funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns and financial institutions, as well as investing in high investment grade securities. • Liquidity: The City’s investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated. Liquidity refers to the ability to sell an investment at any given moment with a minimal chance of losing some portion of principal or interest.
• Yield: The City’s investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints and the cash flow characteristics of the portfolio.

DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Authority to manage the City’s investment program is derived from the California Government Code. Management responsibility for the investment program is hereby delegated to the Treasurer, who shall be responsible for all transactions undertaken and shall establish a system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate officials, and their procedures in the absence of the Treasurer.

The Treasurer shall establish written investment policy procedures for the operation of the investment program consistent with this investment policy. The procedures should include references to safekeeping, Public Securities Association repurchase agreements, wire transfer agreements, collateral/depository agreements, banking services contracts, and other investment- related activities. Such procedures shall include explicit delegation of authority to persons responsible for investment transactions. No person may engage in an investment transaction except as provided under the terms of this policy and the procedures established by the Treasurer.

The Treasurer can designate a staff person(s) to be responsible for investment transactions and to sign as a secondary signature on time deposits and other public fund accounts. Regardless of any other person so designated, the Treasurer is expressly authorized to so designate the City’s Treasury Analyst as having this capacity. The City may engage the support services of outside professionals in regard to its investment program, as long as it can be clearly demonstrated that these services produce a financial advantage and protection of the portfolio.

ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The Treasurer and all investment personnel shall refrain from personal business activities that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. The Treasurer and all investment personnel shall disclose to the City Manager any material financial interests in financial institutions that conduct business within this jurisdiction, and they shall further disclose any material personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the performance of the City’s investment portfolio.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 4 of 15 The State of California Fair Political Practices Commission Statement of Economic Interests, Form 700, shall be completed on an annual basis by the Treasurer and other employees designated in Government Code Section 87200.

AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND DEALERS
The Treasurer will maintain a list of financial institutions that are authorized to provide investment capacity selected on the basis of their creditworthiness, financial strength (minimum capitalization of $10,000,000), experience (at least five years of operation), and references. In addition, a list will also be maintained of approved security broker/dealers, primary or regional, who are authorized to provide investment and financial advisory services in California. If the City retains an investment advisor, the investment advisor may use its own list of approved issuers and authorized broker/dealers to conduct transactions on behalf of the City provided that the list is made available to the City upon request. No public deposit shall be made except in a qualified public depository as established by state laws.

An annual audited financial statement is required to be submitted by each financial institution and broker/dealer. The registration status and standing of all brokers/dealers shall be verified with the National Association of Securities Dealers, the Securities and Exchange Commission or other applicable self-regulatory organizations.

Annually and before engaging in investment transactions with a broker/dealer, the firm shall sign a certification form attesting that the individual responsible for the City’s account with that firm has reviewed the investment policy and that the firm understands the policy and intends to present only those investment transactions appropriate under the policy.

AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
The City is empowered by California Government Code Section 53601 to invest in the following types of securities:
• Bonds and notes issued by the City of Fremont and the Fremont Public Financing Authority, regardless of the term to maturity for such bonds and notes. This extension of the maximum five-year term specified in California Government Code Section 53601 applies only to such bonds and notes issued by the above entities constituting the City and its affiliated public agencies.
• United States Treasury bills, notes, bonds, or certificates of indebtedness, or those for which the faith and credit of the United States are pledged for the payment of principal and interest. • Registered state warrants or treasury notes or bonds issued by the State of California in the third highest rating category or better by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization (NRSRO). Purchases may not exceed 30% of surplus funds. • Registered treasury notes or bonds of any of the other 49 states in addition to California in the third highest rating category or better by a NRSRO. Purchases may not exceed 30% of surplus funds.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 5 of 15 • Bonds, notes, warrants or other evidence of debt issued by a local agency within the State of California in the third highest rating category or better by a NRSRO. Purchases may not exceed 30% of surplus funds.
• Obligations issued by agencies or instrumentalities of the U.S. Government. • Bankers’ acceptances with a term not to exceed 180 days. Not more that 40% of surplus funds can be invested in bankers’ acceptances and no more than 30% of surplus funds can be invested in the bankers’ acceptances of any single commercial bank. The financial institutions must be rated in the highest short-term rating category by a NRSRO. • Prime commercial paper may not exceed 270 days and must carry the highest rating issued by Moody’s Investors Service or Standard & Poor’s Corporation. Commercial paper may not exceed 40% of total surplus funds. Eligible paper shall be issued by corporations that are organized and operating within the United States, having total assets in excess of $500,000,000, rated A-1, and if the issuer has issued long-term debt, it must be rated in the third highest rating category or better by a NRSRO.
• Negotiable certificates of deposit issued by federally or state chartered banks or associations, a state or federal credit union, or by a federally licensed or state licensed branch of a foreign bank.

Purchases may not exceed 30% of surplus funds and must be rated in the third highest rating category or better by a NRSRO.
• Repurchase agreements that comply with statutory requirements, are documented by a written agreement, are fully collateralized by delivery to an independent third party custodian or the counterparty’s bank’s trust department or safekeeping department, and are for a term of one year or less. The market value of the collateral shall be 102% or greater of the funds borrowed against those securities and the value shall be adjusted no less frequently than monthly.

Repurchase agreements shall only be made with primary dealers of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Reverse repurchase agreements and securities lending transactions are not to be entered into unless specifically authorized by the City Council. • Medium term notes with a maximum maturity of five years, by corporations organized and operating in the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States, or any state operating within the United States, and rated in the third highest rating category or better by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of surplus funds can be invested in this type of security. • The Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) maintained by the State of California. • Shares of beneficial interest issued by diversified management companies investing solely in the securities and obligations authorized by this section categorized as money market mutual funds.

Such funds must carry the highest credit rating by a NRSRO. No more than 20% of surplus funds can be invested in such funds. The companies shall retain an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years’ experience investing in the securities and obligations as authorized by this section, and with assets under management in excess of $500,000,000. The purchase price of shares of beneficial interest purchased pursuant to this subdivision shall not include any commission that these companies may charge.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 6 of 15 • Shares of beneficial interest issued by a joint powers authority organized pursuant to Section 6509.7 of the California Government Code that invests in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (r), inclusive. Each share shall represent an equal proportional interest in the underlying pool of securities owned by the joint powers authority. To be eligible under this section, the joint powers authority issuing the shares shall have retained an investment adviser that meets all of the following criteria. The adviser is registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The adviser has not less than five years of experience investing in the securities and obligations authorized in subdivisions (a) to (q), inclusive. The adviser has assets under management in excess of five hundred million dollars.
• Insured or collateralized time deposits or savings accounts secured in accordance with the provisions of Sections 53651 and 53652 of the California Government Code. If the collateral is government securities, 110% of market value to the face amount and accrued interest of the deposit is required. If secured by first mortgages and first deeds of trust, the market value must be 150% of the face amount and accrued interest of the deposit. The collateral must be held by a third party.
• Mortgage pass-through securities, collateralized mortgage obligations, mortgage-backed or other pay-through bonds, equipment lease-backed certificates, consumer receivable passthrough certificates, or consumer receivable-backed bonds. For securities eligible for investment not issued or guaranteed by the United States Treasury, federal agencies and government-sponsored enterprises, the following limitation apply: securities must be rated in a rating category of “AA” or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO; securities must have a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less; no more than 20% of surplus funds may be invested in these securities. • United States dollar denominated senior unsecured unsubordinated obligations issued or unconditionally guaranteed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Finance Corporation, or Inter-American Development Bank, with a maximum remaining maturity of five years or less, and eligible for purchase and sale within the United States. Securities in this category must be rated in the second highest rating category or better by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of surplus funds may be invested in these securities.

Required ratings will be deemed to be the rating on the date of purchase.

A five-year maximum remaining maturity is allowed unless an extension of maturity is granted by the City Council. For purposes of compliance with this Policy, an investment’s term or remaining maturity shall be measured from the settlement date to final maturity. A security purchased in accordance with this Policy shall not have a forward settlement date exceeding 45 days from the time of investment.

Where this section specifies a percentage limitation for a particular security type, that percentage is applicable only on the date of purchase. Credit criteria listed in this section refers to the credit rating at the time the security is purchased. If an investment’s credit rating falls below the minimum rating required at the time of purchase, the Treasurer will perform a timely review and decide whether to sell or hold the investment.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 7 of 15 Prohibited Investments. In accordance with Section 53651 of the California Government Code, the City shall not invest any funds in inverse floaters, range notes or interest-only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages or in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity, except as provided in the subsequent paragraph.

Notwithstanding the prohibitions stated in the above paragraph, effective January 1, 2021, the City may invest in securities issued by, or backed by, the United States government that could result in zero- or negative-interest accrual if held to maturity, in the event of, and for the duration of, a period of negative market interest rates. The City may hold these instruments until their maturity dates.

This paragraph shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2026, and as of that date is repealed.

The limitation shall not apply to investments in shares of beneficial interest issued under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that are authorized investments under Section 53601 of the California Government Code. Additionally, pursuant to City Council policy adopted October 9, 2018, the City shall not invest any funds in securities issued by firms whose general business activities are classified as “Energy - Oil, Gas & Coal” according to the Bloomberg Industry Classification System.

INVESTMENT POOLS/MUTUAL FUNDS
A thorough analysis of any pooled investments such as LAIF, money market funds, or local government investment pools held by the City shall be conducted by the City Treasurer on an annual basis. The analysis shall include a review of the pools investment p olicy, underlying securities, and an assessment of risk management procedures.

SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
All security transactions entered into by the City shall be conducted on a delivery versus payment (DVP) basis. All securities purchased or acquired shall be held by a third-party custodian having a custodial agreement with the City and shall be evidenced by a safekeeping receipt. The custodian must be a federal or state association, a trust company or a state or national bank who is a member of the Federal Reserve System.

DIVERSIFICATION
The City will diversify its investments by security type, except for securities issued by the U.S.

Government and its agencies, and by institution to reduce or eliminate risk of loss. The following guidelines shall apply:
• Maturities selected shall provide for stability and liquidity. • No more than 5% of surplus funds shall be invested in the securities of any issuer regardless of security type, excluding U.S. Treasuries, Federal Agencies, and pooled investments such as LAIF, money market funds, or local government investment pools.

REPORTING
The Treasurer shall submit to each member of the City Council a monthly report. The report shall contain a complete description of the portfolio, including the types of investments, issuers, maturity

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 8 of 15 dates, par values and current market values. In the case of funds invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), funds invested by external investment managers, funds held by trustees or fiscal agents, and moneys administered by plan administrators of retirement or deferred compensation plans, current statements from those institutions will satisfy the reporting requirements. The report will also include a certification of the following:
• All investment activities since the last report have been made in full compliance with the investment policy.
• The City will meet its expenditure requirements for the next six months.

INTERNAL CONTROL
The Treasurer shall establish investment procedures that provide for adequate internal control. An annual process of independent review of the procedures will be part of the regular audit procedures performed by the City’s external auditor.

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with investment risk constraints and the City’s cash flow needs. The basis to be used to determine whether market yields are being achieved shall be the funds most comparable to the portfolio and the U.S. Treasury note or bill with a maturity close to the average life of the portfolio.

ADOPTION
The investment policy shall be adopted annually by resolution of the City Council.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 9 of 15 Attachment “1”

CITY OF FREMONT

STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY

GLOSSARY

The following technical words are included in the policy because they are common treasury and investment terminology.

Accrued Interest: Coupon interest accumulated on a bond or note since the last interest payment or, for a new issue, from the dated date to the date of delivery.

Agencies: Debt instruments issued by the U.S. government agencies, departments, government- sponsored corporations and related instrumentalities to finance their own programs. Some examples of these agencies are the Federal Farm Credit Bank and the Federal Home Loan Bank.

Asked: The price at which securities are offered. The offer price is the cost of the security to the buyer.

Bankers’ Acceptance (BA): A draft or bill of exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution, as well as the issuer, guarantees payment of the bill.

Basis Points: Refers to the yield on bonds. Each percentage point of yield in bonds equals 100 basis points (1/100% or 0.01%). If a bond yield changes from 7.25% to 7.39%, that is a rate change of 14 basis points.

Benchmark: A passive index used to compare the performance, relative to risk and return, of an investor’s portfolio.

Bid: The price offered by a buyer of securities. This is payment that the seller gets when a security is sold.

Broker: A broker brings a buyer and seller together for a commission.

Callable: Securities subject to payment of the principal amount and accrued interest prior to the stated maturity date, with or without premium.

Certificate of Deposit (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity, evidenced by a certificate issued by commercial banks and savings institutions, that usually returns principal and interest to the lender at the end of the loan period. CDs differ in terms of collateralization and marketability, as follows:

Negotiable Certificates of Deposit – Generally, a short-term debt instrument that usually pays interest and is issued by a bank, savings or federal association, state or federal credit union, or state-licensed branch of a foreign bank. The majority of negotiable CDs mature within six months, while the average maturity is two weeks. Negotiable CDs are traded in a secondary market and are payable upon order to the bearer or initial depositor (investor).

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 10 of 15 Non-Negotiable Certificates of Deposit – CDs that carry a penalty if redeemed prior to maturity. A secondary market does exist for these non-negotiable CDs, but includes a transaction cost that reduces returns to the investor. Non-negotiable CDs issued by banks and savings and loans are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) for up to $250,000, including principal and interest. Amounts deposited above this amount are required to be collateralized by the financial institution.

Collateral: Securities, evidences of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan or to secure deposits of public moneys.

Commercial Paper: An unsecured short-term promissory note issued by corporations, with maturities ranging from two to 270 days.

Corporate Notes and Bonds: Debt instruments, typically unsecured, issued by corporations, with original maturities in most cases greater than one year and less than 10 years.

Coupon: The annual rate of interest that a bond’s issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond’s face value. Also, a certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.

Credit Rating: Various alphabetical and numerical designations used by institutional investors, Wall Street underwriters, and commercial rating companies to give relative indications of bond and note creditworthiness. Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings use the same system, starting with their highest rating, of AAA, AA, A, BBB, BB, B, CCC, CC, C, and D for default. Moody’s Investors Service uses Aaa, Aa, A, Baa, Ba, B, Caa, Ca, C, and D. Each of the services uses pluses (+) and minuses (-), or numerical modifiers to indicate steps within each category. The top four letter categories are considered investment-grade ratings.

Credit Risk: The chance that an issuer will be unable to make scheduled payments of interest and principal on an outstanding obligation. Another concern for investors is that the market’s perception of a corporation’s credit will cause the market value of a security to fall, even if default is not expected.

CUSIP Number: An identifying number developed by the Committee on Uniform Security Identification Procedures, under the auspices of the American Bankers Association, to provide a uniform method of identifying municipal, U.S. government, and corporate securities. The CUSIP number is a nine-character identifier unique to the issuer, the specific issue and the maturity, if applicable (the first six characters identifying the issuer, the next two identifying the security, and the last digit providing a check digit to validate the accuracy of the preceding CUSIP number).

Custodian: A bank or other financial institution that keeps custody of stock certificates and other assets.

Dealer: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account.

Debenture: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.

Delivery versus Payment: There are two methods of delivery of securities: delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt. Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 11 of 15 money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of signed receipt for the securities.

Discount: The difference between the price of a security and its value at maturity, when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling below original offering price shortly after sale also is considered to be at a discount.

Discount Securities: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that are issued below the face amount and redeemed at maturity at full face value, such as U.S. Treasury Bills.

Diversification: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent returns, maturities and market risks.

External Investment Managers: Professional money managers who administer pooled investments on behalf of local governments and are paid on a fee for service basis. A local agency may delegate discretionary or non-discretionary authority. Discretionary authority allows the manager to make trades proactively in compliance with a set of investment criteria. With non-discretionary authority, the manager must obtain the local agency’s approval for investment transactions.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $250,000 per deposit.

Federal Funds Rate: The rate of interest at which Fed funds are traded. This rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-market operations.

Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB): Government-sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks) that lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions, and insurance companies. The mission of the FHLB is to liquefy the housing-related assets of its members who must purchase stock in their district Bank.

Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or Fannie Mae): FNMA, like GNMA, was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act of 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. FNMA is a private stockholder-owned corporation. The corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans, in addition to fixed rate mortgages. FNMA’s securities are highly liquid and widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest.

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC or Freddie Mac): This agency was established in 1970 to help maintain the availability of mortgage credit for residential housing.

Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member, while the other presidents serve on a rotating basis.

The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of government securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 12 of 15 Federal Reserve System: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven-member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 regional banks and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.

Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae): Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and other institutions. Security holders are protected by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. GNMA securities are backed by the FHA, VA, or FMHA mortgages. The term “pass-throughs” is often used to describe GNMA securities.

Guaranteed Investment Agreement: A contract with a financial institution to guarantee a certain investment return on moneys invested under the agreement. It is usually provided by a highly rated financial company, in most instances an insurance company or a commercial bank. It is sometimes used as a convenient means of managing bond proceeds that are subject to yield restrictions or rebate. The return may be fixed or may float at a level related to the yield on the bonds (bond proceeds) or an index.

Liquidity: An asset that can be converted easily and rapidly into cash without a substantial loss of value. In the money market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable in size.

Liquidity Risk: The chance that a security, sold prior to maturity, will be sold at a loss of value. For a local agency, the liquidity risk of an individual investment may not be a critical as how the overall liquidity of the portfolio allows the agency to meet its cash needs.

Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed in the custody of the State Treasurer for investment.

Market Risk: The chance that the value of a security will decline as interest rates rise. In general, as interest rates fall, prices of fixed income securities rise. Similarly, as interest rates rise, prices fall.

Market risk also is referred to as systematic risk or risk that affects all securities within an asset class similarly.

Market Value: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold at a particular point in time.

Master Repurchase Agreement: A written contract covering all future transactions between the parties to repurchase/reverse repurchase agreements that establishes each party’s rights in the transactions. It specifies the right of the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of default by the seller-borrower.

Maturity: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.

Medium-Term Note: Corporate or depository institution debt securities meeting certain minimum quality standards (as specified in the California Government Code) with a remaining maturity of five years or less.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 13 of 15 Money Market: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers’ acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.

Offer: The price asked by a seller of securities. When buying securities, the investor asks for an offer.

Open Market Operations: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank as directed by the FOMC in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are the Federal Reserve’s most important and most flexible monetary policy tool.

Par Amount or Par Value: The principal amount of a note or bond that must be paid at maturity.

Par, also referred to as the “face amount” of a security, is the principal value stated on the face of the security. A par bond is one sold at a price of 100% of its principal amount.

Portfolio: Collection of securities held by an investor. The purpose of a portfolio is to reduce risk by diversification.

Premium: The difference between the par value of a security and the cost of the security, when the cost is above par. Investors pay a premium to purchase a security when the return to the investor (yield) is lower than the stated coupon (interest rate) on the investment.

Primary Dealer: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)-registered securities broker-dealers, banks and a few unregulated firms.

Prudent Person Rule: A standard of conduct where a person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of principal acts with care, skill, prudence and diligence when investing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, and managing funds. The test of whether the rule is being met is if a prudent person acting in such a situation would engage in similar conduct to ensure that investments safeguard principal and maintain liquidity.

Rate of Return: The yield of a security based on the ratio of the coupon income to the purchase or market price.

Repurchase Agreement: An agreement of one party (for example, a financial institution) to sell securities to a second party (such as a local agency) and a simultaneous agreement by the first party to repurchase the securities at a specified price from the second party on demand or at a specified date. The security “buyer” in effect lends the “seller” money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this.

Reverse Repurchase Agreement: An agreement of one party (for example, a financial institution) to purchase securities at a specified price from a second party (such as a local agency) and a simultaneous agreement by the first party to resell the securities at a specified price to the second party on demand or at a specified date.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 14 of 15 Risk: The uncertainty of maintaining the principal or interest associated with an investment due to a variety of factors.

Safekeeping: A service to customers rendered by financial institutions for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank’s vault for protection. Other services normally provided include marking the portfolio to market value, and reporting investments held and investment activities.

Safety: In the context of investing public funds, safety relates to preserving the principal of an investment in an investment portfolio; local agencies address the concerns of safety by controlling exposure to risks.

Secondary Market: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution.

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): An agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation.

Structured Notes: Notes issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises (FHLB, FNMA, etc.) and Corporations, which have imbedded options (e.g., call features, step-up coupons) into their debt structure. Their market performance is affected by the fluctuation of interest rates, the volatility of the imbedded options, and shifts in the shape of the yield curve.

Supranational Debt: International or multi-lateral financial agency debt, will capitalized, with strong credit support from contingent capital calls from member countries. Large Supranational Debt is rated AAA by most NRSROs and is highly liquid, with availability in a wide range of maturities.

Treasury Bills: A non-interest bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Treasury bills have a maximum maturity of one year.

Treasury Bonds: Long-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. government and having initial maturities of more than 10 years.

Treasury Notes: Medium-term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. government and having initial maturities from two to 10 years.

Variable Rate Notes: Securities which pay interest at rates that can fluctuate during the life of the security.

When Issued: A conditional transaction that takes place between the time a new issue is offered and the time of physical delivery of the bonds. It is understood between the buyer and the seller that a transaction will occur when and if the bonds are issued.

Yield: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. Income yield is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. Net yield or yield to maturity is the current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the purchase date to the maturity date.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy)

Resolution 2025-XX Page 15 of 15 Yield Curve: A graphic representation that shows the relationship at a given point in time between yields and maturity for bonds that are identical in every way except maturity.

2.E.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Draft Resolution - 2025-26 Investment Policy (5420 : Annual Approval of Investment Policy) Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Code Enforcement
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Code Adoptions & Amendments

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5403) DOC ID: 5403
Updated: 4/30/2025 4:44 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 1
CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES – Consider Introduction of Ordinances Amending Chapter 8.70 of Fremont Municipal Code to Expand the Definition of a Residential Unit that Qualifies for Tenant Relocation Assistance as Defined by State Law, Amending Chapter 8.75 to Clarify Tobacco Retail License Ordinance Enforcement, and Adding Chapter 8.85 of the Fremont Municipal Code, to create an Elevated Exterior Elements Ordinance and to Consider a Finding that the Ordinances are Exempt from the Requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per, Each as a Separate and Independent Basis, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), 15378(b)(2) and 15378(b)(5).

Contact Persons:

Name: David Wage Dan Schoenholz
Title: Code Enforcement Manager/Senior
Planner
Community Development Director
Div/Dept: Code Enforcement Community Development
Phone: 510-494-4447 510-494-4438
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: Staff is recommending amendments to three separate sections of the Fremont Municipal Code (FMC). The first code amendment would include an update to FMC Chapter 8.70 to expand the definition of rental unit that is entitled to tenant relocation assistance under the ordinance to be consistent with state law. The second code amendment would clarify existing language in the Tobacco Retailers Licensing (TRL) Ordinance, FMC Chapter 8.75 related to license suspensions and revocations and also update the definition of “flavored tobacco product.” The third code amendment would add a new Chapter in Title 8 (Health and Safety) to implement the requirements of two state laws (SB721 and SB326) related to required periodic inspections of exterior elevated elements (EEE) in multi-family apartment and condominium buildings.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Tenant Relocation:

California Health & Safety Code § 17975 addresses substandard buildings. Among its requirements, property owners must pay relocation payments to a tenant where the need to relocate arises from code violations so extensive and of such nature that the immediate health and safety of the residents is endangered. In 2013, the City of Fremont (City) adopted FMC Chapter 8.70 (Tenant Relocation Assistance) to implement California Health & Safety Code § 17975, which requires landlords to pay tenants relocation costs when the rental unit is ordered to be vacated by the City due to the substandard condition of the structure.

On September 22, 2024, the California Legislature passed SB 1465, impacting the enforcement of substandard housing used for human habitation. The intent of SB 1465 was to expand enforcement powers for cities and counties to uphold community health and

2.F
Packet Pg. 85
Council Staff Report (ID # 5403) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 4:44 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 2
safety standards for all buildings used for habitation. SB 1465 amended the California Health and Safety Code to broaden the definition of substandard housing to include all buildings used for habitation (even if not intended to be housing). The change in state law expanded the definition of a rental unit that is entitled to tenant relocation. The proposed amendment to FMC Chapter 8.70 would amend and expand the definition of rental unit that is entitled to tenant relocation assistance under the ordinance to be consistent with state law.

Tobacco Retail License:

In 2019, the City adopted the Tobacco Retailers Licensing (TRL) Ordinance, codified in FMC Chapter 8.75. The TRL Ordinance ensures responsible tobacco product sales, prevents sales to minors, and helps enforce tobacco-related laws including those regarding flavored tobacco products. The proposed amendments to the TRL Ordinance include minor wording changes to clarify existing language related to license suspensions and revocations when there are documented violations. In addition, the code amendment would update the definition of “flavored tobacco product” based on tobacco industry product trends and marketing. The updated definition reflects the recommendations and best practices from public health experts.

Exterior Elevated Elements:

On September 17, 2018, Senate Bill 721 (California Health & Safety Code § 17973), the "Balcony Inspection Bill" or "Elevated Exterior Elements (EEE) Bill,” was signed into law for apartments. On August 30, 2019, Senate Bill 326 (California Civil Code § 5551) was signed into law for condominiums. The bills were a response to the tragic deaths of six UC Berkeley students in 2015 at a downtown apartment complex due to the collapse of a balcony. Both laws are intended to enhance the safety of exterior elevated elements, such as balconies, decks and stairways, by requiring regular inspections, maintenance, and repairs. The laws make local code enforcement agencies responsible for ensuring compliance.

The laws require multi-family apartment building owners and condominiums homeowner associations to hire a qualified structural or civil engineer, architect, or contractor for inspections to determine whether specific building elements are in safe and functional condition. Immediate safety issues and identified required repairs must be reported to the City. A building permit may be needed depending on the required repair or maintenance.

January 1, 2025, is the deadline for condominium buildings to complete the first EEE inspection, with subsequent inspections required every nine years. January 1, 2026, is the deadline for apartments to complete the first EEE inspection and subsequent inspections required every six years.

The proposed ordinance would amend Title 8 (Health and Safety) to implement the requirements of SB721 and SB326. The intent of the proposed EEE ordinance is to adopt requirements, processes, and timelines to ensure compliance with the laws and allow for use of administrative remedies rather than require a civil lawsuit to enforce the ordinance.

The following is a summary of the key provisions in the draft EEE ordinance:

• Require the submittal of all completed EEE inspection reports to the City to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the laws. Alternatively, if a building is exempt from the laws, an exemption statement on a form provided by the City must be submitted;

2.F
Packet Pg. 86
Council Staff Report (ID # 5403) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 4:44 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 3
• Establish timelines for the submittal of completed inspection reports to Code Enforcement staff;
• Establish timelines for emergency and non-emergency repairs identified in the report;
• Require submittal of a repair affidavit by a licensed contractor, engineer or architect that required repairs and maintenance were completed and the EEE are in safe condition; and
• Allow for violations of the law to be addressed by administrative remedies in Title 1 of FMC rather than filing a civil lawsuit in order enforce the state law.

FISCAL IMPACT: The code amendment related to Tobacco Retailers Licensing Ordinance is a technical update that does not significantly alter the existing tobacco retail license program and would not have a fiscal impact.

The code amendment related to the Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance would update the definition of rental unit that is entitled to tenant relocation assistance to be consistent with state law would not have a fiscal impact. The cost of tenant relocation is paid by the landlord.

The code amendment related to adoption of the exterior elevated elements ordinance to implement state law would not have a fiscal impact. An application fee of $280 was previously established for City staff to review SB721 and SB326 inspection reports, thereby ensuring that the General Fund does not subsidize services related to private development.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The proposed text amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because, without limitation, it is not a “project” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(2) and/or 15378(b)(5) as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment per CEQA Guidelines Section 15601(b)(3), each as a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Ordinance- Tenant Relocation Amendment
• Draft Ordinance- TRL Enforcement in MT
• Draft Ordinance- EEE

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance, attached as Exhibit A, amending Chapter 8.70 (Tenant Relocation) of the Fremont Municipal Code.

2. Waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance, attached as Exhibit B, amending Chapter 8.75 (Tobacco Retailers Licensing) of the Fremont Municipal Code.

3. Waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance, attached as Exhibit C, adopting Chapter 8.85 (Exterior Elevated Elements) of the Fremont Municipal Code.

4. Find that ordinances are exempt from and not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because, without limitation, it is not a “project” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(2) and/or 15378(b)(5) as it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect

2.F
Packet Pg. 87
Council Staff Report (ID # 5403) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 4:44 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 4
on the environment per CEQA Guidelines Section 15601(b)(3), each as a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

2.F
Packet Pg. 88
Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 1 of 3

ORDINANCE NO. XX-2025

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FREMONT AMENDING CHAPTER

8.70 OF FREMONT MUNICIPAL CODE TO EXPAND THE DEFINITION

OF A RESIDENTIAL UNIT THAT QUALIFIES FOR TENANT

RELOCATION ASSISTANCE AS DEFINED BY STATE LAW
WHEREAS, the City of Fremont adopted Chapter 8.70, the Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance in 2013, which requires landlord to pay tenants relocation costs when the rental unit is ordered to be vacated by the City of Fremont due to the substandard condition of the structure; and WHEREAS, Health & Safety Code Section 17975 was recently amended to expand the definition of a rental unit that would qualify for tenant relocation assistance; and WHEREAS, the City of Fremont now wishes to amend the Fremont Municipal Code to expand the definition of rental unit that is entitled to relocation assistance under the ordinance to be consistent with state law.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FMC CHAPTER 8.70.020 AMENDED
Fremont Municipal Code Title 8, Chapter 8.70, Section 8.70.020 is amended to read as follows (additions are shown as underlined text and deletions as strikethrough):

Sec. 8.70.020 Definitions.

For purpose of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
{All other definitions remain unchanged}
“Residential unit or structure” means any dwelling, apartment, room or place which is a unit rented by a lawful tenant for human habitation, regardless of the zoning designation or approved uses of the building. the place of permanent or customary and usual abode of any person or household. Residential unit or structure shall include mobile homes located in mobile home parks, provided that the city has assumed enforcement authority over such parks from the State Department of Housing and Community Development.

SECTION 2. CEQA
The City Council determines that pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) the ordinance does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment and is not subject to CEQA review. Consequently, no further environmental review is required. The Council therefore directs that a Notice of Exemption be filed with the Alameda County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA guidelines.

2.F.a
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- Tenant Relocation Amendment (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES) Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 2 of 3

SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Fremont hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section or subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.

SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.

SECTION 5. PUBLICATION AND POSTING
The City Clerk has caused the ordinance to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Alameda County and circulated in the City of Fremont for at least five days before the date of adoption. A certified copy of the full text of the ordinance was posted in the office of the City Clerk, since at least five days before this date of adoption. Within 15 days after adoption of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause the ordinance to be published again with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the ordinance and shall post in the office of the City Clerk a certified copy of the full text of this adopted ordinance with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the ordinance.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced before the City Council of the City of Fremont at the regular meeting of the City Council, held on the ____ day of _______, 2025 and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ____ day of ________, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Mayor

2.F.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- Tenant Relocation Amendment (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES) Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 3 of 3

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Clerk City Attorney

2.F.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- Tenant Relocation Amendment (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX- 2025 Page 1 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. XX-2025

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT AMENDING SECTIONS 8.75.010 AND 8.75.210 OF CHAPTER 8.75 OF

THE FREMONT MUNICIPAL CODE TO CLARIFY ORDINANCE

ENFORCEMENT
WHEREAS, in 2019, the City of Fremont adopted Chapter 8.75, the tobacco retailers licensing ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Fremont Code Enforcement Division and the Police Department have undertaken enforcement activities of Chapter 8.75; and WHEREAS, the City of Fremont now wishes to amend the Fremont Municipal Code to clarify the enforcement of Chapter 8.75.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FMC SECTION 8.75.010 AMENDED
Fremont Municipal Code Title 8, Chapter 8.75, Section 8.75.010 is amended to read as follows (additions are shown as underlined text and deletions as strikethrough):

Sec. 8.75.010 Flavored tobacco products prohibited.
{Subsections (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f) not modified.} (g) “Flavored tobacco product” means any tobacco product that imparts a taste or odor other than the taste or odor of tobacco, or that imparts a heating, cooling, or numbing sensation characterizing flavor, including menthol cigarettes and flavored noncigarette tobacco products such as little cigars, smokeless tobacco, and flavored components of e-cigarettes and vaping devices. Flavored tobacco product includes any tobacco product described as “chill,” “ice,” “fresh,” “arctic,” “sweet,” “spicy,” or “frost.”
{Subsections (h), (i), (j), (k), (l), (m), (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r) not modified.} SECTION 2. FMC SECTION 8.75.210 AMENDED
Fremont Municipal Code Title 8, Chapter 8.75, Section 8.75.210 is amended to read as follows:

Sec. 8.75.210 Violations, suspension, and revocations.

If reasonable cause exists to believe a violation of this chapter has occurred, or if a court of competent jurisdiction determines the same, the department shall issue a notice of violation and

2.F.b
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- TRL Enforcement in MT (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX- 2025 Page 2 of 3 begin the revocation process as follows:
(a) For a first violation within any 60-month period, no new the license may issue be suspended for the person or the location for 30 days from the date the violation is discovered. (b) For a second violation within any 60-month period, no new the license may issue be suspended for the person or the location for 90 days from the date the violation is discovered. (c) After a third violation within any 60-month period, no new the license may issue for be suspended for the person or the location for 12 months from the date the violation is discovered. (d) Upon a finding by the department of four or more violations within any 60-month period, the license shall be revoked.
(e) Locations where there is proof that ownership of the business has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction are exempt from the provisions of this section.

SECTION 3. CEQA
The City Council determines that pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) the ordinance does not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment and is not subject to CEQA review. Consequently, no further environmental review is required. The Council therefore directs that a Notice of Exemption be filed with the Alameda County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA guidelines.

SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Fremont hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section or subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.

SECTION 6. PUBLICATION AND POSTING
The City Clerk has caused the ordinance to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Alameda County and circulated in the City of Fremont for at least five days before the date of adoption. A certified copy of the ordinance was posted in the office of the City Clerk, since at least five days before this date of adoption. Within 15 days after adoption of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause the ordinance to be published again with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the ordinance and shall post in

2.F.b
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- TRL Enforcement in MT (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX- 2025 Page 3 of 3 the office of the City Clerk a certified copy of the full text of this adopted ordinance with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the ordinance.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Clerk City Attorney

2.F.b
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- TRL Enforcement in MT (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 1 of 5

ORDINANCE NO. XX-2025
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FREMONT ADDING CHAPTER 8.85

OF FREMONT MUN ICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT A N EXTERIOR

ELEVATED ELEMENTS ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, the City occasionally initiates amendments to the Fremont Municipal Code (FMC) to clarify, add, or amend certain provisions to ensure that the local regulations remain current with Federal and State law, internally consistent, simple to understand and implement, and relevant to changes occurring in the community; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature adopted the Building standards , decks and balconies:
inspection bill of 2018 (SB 721) which requires the inspection of exterior elevated elements and associated waterproofing elements for buildings with three or more multi-family dwelling units by a qualified professional, completion of an inspection report and necessary repairs every six years; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature adopted the Common Interest Developments , decks and balconies: inspection bill of 2019 (SB 326) which requires the inspection of exterior elevated elements and associated waterproofing elements in common interest developments with three or more dwelling units by a qualified professional, completion of an inspection report and necessary repairs every nine years; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature adopted an amendment to Section 17973 of the Health and Safety Code, relating to business and professions : inspection bill of 2024 (AB 2579) which extended the deadline for initial inspection of multi-family dwelling units until January 1, 2026.

The bill would also provide that no new inspection is required until January 1, 2026, if the property was inspected within 3 years prior to January 1, 2019, as specified; and WHEREAS, State law enables the City to enact an ordinance to implement the Exterior Elevated Elements laws and impose requirements that are stricter than those set by state law (California Health and Safety Code § 17973(o) and California Civil Code § 5551(n)); and WHEREAS, this proposed FMC amendment to Title 8 (Health and Safety) is intended to implement the requirements of SB721 and SB326; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations, and testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgment to evaluate the project.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FMC CHAPTER 8.85 ADDED
Chapter 8.85 (Exterior Elevated Elements) of Fremont Municipal Code Title 8 (Health and Safety), is added to read as follows:

2.F.c
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- EEE (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 2 of 5

Sec. 8.85.010 Title.

This Ordinance shall be known as the Exterior Elevated Elements Ordinance.

Sec. 8.85.020 Purpose and Intent
The purpose of this chapter is to establish exterior elevated elements standards that:
(a) Implement the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 721 (2018) (California Health & Safety Code § 17973) and SB 326 (2019) (California Civil Code § 5551) intended to maintain the structural integrity of exterior elevated elements of multi-family residential buildings; and
(b) Adopt regulations for the City to implement and enforce these requirements.

Sec. 8.85.030
Definitions. Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meaning established by this section:
(a) "Exterior Elevated Element" means the following types of structures and load bearing components, including their supports, associated waterproofing systems, and railings: balconies, decks, porches, stairways, walkways, and entry structures that extend beyond exterior walls of the building and which have a walking surface that is elevated more than six feet above ground level, are designed for human occupancy or use, and rely in whole or in substantial part on wood or wood-based products for structural support or stability of the exterior elevated element as defined now or hereafter in California Health and Safety Code § 17973(o) and California Civil Code § 5551(n).

Sec. 8.85.040 Applicability
Multi-family buildings with three or more units, including apartments and common interest developments, shall be subject to the requirements of this Chapter.

Sec. 8.85.050 Inspections
All buildings subject to this Chapter shall have the exterior elevated elements inspected as follows:
(a) Multi-family dwellings with three or more units: the first inspection of exterior elevated elements to be completed by January 1, 2026. Subsequent inspections are required by January 1 every six years thereafter. The inspection of new buildings shall occur no later than six years following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy from the Community Development Department.

2.F.c
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- EEE (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 3 of 5

(b) Common Interest Developments: the first inspection of exterior elevated elements to be completed by January 1, 2026. Subsequent inspections are required by January 1 every nine years thereafter. The inspection of buildings for which a building permit application has been submitted on or after January 1, 2020, shall occur no later than six years following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy from the Community Development Department.
(c) Inspection Reports. A copy of any inspection report completed pursuant to California Health and Safety Code § 17973 or California Civil Code § 5551 that (1) recommends immediate repairs, (2) advises that any multi-family building assembly poses an immediate threat to the safety of the occupants, or (3) prevents occupant access, shall be provided by the inspector to the owner of the building and to the City of Fremont Code Enforcement Division within 15 days of completion of the report. All other inspection reports shall be submitted to the City of Fremont Code Enforcement Division within 60 days of completion of the report.

Sec. 8.85.060 Repairs
(a) Repairs of exterior elevated elements for all multi-family budlings shall be subject to the following performance standards:
(1) Emergency repairs. An exterior elevated element that the inspector advises poses an immediate threat to the safety of the occupants, or finds preventing occupant access or emergency repairs, including shoring, or both, are necessary, shall be considered an emergency condition and the owner of the building shall perform required preventive measures immediately. Immediately preventing occupant access to the exterior elevated element until emergency repairs can be completed constitutes compliance with this paragraph. All repairs of emergency conditions shall comply with the requirements of California Health and Safety Code § 17973(g), be inspected by the inspector, and reported to the Code Enforcement Division. (2) Non-emergency repairs. The owner of the building requiring corrective work to an exterior elevated element that, in the opinion of the inspector, does not pose an immediate threat to the safety of the occupants, shall apply for a permit within 120 days of receipt of the inspection report.
(3) Once the permit is approved, the owner of the building shall have 120 days to make the repairs unless an extension of time is granted by the Code Enforcement Division.

All repairs shall meet the requirements of California Health and Safety Code § 17973(g).
(b) Repair Certification Affidavit. If the inspection report identifies the need for any repairs or maintenance, whether or not building permits are required for the identified scope of work, property owners shall provide proof of compliance with this Chapter by having a licensed general contractor, architect or engineer, or other qualified individual as determined by the Building Official or designee submit an inspection affidavit to the Building Official or designee on a form provided by the City certifying that all required repairs and maintenance have been completed and exterior elevated elements are now in

2.F.c
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- EEE (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 4 of 5

safe condition, adequate working order and free from deterioration, decay, corrosion or similar damage and there is no evidence of active water intrusion in concealed spaces of the inspected elements.

Sec. 8.85.070 Exemption
Multi-family dwelling and common interest development buildings with three or more units that are exempt from the requirements of California Health and Safety Code § 17973 and California Civil Code § 5551 shall submit a signed affidavit to the City of Fremont Code Enforcement Division on the form approved by the city.

Sec. 8.85.080 Administrative Regulations
The Building Official or designee is authorized to adopt administrative regulations, which may include, but are not limited to reporting requirements, documentation of repairs or maintenance, and enforcement procedures, to implement the provisions of this chapter.

Sec. 8.85.090 Fees
The City Council may establish and amend by resolution all fees and charges as may be necessary to effectuate the purpose of this chapter.

Sec. 8.85.100 Violations and Remedies
(a) Violation of this chapter is punishable as set forth in Title 1, General Provisions of this code.
(b) Violation of this chapter is a public nuisance subject to abatement under Title 8, Health and Safety, Chapter 8.60 Neighborhood Preservation.

SECTION 2. CEQA
The Exterior Elevated Elements Ordinance, an administrative government activity, is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that the there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The Exterior Elevated Elements Ordinance will clearly not have a significant effect on the environment and, thus, CEQA does not apply. The Council therefore directs that a Notice of Exemption be filed with the Alameda County Clerk in accordance with the CEQA guidelines.

2.F.c
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- EEE (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES)

Ordinance No. XX-2025 Page 5 of 5

phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.

SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall take effect and will be enforced thirty (30) days after its adoption.

SECTION 5. PUBLICATION AND POSTING
The City Clerk has prepared and published at least five days before the date of adoption, this ordinance once in a newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Alameda County and circulated in the City of Fremont. A certified copy of the full text of the ordinance was posted in the office of the City Clerk since at least five days before this date of adoption. Within 15 days after adoption of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause the summary to be published again with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the ordinance and shall post in the office of the City Clerk a certified copy of the full text of this adopted ordinance with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the ordinance.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Mayor

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Clerk City Attorney

2.F.c
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Draft Ordinance- EEE (5403 : CODE ENFORCEMENT CODE UPDATES) Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: City Manager's Office
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Plans, Policies and Studies

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5424) DOC ID: 5424
Updated: 4/30/2025 6:23 AM by Dina Lewis Page 1
ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK - Consideration and Adoption of Legislative Framework
Contact Persons:

Name: Geneva Bosques
Title: Director of Communications and
Legislative Affairs

Div/Dept: City Manager's Office
Phone: 510-284-4094
E-Mail: [email protected]

Executive Summary: The Legislative Framework outlines and prioritizes the City's legislative interests. The Framework serves as a guiding document for staff to follow when analyzing or taking action on legislative areas of interest. The Framework is updated in accordance with City Council’s stated priorities and to reflect other important considerations in the legislative environment. Staff recommends Council adopt this updated Legislative Framework and authorize the City Manager to implement the City's legislative work plan.

BACKGROUND: Since 2001, the City Council has formally adopted a Legislative Framework (Framework) to guide the City's legislative work program. This includes advocacy with local, regional, State, and federal agencies; interaction with advocacy organizations; and engaging on specific bills considered in the legislature.

The City of Fremont is a member of many legislative and government entity advocacy groups, including but not limited to: League of California Cities, National League of Cities, United States Conference of Mayors, California Fire Chiefs Association, California Park and Recreation Society, California Police Chiefs Association, etc. These organizations advocate on behalf of cities at the regional, state, and federal levels. In addition, the City of Fremont maintains professional contracts with Holland and Knight (Washington D.C.) and Townsend Public Affairs (Sacramento) to assist with direct legislative advocacy.

City staff regularly monitors and analyzes proposed legislation to determine potential impacts to City services and operations. Staff prioritizes efforts that clearly align with established City policy and the City Council Priorities. Staff conducts limited advocacy through position letters, proposed amendments, or formal comments at hearings, should issues arise that could significantly impact City services, operations or prioritized policy areas.

Positions on Statewide ballot measures are required to be brought to the City Council for consideration. Additionally, legislation or regulatory issues that do not clearly fall within the adopted Framework, or when there is disagreement in interpretation, would also be brought back to the City Council for consideration and/or action, on a case-by-case basis.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: At this year’s City Council Retreat, the City Council renewed its established priorities: to continue to address homelessness, focus on public safety and focus on environmental sustainability. Additionally, the City Council reaffirmed the foundational

2.G
Packet Pg. 100
Council Staff Report (ID # 5424) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:23 AM by Dina Lewis Page 2
principle of financial sustainability, with an emphasis on economic development in support of this principle. Staff will prioritize legislation supporting these adopted Council Priorities. The Framework is broad by design, in an effort to be adaptable over the course of the two-year State legislative cycle, and possibly beyond.

Each legislative principle documented in the Framework includes broad policy statements that articulate the City’s legislative priorities by addressing major areas of interest. Staff continuously evaluates the legislative climate to identify new areas of legislative concern with the overarching goal of improving quality of life in Fremont.

A record number of bills were introduced earlier this year by State lawmakers for consideration in the 2025/26 California legislative cycle. City staff are currently monitoring and prioritizing bills that address the City Council’s adopted Priorities. Key issues the City will be keeping an eye on this session include the State’s budget, housing and homelessness, environment and climate change, economic development, federal funding, and public safety.

The newly proposed Framework document will replace and update the previous version, adopted in 2023. The updated Framework includes an overview of the City’s legislative work plan and more specifically defines advocacy positions which guide areas of priority in alignment with City Council Priorities. This year’s proposed Framework also includes a new section which will prioritize advocacy for legislation that protects current and future federal funding that the City receives.

Once adopted, the City Manager, or her designee, will oversee the Framework implementation and will administer day activities. Staff will continue to share regular updates and progress on the Legislative Affairs section of Fremont.gov.

FISCAL IMPACT: N/A

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: N/A

ATTACHMENTS: None.

LINKS: Legislative Affairs on Fremont.gov:
https://www.fremont.gov/government/legislative-affairs

ATTACHMENTS:
• 2025 Legislative Framework

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt the Legislative Framework.

2. Authorize the City Manager to implement the City's legislative work plan.

3. Authorize the City Manager, Mayor, or designee to transmit documents that are consistent with the City's legislative priorities.

2.G
Packet Pg. 101

LEGISLATIVE

FRAMEWORK
Exhibit C – Architectural Design Concept
Central Park Community Center Project - June 2024

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK) Legislative Affairs Program Overview
The Legislative Framework outlines the City’s priorities for legislative interests at the federal, State, and regional levels. This framework informs staff and the Fremont community about the goals that guide the City of Fremont in its legislative strategy.

In alignment with the two-year California State Legislature Legislative cycle, the City develops broad legislative advocacy positions in support of Council adopted policies and annual priorities. Staff uses the guiding Legislative Framework, to develop a work plan that includes researching, monitoring, and advocating for legislation and funding to help advance the City’s vision, goals, and policies.

Once adopted by the City Council, the Legislative Framework, will remain in effect until amended. If the Council would like to consider taking action on a statewide ballot measure or legislative issue that does not clearly fall within the adopted City Legislative Framework, staff will bring that to Council for consideration and formal adoption on a case by case basis.

Fremont City Council Priorities
Annually the Fremont City Council adopts priorities that guide City staff’s work plan throughout the calendar year. The Council’s adopted priorities serve as the foundation of the City’s legislative framework and are also used to guide staff’s time and resources to review and prioritize legislation and funding opportunities.

Fremont City Council Adopted Policies and Plans
Adopted policies and plans inform the City’s legislative advocacy efforts. The following documents may be found on the City’s website at www.fremont.gov or by accessing the links below.

City of Fremont General Plan
City of Fremont Climate Action Plan
City of Fremont Age-Friendly Action Plan
City of Fremont Homeless Response Plan
City of Fremont Mobility Plan
City of Fremont Parks and Recreation Master Plan
City of Fremont Trails Strategy Plan
City of Fremont Business and Economic Recovery Framework City of Fremont Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
City of Fremont Housing Element
City of Fremont Fiber Master Plan

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK)

1 Legislative Advocacy Positions
To underscore issues and focus advocacy resources, the City’s Legislative Advocacy Positions are as follows:

Quality of Life The City supports legislation and policies that provide opportunities to protect and enhance our residents’ quality of life through active living, a healthy lifestyle, and diverse recreational services.

Protect Local Control The City values its ability and authority to exercise local control and fiscal sustainability, enable excellent public services and protect and enhance the quality of life for Fremont residents and businesses, and supports efforts to streamline regulations that simplify the job of running the City and opposes efforts that erode the City’s ability to control its own affairs.

Keep Fremont Safe The City supports legislation and policies that enable local officials to access expanded resources to provide quality police, fire, emergency management, mental health, emergency medical services, traffic safety, youth violence, crime prevention and education, crime mitigation and delinquency prevention efforts for Fremont community members.

Ensure Competitiveness Through Strategic Economic Development The City embraces efforts to obtain funding for economic development, including planning and implementation of regional transportation; economic stimulus programs; workforce development and education initiatives; small business entrepreneurship training and assistance; and new business attraction and growth. The City supports equal access to State and federal funding opportunities, including grant eligibility criteria for cities.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion The City supports legislation and efforts that assist publicly funded government institutions to create organizational policies and procedures that incorporate the concepts of “diversity, equity and inclusion” in daily operations including hiring and employment practices, labor negotiations, racial equity, contracting opportunities, public engagement, education and methods of service delivery to all residents and visitors.

Promote Investment in Transportation, and Infrastructure Maintenance and Rehabilitation The City supports legislation and policies that promote investing in the maintenance and rehabilitation of aging infrastructure and building new system capacity to support smart growth principles and safety improvements.

Prevent, Reduce and Eliminate Homelessness The City recognizes and values the importance of all community members having stable housing, access to jobs, the ability to earn a livable and sustainable wage, and access to essential services. The City supports efforts and legislation that seeks to alleviate the State’s large homelessness problem via funding and programmatic assistance (including expanded mental health and SUD resources) to cities and counties.

Pursue efforts to create new financing tools to support, build, and preserve affordable housing The City remains firmly committed to the production of high quality, affordable

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK)

2 housing for a range of income levels and target populations such as families, seniors, homeless, and those with special needs.

Promote the “strategically urban” vision of the General Plan The City supports policies that promote a strategically urban mix of land uses and urban form in transit-rich areas.

Advance climate action, adaptation, and resiliency The City is committed to being a climate- ready community that works to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions; expand clean energy policies; improve community adaptation and resiliency to climate change; improve environmental standards and the regulatory process; improve water conversation and support State and Federal incentives and financial support for preservation of natural resources.

Improve federal, State, regional, county, and local coordination and planning to strengthen community disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and resilience The City supports legislation and policies that provide resources and support to reduce community risks and increase capabilities to manage major emergencies when they occur. Significant community risks include catastrophic earthquake, climate-related emergencies (sea level rise, catastrophic wildfires, and flooding), and other human-caused and naturally occurring threats and hazards.

Strengthen Youth Programs, Services and Activities The City supports legislation and policies that furthers the City’s commitment to nurturing a safe, supportive community that is responsible to the full range of needs of all children, youth and their families.

Smart City Initiatives: The City supports legislation and policies that allow the City to continue to develop a cohesive smart city agenda, including areas of City operations, public safety, sustainability, and community engagement to ultimately improve Fremont’s resilience and quality of life.

Federal F unding
With the current session of Congress deliberating significant budget policy changes that could impact our community, the City is committed to federal advocacy that protects, preserves, and enhances funding. The City’s federal funding program objectives include:

Advocating for legislation and appropriations that will assist the City with critically needed resources to help advance Council Priorities and align with the City’s Legislative Priorities.

Advocating for Community Project Funding (CPF) priorities, with the support of its congressional delegation members, through the House and Senate appropriations project request process. The City has had a successful track record securing this funding through past appropriation rounds.

Protecting the tax-exempt status of municipal bond interest as well as private activity bonds so that local and state governments can invest more efficiently in projects throughout their communities.

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK)

3 Advancing legislation that provides funding for smart and safe communities that engage, and are responsive to, the public safety needs of all of its residents.

Advocating for the City’s transportation priorities, including transit, roads, and bridges, in the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization, with current law expiring in September 2026 and hearings starting this year.

Supporting manufacturing policy incentives that help to further the City’s economic and business development goals.

Protect critical resources for affordable housing, including Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Grants, Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG), HOME Investments Partnerships Program (HOME), Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA), the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), Preservation and Reinvestment Initiative for Community Enhancement Program (Manufactured Housing Program), Pathways to Removing Obstacles to Housing Program (PRO Housing), and Community Development Block Grants (CDBG),

1. Continuing to identify and pursue promising grant opportunities that will provide additional resources in addressing City project priorities

2. Actively engaging in the deliberations of the national local-government leadership organizations, including the US Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities, as kay platforms to: (a) address federal policy issues; (b) meet with White House and Administration officials and Congressional leaders, (c) present the City’s interests and recommendations through the organization’s working committee and task forces and through passage of City-led policy resolutions at plenary sessions.

3. Opposing unfunded mandates that impose costs without resources, issuance of burdensome red tape, or the preemption or undermining of local control.

Legislative Program Administration

Under the direction of the City Manager, the Director of Communications and Legislative Affairs will have oversight over the City’s legislative platform. Legislative staff will administer day to day legislative matters and work with City departments to analyze legislative initiatives to determine the impact on the City. The main functions of the Legislative Affairs Program are listed below:

1. Legislative requests: All legislative requests for review, support or opposition will be directed to the City Manager’s Office. Requests can be brought to the attention of the City through a variety of channels:

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK)

4 • State and federal legislative advocates
• Fremont City Council members
• City of Fremont staff
• City residents and businesses
• Elected representatives
• League of California Cities
• Other governmental associations

2. Assessment and research: City staff will review legislative requests in coordination with any relevant departments, lobbyists and legislative representatives such as League of California Cities, and US Conference of Mayors, to analyze whether the legislation aligns with the City’s adopted policies, priorities and positions. If the legislation is found to be in alignment, City staff will monitor and track the legislation, providing updates when necessary. Concurrent with this evaluation, staff will on a limited basis, draft a position letter and take the appropriate course of action when the proposed legislation could have a significant impact on City services and/or operations.

3. Advocacy: Staff will utilize legislative advocates to occasionally advocate in support, support with changes, or in opposition to legislation in strict conformance with Council priorities and the guiding principles: City Legislative Affairs staff will notify lobbyists of the City’s position and direct them to take appropriate action with legislators. The City reserves the right to remain neutral on a given piece of legislation.

4. Draft of sponsor legislation: City staff and legislative advocates will work with the City’s legislative representatives to articulate the City’s stance on a policy and to ensure said stance is codified in statute.

5. City correspondence with relevant legislators: City staff will draft position letters for the City Manager and/or Mayor to review and sign. This letter will be distributed to the appropriate legislators and posted on the City’s website.

6. Council approved resolution: If a legislative proposal, regulation, or ballot measure arises that is not addressed by the adopted Legislative Framework and it is determined that it may impact the City, staff will draft a staff report and resolution for consideration by the full City Council. Approved resolutions will be forwarded along with a letter signed by the Mayor to the appropriate legislators.

7. Council outreach: A copy of all legislative letters and regular program updates will be posted to Fremont.gov and City Council will be routinely notified.

Legislative Program Work Plan

1. Seek federal, State, regional and county funding assistance for City projects, services, and programs.
a. Identify City projects for potential submittal for federal, State or regional funding consideration.
b. Provide information to City departments on potential grant funding opportunities.

2. Advocate and request letters of support for City initiatives and grant applications.

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK)

5 3. Inform and provide information to our legislators, City Council and staff on the legislative process and monitor key issues and legislation that could have a potential impact on the City.

4. Promote the City’s legislative interests at the federal, State, regional, and county levels.

5. Serve as an active partner and participant with other local governments, Fremont Unified School District, the League of California Cities, regional agencies, and local professional organizations on legislative/regulatory issues that are important to the City and our region.

2.G.a
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: 2025 Legislative Framework (5424 : ADOPTION OF LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK) Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Finance Department
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Agreements and Contracts

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5425) DOC ID: 5425
Updated: 4/30/2025 5:01 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 1
COST ALLOCATION SERVICES - Authorization to Execute Agreement for a Citywide Cost Allocation Plan and a Grant Cost Allocation Plan with Capital Accounting Partners, LLC
Contact Persons:

Name: Hein Hein Myat David Persselin
Title: Accounting Manager Finance Director
Div/Dept: Finance Department Finance Department
Phone: 510-494-4602 510-494-4631
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The City needs to maintain a Citywide Cost Allocation Plan and a Grant Cost Allocation Plan to determine the full cost of services, allocate indirect costs, and request reimbursement for indirect costs supporting programs and services funded by federal and State grants.

Staff recently issued a request for proposals (RFP) process to solicit proposals from qualified firms. Having reviewed and evaluated the proposals based on the criteria outlined in the RFP, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager or her designee to execute a five-year service agreement with Capital Accounting Partners, LLC (CAP) for a total amount not to exceed $112,750.

BACKGROUND: The City incurs both direct and indirect costs to provide services. While direct costs can be specifically identified with a particular program, service, or department, indirect costs represent shared administrative and operational expenses that support multiple departments and functions across the City. To ensure that these shared costs are allocated fairly and consistently, the City maintains a cost allocation plan (the Plan) as an ongoing financial management tool. The Plan is an accounting method that allocates indirect costs from Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology, and other centralized services to the departments and programs that utilize these services.

By identifying the full cost of delivering services, the Plan promotes transparency, enhances financial accountability, and helps ensure that City’s resources are appropriately allocated and recovered. The Plan is critical to ensure that the General Fund is reimbursed for the services it provides to other funds. The Plan is also utilized for budgeting, charging other funds for services, user fee analysis, measuring the cost of government services, and requesting reimbursement from federal and State grants.

Two annual cost allocation plans are prepared each year as part of the budget process:

• A Citywide Cost Allocation Plan to set service fees and recover the cost of General Fund administrative and support services from City activities budgeted outside the General Fund; and

• A Grant Cost Allocation Plan to support reimbursement claims for indirect costs associated with programs funded by federal and State grants. Maintaining a cost

2.H
Packet Pg. 109
Council Staff Report (ID # 5425) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 5:01 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 2
allocation plan that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200) is essential to maximize recovery of allowable indirect costs, comply with audit requirements, and maintain eligibility for current and future grant funding

Capital Accounting Partners, LLC, has provided the Citywide and Grant Cost Allocation services to City for fiscal years ending June 30, 2013, through June 30, 2025. CAP is currently providing similar services to the cities of Glendale, Burbank, Santa Barbara, and the counties of Riverside and Contra Costa.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: As the current cost allocation services agreement with CAP ended on June 30, 2025, staff issued an RFP for cost allocation services in February 2025 and received responses in March 2025 from five firms.

Staff reviewed the proposals based on criteria outlined in the RFP and has determined that continuing with CAP best meets City’s needs. Accordingly, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager or her designee to execute an agreement with CAP to provide cost allocation services for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2026 through 2030.

FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended agreement includes the full preparation and support of the Citywide and Grant Cost Allocation Plans and provides for a fixed annual fee of $22,550 and a total amount not to exceed $112,750 over the five-year term.

A General Fund appropriation for next year’s cost allocation services will be included in the FY 2025/26 proposed operating budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Action on this item represents a fiscal, organizational, and/or administrative governmental activity that will not result in physical changes in the environment. Therefore, it is not a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

2.H
Packet Pg. 110
Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Public Works
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Private Development Projects

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5428) DOC ID: 5428
Updated: 4/30/2025 5:03 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 1

VACATION OF EASEMENT AT FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE HOUSE TERRACE - Adopt a Resolution Summarily Vacating a Public Utility Easement at Fremont Boulevard and Ice House Terrace in the South Fremont Community Plan Area (PLN2024-00080) and Make Findings of CEQA Exemption.

Contact Persons:

Name: Homira Shafaq Hans Larsen
Title: Associate Civil Engineer Public Works Director
Div/Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: (510) 494-4780 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to facilitate the development of a new 70,000 square-foot industrial building by vacating a public utility easement that is no longer needed.

BACKGROUND: On January 14, 2025, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Discretionary Design Review to allow the construction of a 70,000 square foot industrial building at a vacant site located at Fremont Boulevard and Ice House Terrace for a project commonly known as Palisade Fremont Boulevard. To fulfill conditions of approval for the project, Pacific Palisades, the property owner and developer of the project, has submitted an application for the vacation of a public utility easement on their property. The public utility easement proposed for vacation was originally dedicated to the City by Parcel Map 6123 recorded on February 28, 1992. The vacation shall be effective immediately with the recordation of the resolution of vacation.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: California Streets and Highways Code Section 8330 – 8334.5 allows the City to summarily vacate a public service easement when it is “superseded by relocation, or determined to be excess by the easement holder, and there are no other public facilities located within the easement.” City staff have determined that the public utility easement is no longer needed and there are no other public facilities located within the easement.

Notification to Utility Companies: All concerned utility companies have been notified and consented to the proposed vacation of the easement.

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The vacation of the public utility easement is exempt from environmental review, as a minor alteration to land use limitations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15305 (14 CCR § 15305).

ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution- Summary Vacation PLN2024-00080
• Exhibit A - Legal Description

2.I
Packet Pg. 111
Council Staff Report (ID # 5428) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 5:03 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 2
• Exhibit B - Plat Map

RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution to vacate a Public Utility Easement at Fremont Boulevard and Ice House Terrace on grounds the easement is no longer needed.

2.I
Packet Pg. 112
Resolution 2025-XX Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT

SUMMARILY VACATING A PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT AT
FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE HOUSE TERRACE, (PLN2024-00080)

AND MAKING A FINDING OF CEQA EXEMPTION

WHEREAS, the applicant of the property located at Fremont Boulevard and Ice House Terrace is requesting approval of a summary vacation of the public utility easement described and depicted in Exhibits A and B, attached and incorporated herein by this reference; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 8333(c), the legislative body of a local agency may summarily vacate a public service easement when it is superseded by relocation, or determined to be excess by the easement holder, and there are no other public facilities located within the easement.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council approves the summary vacation of the public utility easement described and depicted in Exhibits A and B, which is hereby vacated in accordance with Public Streets, Highways and Service Easements Vacation Law, Chapter 4, Part 3, Division 9 of the California Streets and Highways Code (Section 8300 et seq.), based upon the following findings and conditions:

A. The City Council finds, based on the information contained in the City Council report and presented by City staff, that the public utility easement being vacated is no longer needed, has been superseded by relocation, constitutes excess land, and there are no other public facilities located within the easement.

B. The vacation shall conform to Exhibits A and B (Legal Description and Plat for Public Utility Easement Vacation)

Section 2. The City Council finds that the vacation of the easement is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines, Section 15305.

Section 3. The City Clerk is directed to cause a certified copy of this resolution, with a copy of Exhibit A and B, attested by her under seal, to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Alameda County after the above conditions are met.

2.I.a
Packet Pg. 113
Attachment: Draft Resolution- Summary Vacation PLN2024-00080 (5428 : VACATION OF EASEMENT AT FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE Resolution 2025-XX Page 2 of 2

ADOPTED _______________, 2025 by the City Council of the City of Fremont by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
City Attorney

2.I.a
Packet Pg. 114
Attachment: Draft Resolution- Summary Vacation PLN2024-00080 (5428 : VACATION OF EASEMENT AT FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE

2.I.b
Packet Pg. 115
Attachment: Exhibit A - Legal Description (5428 : VACATION OF EASEMENT AT FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE HOUSE TERRACE)

2.I.c
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment: Exhibit B - Plat Map (5428 : VACATION OF EASEMENT AT FREMONT BOULEVARD AND ICE HOUSE TERRACE) Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Public Works
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Agreements and Contracts

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5429) DOC ID: 5429
Updated: 4/30/2025 6:38 AM by Dina Lewis Page 1
FREMONT CENTRAL PARK RESTROOMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT - Approval of Plans and Specifications; Award of Contract to Alex Kushner General, Inc. in the amount of $793,500 (including 15% Contingency) for the Fremont Central Park Restroom Replacements Project (PWC9089); Make Findings of CEQA Exemption Contact Persons:

Name: Martha Martinez Hans Larsen
Title: Facilities Project Manager Public Works Director Div/Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4750 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to facilitate replacing four of the aging and substandard public restrooms at Fremont Central Park with new prefabricated restrooms.

BACKGROUND: Fremont Central Park, located at 40000 Paseo Padre Parkway in Fremont, is set on 450 acres with an 83-acre lake, large grass fields, sports field, playgrounds, restrooms, and various parking lots.

The City’s updated Parks and Recreation Master Plan, adopted in 2022, identified existing park restrooms as one of the highest priorities for park facility/amenity investments. The restrooms are beyond their useful life and do not comply with current building codes or the Americans with Disability Act (ADA). The Central Park restrooms located at the Tennis Complex, Soccer Complex, Babbling Brook Picnic Area, and Lions Picnic Area are four of the several public restrooms being replaced as part of a multi-year park restroom improvement program. The new restrooms are prefabricated by Public Restroom Company, through a contract previously awarded by the City Council on June 4, 2024, and they will have a traditional men’s and women’s restroom, one all gender restroom, a storage area, and a utility room.

A separate construction contract that is the subject of this report includes work to demolish the existing four restrooms and prepare the site to accept the new prefabricated restroom structures. Construction is anticipated to begin in June 2025 with completion anticipated by Fall 2025.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: Bids for this project were opened on April 8, 2025. The bidders with their respective bid amount are shown below. The Engineer’s Estimate is $1,000,000.

Bidder Bid Amount
Alex Kushner General Inc. $ 690,000
CF Contracting, Inc. $ 848,000
Grade Tech Inc. $ 917,403
Zolman Construction, Inc. $ 968,250
S&H Construction, Inc. $ 1,068,600

2.J
Packet Pg. 117
Council Staff Report (ID # 5429) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:38 AM by Dina Lewis Page 2
JPB Designs Inc. $ 1,070,000
Oveisi Construction Inc. $ 1,110,000

The low bidder, Alex Kushner General Inc., is a responsive bidder and all documents are in order. The contractor is experienced in this type of work and has satisfactorily completed contracts of a similar nature with the City and other nearby agencies.

Project Cost & Funding
Estimated Project Costs
Design Consultant and Project Administration $ 300,000
Construction Contract - Low Bid 690,000
Construction Contingency (15%) 103,500
Construction Inspection and Administration (10%) 69,000 Total Estimated Project Costs: $ 1,162,500

Source of Funding
PWC 9089–501–Capital Improvement Fund $ 1,162,500
Total Funds Available $ 1,162,500

FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated project cost of $1,162,500 will be funded from sources in the adopted Capital Budget. The appropriation for the Citywide Park Restroom Replacement Project (PWC9089) has sufficient funding to complete the project.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is categorically exempt from environmental review based on, without limitation, CEQA Guideline Section 15302(c). The replacement of the existing park restroom involves negligible or no expansion of use or capacity, which does not involve significant new environmental effects or changed circumstances.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

LINKS:

Demolition Drawings:
https://www.fremont.gov/home/showdocument?id=17879&t=638798144088142850 Construction Drawings:
https://www.fremont.gov/home/showdocument?id=17881&t=638798147601820397 Special Provisions Manual:
https://www.fremont.gov/home/showdocument?id=17877&t=638798142771004286

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the following actions related to the Fremont Central Park Restrooms Replacement Project (PWC9089):

1. Approve Plans and Specifications for the Fremont Central Park Restrooms Replacement (Phase I) Project.

2.J
Packet Pg. 118
Council Staff Report (ID # 5429) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/30/2025 6:38 AM by Dina Lewis Page 3

3. Find the project is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guideline pertaining to replacement of the park restroom involving negligible or no expansion of capacity.

2.J
Packet Pg. 119
Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Public Works
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Agreements and Contracts

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5431) DOC ID: 5431
Updated: 5/1/2025 11:57 AM by Susan Gauthier Page 1
WALNUT AVENUE BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS - Approval of Plans and Specifications; Award Contract to Radius Earthwork Inc. in the Amount of $3,327,642.60 (includes 10% Contingency) for the Walnut Avenue Bikeway Phase 2 Improvement Project (PWC9100A); Appropriation Actions; and Make Findings of CEQA Exemption
Contact Persons:

Name: Edelzar Garcia Hans Larsen
Title: Senior Civil Engineer Public Works Director
Div/Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4781 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to initiate the construction of a multimodal improvement project along Walnut Avenue from Fremont Boulevard to Paseo Padre Parkway. The project is the completion of a series of investments that are improving Walnut Avenue to provide safe and convenient mobility by all travel modes and for all ages and abilities. The project is in close proximity to the Fremont BART station and is partially funded through a Safe Routes to BART grant.

BACKGROUND: In 2023, the City of Fremont received a competitive grant through the Safe Routes to BART (SR2B) Program to enhance bicycle safety along Walnut Avenue between Fremont Boulevard and Paseo Padre Parkway and improve station access for BART riders.

The Project consists of constructing a raised separated bikeway along Walnut Avenue, a pedestrian flashing beacon at the intersection of Walnut Avenue and California Street, pavement maintenance improvements, and the planting of trees and landscaping within an existing median island.

The project represents the completion of improvements along the Walnut Avenue corridor from Mission Boulevard to Fremont Boulevard, that began in 2019 and has been funded by a combination of grants from the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC), BART, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), and private development. The corridor serves to connect a variety of land uses that include the California School of the Blind, new high-density housing, the Fremont BART station, health care offices, senior facilities, and the Downtown Fremont area. The project has been designed using current standards for “complete streets” that are safe and convenient for all travel modes and all ages and abilities. Other corridor investments have included modernization of traffic signals with pre-emption technology for emergency vehicles and improvements to pavement conditions.

Construction is anticipated to begin in Summer 2025 with completion scheduled by Summer 2026.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: Bids for this project were opened on April 1, 2025. The bidders with their respective bid amounts are shown below. The Engineer’s Estimate is $3,400,000.

2.K
Packet Pg. 120
Council Staff Report (ID # 5431) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/1/2025 11:57 AM by Susan Gauthier Page 2

Bidder Bid Amount

1. Radius Earthwork Inc. $3,025,129.60

2. GradeTech, Inc. $3,085,124.68

3. Galeb Paving, Inc. $3,125,885.00

4. Sposeto Engineering, Inc. $3,309,777.50

5. Redgwick Construction Co. $3,351,778.00

6. O’Grady Paving, Inc. $3,406,087.50

7. QLM-Inc. $3,449,317.00

8. Ghilotti Construction Company, Inc. $3,737,155.25

Bid Protest: GradeTech Inc., the apparent second low bidder, submitted a bid protest within the applicable time period (see attached letter). Staff reviewed the bid protest and finds it without merit. Therefore, staff recommends rejecting the bid protest and awarding the contract to Radius Earthwork, Inc.

The GradeTech Inc.’s protest letter cited three arguments for their basis for protest as follows:

1. Radius Earthwork failed to list a C-10 Licensed electrical subcontractor for the electrical portion of the bid.

City Response: Bid requirements state that for each subcontractor that will perform a portion of the Work in an amount in excess of one-half of 1% of the Bidder’s total Contract Price, the bidder must list a description of the Work, the name and email address of the Subcontractor and the percentage of the total Work to be performed by that Subcontractor, as a portion of the base bid price. Radius Earthwork provided a written response stating that it plans to self-perform most of the work, including purchasing of material. Radius Earthworks intends to subcontract an electrical subcontractor for a portion of electrical work in an amount for $14,500, which is less than one-half of 1%. As such, Radius Earthwork was not required to list the subcontractor in their bid.

2. Radius Earthwork failed to acknowledge the type of Bid Security in Section 5 of the Bid Proposal.

City Response: Radius Earthwork submitted a Bid Bond as their Bid Security. The omission of acknowledging the type of Bid Security is an administrative oversight and can be waived without prejudice to the other bidders.

3. Radius Earthwork failed to properly sign the Bid Proposal. GradeTech claims that as a California Corporation, Radius Earthwork is required to have two officers sign the Bid Proposal as required in the Instructions to Bidders.

City Response: The omission, error or minor deviation from the bid invitation requirements is an immaterial irregularity. The missing second signature would be an immaterial irregularity because it does not affect the price, quantity, quality, or delivery of the services, and can be corrected or waived without prejudice to the other bidders.

2.K
Packet Pg. 121
Council Staff Report (ID # 5431) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/1/2025 11:57 AM by Susan Gauthier Page 3
For the reasons set forth above, Staff recommends that the City Council reject GradeTech’s bid protest as without merit and award the contract to Radius Earthwork as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

Radius Earthwork is a responsible bidder experienced in this type of work and has satisfactorily completed contracts of this nature with other nearby local agencies. Pursuant to the requirements of Section 21080.25 of the Public Resources Code, staff certifies that the entire project will be completed with a skilled and trained workforce and that the contractor Radius Earthwork Inc., shall be required to provide sufficient and competent administration, staff, and a skilled and trained workforce necessary to perform and timely complete the work in accordance with the contract documents.

The project cost is consistent with the Engineer’s Estimate, but funding transfers are needed to augment the project budget. The SR2B Grant was accepted by the City Council at its October 17, 2023, meeting. At the time of Grant approval, the reallocation of local matching funds was deferred until the construction contract award. In addition, landscaping improvements were added to the scope of work within the project limits.

Project Costs and Funding:

Estimated Project Costs
Preliminary Engineering, Design and Project Management $600,576.00 Construction Cost (Lowest Responsible Bid) $3,025,129.60 Construction Inspection, Surveying and Administration (15%) $453,769.00 Construction Contingency (10%) $302,513.00
Total Estimated Project Costs $4,381,987.60

Source of Funding:

Currently Budgeted
PWC9100 – Fund 134 – SB1 (Design Only) $12,500.00
PWC9100 – Fund 504 – ACTC/MTC Capital Grants (Design Only) $375,331.88 PWC9100 – Fund 515 – ACTC Measure B 2012 Bike/Peds Funds (Design Only) $112,744.12 PWC9100 – Fund 531 – Traffic Impact Fee $100,000
PWC9110 – Fund 571 – Safe Routes to BART Grant (SR2B) $1,500,000

Proposed Additional Funding
PWC8677 – Fund 136 – Gas Tax $675,000
PWC8932 – Fund 531– Traffic Impact Fee $1,500,000
PWC9041 – Fund 515 – ACTC Measure BB Local Streets $30,000 PWC9041 – Fund 531 – Traffic Impact Fee $97,000
Total Funding Available $4,402,576

FISCAL IMPACT: Funding transfers in the amount of $2,302,000 (including $974,120 of required local match for the SR2B grant) are recommended to complete the construction of the project. The proposed additional sources of funding include: reallocating $675,000 from the State Street Complete Street Project (PWC8677, Fund 136 – Gas Tax); $1,500,000 from the Grimmer Blvd. Project (PWC8932, Fund 531 - Traffic Impact Fee), $97,000 from the Regional Projects Funding Match Program (PWC9041, Fund 531 - Traffic Impact Fee); and $30,000 from the Regional Projects Funding Match Program (PWC9041, Fund 515 - Measure BB). Alternative funding sources for the State Street and Grimmer Blvd. projects will be

2.K
Packet Pg. 122
Council Staff Report (ID # 5431) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/1/2025 11:57 AM by Susan Gauthier Page 4
pursued from grant sources, including from the ACTC Measure BB program which has funds dedicated to the City of Fremont for “complete street” improvements.

Staff recommends the reallocation of funds as proposed above, to allow construction to move forward for this project, thereby meeting the grant deadline for project delivery. With the recommended additional reallocation of funds to the project, there will be sufficient funds available for the estimated project cost.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Based on the whole records and each as a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance, the project is statutorily exempt from CEQA review under Section 21080.25 of the Public Resources Code, as amended, because the project is a sustainable transportation project that implements pedestrian and bicycle facilities (i.e., construction of protected intersection corners, elevated curb returns, raised pedestrian/bicycle corners and green buffered bike lanes), improves pedestrian and bicycle safety, and improves access for current and potential transit riders. The project is located within public right of way and does not add new infrastructure that increases automobile capacity or requires demolition of affordable housing. Furthermore, the City certifies the project will be completed by a skilled and trained workforce pursuant to enforceable contract provisions requiring contractors and subcontractors at every tier to use skilled labor. As a separate and independent basis, the project is exempt under CEQA Guideline Section 15301, Class 1(c), 15301 for “Existing Facilities’ in that it involves operation, repair, maintenance or minor alteration of existing structures and facilities involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. None of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies to the project.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the following actions related to the Walnut Avenue Bikeway Phase 2 Improvement Project (PWC9100A):

1. Approve the plans and specifications for the project.

3. Reallocate $675,000 from PWC8677-136 and appropriate it to PWC9110-136.

4. Reallocate $1,500,000 from PWC8932-531 and appropriate it to PWC9110-531.

5. Reallocate $97,000 from PWC9041-531 and appropriate it to PWC9110-531.

6. Reallocate $30,000 from PWC9041-515 and appropriate it to PWC9110-515.

7. Find that this project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Section 21080.25 of the California Public Resources Code as a sustainable transportation project that implements pedestrian and bicycle facilities and improves multimodal safety and access for current and potential transit riders and is further exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 as the repair, maintenance or minor alteration of existing facilities involving no or negligible expansion of use beyond that presently existing.

2.K
Packet Pg. 123
Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Public Works
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Agreements and Contracts

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5433) DOC ID: 5433
Updated: 4/28/2025 12:00 PM by Dina Lewis Page 1
FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER TENANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - Approval of Plans; Award of Contract to Ron Paris Construction Company inc. in the amount of $150,970 (including 20% Contingency) for the Department of Rehabilitation Tenant Improvements Project (PWC8393) located at the Family Resource Center; Appropriation Action: Make Findings of CEQA Exemption
Contact Persons:

Name: Gurshran (Gigi) Gill Hans Larsen
Title: Facilities Design Construction
Project Supervisor
Public Works Director
Div/Dept: Public Works Public Works
Phone: 510-494-4558 510-494-4722
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to facilitate interior tenant improvements at the Family Resource Center (FRC), in a space currently leased by Department of Rehabilitation (DOR). The improvements support the conditions of a lease extension.

BACKGROUND: The FRC buildings, located at 39175 Liberty Street, were constructed in 1981. The FRC houses multiple public and non-profit agencies providing services including but not limited to counseling, clinic, tax service and disabilities service. The lease for the Department of Rehabilitation, located at FRC Building 2, Suite F630, is set to renew at the start of the upcoming fiscal year, and these interior modifications are to satisfy the new lease terms.

Proposed tenant improvements include the replacement of flooring throughout the DOR suite, fresh paint in the hallways and common areas (breakroom, conference room, lobby), replacement of kitchenette in break area, new data and power connections, and door replacements.

Construction is anticipated to begin in June 2025 with completion anticipated by August 2025.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: Bids for this project were opened on April 8, 2025. The bidders with their respective bid amount are shown below. The Engineer’s Estimate is $150,000.

Bidder Bid Amount
Ron Paris Construction Company, Inc. $ 125,808
SDM Construction $ 145,500
Domain Construction, Inc. $ 146,500
Oveisi Construction, Inc. $ 159,000
Argos Construction $ 174,000
Pro-Ex Construction, Inc. $ 261,500

2.L
Packet Pg. 124
Council Staff Report (ID # 5433) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/28/2025 12:00 PM by Dina Lewis Page 2

The low bidder, Ron Paris Construction Company, Inc., is a responsive bidder and all documents are in order. The contractor is experienced in this type of work and has satisfactorily completed contracts of a similar nature with the City and other nearby agencies.

Project Cost & Funding
Estimated Project Costs
Design Consultant and Project Administration $

13,000
Construction Contract - Low Bid $ 125,808
Construction Contingency (20%) $ 25,162
Construction Inspection and Administration (10%) $ 12,581 Total Estimated Project Costs: $ 176,551

Source of Funding
Proposed Funding
Family Resource Center Fund 108 $ 176,551

Total Funds Available $ 176,551

FISCAL IMPACT: This project is fully funded from the Family Resource Center Fund (Fund 108). This fund supports improvements to revenue generating FRC facilities. Staff is recommending the City Council appropriate $176,551 in Fund 108 to cover the cost of the improvements. Fund 108 has sufficient fund balance. Per the lease agreement, $99,000 of the improvement cost will be reimbursed by DOR.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The project is categorically exempt from environmental review based on, without limitation, CEQA Guideline Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). The project involves minor repair, maintenance, or modification of the interior of the existing facility involving no expansion of use beyond that which presently exists.

ATTACHMENTS: None.

LINK:

Construction Drawings:
https://www.fremont.gov/home/showdocument?id=17937&t=638804169155800793

RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the following actions related to the Department of Rehabilitation Tenant Improvement Project (PWC8393):

1. Approve project plans.

2.L
Packet Pg. 125
Council Staff Report (ID # 5433) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 4/28/2025 12:00 PM by Dina Lewis Page 3
contract amount of $150,970 and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the contract.

3. Appropriate $176,551 from the Family Resource Center Fund (Fund 108) to PWC8393-108 to pay for the project costs.

4. Find the project is exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guideline pertaining to modifications of existing facilities involving no expansion of use.

2.L
Packet Pg. 126
Fremont City Council Meeting: 05/06/25 07:00 PM
3300 Capitol Avenue Div/Dept: Planning
Fremont, CA 94538 Category: Appeals

SCHEDULED
Sponsors:

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT (ID # 5398) DOC ID: 5398
Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 1
ARDENWOOD AT PASEO APPEAL – – Public Hearing (Published Notice) to consider a third-party Appeal of the Planning Commission's denial action of a separate third-party Appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval action of a Discretionary Design Review Permit and Floor Area Ratio increase (under PLN2022-00466) to allow a proposed five-building light-industrial/R&D development consisting of 407,250 square feet of new floor area, plus renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot light-industrial/R&D building, on the site bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive in the North Fremont Community Plan Area; and to consider an exemption from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per, without limitation, CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, as the project is consistent with the General Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified, and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, as none of the circumstances requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred. Each of the foregoing provides a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance.

Contact Persons:

Name: Marc Cleveland Dan Schoenholz
Title: Planner II Community Development Director
Div/Dept: Planning Community Development
Phone: 510-494-4543 510-494-4438
E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Executive Summary: This item is to consider a third-party Appeal of the Planning Commission’s February 13, 2025, action to deny a previous third-party Appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator’s October 15, 2024 approval of a Discretionary Design Review Permit and a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) increase in conjunction with development of five new industrial buildings and the renovation of an existing industrial building on 24.2 acres of land in P-81-15, the Ardenwood Planned District. The project’s southern lot would have a

0.51 FAR that exceeds the maximum 0.35 FAR standard applicable to Tech Industrial - designated lots occupied by light-industrial/R&D uses. Both the Appeal upheld by the Planning Commission and the subject Appeal were filed by Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo on behalf of East Bay Residents for Responsible Development (Appellant).

Staff has found the project consistent with the applicable policies of the General Plan and, with the exception of the requested FAR increase, consistent with the relevant statutes of the Fremont Municipal Code (FMC) and in substantial conformance with the Citywide Design Guidelines.

5.A
Packet Pg. 127
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 2
BACKGROUND:

Zoning Administrator Hearing

On October 15, 2024, the Ardenwood at Paseo project (PLN2022-00466) was presented at a noticed Zoning Administrator public hearing. Following a presentation from staff that included a project approval recommendation, two members of the public spoke on the item.

Both speakers were opposed to the project. One speaker raised concerns about the project’s potential to negatively impact public safety, and Kelilah Federman, from Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo representing East Bay Residents for Responsible Development (Appellant), challenged staff’s finding that the project is not subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. After considering testimony and the whole of the record, the Zoning Administrator approved the project, as conditioned.

On October 23, 2024, within the post-action 10-day appeal period, the Appellant filed a qualifying third-party Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s approval action (Informational Item No. 4 – Appellant’s Zoning Administrator Appeal Letter).

Planning Commission Hearing
On February 13, 2025, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing to consider the Appellant’s original Appeal (Informational Item No. 5 – Planning Commission Staff Report). Two members of the public spoke on the item, both in opposition to the project.

Questions of staff and the project applicant from the Planning Commissioners related to the scope of the project, adjacent uses, CEQA administrative matters, and future tenant modifications. A motion to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval action and deny the Appeal passed 6-1 (Informational Item No. 7 – February 22, 2024, Planning Commission Hearing Minutes).

On February 21, 2025, within the applicable 10-day appeal period, the Appellant filed a second Appeal (Informational Item No. 8 – Appellant’s Planning Commission Appeal Letter).

Appeal to the City Council
The Appellant’s Appeal to the City Council requests that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the prior Appeal and approve the project. As detailed in Informational Item No. 8, the Appellant makes several assertions that they believe justify reversal of the Planning Commission’s decision. These points are outlined below.

1. The City’s decision to not prepare a subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 was not supported by substantial evidence;

2. The City lacks substantial evidence to support approval of the project under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183; and

3. The City cannot make the necessary findings to approve the project’s entitlements.

5.A
Packet Pg. 128
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 3
Grounds of the Appeal:

The Appellant’s grounds for the Appeal and brief responses by the City are as follows. Staff’s responses are further detailed in Informational Item No. 6 – Consultant Appeal Response Letter, which was prepared by a staff-commissioned CEQA consultant.

Ground#1: The City lacks substantial evidence to support approval of the project under a community plan exemption or addendum and the project has significant project specific impacts that are peculiar to the project, were not analyzed in the General Plan EIR, were not known and could not have been known when the 2011 General Plan EIR was certified, and are more severe than previously analyzed.

The record does not contain substantial evidence indicating that the project will have new or more severe significant impacts that are peculiar to the project that were not analyzed, were not known or could not have been known with the exercise or reasonable diligence at the time the 2011 General Plan EIR was certified. As described in the CEQA Consistency Checklist (Informational Item No. 2) and prior staff reports (Informational Item Nos. 1 and 5), the project is consistent with the development intensity and land use characteristics established pursuant to the 2011 Fremont General Plan and as analyzed in the General Plan EIR (“GP EIR”). The Project is consistent with the standards of the Tech Industrial designation of the General Plan and P-81-15 zoning with respect to site planning, massing, architecture, and other urban design characteristics. The Appeal asserts that specifics of the project were not contemplated in the General Plan because the Project’s application was filed after it was adopted. The absence of such detail at the time of the prior EIR, however, does not necessitate the preparation of further environmental review under either CEQA Guidelines 15183 or 15162, et seq. These streamlining provisions of CEQA expressly limit the circumstances requiring further CEQA review and dictate that projects not meeting those requirements are exempt from such review. Here, the Ardenwood at Paseo Project clearly qualifies for the cited exemptions from further review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 and 15162, each as a separate and independent basis.

Ground#2: Significant air quality health risk impacts were not disclosed per the Appellant’s consultant’s analysis (Informational Item No. 8.)

No significant air quality health risk impacts have been demonstrated that would trigger the requirements for further environmental review. Aproject-specific Emissions Study was completed and presented in the CEQA Consistency Checklist (Informational Item No. 2). No additional mitigation was deemed necessary because of mandatory project compliance with the City’s standard development requirements (FMC Chapter 18.218), which include mandatory, universally applied measures related to project emissions and other air quality impacts.

Ground#3: SWAPE (Appellant’s consultant) conducted a quantified health risk analysis (“HRA”) of the Project’s toxic air contaminant (“TAC”) emissions, including DPM, and identified health risk impacts which are more severe than analyzed in the 2011 General Plan EIR and in the CEQA Checklist.

The appellant’s consultant, SWAPE’s analysis does not identify more severe significant impacts; rather, SWAPE’s documents reference “screening level” health risk calculations which are more conservative and less refined analysis than that conducted by the City for

5.A
Packet Pg. 129
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 4
the project. Such screening analyses are intended to identify whether a more detailed, refined and complex project-level analysis is warranted. Here, the City performed just such a detailed, refined and complex project-level analysis that presents a more accurate reflection of project’s emissions impacts than SWAPE’s screening-level analysis and concluded that there was nothing peculiar to the project or the site that would result in conclusions different from those found in the General Plan EIR, nor that more severe TAC emissions would result.

Ground#4: Potential health risk impacts on a nearby day care were not contemplated in the General Plan EIR.

Day cares are permitted throughout all residential zones in the City of Fremont (FMC

18.90.080) and can be allowed with Zoning Administrator approval in many other zones.

Since the proposed project use is consistent with the General Plan and zoning, as is the day care in the adjacent residential neighborhood, the proximity of these two uses was contemplated by the General Plan. As a result, they cannot reasonably be found to be peculiar to this project or its location and were both known and could have been known at the time of the prior EIR. Notably, the City’s emissions study for the project assessed potential impacts on sensitive receptors (which includes uses such as daycare) which a daycare would fall under, and concluded the proposed project would not cause significant impacts.

Ground#5: The project may result in new and significant construction and operational impacts, including those related to air quality, traffic, noise, and greenhouse gas emissions.

The record does not evidence that the project would result in new or significant construction or operational impacts that would necessitate further environmental review in accordance with CEQA. CEQA Checklist (Informational Item No. 2) details compliance related to each of these concerns, with conclusions supported by studies prepared by technical subject matter experts. Project implementation would be consistent with what the General Plan EIR envisioned for the site and does not constitute an unusual circumstance.

Discretionary Design Review Permit

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.235.060, in order to approve a Discretionary Design Review Permit, the approval authority must make the following findings applicable to the project:

(a) The proposed project is consistent with the general plan, any applicable community or specific plan, planning and zoning regulations, and any adopted design rules and guidelines.

The project will transform an underutilized infill site with a development that’s consistent with the scale and design character sought for new industrial development within the North Fremont’s Tech Industrial-designated lands, and is consistent with the economic development objectives of the Ardenwood Technology Park.

5.A
Packet Pg. 130
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 5

(b) When a proposed project is inconsistent with an adopted design rule, the purpose and intent of the design rule is met through alternative means.

Analysis: The proposed project is consistent with the applicable Design Rules contained within the Citywide Design Guidelines, is in substantial conformance with the same document’s Design Guidelines, and is compliant with the limited design language contained within the P-81-15 ordinance. No exceptions to adopted Design Rules are necessary for the project.

(c) The multifamily residential project’s architectural, site, and landscape design will not be detrimental to the public health or safety; or a non- multifamily project’s architectural, site, and landscape design will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent development nor be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and

Analysis: The proposed project’s design would not interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent development, nor would it be detrimental to public health or safety because the project has been designed in a logical manner that comfortably fits within the site’s buildable envelope while providing significantly increased building setbacks from all street frontages and interior property lines. The project features high-quality architecture that enhances the appearance of the site, and significant landscaping within the site frontages’ landscape easements and the introduction of a Commerce Drive sidewalk connecting with the existing sidewalk network that wraps the site would create a safer, more pedestrian-friendly public realm. Furthermore, the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons or property in the vicinity owing to its conformance with applicable Building and Fire code regulations.

(d) Where HARB review is required, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable standards and findings required in Chapters 18.135 and 18.175.

Analysis: The proposed project does not involve a site within a historical overlay district or one that includes a Register or Register-eligible historic resource. As such, HARB review is not required for the project.

FAR Increase

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.250.070, the following findings are required prior to approval of an application for a FAR increase:

(a) The increase in floor area ratio will not cause the project to exceed the capacity of streets and will not adversely affect the privacy of properties in the vicinity of the project;

5.A
Packet Pg. 131
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 6
would not be exceeded. As part of project implementation, a traffic signal would be installed at the Paseo Padre Parkway / Commerce Drive intersection, which is currently unsignalized, in order to improve current level of service and reduce delays for project inbound and outbound vehicular movements. Though the project site is adjacent to existing residential uses located across Ardenwood Boulevard, privacy impacts on the residences would be nonsignificant owing to at least 200 feet of separation between those existing uses and the proposed project buildings.

(b) A deed restriction approved by the city attorney shall be recorded on the property to ensure that the use of the property remains limited to that presented to the approval authority; and

Analysis: As conditioned, project implementation will be subject to a restrictive covenant and notice of land use limitation for the subject floor area ratio increase.

Analysis: The proposed increase in floor area ratio is associated with an industrial project that constitutes the first viable development at the project site in the planned district’s 43-year history. At present time, demand for industrial space (including R&D and advanced manufacturing spaces, which project buildings are design to accommodate) in Fremont is strong, with limited availability of space and low vacancy rates. The project figures to deliver high-paying jobs in professional and technical occupations and increase the City’s industrial standing in the region, which would be aided by the site’s key location adjacent to State Route 84, which connects Fremont to the Bay Area’s primary cluster of innovation-oriented technology businesses. The project’s modern industrial buildings will better meet building configuration, access, and power needs of tenants compared to older building stock in the area. Additionally, the project will pay development impact fees and commercial linkage fees to offset the project’s potential impacts on City public facilities and affordable housing. The floor area ratio increase would result in a higher fee total than a project with a conforming floor area ratio.

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.250.070, the following findings are required prior to approval of an application for a FAR increase:

Tree Removal

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.215.070, the following finding is required in order to allow for the proposed removal of trees that are subject to protection under the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance:

(a) The proposed removal of 372 protected trees would be consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

5.A
Packet Pg. 132
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 7
requires their removal. The remainder of the site’s private protected trees would remain in place, and new trees, both on-site and within the adjacent right-of-way, are proposed in accordance with the City’s Landscape Development Requirements and Policies (LDRP). Of the removed trees, 209 will be mitigated. A tree mitigation fee will be collected for the 163 trees scheduled for removal that cannot be mitigated with on-site tree plantings

CEQA

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, when an EIR has been certified for a project no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:

1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;

2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;

(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;

(c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or

(d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

5.A
Packet Pg. 133
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 8
EIR for the project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, finding that the mitigation measures from the EIR are applied to and adequate for the proposed project, which is within the scope of the EIR, and that no further CEQA documentation is required.

FISCAL IMPACT: This project is consistent with the economic development objectives of the Ardenwood Technology Park and would be subject to citywide Development Impact Fees, including fees for fire protection, capital facilities, and traffic infrastructure. The project would also be subject to the commercial linkage affordable housing fees applicable to non-residential development. All applicable fees would be calculated and paid at the fee rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. The applicant may elect to defer payment of the fees in accordance with the City’s Impact Fee Deferral Program.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The proposed project is subject to no further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning, as the project is consistent with the General Plan for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified. Please see Informational Item No. 2 for more information.

Additionally, the project has been found to not require further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 as no substantial changes are proposed in the project that would require revisions to the General Plan Update EIR, nor have substantial changes occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed project would be undertaken require revisions to the General Plan Update EIR, nor has new information of substantial importance been identified that would indicate the project would have any new or more significant effects or require new or additional mitigation than what was included in the General Plan Update EIR. The programmatic mitigation measures from the General Plan Update EIR and/or the standard development requirements contained within FMC Chapter

18.218 will be implemented for the project, and adequately address the potential environmental effects of the project. The project is thus within the scope of the General Plan Update EIR and no further CEQA documentation is required. The CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist presents substantial evidence that the analyses conducted, and the conclusions reached in the 2011 General Plan Update EIR (SCH#2010082060) remain valid, and no supplemental environmental review is required for the proposed project. The proposed project would not cause new significant impacts that were not previously identified in the EIR or result in a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures would be necessary to reduce significant impacts. No changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances that would cause significant environmental impacts to which the proposed project would contribute considerably, and no new information has been put forward that shows that the proposed project would cause new or substantially worsened significant environmental impacts.

Therefore, no supplemental environmental review is required and an addendum to the 2011 General Plan Update EIR could be relied upon for CEQA clearance of the proposed project, in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

Link: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit A - Project Plans

ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Resolution - Fremont at Paseo
• PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions

5.A
Packet Pg. 134
Council Staff Report (ID # 5398) Meeting of May 6, 2025 Updated: 5/2/2025 1:51 PM by Susan Gauthier Page 9
• PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 3 - Zoning Administrator Hearing Minutes • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 4 - Zoning Administrator Appeal Letter • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 5 - Planning Commission Staff Report • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 6 - Appeal Response Letter • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 7 - Planning Commission Hearing Minutes • PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 8 - Planning Commission Appeal Letter

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Hold public hearing.

4. Approve the proposed removal and mitigation of three hundred and seventy-two (372) private protected trees pursuant to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

5.A
Packet Pg. 135
Resolution 2024-XX Page 1 of 3
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT DENYING AN APPEAL (PLN202 5-00163) AND APPROVING A

DISCRETIONARY DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT AND FLOOR AREA RATIO INCREASE (PLN2022-00466) FOR THE AREDENWOOD AT PASEO PROJECT AT 6100 PASEO PADRE PARKWAY, 6200 PASEO PADRE PARKWAY AND

TWO UNADDRESSED PARCELS IN THE NORTH FREMONT COMMUNITY
PLAN AREA ; MAKING FINDINGS OF CEQA EXEMPTION AND NO

FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIRED

WHEREAS, Gavin Christensen (“Applicant”) applied for a Discretionary Design Review Permit and Floor Area Increase for a new industrial project located at 6100 Paseo Padre Parkway, 6200 Paseo Padre Parkway, and two unaddressed parcels 543-439-35 and 543-439- 127, consisting of five new industrial buildings totaling 407,250-square-foot and the renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot industrial building (the “Project”); and

WHEREAS, on October 15, 2024, the Zoning Administrator held a duly noticed public hearing and found the Project to be consistent with the General Plan, the North Fremont Community Plan, and the P-81-15 zoning district, and found that no further environmental review is required for the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 as the Project is consistent with the density established by the General Plan for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 as none of the circumstances requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred, with each of the foregoing providing a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance; and

WHEREAS, on October 23, 2024, Adams Broadwell Joseph & Cardozo on behalf of East Bay Residents for Responsible Development (“Appellant”) submitted a qualifying Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s approval action of the Project; and

WHEREAS, on February 13, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed de novo public hearing and denied the Appeal (6-1), upholding the Zoning Administrator’s prior approval of the Project; and

WHEREAS, on February 21, 2025, the Appellant submitted a qualifying Appeal of the Planning Commission’s action to deny the previous Appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator’s approval action of the Project; and

WHEREAS, on May 6, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed de novo public hearing to consider the deliberations by the Planning Commission, and all interested persons who desired to comment on or object to the Project were heard.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: Draft Resolution - Fremont at Paseo (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Resolution 2024-XX Page 2 of 3

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FREMONT RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds that no further environmental review is required for the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, as the Project is consistent with the density established by the General Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified, and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, as none of the circumstances requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred, with each of the foregoing, detailed in Informational Item Nos. 2 (CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist) and 6 (Appeal Response Letter), providing a separate and independent basis for CEQA compliance, and that this finding reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.

SECTION 2. The City Council hereby finds that the Project is in conformance with the General Plan, including the goals and policies of the Land Use, and Community Character Element, in that the Project develops and completes a six-parcel site that’s located at the north end of the P-81-15 Ardenwood Forest – New Town Plan which included 280 acres of industrial business parks, as state in No. 5 (Planning Commission Staff Report).

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby finds that, based on the available information, evidence presented at the hearing, and consideration of the above, the Project is consistent with the City Center Community Plan and the P-81-15 zoning district for the reasons described Informational Item No. 5 (Planning Commission Staff Report).

SECTION 4. The City Council hereby denies the Appeal (upholding the Planning Commission’s action to deny the previous Appeal) and approves the Project’s Discretionary Design Review Permit as shown in Exhibit “A,” subject to the findings and conditions of approval contained in Exhibit “B” and implementation of all relevant mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR.

ADOPTED ____________, 202 5, by the City Council of the City of Fremont by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment: Draft Resolution - Fremont at Paseo (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Resolution 2024-XX Page 3 of 3

_________________________________
Mayor

ATTEST:

__________________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________________
City Attorney

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment: Draft Resolution - Fremont at Paseo (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

EXHIBIT “B”
Findings and Conditions of Approval
PLN2022-00466
Ardenwood at Paseo Discretionary Design Review Permit and Floor Area Ratio Increase
6100 Paseo Padre Parkway & 6200 Paseo Padre Parkway

I. FINDINGS:

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.235.060, in order to approve a Discretionary Design Review Permit, the approval authority must make the following findings applicable to the project:

(a) The proposed project is consistent with the general plan, any applicable community or specific plan, planning and zoning regulations, and any adopted design rules and guidelines.

Analysis: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, P -81-15 standards, and the applicable Design Rules of the Citywide Design Guidelines. The project will advance the vision of the site’s planned district, which has tabbed the property to be developed as an industrial campus dating back to its 1981 adoption. The project will transform an underutilized infill site with a development that’s consistent with the scale and design character sought for new industrial development within the North Fremont’s Tech Industrial-designated lands.

(b) When a proposed project is inconsistent with an adopted design rule, the purpose and intent of the design rule is met through alternative means.

(c) The multifamily residential project’s architectural, site, and landscape design will not be detrimental to the public health or safety; or a non -multifamily project’s architectural, site, and landscape design will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent development nor be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and

Analysis: The proposed project’s design would not interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent development, nor would it be detrimental to public health or safety because the project has been designed in a logical manner that comfortably fits within the site’s buildable envelope while providing significantly increased building setbacks from all street frontages and interior property lines. The project features high -quality architecture that enhances the appearance of the site, and significant landscaping within the site frontages’ landscape easements and the introduction of a Commerce Drive sidewalk connecting with the existing sidewalk network that wraps the site would create a safer, more pedestrian - friendly public realm. Furthermore, the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons or property in the vicinity owing to its conformance with applicable Building and Fire code regulations.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

(d) Where HARB review is required, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable standards and findings required in Chapters 18.135 and 18.175.

FAR Increase

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.250.070, the following findings are required prior to approval of an application for a FAR increase:

(a) The increase in floor area ratio will not cause the project to exceed the capacity of streets and will not adversely affect the privacy of properties in the vicinity of the project;

Analysis: A Transportation Analysis prepared for the project found that all of the signalized intersections studied in the vicinity of the project site would maintain current level of service goals and/or not increase current delay by more than 10 seconds with project implementation. As a result, project impacts on area roadways would not be considered to have an adverse effect and capacities of area streets would not be exceeded. As part of project implementation, a traffic signal would be installed at the Paseo Padre Parkway / Commerce Drive intersection, which is currently unsignalized, in order to improve current level of service and reduce delays for project inbound and outbound vehicular movements.

Though the project site is adjacent to existing residential uses located across Ardenwood Boulevard, privacy impacts on the residences would be nonsignificant owing to at least 200 feet of separation between those existing uses and the proposed project buildings.

(b) A deed restriction approved by the city attorney shall be recorded on the property to ensure that the use of the property remains limited to that presented to the approval authority; and

Analysis: As conditioned, project implementation will be subject to a restrictive covenant and notice of land use limitation for the subject floor area ratio increase.

Analysis: The proposed increase in floor area ratio is associated with an industrial project that constitutes the first viable development at the project site in the planned district’s 43 - year history. At present time, demand for industrial space (including R&D and advanced manufacturing spaces, which project buildings are design to accommodate) in Fremont is strong, with limited availability of space and low vacancy rates. The project figures to deliver high-paying jobs in professional and technical occupations and increase the City’s industrial standing in the region, which would be aided by the site’s key location adjacent to State Route 84, which connects Fremont to the Bay Area’s primary cluster of innovation - oriented technology businesses. The project’s modern industrial buildings will better meet building configuration, access, and power needs of tenants compared to older building stock in the area. Additionally, the project will pay full -freight development impact fees and commercial linkage fees to offset the project’s potential impacts on City public facilities.

The floor area ratio increase would result in a higher fee total than a project with a conforming floor area ratio.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.250.070, the following findings are required prior to approval of an application for a FAR increase:

Tree Removal

(a) The proposed removal of 372 protected trees would be consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

Analysis: The removal of 372 private protected trees from the site is necessary to enable reasonable and conforming use of the property as an industrial development in a campus - type setting. Redevelopment of the site with five new buildings with a combined ground floor footprint of 188,431 square feet, plus necessary parking, circulation, landscaping, storm water treatment, and other associated improvements requires their removal. The remainder of the site’s private protected trees would remain in place, and new trees, both on-site and within the adjacent right-of-way, are proposed in accordance with the City’s Landscape Development Requirements and Policies (LDRP). Of the removed trees, 209 will be mitigated. A tree mitigation fee will be collected for the 163 trees scheduled for removal that cannot be mitigated with no on-site tree plantings

CEQA

(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;

(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;

(c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or

Analysis: As documented in the CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist prepared for the project, none of the criteria listed above has occurred. This checklist and other evidence in the record supports the use of the certified General Plan Update EIR for the project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, finding that the mitigation measures from the EIR are applied to and adequate for the proposed project, which is within the scope of the EIR, and that no further CEQA documentation is required.

II. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

General Conditions:

A-1. Conformance to Approved Plans and Exhibits. The project shall substantially conform to Exhibit “A” (Project Plans) and is subject to compliance with all conditions of approval set forth herein.

A-2. Minor Modifications to Approved Plans. Minor modifications to the approved plans may be made, subject to review and approval of the Planning Manager and/or City Engineer.

Minor modifications to building elevations and footprints that support a superior project design may be made, subject to review and approval of the Planning Manager and City Engineer. The Planning Manager and City Engineer shall retain the authority to determine the level of review required (i.e., depending on the severity or location of the modification, the project may be referred to the Planning Commission or City Council for public comment, review and approval).

A-3. Addressing. An application shall be submitted to the City’s GIS Division for approval of the addressing for the development prior to building permit issuance . Building addresses shall be plainly legible and visible from the public street. These numbers shall contrast with their background.

A-4. Development Impact Fees. The project shall be subject to Citywide Development Impact Fees. These fees include fees for fire protection services, capital facilities, and traffic facilities. The fees shall be calculated at the rate in effect at the time of building permit issuance.

A-5. Affordable Housing Fees. The project shall be subject to applicable provisions of the Affordable Housing Ordinance (FMC Chapter 18.15 6), as set by the fee resolution in effect at the time of building permit issuance.

A-6. Expiration. Approval of the project entitlements shall expire twenty -four (24) months after the date of approval in accordance with the provisions of the Fremont Municipal Code.

A-7. Standard Development Requirements. The project shall be subject to the standard development requirements to address resource protection (FMC Section 18.218.050).

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

A-8. Industrial Performance Standards . The project shall be subject to the performance standards applicable to development within an industrial zoning district (FMC Section

18.50.040).

A-9. City Indemnification. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its boards, commissions, agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, its boards, commissions, agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the approval of the project. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding. The City shall have the option of coordinating the defense. The City shall have the right, in its discretion, to approve separate legal counsel providing the City's defense. The applicant shall reimburse City for any attorneys' fees, costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of such defense. Applicant agrees that City will forward monthly invoices to Applicant for attorneys' fees, costs and expenses it has incurred related to its defense of any Action and applicant agrees to timely payment within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice. Within fourteen (14) days of an Action being filed, applicant agrees to post adequate security or a cash deposit with City in an amount to cover the City's estimated attorneys' fees, costs and expenses incurred by City in the course of the defense in order to ensure timely payment of the City's invoices. The amount of the security or cash deposit shall be determined by the City. City shall cooperate with applicant in the defense of any Action. Nothing in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or proceeding if the City bears its own attorney’s fees and costs, and the City defends the action in good faith.

A-10. Water Supply Assessment (WSA). The use of the project shall comply with the thresholds of Section 10912 of the Water Code for the requirements of a Water Supply Assessment. The developer shall coordinate with the Alameda County Water District (ACWD) during the building permit review with respect to WSA thresholds, and comply with all applicable requirements.

Planning Conditions:

B-1. Final Colors and Materials Approval . The final colors and materials palette for the project shall be subject to review and approval to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit .

B-2. Fences and Walls. Installation of chainlink fencing shall be prohibited exterior of project buildings. Barbed wire or razor wire shall be prohibited on the site.

B-3. Site and Building Signage. Site and building signage shall be subject to approval of a Master Sign Program. In addition to signage for the individual buildings, monument gateway/entry signs shall be included in the proposed Master Sign Program.

B-4. Lighting Plan. A lighting plan, submitted in conjunction with a photometric plan, shall be subject to City review and approval during the building permit review process. The lighting plan should be designed to meet Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) standards. All lighting shall be consistent with the architectural design of the buildings. In compliance with the FMC, lighting will be reviewed to avoid substantial light or glare that may have an impact on day or nighttime views in the area. All wall lighting fixtures or sconces shall be of high quality, decorative lighting fixtures with concealed lighting elements. Sufficient security lighting shall be installed within commons areas, parking areas, and walkways , subject to the review and approval of Planning Manager or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

B-5. Screening of Rooftop Equipment. The developer shall submit building permit plan s that include r ooftop screening elements for all HVAC and mechanical units and associated appurtenances. The type of screening material s selected for rooftop mechanical equipment shall demonstrate sufficient screening and achieve consistency with the architectural design of the buildings to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.

B-6. Deed Restriction. A deed restriction approved by the City Attorney shall be recorded on the property to ensure that the use of the property remains limited to that presented to the approval authority.

Landscape Conditions:

C-1. Backflow Devices and Other Above -Ground Utilities. Backflow devices and all other above-ground utilities located exterior of project buildings shall be screened with a continuous evergreen (non -seasonal) hedge, minimum five -gallon size and three -foot minimum height or otherwise concealed from public view to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.

C-2. Tree Planting Clearances. All tree planting areas shall be free of all utility structures and other built features, consistent with the spacing requirements defined in Landscape Standard Details (LSDs) 5 and 6.

Transportation Conditions:

D-1. Signage and Striping Plans . Approval of on- site and off-site signage and striping plans shall be required prior to the issuance of building permits. Signage and striping plans shall include a general note stating that “All signage and striping shall conform to the latest CA MUTCD, Caltrans Standard Plans and Specifications, and the City of Fremont Standard Details.”

D-2. Retrofit Curb Ramps. The developer shall retrofit the existing curb ramps located on site to meet the latest ADA standards as of building permit issuance to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.

D-3. Paseo Padre Parkway at Commerce Drive Traffic Signal. The developer shall install a traffic signal at the Paseo Padre Parkway and Commerce Drive intersection to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.

D-4. New Sidewalk Commerce Drive . The Developer shall install sidewalk along the Commerce Drive frontage of the sidewalk to the Satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer .

D-5. Sight Distance. Site development plans submitted for review and approval must satisfy adequate sight distances to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.

D-6. Bicycle Parking. The number of bicycle parking spaces shall conform to FMC 18.183.135 “Required Bicycle Parking,” per Fremont Municipal Code, or the latest California Green Building Standards Code, whichever is more stringent. The location of bicycle parking facilities within the project site, spacing, and required pedestrian walkway clearances adjacent to the bicycle parking spaces are subject to review and approval by the Public Works Director or designee, prior to issuance of a building permit.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

Engineering Conditions:

E-1. Encroachment Permit and Construction Agreement. An encroachment permit for the street improvements is required. Encroachment permit shall be issued prior to or concurrently with issuance of the 1 st building permit of the project. The public improvements conditioned as part of this entitlement requires the execution of an Improvement Agreement that guarantees the completion of the public street improvements to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The Improvement Agreement shall be fully executed by the developer prior to issuance of the encroachment permit. This agreement includes engineered plans prepared by the applicant’s consultant, reviewed, and approved by the City, surety (Faithful Performance, Labor and Material and Warranty) and insurance.

E-2. Street Improvements:
a. Developer shall be responsible to remove and replace curb, gutter, and sidewalk damaged during construction of the proposed project.
b. Developer shall remove and replace broken or uplifted curb, gutter, and bike path along project frontage.
c. Developer shall close unused driveway cut(s).
d. Proposed driveway approaches shall be type “E”.
e. Developer shall construct the street improvement of Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Improvements shall include but are not limited to the following: curb & gutter, sidewalk, asphalt pavement, streetlights, fire hydrants, street trees, tree well planters, water, sewer and storm drainage facilities, joint trench facilities, curb ramps, and signing and striping.
f. Developer shall be required grind and overlay the public streets in accordance with the City of Fremont “Street Cutting Policy – Multiple Cuts within One Block.”

E-3. Right-of-Way Dedication . Developer shall dedicate the right -of-way needed to accommodate the ultimate street configuration along the project frontages on Commerce Drive to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The right-of-way easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-4. Public Sidewalk Easement Dedication. Developer shall dedicate the public sidewalk easement needed to accommodate the ultimate sidewalk configuration along the project frontages on Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The sidewalk easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-5. Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE). Developer shall dedicate EVAE to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. The easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-6. Ingress and Egress Easement (IEE). Developer shall dedicate IEE per the approved plans. The easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit

E-7. Private Strom Drain Easement (PDSE). Developer shall dedicate PSDE per the approved plans. The easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-8. Grading and Geology:

a. Coverage Under Statewide Construction General Permit: Projects involving land disturbance of one acre or more are required to obtain coverage under the

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

“Construction General Permit” (NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities). The applicant must file a Notice of Intent (NOI) to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and obtain a Waste Discharge Identification number (WDID). A copy of the NOI must be submitted to the City’s Project Engineer prior to issuance of development permits (including demolition, grading, and building permits).
b. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan: The project plan set must include an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) sheet showing the Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented to minimize pollutant discharges related to construction activity.

The ESCP must show the development site at the stage of maximum land disturbance. A copy of the ESCP and/or SWPPP Plan must be maintained on the project site at all times throughout the demolition/grading/construction process; the ESCP and/or SWPPP must be updated as necessary to show adequate BMPs appropriate for the current stage of the project.
c. The Project site is within the State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for Earthquake Induced Liquefaction Zone. A preliminary geotechnical investigation report was submitted which was reviewed and approved with conditions by the City’s peer review consultant. The developer shall submit a final geotechnical report addressing the potential hazard and to be reviewed and approved by the City’s peer review consultant prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-9. Stormwater Treatment and Flow Control Facilities. The Project is required to implement post-construction measures to minimize stormwater pollutant discharges and increases in peak flows in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). The Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan provided by the developer as part of the entitlement approval is approved in concept only; the Final Stormwater Management Plan must contain/address all elements of the Final Stormwater Management Plan Checklist (available at www.fremont.gov/swmp). Developer is required to submit engineered plans, details and calculations that demonstrate compliance with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit.

E-10. Quitclaim Stormwater Treatment Measures Maintenance Agreement. The project is required to submit a Stormwater Treatment Measures Maintenance Agreement (aka O&M Agreement) for review and approval concurrent with the application for building permits.

Template documents and instructions for completing the O&M Agreement may be found at http://fremont.gov/stormwaterdevelopment. Submittal of an approved, executed O&M Agreement is required prior to building permit issuance.

E-11. Lot Combination. Developer shall file a separate lot combination application to consolidate the existing two lots into a single lot within the boundaries of the project. The lot combination must be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit for Building 3.

E-12. Vacation of Public Easements . Developer shall file a separate application to vacate the existing Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE) and Public Utility Easement (PUE) within the boundaries of the project. The vacation of the easements shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-13. Vacation of ACFC, WCD, and EBRPD Easement . Developer shall vacate the existing 40’ easement within the boundaries of the project prior to issuance of the building permit.

Commented [A1]: Is this for Ardenwood at Paseo?

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

E-14. Quitclaim of Private Easements . Developer shall cause to quitclaim all existing private easements per the approved plans. The quitclaim documents shall be recorded prior to issuance of the building permit.

E-15. Storm. Developer is required to submit a hydrology map and hydraulic calculations prepared, stamped, and signed by a licensed California Civil Engineer using a design storm of 15 -year recurrence interval for primary facilities and 10 -year recurrence interval for secondary facilities in accordance with the latest Alameda County Public Works Agency Hydrology and Hydraulics Criteria to ensure adequate conveyance of storm run -off from the project site. Off -site construction of storm drainage facilities to mitigate projected flows may be required.

E-16. Undergrounding. A ll new utility service connections, including electrical and communications, shall be installed underground .

E-17. Referrals. Prior to issuance of the building permit, Developer shall refer the project to the following agencies for approvals: Alameda County Water District (ACWD); Union Sanitation District (USD); and Alameda County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (ACFC&WCD).

Fire Safety Conditions:

F-1. Emergency Response Requirements. The project will require a digital plan submission to the GIS Department. The digital plan submission will be used by the Fire Department to aid in emergency response. The information required in the digital plan submission is listed on the City of Fremont, GIS website under Digital Submittal Standards and Requirements at the following link: http://www.fremont.gov/index.aspx?NID=657 It should be noted that the information required is specific to emergency response and may require the removal or addition of layers and coordination between design disciplines i.e. sprinkler design, fire underground design, fire alarm design, etc. This process contains detailed information which if left till the end of the construction phase may cause in a delay of occupancy due that the information must be completed and approved prior to occupancy.

F-2. Fire Flow and Duration. In accordance with the California Fire Code, Appendix B, “fire flow and duration shall not be less than that specified in table B105.1. A reduction in required fire flow of 50%, as approved, is allowed when the building is provided with an approved automatic sprinkler system." Calculations will be required in upcoming Entitlements/Building Permits.

Stormwater Conditions:

G-1. Stormwater Management Plan . The Project is required to implement post -construction measures to minimize stormwater pollutant discharges and increases in peak flows in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). The Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan provided by the developer as part of the tentative map approval is approved in concept only. Approval of a final Stormwater Management Plan is subject to City Engineer approval prior to Building Permit issuance. Approval is subject to the provision of necessary plans, details, and calculations that demonstrate that the proposed stormwater treatment measures comply with the standards established with the most recent San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit.

G-2. Operations and Maintenance Agreement . A Stormwater Management Measures Operations and Maintenance Agreement (aka O&M Agreement) shall be submitted for

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

review and approval as part of the project’s initial building permit application package.

Building permits for project buildings shall be subject to O&M Agreement execution.

Building Safety:

H-1. Building Code. Project shall meet current building code (at the time of building permit application). At present time, applicable code requirements are the 20 22 California Building Code; the 202 5 California Building Code requirements shall be applicable to any application received after January 1, 2026.

H-2. Trash Enclosures. Final trash enclosure designs shall include an accessible path of travel and pedestrian access door to the satisfaction of the Building Official.

H-3. Building Code Area and Height . At building permit application, the developer shall revise the calculations to indicate at 69,000 square feet for a Type II -B sprinkler multi - story buildings to comply with CBC section 506.2.1 to determine the allowable area.

Environmental Services – Waste Management:

I-1. Garbage and Recycling Requirements. Garbage and recycling requirements are explained in the Fremont Waste Handling Guidelines document, available at:
www.fremont.gov/whg.

I-2. Collection Service. Weekly garbage, recycling and organics collection services are required for all commercial and residential properties and are provided by Republic Services on an exclusive basis.

I-3. Collection. Applicant shall ensure adequate, accessible and convenient areas for collecting and loading of materials by garbage and recycling trucks are maintained.

END OF CONDITIONS

APPLICANT PLEASE NOTE:

The fees, dedications, reservations and/or other exactions imposed on this project are those listed in the foregoing conditions of approval. Any fee, dedication, reservation or other exaction is deemed imposed on the date of this approval. The applicant is hereby notified that the 90 -day period in which the applicant may protest these fees, dedications, reservations and other exactions pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a) begins on the date they are imposed. If the applicant fails to file a protest within this 90 -day period complying with all the requirements of Government Code Section 66020, the applicant shall be legally barred from later challenging such actions.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Exhibit B - Findings and Conditions (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR PERMIT

STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 15, 2024

Project: ARDENWOOD AT PASEO — 6200 Paseo Padre Parkway —PLN2022- 00466

Proposal: To consider a Discretionary Design Review Permit and a floor area ratio increase request in conjunction with a proposed five -building light- industrial/R&D development consisting of 407,250 square feet of new floor area , plus renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot light- industrial/R&D building, on the site bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive in the North Fremont Community Plan Area; and to consider an exemption from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per, without limitation, CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 , as the project i s consistent with the General Plan, for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified.

Recommendation: Approve, based on findings and subject to conditions.

Location: 6100 Paseo Padre Parkway, APN 543-439-125
6200 Paseo Padre Parkway, APN 543-439-148
Unaddressed parcel, APN 543-439-35
Unaddressed parcel, APN 543-439-127
(See aerial photo next page)
Area: 407,250 square feet of new floor area and 43,172 square feet of renovated floor area on a 1,054,200-square-foot (24.2-acre) site People: Evan Sockalosky, Arc Tec Inc., Applicant/Architect Mark Knudsen, Kier + Wright, Civil Engineer
Gavin Christensen, Owner
Marc Cleveland, Staff Planner (510) 494-4543;
[email protected]

General Plan: Tech Industrial
Zoning: P-81-15 (Ardenwood Planned District)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The subject of this application is a request for approval of a Discretionary Design Review Permit and a floor area ratio (FAR) increase in conjunction with development of five new industrial buildings and the renovation of an existing industrial building on 24 .2 acres of land in P-81-15, the Ardenwood Planned District. The project’s southern lot would have a 0.51 FAR that exceeds the maximum 0.35 FAR standard applicable to Tech Industrial-designated lots occupied by light-industrial/R&D uses.

With that exception, for which findings for approval have been recommended within this report, the project is consistent with the development standards and objective Design Rules in effect for the site, as well as numerous General Plan policies. Staff therefore recommends approval of the project as depicted in Exhibit “A,” based on findings and subject to the conditions of approval in Exhibit “B.”

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 2 of 10

Figure 1: Aerial Photo of Project Site and Surrounding Area.

SURROUNDING LAND USES:

North: Baylands (zoning: Open Space); Residential (zoning: P-2005-80 and P-2005-186) South: Industrial (zoning: P-81-15)
East: Residential (zoning: P-81-15 and P-2005-80)
West: Baylands (zoning: Open Space)
Project Site
(bounded in red)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 3 of 10
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS ACTIONS:

The site was historically used for agricultural purposes until 1985, when the 43,172-square-foot building at 6200 Paseo Padre Parkway was constructed. Initially used for the design and production of communications systems, the building has been used as a solar panel R&D facility from 2010 to present day. Since 2011, the 6100 Paseo Padre Parkway parcel and the unaddressed vacant parcel at the southern end of the site have been used as a commercial solar farm operated by the 6200 Paseo Padre Parkway tenant (Nextracker). All other project site land sits vacant.

Planned District P-81-15 was approved by the City Council in December 1981 for the development of the project originally referred to as Ardenwood Forest – New Town. As originally planned, Ardenwood Forest – New Town was to include facilities for living, working, shopping, and recreation.

The plan called for approximately 3,800 dwelling units, 280 acres of high-technology industr ial business park, 37 acres of commercial uses, and 105 acres for schools, parks, and open spaces.

Much of the plan has been implemented; the project would infill a significant portion of the planned yet unbuilt industrial area.

In February 2006, the City Council amended P-81-15 to allow an increase in the maximum building height to 75 feet (from 45 feet) on lands bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and State Route 84, an area which includes the project site. The City Council further amended the planned district in September 2016 by tying land use allowances within the planned district’s Tech Industrial-designated areas to the land use allowances of the I-T (Tech Industrial) zoning district, as set forth in Fremont Municipal Code Table 18.50.090.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The project would complete development of the six-parcel site that’s located at the north end of the planned district’s industrially-focused area . As proposed, the southern portion of the site along Commerce Drive would be developed with two (2) two -story light -industrial buil dings, both measuring 75,112 square feet, and one (1) three-story, 91,162-square-foot light-industrial building.

The two-story buildings would stand 36’ -6” tall and the three -story building would stand 51’ -6” in height. The site’s Paseo Padre Parkway front age would be developed with two (2) two -story light- industrial buildings. The building proposed at the southern end of the frontage would measure 75,112 square feet in size and the building proposed at the northern end of the frontage would measure 90,750 square feet. Both buildings would stand 36’-6” in height. Situated between these two buildings is an existing one -story light-industrial building (6200 Paseo Padre Parkway) measuring 43,172 square feet that would be renovated but not expanded. Two existing light-industrial buildings along the Ardenwood Boulevard frontage (34175 and 34325 Ardenwood Boulevard) would remain unmodified by the project.

The project would also include 79 short-term bicycle parking spaces and 61 long-term bicycle parking spaces. Access to the site would come from two proposed curb -cuts along Commerce Drive, two existing curb -cuts along Paseo Padre Parkway, and one existing curb -cut along Ardenwood Boulevard. Existing parking areas and an Ardenwood Boulevard curb-cut supporting the two existing light-industrial buildings adjacent to the project site would remain unmodified by the project.

Project development would necessitate removal of 372 trees from the site. A total of 523 new trees would be planted within the site’s perimeter landscape easement, within the proposed parking fields, and in open space amenity areas proposed adjacent to each project building.

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 4 of 10
The project would involve the combination of the site’s two southern lots (APNs 543 -439-35 and 543-439-127) to create a single, 14.22-acre lot. The combined southern lot would house the three new Commerce Drive buildings and the southern-most Paseo Padre Parkway building. The resulting FAR for the lot would be 0.51, which exceeds the adopted FAR maximum (0.35) for non - manufacturing or warehouse uses on Tech Industrial-designated sites. The project as a whole would have a FAR of 0.42.

Off-site, a new six-foot-wide sidewalk would be installed along the site’s Commerce Drive frontage where no public walk current exists. The sidewalk would connect to existing sidewalks that line the site’s Paseo Padre Parkway and Ardenwood Boulevard frontages. Additionally, as conditioned and found warranted based on a traffic signal warrant analysis, the project would be required to install a traffic signal at the currently-unsignalized Paseo Padre Parkway / Commerce Drive intersection that abuts the site.

PROJECT ANALYSIS:

General Plan Conformance:

The project site is designated Tech Industrial in the General Plan’s Land Use Element. Sites with this designation are intended for research and development, “clean and green” tech, and semi-conductor, computer hardware, software a nd related technological, administrative, sales, and engineering facilities. These areas play an essential role in the Silicon Valley economy and provide a high volume of business-to-business sales tax for Fremont.

The following General Plan Policies and Goals are applicable to the proposed project:

LAND USE POLICY 2-1.11: Infill Emphasis – Focus new development on under-developed or “skipped over” sites that are already served by infrastructure and public streets.

LAND USE GOAL 2-2.7: Building Height and Intensity – Apply Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and building height standards in commercial, industrial, and mixed use areas which limit the intensity of development; permit FARs and heights which exceed the adopted maximums for projects which provide extraordinary benefits to the City.

LAND USE POLICY 2-5.1: Land Supply and Job Growth – Maintain an industrial land supply that is adequate and suitable for the continued growth of the City’s core industries, including computer and communications manufacturing, biotechnology, green technology, logistics/distribution, and emerging technologies.

LAND USE POLICY 2-5.9: Optimizing the Use of Industrial Land – Encourage more efficient and productive use of underutilized industrial land. Industrial land should be recognized as a limited resource that must be carefully managed to accommodate projected job growth and market needs.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL 6-1: A Dynamic Local Economy – Create and sustain a dynamic local economy that attracts investment, increases the tax base, generates public revenues, creates employment, provides recreational, shopping and service opportunities for residents, and maintains a balance of jobs and housing.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL 6-3: A Diverse Mix of Industrial and Technology Uses – Support and promote a diverse mix of industrial and technology uses to provide jobs and tax revenues for the community.

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 5 of 10
Analysis: The project constitutes a n infill industrial development on land that’s been intended for such use since 1981 and is well-served by abutting high-volume roadways and other infrastructure.

Implementation of the project would strengthen the City’s industrial base, support a wide range of quality jobs, and generate a significant amount of revenue. The project features a logical site layout, abundant perimeter landscaping, and clean, contemporary architecture with a high degree of transparency for increased compatibility with adjacent residential uses. The increased project FAR would enhance the viability of the project and contribute to greater project employment potential.

Zoning Regulations:

Per the aforementioned September 2016 amendment to P -81-15, future uses at the project site would be subject to the land use allowances of the I-T zoning district. The proposed project buildings and the existing building to be renovated have been designed to accommodate light-industrial/R&D uses, which are permitted uses within the I -T zoning district. Future occupants of project buildings will be evaluated individually for conformance with I-T zoning district land use regulations.

The planned district features specific development criteria that in some areas differs from citywide standards. The following tables show project compliance with select applicable standards for the site.

Table 1—Development Standards (P-81-15 or General Plan)

Development
Standard

Requirement

Proposed Project

Complies?
Maximum FAR

0.35 (non-manufacturing or
warehouse uses)

0.30 (6100 Paseo Padre
Parkway);

0.33 (6200 Paseo Padre
Parkway; existing/no
change); and

0.51 (Southern lot)

No
(Southern
lot)
Minimum
Street Setback
25 feet 25+ feet (parking areas)
102+ feet (buildings)
Yes
Minimum
Interior Setback
20 feet 45+ feet Yes
Maximum
Building Height
75 feet 36’-6” – 51’-6” Yes

As shown in Table 1 above, the project would conform to applicable development standards for a new industrial project at the site with the exception of the southern lot’s FAR. Staff’s findings for the requested FAR increase can be found in the Findings for Approval section of this report.

Table 2—Automobile Parking Standards (P-81-15)

Project
Industrial
Gross Floor
Area
Industrial
Parking
Standard

Parking Spaces
Required

Parking Spaces
Proposed Complies?
450,422 SF One space /
450 SF

1,001 1,403 Yes

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 6 of 10
Table 3—Bicycle Parking Standards (FMC Table 18.183.135)

Bicycle
Parking Type Minimum

Parking Spaces
Required

Parking Spaces
Proposed
Complies?
Short-term
Four, plus 5%
required
automobile
parking

55 79 Yes
Long-term
One, plus 5%
required
automobile
parking

52 61 Yes

Per Tab les 2 and 3 above, the project meets the minimum automobile and bicycle parking requirements. Automobile and short-term bicycle parking would be provided upon construction of project buildings and their related site improvements; long -term bicycle parking is proposed to be within the interior of each building and would be provided upon initial tenant improvement.

Architecture and Design:

The proposed project has been designed for consistency with the Section IV—Siting and Design Criteria of P-81-15. Additionally, the project conforms with the requirements of the Citywide Design Guidelines in that all Design Rules applicable for an industrial development have been met, including those related to site d evelopment, building design, and landscape design , and the project is in substantial conformance with the non-required Design Guidelines.

The project is laid out in a manner that creates a campus -like environment, as intended by the planned district. A wide landscape buffer rings the site’s perimeter, and project buildings are situated such that they conceal much of the site’s interior parking areas from public view. The project’s concrete tilt-up buildings feature a consistent, high-quality design aesthetic that incorporates high- transparency, aluminum-framed window systems and a mix of finishes that includes metal composite and corrugated panels, horizontal accent elements, and a complementary color palette to add visual interest. Building r ooftops have been designed with eight -foot-tall parapets that architecturally integrate into the building elevations. The loading and service areas of each building have been placed along their rear, concealing these areas and from public view. Exterior lighting, both at each building and within the parking fields , has been designed to eliminate the potential for glare on neighboring properties.

Landscape:

The project features a comprehensive landscape design that adds to the visual quality of the site.

Project frontages feature a 20’ – 30’-foot-wide landscape easement that would be planted with a repeating pattern of spreading shade trees and row trees along the parking lot edges. Within the easement, a three-foot-tall earthen berm, planted with evergreen buffer shrubs, would further screen the site’s parking areas from public view. Enhanced tree and shrub plantings would be provided at each driveway entrance and at street intersections to elevate the project’s curb appeal. In total, 523 new tree plantings would be proposed.

Within the site’s interior, parking areas would feature landscaped medians with tree plantings to provide shading and visual relief. The front elevations of each building would feature strategically

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 7 of 10
located accent and specimen trees. Outdoor employee amenity spaces are provided b etween each pair of project buildings. These spaces – three in total – feature accent paving, seat walls, movable furniture, and an overhead shade structure that shelters an outdoor kitchen and dining area.

The project’s conceptual landscape plan has been reviewed by a staff landscape arch itect and been found to be in conformance with applicable FMC provisions and to contribute to project aesthetics.

As selected, all proposed project plantings would be of species having low -to-medium water demands, furthering water conservation efforts.

FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:

Pursuant to FMC Section 18.235.060, in order to approve a Discretionary Design Review Permit, the Zoning Administrator must make the following findings:

(a) The proposed project is consistent with the general plan, any applicable community or specific plan, planning and zoning regulations, and any adopted design rules and guidelines.

Analysis: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, P-81-15 standards, and the applicable Design Rules of the Citywide Design Guidelines. The project will advance the vision of the site’s planned district, which has tabbed the property to be developed as an industrial campus dating back to its 1981 adoption. The project will transform an underutilized infill site with a development that’s consistent with the scale and design character sought for new industrial development within the North Fremont’s Tech Industrial-designated lands.

(b) When a proposed project is inconsistent with an adopted design rule, the purpose and intent of the design rule is met through alternative means; and Analysis: The proposed project is consistent with the applicable Design Rules contained within the Citywide Design Guidelines , is in substantial conformance with t he same document’s Design Guidelines, and is compliant with the limited design language contained within the P- 81-15 ordinance. No exceptions to adopted Design Rules are necessary for the project.

(c) The nonmultifamily project’s architectural, site, and lan dscape design will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent development nor be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare; and Analysis: The proposed project’s design would not interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent development nor would it be detrimental to public health or safety because the project has been designed in a logical manner that comfortably fits within the site’s buildable envelope while providing significant ly increased building setbacks from all street frontages and interior property lines. The project features high-quality architecture that enhances the appearance of the site , and s ignificant landscaping within the site frontages’ landscape easements and the introduction of a Com merce Drive sidewalk that w ill connect with the existing sidewalk network that wraps the site would create a safer, more pedestrian-friendly public realm. Furthermore, the proposed project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons or property in the vicinity owing to its conformance with applicable Building and Fire code regulations.

(d) Where HARB review is required, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable standards and findings required in Chapters 18.135 and 18.175.

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 8 of 10
Analysis: HARB review is not required for this project as it is not within a designated historic district and there are no Register or Register-eligible resources on the site.

Pursuant to FMC Section 18. 250.070, the following findings are required prior to approval of an application for a floor area ratio increase:

(a) The increase in floor area ratio will not cause the project to exceed the capacity of streets and will not adversely affect the privacy of propertie s in the vicinity of the project;

As a result, project impacts on area roadways would not be considered to have an adverse effect and capacities of area streets would not be exceeded. As part of project implementation, a traffic signal would be installed at the Paseo Padre Parkway / Commerce Drive intersection, which is currently unsignalized, in order to improve current level of service and reduce delays for project inbound and outbound vehicular movements.

(b) A deed restriction approved by the city attorney shall be recorded on the property to ensure that the use of the property remains limited to that presented to the approval authority; and

Analysis: As conditioned, project implementation will be subject to a restrictive covenant and notice of land use limitation for the subject floor area ratio increase.

Analysis: The proposed increase in floor area ratio is associated with an industrial project that constitutes the first viable development at the project site in the planned district’s 43 -year history. At present time, demand for industrial space (including R&D and advanced manufacturing spaces, which project buildings are design to accommodate) in Fremont is strong, with limited availability of space and low vacancy rates. The project figures to deliver high-paying jobs in professional and technical occupations and increase the City’s industrial standing in the region, which would be aided by the site’s key location adjacent to State Route 84, which connects Fremont to the Bay Area’s primary cluster of innovation -oriented technology businesses. The project’s modern i ndustrial building will better meet building configuration, access, and power needs of tenants compared to older building stock in the area. Additionally, the project will pay full-freight development impact fees and commercial linkage fees to offset the project’s potential impacts on City public facilities. The floor area ratio increase would result in a higher fee total than a project with a conforming floor area ratio.

(a) The proposed removal of protected trees would be consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 9 of 10
footprint of 188,431 square feet , plus necessary parking, circulation, landscaping, storm water treatment, and other associated improvements requires their removal. The remainder of the site’s private protected trees would remain in place, and new trees, both on-site and within the adjacent right -of-way, are proposed in accordance with the City’s Landscape Development Requirements and Policies (LDRP). Of the removed trees, 209 will be mitigated.

A tree mitigation fee will be collected for the 163 trees scheduled for removal that cannot be mitigated with no on-site tree plantings.

Environmental Review:

The proposed project is subject to no further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan, or Zoning, as the project is consistent with the General Plan for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified . Please see Informational Item No. 1 – CEQA Determination for more information.

CITY FEES:

The proposed project is subject to development impact fees. Fees would be calculated and due at the time of building permit issuance unless a deferral agreement is approved and executed.

PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT:

Public hearing notification is applicable. Notices were mailed to owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the site. The notices to owners and occupants were mailed on September 6, 2024.

A Public Hearing Notice was published by The Tri-City Voice on September 3, 2024.

ENCLOSURES:

Exhibit A—Project Plans
Exhibit B—Findings and Conditions
Informational Item No. 1—CEQA Determination
RECOMMENDATION:

1. Hold public hearing;

2. Find that the project as shown in Exhibit “A” is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, as the project is consistent with the General Plan for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2010082060) was previously prepared and certified; and

3. Approve the Discretionary Design Review Permit and floor area ratio increase, as shown on Exhibit “A,” subject to findings and conditions of approval in Exhibit “B.”

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) Item 1. Ardenwood at Paseo - MC PLN2022-00466
October 15, 2024 Page 10 of 10
Existing Zoning
Shaded Area represents the Project Site

Existing General Plan
Shaded Area represents the Project Site

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 1 - Zoning Administrator Staff Report (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal)

CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSISTENCY CHECKLIST
Introduction
City General Plan Tech Industrial
The City of Fremont’s General Plan for Tech Industrial primarily applies to areas used for research and development, “clean and green” tech, and semi-conductor, computer hardware, software and related technological, administrative, sales, and engineering facilities. These areas play an essential role in the Silicon Valley economy and provide a high volume of business-to-business sales tax for Fremont. Manufacturing is permitted, provided that characteristics such as noise, vibration, and odor do not generate significant impacts.

Warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution facilities also may locate within these areas. A moderate level of hazardous materials handling and storage may occur. Some of the Tech Industrial areas, such as Bayside and Ardenwood technology Parks, are characterized by a campus-like environment of one and two story buildings on large parcels. Architectural and landscape standards have been applied in these areas to maintain high standards of visual quality. Other areas with this designation have a more varied mix of parcels and uses. A permitted FAR of 0.35 applies, although FARs up to 0.45 are permitted for manufacturing and warehouse uses.

The proposed
Project is located within the Ardenwood Forest – New Town Planned District In the Tech – Industrial General Plan area.

Key policy guidance from the Tech Industrial General Plan section pertaining to desired land use and design for future development, including new development, include the following:
 Policy 2-5.2A, Tech Industrial Areas: Accommodate a range of development settings in the “Tech Industrial” designation, including planned industrial parks with abundant landscaping and high design and aesthetic standards similar to Ardenwood and Bayside Technology Parks, and more conventional industrial businesses with outdoor storage and use of hazardous materials.

Consistent with
the General Plan’s vision, the proposed development would develop five new light industrial buildings totaling 407,250 square feet and renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot light industrial building on the 24.2-acre site This is consistent with the creation of more large campus style developments desired by the Ardenwood area Tech Industrial General Plan Area.

Prior Environmental
Review / 2011 General Plan Update EIR
In 2011, the City of Fremont adopted a comprehensive update of the City of Fremont General Plan General Plan Update). The 2011 General Plan Update lays out a broad vision for the City, with goals, policies and implementation measures to achieve that vision. The 2011 General Plan Update established year 2035 as the horizon year, or the year by which the City projects is the earliest time period that the growth anticipated in the Plan will be achieved. The General Plan update was found consistent with state and regional planning efforts to focus growth near existing transit stations and corridors.

Concurrent with
adoption of the 2011 General Plan Update, the City also prepared and certified a General Plan Update EIR (SCH#2010082060). The 2011 General Plan EIR identifies potentially significant environmental impacts in the topics of Transportation and Circulation, Cultural and Archaeological Resources, Air Quality, Agricultural Resources, Noise, Utilities and Service Systems, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Global Climate Change. Mitigation were identified to reduce all potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant level, except for the following;
 Unacceptable levels of service at specified intersections and on specified roadway segments  Air quality emissions and Clean Air Plan consistency  Noise increases related to traffic, and noise conflicts of incompatible uses and construction noise  Potential demolition of cultural and historic resources  Loss or conversion of prime or unique farmland to urban uses, and  Cumulative greenhouse gas emissions
No feasible mitigation was found capable of fully reducing these impacts.

Fremont Standard Development Requirements

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 2
Subsequent to adoption of the City General Plan, Fremont has adopted Standard Development Requirements (SDRs) as part of the Fremont Municipal Code. Where SDRs supersede mitigation identified in the General Plan Update EIR or are otherwise applicable, they are included in this analysis.

The Purpose of this CEQA Document
The environmental analysis in this CEQA Consistency Checklist has been prepared for the proposed Project pursuant to the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines.

Specifically, the following CEQA Consistency Checklist has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 (Projects Consistent with a Community Plan or Zoning), to determine if the Project requires additional environmental review. Section 15183 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that projects that are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified (e.g., the General Plan Update EIR) shall not require additional environmental review, except as necessary to examine whether there are project‐ specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or project site.

In accordance
with the conclusion of the following CEQA Consistency Checklist, there are no new significant effects peculiar to this Project or this Project’s site other than those previously identified in the General Plan Update EIR. The programmatic mitigation measures from the General Plan Update EIR and/or SDRs are applied to the Project, and these measures and/or SDRs adequately address the potential environmental effects of the Project, as described in the environmental analyses below.

This analysis
concludes that the Ardenwood and Paseo Project at 39150 is within the scope of the Fremont General Plan Update EIR and that no further CEQA documentation is required.

The Fremont General Plan Update EIR is hereby incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available at:

City of Fremont Community Development Department, Planning Division 39550
Liberty Street
Fremont, CA 94538
Or online at:
https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning-building-permit- services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 3

PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title: Ardenwood at Paseo
Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Fremont, Planning Division 39550 Liberty Street, PO Box 5006
Fremont, CA 94537-5006
Contact Person and Phone Number: Mark Hungerford, Senior Planner – (510) 494-4541 Project Location: 6200 Paseo Padre Parkway
Fremont, CA 9455
(APN 543 043914800)
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Evan Sockalosky, Arc Tec Inc. 17312 Technology Dr, Ste. 750
San Jose, CA 95110
General Plan Designation: Industrial - Tech
Zoning: P-81-15
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
The 24.2-acre project site is bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 543-439-125, 543-439-148, 543-439-35, and 543-439-127) in the City of Fremont. The project site is mostly vacant undeveloped land, with the Northernmost and southernmost parcel developed with a solar farm and the middle parcel developed with an existing single-story industrial building.

Description of Project
The proposed project would modify the Zoning Standards with a request for increased floor area ratio in conjunction with development of five new light industrial buildings totaling 407,250 square feet and renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot light industrial building on the 24.2-acre site bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive in the Ardenwood Forest—New Town Planned District (P-81-15) and North Fremont Community Plan Area.

The project
would complete development of the six-parcel site that’s located at the north end of the greater Ardenwood Corporate Commons Business Park, which is the industrially-focused area within the Ardenwood Forest—New Town, a Planned District adopted for the area that planned for approximately 3,800 residential units, 280 acres for a high technology business park, 37 acres for commercial uses, and 105 acres for schools, parks, and open space. Much of the plan has been implemented; the project would infill a significant portion of the planned yet unbuilt industrial area.

As proposed,
the southern portion of the site along Commerce Drive would be developed with two (2) two-story light industrial buildings, both measuring 75,112 square feet, and one (1) three-story, 91,162-square-foot light industrial building. The two-story buildings would stand 36’-6” tall and the three-story building would stand 51’-6” in height. The site’s Paseo Padre Parkway frontage would be developed with two (2) two-story light industrial buildings. The building proposed at the southern end of the frontage would measure 75,112 square feet in size and the building proposed at the northern end of the frontage would measure 90,750 square feet. Both buildings would measure 36’-6” in height. Situated between these two buildings is an existing one-story light industrial building (6200 Paseo Padre Parkway) measuring 43,172 square feet that would be renovated but not expanded.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 4
Two existing light industrial buildings along the Ardenwood Boulevard frontage (34175 and 34325 Ardenwood Boulevard) would remain unmodified by the project.

A total of 1,403 vehicle parking spaces would be provided for the project. These parking spaces would be located in a contiguous surface parking lot that covers the non-building and landscape areas of the site. Of these spaces, 145 would be equipped with electric vehicle charging stations. The project would also include 79 short-term bicycle parking spaces and 61 long-term bicycle parking spaces. Access to the site would come from two proposed curb-cuts along Commerce Drive, two existing curb-cuts along Paseo Padre Parkway, and one existing curb-cut along Ardenwood Boulevard. Existing parking areas and an Ardenwood Boulevard curb-cut supporting the two existing light industrial buildings adjacent to the project site would remain unmodified by the project.

Project development
would necessitate removal of 372 trees from the site. A total of 523 new trees would be planted within the site’s perimeter landscape easement, within the project’s parking fields, and in open space amenity areas proposed adjacent to each project building.

The project would involve the combination of the site’s two southern lots (APNs 543-439-35 and 543-439-127) to create a single, 14.22-acre lot. The combined southern lot would house the three new Commerce Drive buildings and the southern-most Paseo Padre Parkway building. The resulting floor area ratio for the lot would be 0.51, which exceeds the adopted floor area ratio maximum (0.35) for non-manufacturing or warehouse uses on Tech Industrial-designated sites. The project’s Design Review Permit would be subject to Community Development Director approval in accordance with P-81-15 policy.

Construction Activities and Schedule
While the timeline for construction is variable and subject to change, construction is anticipated to begin immediately after building permit issuance. Construction activities for the project would occur over a span of approximately 24 to 28 months. The proposed project would include the demolition of 77,363 square feet of asphalt and the export of 2,472 cubic yards of soil and the import of 16,000 cubic yards of soil.

Construction activities
would comply with Fremont Municipal Code requirements, which limit construction hours to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays (FMC, Section 18.160.010). Typical construction equipment such as dump trucks, backhoes, and bulldozers would be used in construction.

Standard Development Requirements
The City of Fremont has established standard development requirements to address resource protection (Fremont Municipal Code Chapter 18.218). These requirements apply to air quality (construction-related emissions), biological resources (special-status species), and cultural resources (notification of affiliated California Native American Tribes and accidental discovery of cultural resources). The proposed project would comply with these standard development requirements, which are described in subsequent Sections of this Initial Study.

AB52 Notification
The project was not required to send notices to Native American Tribes per Assembly Bill 52. Therefore, no notices were sent.

Project Approvals
The project is a private development proposal that involves private funds (no City, State, or federal funds). To allow the proposed project, the following approvals by the City would be necessary:
 Discretionary Design Review
 Tree Removal Permit
 Grading Permit
 Modification of Zoning Standards
 Tentative Parcel Map
The project would be reviewed and discussed at public hearings before the Zoning Administrator.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 5
Other Public Agencies Requiring Approval
The project may also require permits and/or approvals from:
• Alameda County Flood Control District (ACFCD),
• Alameda County Water District (ACWD), and
• Union Sanitary District (USD)
General Plan Conformance
As previously noted, the proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan for which a program-level Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified by the Fremont City Council in December 2011, in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, projects that are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified (e.g., the General Plan Update EIR) shall not require additional environmental review, except as necessary to examine whether there are project‐specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or project site. This CEQA Consistency Checklist has been prepared for that purpose and has determined that the Project is exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with a Community Plan, General Plan or Zoning. The Project is consistent with the development densities established in the existing zoning and General Plan for which an EIR was certified.

As established
in the substantial evidence presented in thus document, there are no project-specific significant effects that are peculiar to the Project or its site that were not analyzed a significant effects in the prior EIR, no potentially significant off-site impacts or cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior EIR, nor previously identified significant effect which, as a result of substantial new information that was not known at the time the prior EIR was certified and that would have a more severe adverse effect than discussed in the prior EIR.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 6
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Project Site

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 7
Figure 2: Site Aerial

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 8
Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 9

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 mandates that no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for a project for which an EIR has been certified unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
1) Substantial
changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) Substantial
changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3) New information
of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a) The project
will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d) Mitigation
measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

Furthermore, CEQA
Guidelines Section 15183(b) states that, in approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency determines, in an initial study or other analysis:
1) Are
peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located; 2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior General Plan Update EIR on the zoning action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is consistent; 3) Are potentially significant off‐ site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the prior General Plan Update EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action; or 4) Are previously identified significant effects which, due to substantial new information which was not known at the time the General Plan Update EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior General Plan Update EIR.

The following pages of this document contain a CEQA Comparative Checklist that examines the Project’s potential environmental effects are within the parameters outlined by CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15183(b). The “Prior EIR” used for comparison is the Fremont General Plan Update certified by the City Council on December 13, 2011 (SCH#2010082060), including all impact determinations and significant thresholds utilized therein.

The General
Plan Update EIR is hereby incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and can be obtained from the City of Fremont Community Development Services Center at 39550 Liberty St., Fremont, CA 94538 Or online at https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-building-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan. The following CEQA checklist examines how the potential effects relate to the conclusions of the prior General Plan Update EIR, and whether any new or more significant impacts than those identified in that prior EIR would result from the Project.

This CEQA Checklist identifies potential environmental effects of the Project using a checklist method, with adequate explanation and evidence to support the Checklist entries and conclusions. The CEQA Checklist uses the following acronyms for CEQA conclusions:
 No Impact - for environmental factors that would not be affected in any manner  LTS - for less than significant impacts
 LTS w/SDRs or LTS w/MM - for impacts that would be reduced to LTS with implementation of identified City of Fremont Standard Development Requirements (or SDRs) and/or mitigation measures (MMs) as identified in an applicable prior program EIR (i.e., the General Plan Update EIR), and  SU - for significant and unavoidable impacts

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 10

1.1 AESTHETICS
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a public scenic vista? LTS  ☐ - LTS
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including but not limited to
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
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 points.) If the project
is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning
and other regulations governing scenic
quality?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
LTS  ☐ - LTS

1.1.1 Environmental Setting
The 24.2-acre project site is bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers [APNs] 543-439-125, 543-439-148, 543-439-35, and 543-439-127) in the City of Fremont. The project site is mostly vacant undeveloped land with the northernmost and southernmost parcel developed with a solar farm and the middle parcel is developed with an
existing single-story industrial
building. The project site contains 372 trees in varying species, size, and condition.

The proposed project would develop a six-building research and development manufacturing/office campus totaling approximately 450,420 square feet of building area, including five new multi-story buildings and the renovation of the existing one-story-high bay building. The proposed project would include four new two-story buildings and one new three-story building. The goal of the proposed project is to maximize the development opportunity for the parcels and create a campus to attract new and growing companies to Fremont. The campus would be designed to support a single user for the entire campus, multiple users in groups of two buildings, or single/multiple tenants per buildings.

The General Plan considers the East Bay hills north and east of the site as scenic views for neighborhoods and commercial centers, and Fremont residents have voted to protect these hills as open space on several occasions, confirming their value as a scenic resource. The East Bay hills, including Mission Peak, can currently be seen from the project site. The surrounding neighborhood consists of a

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 11
mix of low-rise commercial buildings and multi-story office and residential buildings. Views of the East Bay hills from and across the project site are partially obstructed by trees and the surrounding urban development.

The General
Plan also identified scenic routes for the purpose of prioritizing roadway and landscape treatments and consideration of broad views of resources, including Paseo Padre Parkway, which is adjacent to the project site.

Existing lighting
in the area consists primarily of streetlights in the public right of way and parking lot lighting for the surrounding development. The proposed development would add additional lighting and parking. As discussed in more detail under Section 1.5 Cultural Resources, the existing building at the site is not a significant historic resource.

1.1.2 Discussion
a) Have
a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
While Paseo Padre Parkway is considered a scenic route, views from this roadway toward the East Bay hills scenic resource are already intermittently obstructed by landscaping, topography, and development.

While the proposed development at the site could contribute to this intermittent obstruction, it is consistent with the expected size and type of development for this property, including the incorporation of campus like landscape treatments along this scenic route consistent with expectations under the General Plan.

The proposed project would not have a significant impact on scenic vistas of the East Bay hills or any other scenic vistas.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding scenic vistas. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR. Therefore, impacts from the construction and operation of the project on a scenic vista would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Substantially
damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? There are no designated or eligible State Scenic Highways in the vicinity of the project. 1 The project would not be prominent in views from distant State Scenic Highways.

There are no rock outcroppings or historic buildings located on the project site. The site currently contains 372 trees of various species and size. 353 of these trees would be removed. Removal of these trees would be done in accordance with the City of Fremont Tree Preservation Ordinance (FMC 18.215).

Removed trees would be replaced on site with new trees. Any trees removed and not replaced would be subject to tree mitigation fees to add to the urban canopy elsewhere in the City.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding scenic resources from state scenic highways. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR. Therefore impacts to scenic resources from state scenic highways would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
1 California Department of Transportation, State Scenic Highway Mapping System, accesses 9/30/24, available at:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 12
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 points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
The proposed
project is located in an urbanized area, developed by a mix of commercial, and residential uses. Across the way from the site is the Coyote Hills East Bay Regional Park. The site currently contains one office building, a solar farm, and parking lot. The proposed project would conform to the applicable City zoning rules and development policies, which ensure that the project would be consistent with the General Plan goals and policies related to Aesthetics as evaluated in the General Plan EIR.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding scenic quality. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
d) Create a
new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
The proposed project would be located in an urban area along parkway and arterial streets. The site would be illuminated by both building mounted and pole mounted lights. In accordance with Fremont development policies and the Fremont General Plan, the lighting would be configured in such a way as to prevent light spill onto neighboring properties and to avoid objectionable glare. Compliance with the exterior lighting requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (FMC 18.50.050(d)) and Citywide Design Guidelines would ensure that the project would not create new source of substantial light and glare and impacts would be less than significant. As such, no mitigation is required.

Construction activities
for the site would be required to be within the City’s construction hours, which are limited to the daytime hours (7am to 7pm on weekdays; 9am to 6pm on Saturdays and holidays, no construction allowed on Sunday). Compliance with these hours would ensure construction-related impacts from light and glare would be less than significant.

For these
reasons, the project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area and the impact would be less than significant with no mitigation required. There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding light or glare adversely affecting day or nighttime views in the area. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
References

1. City of Fremont, 2023. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning.

Available online at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fremont/.

2. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Community Character Element. Adopted December 2011. Available: https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-building-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan

3. City of Fremont, 2023. SACGISA. Fremont Mapping. Available online at https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/gis.

4. Project Plans. Prepared for the City of Fremont.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 13

5. California Department of Transportation, State Scenic Highway Mapping System, available at:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic- highways.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 14

1.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
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?
SU  ☐ - No Impact
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract
No Impact  ☐ - No Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land,
timberland, or timberland zoned
Timberland Production, or result in the
loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use
No Impact  ☐ - No Impact

1.2.1 Environmental Setting
The project site is located within the boundaries of the City of Fremont, on a site that is currently partially developed and partially undeveloped, but entirely within an area planned for development. No portion of the site is zoned for or being used for agricultural or forestry purposes.

The project would infill a significant portion of the planned yet unbuilt industrial area of the greater Ardenwood Corporate Commons Business Park, consistent with the Ardenwood Forest—New Town Planned District.

1.2.2 Discussion
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? The proposed project site is mapped as “Urban and Built-Up Land” by the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. 2 No agricultural land use exists within the proposed project site or the Downtown District. This condition precludes the possibility of the conversion of Important Farmland to non-agricultural use. Therefore, no impact to prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance would result from the project and no mitigation is required.

There is
nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in conversion of farmland.

The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this 2 California Department of Conservation, Important Farmland Finder. Accessed on November 3, 2023. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 15
topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: None
Mitigation: None required
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? The project site is not under William Act contract and has a P-81-15 zoning, which is not reserved for agricultural use. Furthermore, there are no agriculturally zoned lands or existing Williamson Act contracts in the project area. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract so no impact to such lands would result from the project.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act contract. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: None
Mitigation: None required
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))?
The site
is zoned P-81-15, which is not for forest or timberland use, and the site does not contain any forest or timberlands. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of forest or timberland or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use, no forest resource impacts would result from the development of the project, and no mitigation is required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding forest or timberland. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: None
Mitigation: None required
d) Result
in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? The proposed project is located in a built-up, urban area and does not contain any forest or timberlands.

Therefore, no forest resource impacts would result from the development of the project, and no mitigation is required. There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding a loss of forest land or conversion of forest land.

The proposed
project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: None
Mitigation: None required
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?
The proposed project is located in a built-up, urban area that does not contain any farmland, forest or timberlands. Therefore, development of the project would not result in conversion of Farmland to non-

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 16
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and no mitigation is required. There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

Potential Impact: None
Mitigation: None required
References

1. California Department of Conservation Important Farmland Finder.

Available at https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.

2. California Department of Conservation, 2022. Williamson Act Status Report. Available at https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/wa/Pages/stats_reports.aspx.

3. City of Fremont, 2023. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning.

Available online at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fremont/.

4. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Community Character Element. Adopted December 2011. Available: https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community- development/planning-building-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 17

1.3 AIR QUALITY
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan or violate any air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation
SU  ☐ - LTS
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
(including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)
Construction:

SU
with MM
Air-3
 ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(a)(1):

Construction Related
Emissions
LTS with
SDR
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations
LTS with MM
Air-2
 SDR FMC

18.218.050(a)(2):

Construction Related
Emissions -
Supplemental
Measures
LTS with
SDR
d) Create objectionable odors affecting
a substantial number of people
LTS  - LTS

1.3.1 Environmental Setting
The proposed manufacturing/office campus development would provide landscaping throughout the project site with amenity areas located between the buildings. The buildings would be designed for flexibility to include manufacturing and loading needs, including loading and service areas located at the rear of the buildings towards the interior of the site, screened for the public. Typical hours would be 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The project also includes parking fields containing a total of 1,379 parking spaces, plus hardscape and hardscape improvements.

The proposed project
would comply with the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code) building measures and Title 24 standards. In addition, the proposed project would be all-electric and would include 139 electric vehicle (EV) standard parking spaces, 1 EV standard accessible parking space, 2 EV van accessible parking spaces, 2 EV ambulatory accessible parking spaces, 12 car share spaces, and 110 clean air/carpool/vanpool/EV parking provided spaces. Once operational, the proposed project would generate approximately 4,512 average daily trips. The proposed project would not include any diesel emergency generators or diesel fire pumps.

Construction activities
for the project would occur over 24 to 28 months. The proposed project would include the demolition of 77,363 square feet of asphalt and the export of 2,472 cubic yards of soil and the import of 16,000 cubic yards of soil.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 175
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 18
The City has adopted “Standard Development Requirements” under the Fremont Municipal Code Section

18.218.050, which include the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines best management practices to control dust during construction projects.

Air quality
is primarily a function of both local climate, local sources of air pollution and regional pollution transport. The amount of a given pollutant in the atmosphere is determined by the amount of the pollutant released and the atmosphere’s ability to transport and dilute the pollutant. The major determinants of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain, and for photochemical pollutants, sunshine.

A region’s
topographic features have a direct correlation with air pollution flow and, therefore, are used to determine the boundary of air basins. Fremont is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (Air Basin), a large shallow air basin ringed by hills that taper into a number of sheltered valleys around the perimeter. Two primary atmospheric outlets exist. One is through the strait known as the Golden Gate, a direct outlet to the Pacific Ocean. The second extends to the northeast, along the west delta region of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.

Fremont is
within the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD, which regulates air quality in the Bay Area. Air quality conditions in the Bay Area have improved significantly since the BAAQMD was created in 1955. Ambient concentrations of air pollutants and the number of days during which the region exceeds air quality standards have fallen dramatically. Neither State nor national ambient air quality standards of the following chemicals have been violated in recent decades: nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, sulfates, lead, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. Those exceedances of air quality standards that do occur primarily happen during meteorological conditions conducive to high pollution levels, such as cold, windless nights or hot, sunny summer afternoons.

Both State
and federal governments have established health-based Ambient Air Quality Standards for six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), lead (Pb), and suspended particulate matter. In addition, the State has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride and visibility-reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. Two criteria pollutants, O3 and NO2, are considered regional pollutants because they (or their precursors) affect air quality on a regional scale. Pollutants such as CO, SO2, and Pb are considered local pollutants that tend to accumulate in the air locally. The BAAQMD is under State non-attainment status for ozone and particulate matter standards.

The BAAQMD is classified as non-attainment for the federal ozone 8-hour standard and non-attainment for the federal PM2.5 24-hour standard. As such, the primary pollutants of concern in the project area are O3, CO, and PM2.5.

Because of
the conservative nature of the significance thresholds, and the basin-wide context of individual development project emissions, there is no direct correlation between a single project and localized air quality-related health effects. One individual project that generates emissions exceeding a threshold does not necessarily result in adverse health effects for residents in the project vicinity. This condition is especially true when the criteria pollutants exceeding thresholds are those with regional effects, such as ozone precursors like nitrogen oxides (NOx) and reactive organic gases (ROG).

Further, by
its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to by itself result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant. In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, the air districts have considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions.

Occupants of
facilities such as schools, daycare centers, parks and playgrounds, hospitals, and nursing and convalescent homes are considered to be more sensitive than the general public to air pollutants because these population groups have increased susceptibility to respiratory disease. Persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise also have increased sensitivity to poor air quality. Residential areas are considered more sensitive to air quality conditions, compared to commercial and industrial areas, because people generally spend longer periods of time at their residences, with greater associated

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 176
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 19
exposure to ambient air quality conditions. Recreational uses are also considered sensitive compared to commercial and industrial uses due to greater exposure to ambient air quality conditions associated with exercise. These populations are referred to as sensitive receptors.

Regulatory Framework:

Federal Regulations
The 1970
Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) authorized the establishment of national health-based air quality standards and set deadlines for their attainment. The CAA Amendments of 1990 changed deadlines for attaining national standards as well as the remedial actions required for areas of the nation that exceed the standards. Under the CAA, State and local agencies in areas that exceed the national standards are required to develop State Implementation Plans to demonstrate how they will achieve the national standards by specified dates.

State Regulations
In 1988,
the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) required that all air districts in the State endeavor to achieve and maintain California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for CO, O3, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) by the earliest practical date. The CCAA provides districts with authority to regulate indirect sources and mandates that air quality districts focus particular attention on reducing emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources. Each nonattainment district is required to adopt a plan to achieve a 5 percent annual reduction, averaged over consecutive 3-year periods, in district-wide emissions of each nonattainment pollutant or its precursors. A Clean Air Plan shows how a district would reduce emissions to achieve air quality standards. Generally, the State standards for these pollutants are more stringent than the national standards.

The CARB is
the State’s “clean air agency.” The CARB’s goals are to attain and maintain healthy air quality, protect the public from exposure to toxic air contaminants, and oversee compliance with air pollution rules and regulations.

Regional Regulations
The BAAQMD seeks to attain and maintain air quality conditions in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin through a comprehensive program of planning, regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and education. The clean air strategy includes the preparation of plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations, and issuance of permits for stationary sources. The BAAQMD also inspects stationary sources and responds to citizen complaints, monitors ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implements programs and regulations required by law.

Clean Air Plan.

The Clean Air Plan guides the region’s air quality planning efforts to attain the CAAQS.8 The BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan, developed in association with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments, is the current Clean Air Plan which contains district-wide control measures to reduce ozone precursor emissions (e.g., ROG and NOx), particulate matter and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan:
• Describes
the BAAQMD plan towards attaining all State and federal air quality standards and eliminating health risk disparities from exposure to air pollution among Bay Area communities; • Defines a vision for transitioning the region to a post-carbon economy needed to achieve ambitious GHG reduction targets for 2030 and 2050;
• Provides a regional climate protection strategy that will put the Bay Area on a pathway to achieve GHG reduction targets; and
• Includes a wide range of control measures designed to decrease emissions of air pollutants that are most harmful to Bay Area residents, such as particulate matter, ozone, and toxic air contaminants; to reduce emissions of methane and other “Super-GHGs” that are potent climate pollutants in the near term; and to decrease emissions of carbon dioxide by reducing fossil fuel combustion.

BAAQMD CEQA
Air Quality Guidelines. The BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (“BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines”) were prepared to assist in the evaluation of air quality impacts of projects and plans proposed within the Bay Area. The guidelines provide recommended procedures for evaluating potential

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 177
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 20
air impacts during the environmental review process, consistent with CEQA requirements, and include recommended thresholds of significance, mitigation measures, and background air quality information.

They also include recommended assessment methodologies for air toxics, odors, and GHG emissions. In 2023, the BAAQMD published an updated version of the CEQA Guidelines. The BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines include thresholds to evaluate project impacts to protectively evaluate the potential effects of the project on air quality. These protective thresholds are appropriate in the context of the size, scale, and location of the proposed project.

Local Regulations
The Conservation
Element of the City of Fremont General Plan9 includes air quality policies and implementation measures intended to improve air quality over current conditions to meet or exceed State and regional standards. The following policies and implementation measures are applicable to the project:
• Policy 7-7.2: Reduce Air Pollution Levels. Reduce City of Fremont air contaminant levels and particulate emissions below BAAQMD attainment levels, in particular, ozone and particulate matter levels.

Implementation 7-7.2.A: Construction Practices. Require construction practices that reduce dust and other particulate emissions and require watering of exposed areas at construction sites.

Implementation 7-7.2.B:

Reducing Fireplace Emissions. Ensure new development
complies with the City’s Wood Burning Fireplace Ordinance to assist in reducing fireplace particulate emissions.
• Policy 7-7.3: Land Use Planning to Minimize Health Impacts from Toxic Air Contaminants.

Coordinate land use planning with air quality data and local transportation planning to reduce the potential for long-term exposure to toxic air contaminants (TAC) from permanent sources that affect the community.

Implementation 7-7.3.A: Limit
New TAC Sources. Evaluate new sources of TAC
emissions pursuant to BAAQMD guidelines and thresholds for an increased health risk of no more than 10 additional incidents of cancer per million exposures or contribute to a cumulative risk in excess of 100 additional incidents of cancer per million exposures.

Implementation 7-7.3.B:

Limit New Residential Development in High Risk Areas. For infill development sites within existing neighborhoods, apply thresholds for review when new sensitive receptors are within areas exposed to health risk levels in excess of 100 additional incidents of cancer per million exposures. Infill development also includes conditional development of a mixed use and urban residential development nature within residential and commercial areas of Centers and Urban Corridors.

When considering
land use changes that add sensitive receptor uses outside of existing neighborhoods, apply thresholds for review when new sensitive receptors are within areas exposed to health risk levels in excess of 10 additional incidents of cancer per million exposures.

Implementation 7-7.3.C:

Incorporate TAC Controls with New Development. New
development projects with sensitive receptors within 1,000 feet of a freeway or major TAC source shall assess the TAC health risk for the site and incorporate, to the maximum extent feasible, risk reduction measures to reduce exposure to TAC. Risk reduction measures may include, but not be limited to, project phasing, site orientation, distance separations, landscape buffering, building air filtration systems, modified building design or building type, or off site improvements at a TAC source.

In addition,
the City of Fremont Municipal Code (FMC) identifies standard development requirements for construction-related emissions in Section 18.218.050. FMC Section 18.218.050 requires the implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures for all proposed development projects and the implementation of additional Supplemental Measures when construction emissions are above the BAAQMD’s thresholds. These are detailed under items a) and c) below.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 178
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 21

1.3.2 Discussion
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The applicable air quality plan is the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan (Clean Air Plan), which defines control strategies to reduce emissions and ambient concentrations of air pollutants; safeguard public health by reducing exposure to air pollutants that pose the greatest health risk, with an emphasis on protecting the communities most heavily affected by air pollution; and reduce GHG emissions to protect the climate.

The BAAQMD
recommends analyzing a project’s consistency with current air quality plan primary goals and control measures. The impact would be presumed significant if the project would conflict with or obstruct attainment of the primary goals or implementation of the control measures.

Clean Air Plan Goals. The primary goals of the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan are: (1) Attain all state and national air quality standards, (2) Eliminate disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from toxic air contaminants, (3) Reduce Bay Area GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 (this third goal is addressed in Section 1.8: Greenhouse Gas Emissions.)
The BAAQMD has
established significance thresholds for project construction and operational impacts at a level at which the cumulative impact of exceeding these thresholds would have an adverse impact on the region’s attainment of air quality standards. The health and hazards thresholds were established to help protect public health. As discussed in the project’s Air Quality Memo prepared for the City by LSA Associates and summarized in items b) through d) below, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in the generation of criteria air pollutants that would exceed BAAQMD thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed project would not obstruct obtainment of the Clean Air Plan goals.

Clean Air
Plan Control Measures. The control strategies of the Clean Air Plan include measures in the following categories: Stationary Source Measures, Transportation Measures, Energy Measures, Building Measures, Agriculture Measures, Natural and Working Lands Measures, Waste Management Measures, Water Measures, and Super-GHG Pollutants Measures. The proposed project’s compliance with each of these control measures is discussed below.

Stationary Source
Control Measures. The Stationary Source Control Measures, which are designed to reduce emissions from stationary sources such as metal melting facilities, cement kilns, refineries, and glass furnaces, are incorporated into rules adopted by the BAAQMD and then enforced by the BAAQMD Permit and Inspection programs. Since the proposed project would not include any of these stationary sources, the Stationary Source Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the proposed project.

Transportation Control
Measures. The BAAQMD identifies Transportation Control Measures as part of the Clean Air Plan to decrease emissions of criteria pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by reducing demand for motor vehicle travel, promoting efficient vehicles and transit service, decarbonizing transportation fuels, and electrifying motor vehicles and equipment. The proposed project would result in the redevelopment of the site with a research and development manufacturing/office campus on an infill site that would locate employees near existing commercial, industrial, recreational, and residential uses, reducing the demand for travel by single occupancy vehicles. The proposed project would also provide EV charging and pedestrian and bicyclist amenities, including crosswalks, sidewalks, bicycle parking, and landscaping, which would also help to reduce the demand for travel by single occupancy vehicles. In addition, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) Bus Routes Lines 32 and 621 operate adjacent to the proposed project and a transit center with a Park & Ride lot and bus stops at the south corner of the intersection of Ardenwood Boulevard and Ardenwood Terrace, located approximately 0.7 mile from the project site. The Fremont Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station is also located 4 miles northeast of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would support the ability to use alternative modes of transportation, would promote initiatives to reduce vehicle trips and VMT, and would increase the use of alternate means of transportation. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the identified Transportation Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 179
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 22
Energy Control Measures. The Clean Air Plan also includes Energy Control Measures, which are designed to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by decreasing the amount of electricity consumed in the Bay Area, as well as decreasing the carbon intensity of the electricity used by switching to less GHG-intensive fuel sources for electricity generation. Since these measures apply to electrical utility providers and local government agencies (and not individual projects), the Energy Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the proposed project.

Building Control
Measures. The BAAQMD has authority to regulate emissions from certain sources in buildings such as boilers and water heaters but has limited authority to regulate buildings themselves.

Therefore, the strategies in the control measures for this sector focus on working with local governments that do have authority over local building codes, to facilitate adoption of best GHG control practices and policies. The proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the California Code of Regulations, established by the CEC, regarding energy conservation and green building standards. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the Building Control Measures.

Agriculture Control
Measures. The Agriculture Control Measures are designed to primarily reduce emissions of methane. Since the project does not include any agricultural activities, the Agriculture Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the proposed project.

Natural and Working
Lands Control Measures. The Natural and Working Lands Control Measures focus on increasing carbon sequestration on rangelands and wetlands, as well as encouraging local governments to adopt ordinances that promote urban-tree plantings. Since the proposed project does not include the disturbance of any rangelands or wetlands, the Natural and Working Lands Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan are not applicable to the proposed project.

Waste Management
Control Measures. The Waste Management Control Measures focus on reducing or capturing methane emissions from landfills and composting facilities, diverting organic materials away from landfills, and increasing waste diversion rates through efforts to reduce, reuse, and recycle. The proposed project would comply with local requirements for waste management (e.g., recycling and composting services). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Waste Management Control Measures of the Clean Air Plan.

Water Control Measures.

The Water Control Measures focus on reducing emissions of criteria pollutants, TACs, and GHGs by encouraging water conservation, limiting GHG emissions from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), and promoting the use of biogas recovery systems. Since these measures apply to POTWs and local government agencies (and not individual projects), the Water Control Measures are not applicable to the proposed project.

Super GHG
Control Measures. The Super-GHG Control Measures are designed to facilitate the adoption of best GHG control practices and policies through the BAAQMD and local government agencies. Since these measures do not apply to individual projects, the Super-GHG Control Measures are not applicable to the proposed project.

As discussed above,
the proposed project would generally implement the applicable measures outlined in the Clean Air Plan, including Transportation Control Measures. Therefore, the project would not disrupt or hinder implementation of a control measure from the Clean Air Plan.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding conflicts with clean air plan goals. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
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?
The BAAQMD is currently designated as a nonattainment area for State and national ozone standards and national particulate matter AAQS. The BAAQMD’s nonattainment status is attributed to the region’s development history. Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 180
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 23
single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of AAQS. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant.

In developing
thresholds of significance for air pollutants, the BAAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, additional analysis to assess cumulative impacts is unnecessary. The following analysis assesses the potential project-level construction- and operation-related air quality impacts.

Short-Term Construction Emissions.

During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate emissions generated by demolition, grading, paving, building, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, NOx, ROG, directly emitted particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), and TACs such as diesel exhaust particulate matter.

Project construction
activities would include demolition, site preparation, grading, building, paving, and architectural coating (painting). Construction-related effects on air quality from the proposed project would be greatest during the site preparation phase due to the disturbance of soils. If not properly controlled, these activities would temporarily generate particulate emissions. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit dirt and mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and the amount of operating equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, while fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site.

Water or
other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50 percent or more. The BAAQMD has established standard measures for reducing fugitive dust emissions (PM10).

With the implementation of these Basic Construction Mitigation Measures, fugitive dust emissions from construction activities would not result in adverse air quality impacts.

In addition
to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, SO2, NOx, ROG, and some soot particulate (PM2.5 and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those vehicles idle in traffic. These emissions would be temporary in nature and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site.

As shown
in the air quality memo for the project by LSA Associates, construction emissions associated with the project would not exceed the BAAQMD’s thresholds for ROG, NOX, exhaust PM10, and exhaust PM2.5 emissions. FMC Section 18.218.050(a) (which supersedes General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure AIR-3) would require the implementation of the BAAQMD’s Basic Construction Mitigation Measures to incorporate best management practices (BMPs) in order to ensure construction fugitive dust impacts would be at a less-than-significant level. Therefore, additional project-specific mitigation is not required.

As such, construction of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS.

FMC 18.218.050(a)(1)
Construction-Related Emissions.

The following construction measures, as periodically amended by BAAQMD, are required for all proposed development projects to reduce construction-related fugitive dust and exhaust emissions:
(A) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times daily.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 181
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 24
(B) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off site shall be covered. (C) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. (D) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. (E) All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible.

Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading, unless seeding or soil binders are used.
(F) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or by reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. (G) All construction equipment
shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation. (H) A
publicly visible sign shall be posted with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s phone number also shall be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Long-Term Operational Emissions.

Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with mobile sources (e.g., vehicle trips), energy sources (e.g., natural gas), area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and the use of landscape maintenance equipment), and stationary sources (e.g., use of the fire pump) related to the proposed project.

PM10 emissions
result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Entrainment of PM10 occurs when vehicle tires pulverize small rocks and pavement, and the vehicle wakes generate airborne dust. The contribution of tire and brake wear is small compared to the other particulate matter emissions processes. Gasoline- powered engines have small rates of particulate matter emissions compared with diesel-powered vehicles.

Typically, area
source emissions consist of direct sources of air emissions located at the project site, including architectural coatings, consumer products, and the use of landscape maintenance equipment.

Stationary source emissions would be associated with use of the fire pump.

As modeled in the air quality memo prepared for the project by LSA Associates, the project would not exceed the significance criteria for daily or annual ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions and would meet screening criteria for project with less than significant CO emissions. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in a significant net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS and the projects impact under this topic would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non-attainment. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 182
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 25
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? BAAQMD identifies “Overburdened Communities” as those with residents already experiencing higher- than normal levels of air pollution. No portion of Fremont is identified as an overburdened community and therefore no supplemental environmental justice analysis is warranted in addition to the analysis below.3, 4 Sensitive receptors are defined as residential uses, schools, daycare centers, nursing homes, and medical centers. Individuals particularly vulnerable to diesel particulate matter are children, whose lung tissue is still developing, and the elderly, who may have serious health problems that can be aggravated by exposure to diesel particulate matter. Exposure from diesel exhaust associated with construction activity contributes to both cancer and chronic non-cancer health risks. Consistent with General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure AIR-2 and General Plan Implementation Measures 7-7.3.A through 7-7.3.B, the following sections evaluate the potential for exposure to TACs on sensitive receptors from construction and operation of the proposed project.

According to the
BAAQMD, a project would result in a significant impact if it would: individually expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 10.0 in one million, an increased non-cancer risk of greater than 1.0 on the hazard index (chronic or acute), or an annual average ambient PM2.5 increase greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3). A significant cumulative impact would occur if the project, in combination with other projects located within a 1,000-foot radius of the project site, would expose sensitive receptors to TACs resulting in an increased cancer risk greater than 100.0 in one million, an increased non-cancer risk of greater than 10.0 on the hazard index (chronic), or an ambient PM2.5 increase greater than 0.8 μg/m3 on an annual average basis.

The proposed
project site is located in an urban area in close proximity to existing residential uses that could be exposed to diesel emission exhaust during the construction period. As such, to estimate the potential health risk from project construction equipment exhaust (including diesel particulate matter), a dispersion model was used to translate an emission rate from the source location to a concentration at the receptor location (i.e., a nearby residential land use). Dispersion modeling varies from a simpler, more conservative screening-level analysis to a more complex and refined detailed analysis. This refined assessment was conducted using CARB’s exposure methodology, with the air dispersion modeling performed using the USEPA dispersion model AERMOD. The model provides a detailed estimate of exhaust concentrations based on site and source geometry, source emissions strength, distance from the source to the receptor, and site specific meteorological data.

As shown
in Table C of the LSA Air Quality Memo, the risk associated with project construction at the maximally exposed individual (MEI) would be 12.44 in one million, which would exceed the BAAQMD cancer risk of 10 in one million. The results of the analysis also indicate that the total chronic hazard index would be 0.009 and acute hazard index would be negligible, which would both be below the threshold of

1.0; the PM2.5 concentration would be 0.049 μg/m3, which would not exceed the BAAQMD significance threshold of 0.30 μg/m3. Therefore, implementation of the supplemental construction measures identified in FMC Section 18.218.050(a)(2) would be required.

FMC 18.218.050(a)(2)
Construction-Related Emissions –
Supplemental Measures. The following supplemental construction measures, as periodically amended by BAAQMD, are required for all proposed development projects that would exceed the thresholds of significance for construction criteria air pollutant and precursors provided in the most recent BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines:
(A) All
exposed surfaces shall be watered at a frequency adequate to maintain minimum soil moisture of 12 percent. Moisture content can be verified by lab samples or moisture probe. 3 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2022, California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines, Chapter 2.
4 The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), on behalf of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), last updated October 2021, Communities Environmental Health Screening Tool: CalEnviroScreen Version 4.0, available at https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 26
(B) All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.
(C) Wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) shall be installed on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. Wind breaks should have at maximum 50 percent air porosity. (D) Vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) shall be planted in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established. (E) The simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities on the same area at any one time shall be limited. Activities shall be phased to reduce the total area of surfaces disturbed at any one time.
(F) All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site. (G) Site accesses to a distance of 100 feet from the paved road shall be treated with a six- to 12- inch compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
(H) Sandbags or other erosion control measures shall be installed to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent. (I) Idling time of diesel-powered construction equipment shall be limited to two minutes. (J) The project shall develop a plan demonstrating that the off-road equipment (more than 50 horsepower) to be used in the construction project (i.e., owned, leased, and subcontractor vehicles) would achieve a project-wide fleet-average 20 percent nitrogen oxide (NOx) reduction and 45 percent particulate matter (PM) reduction compared to the most recent Air Resources Board fleet average. Acceptable options for reducing emissions include the use of late model engines, low-emission diesel products, alternative fuels, engine retrofit technology, after- treatment products, add-on devices such as particulate filters, and/or other options as such become available.
(K) Low
volatile organic compound (i.e., reactive organic gas) coatings beyond the local requirements (i.e., BAAQMD Regulation 8, Rule 3: Architectural Coatings) shall be used. (L) All construction equipment, diesel trucks, and generators shall be equipped with best available control technology for emission reductions of NOx and PM. (M) All contractors shall use equipment that meets the Air Resources Board’s most recent certification standard for off-road heavy-duty diesel engines. The following construction measures, as periodically amended by BAAQMD, are required for all proposed development projects to reduce construction-related fugitive dust and exhaust emissions:

Based on
these requirements of FMC Section 18.218.050(a)(2), the project was modeled assuming the use of construction equipment that meets the CARB Tier 2 emissions standards equipped with Level 3 diesel particulate filters or equivalent. As shown in Table D of the LSA Air Quality Memo, all health risks would be reduced with implementation of FCM Section 18.218.050(a)(2), and the reduced cancer risk at the MEI would be 2.17 in one million, which would not exceed the BAAQMD cancer risk of 10 in one million. Therefore, with implementation of the supplemental construction measures identified in FMC Section 18.218.050(a), construction of the proposed project would not exceed BAAQMD thresholds and would not expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Once the
project is constructed, the project would not be a source of substantial emissions. Therefore, nearby sensitive receptors are not expected to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction or operation.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding exposure of sensitive populations to substantial pollutant concentrations. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 184
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 27
or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
During construction, the various diesel-powered vehicles and equipment in use on site would create localized odors. These odors would be temporary and are not likely to be noticeable for extended periods of time beyond the project site. Additionally, the proposed uses that would be developed within the project site are not expected to produce any offensive odors that would result in frequent odor complaints.

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

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding other emissions adversely affecting a substantial number of people. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less Than significant
Mitigation: None required
References

1. City of Fremont, 2023. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning.

Available online at www.fremont.gov/fmc.

2. City of Fremont Waste Handling Guidelines. Available online at www.fremont.gov/whg.

3. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Housing Element. Adopted December 2011. Available: https://fremont.gov/generalplan.

4. City of Fremont, 2023. SACGISA. Fremont Mapping. Available online at http://egis.fremont.gov/apps/public/.

5. LSA Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Memo, February 7th 31, 2024, prepared for the City of Fremont by LSA Associates.

6. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, 2022, California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines, available at: https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/california-environmental-quality-act-ceqa/updated- ceqa-guidelines.

7. BAAQMD, adopted April 19, 2017, Spare the Air - Cool the Climate: A Blueprint for Clean Air and Climate Protection in the Bay Area, available at https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and-climate/air-quality-plans/current- plans.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 185
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 28

1.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
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 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
LTS  ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(b)(1):

Burrowing Owl.

18.218.050(b)(2):

Nesting Birds.

LTS with
SDRs
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations
or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
LTS  - LTS
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?
LTS  LTS
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
LTS  ☐ LTS
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?
LTS  ☐ - No Impact

1.4.1 Environmental Setting
The 24.2-acre project site is mostly vacant undeveloped land with the northernmost and southernmost parcel developed with a solar farm and the middle parcel is developed with an existing single-story industrial building. The project site’s location is depicted on the United States Geological Survey (USGS)

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 186
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 29
Newark, California topographic quadrangle map. The site mostly flat but is surrounded by a small berm.

The average elevation of the site is approximately 15 feet above sea level.

The proposed project would develop a six-building research and development manufacturing/office campus totaling approximately 450,420 square feet of building area, including five new multi-story buildings and the renovation of the existing one-story-high bay building. The proposed project would provide landscaping throughout the project site with amenity areas located between the buildings. The buildings would be designed for flexibility to include manufacturing and loading needs, including loading and service areas located at the rear of the buildings towards the interior of the site, screened for the public. Typical hours would be 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The project also includes parking fields containing a total of 1,379 parking spaces, plus hardscape and hardscape improvements.

Regulatory Setting:

Federal Endangered
Species Act.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has jurisdiction over federally listed threatened and endangered plant and animal species. The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) protects listed species from harm or “take,” which is broadly defined as to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Any such activity can be defined as a “take” even if it is unintentional or accidental. Listed plant species are typically provided less protection than listed animals.

An endangered species
is one that is considered in danger of becoming extinct throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is one that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. Federal agencies involved in permitting projects that may result in take of federally listed species (e.g., United States Army Corps of Engineers [USACE]) are required under Section 7 of the FESA to consult with the USFWS prior to issuing such permits. Any activity that could result in the take of a federally listed species and is not authorized as part of a Section 7 consultation requires an FESA Section 10 take permit from the USFWS.

Clean Water Act Section 404 (33 United States Code Sections 1251 to 1376).

The USACE is responsible under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) to regulate the discharge of fill material into waters of the U.S. (WOTUS). The CWA provides the primary means for the protection of “waters of the United States,” including wetlands. Under Section 404 of the CWA, the USACE, under the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material into WOTUS, including wetlands.

The CWA addresses “navigable waters,” defined in the statute as WOTUS. The USACE has further refined the definition through various Clean Water Rules, including wetlands as a subset of WOTUS.

Wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas (33 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 328.3[b]; 40 CFR 230.3[t]). Wetlands contain three distinct parameters: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology.

WOTUS generally not considered to be USACE-jurisdictional include nontidal drainage and irrigation ditches excavated on dry land, artificially irrigated areas, artificial lakes or ponds excavated on dry land used for irrigation or stock watering, small artificial water bodies such as swimming pools, and water-filled depressions (51 Federal Register 41, 217 1986). In addition, a Supreme Court ruling (South Waste Agency of North Cook County [SWANCC] vs. USACE, January 9, 2001) determined that the USACE exceeded its statutory authority by asserting CWA jurisdiction over “an abandoned sand and gravel pit in northern Illinois, which provides habitat for migratory birds.” Based solely on the use of such waters by migratory birds, the Supreme Court’s holding was strictly limited to waters that are “non-navigable, isolated, and intrastate.”
The Supreme Court further addressed the extent of the USACE’s jurisdiction in the consolidated cases Rapanos v. United States (No. 04-1034) and Carabell v. United States (No. 04-1384 [USACE and

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 187
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 30
USEPA 2007]), referred to as “Rapanos.” In Rapanos, a sharply divided Court issued multiple opinions, none of which garnered the support of a majority of the Justices. This created substantial uncertainty as to which jurisdictional test should be used in routine jurisdictional determinations.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, which encompasses California, answered this in Northern California River Watch v. City of Healdsburg (August 11, 2006). In this case, the Court held that Justice Kennedy’s opinion in Rapanos provided the controlling rule of law. Under that rule, wetlands or other waters that are not navigable are subject to USACE jurisdiction if they have “a significant nexus to waters that are navigable in fact.” As Justice Kennedy explained, whether a “significant nexus” exists in any given situation will need to be decided on a case-by-case basis, depending on site-specific circumstances. The USEPA and USACE subsequently developed an instructional guidebook on how to apply these rulings for all future jurisdictional determinations (USACE and USEPA 2007), as well as a memorandum providing guidance to implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Rapanos (Grumbles and Woodley 2007).

On January 18, 2023, the USACE published in the Federal Register the final Revised Definition of “Waters of the United States (88 Federal Register 2004). On March 25, 2023, the United States Supreme Court modified the January 2023 definition of WOTUS in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (No. 21-454), herein referred to as “Sackett.” Specifically, the Court considered the “significant nexus” standard established under Rapanos to be inconsistent with the CWA while upholding the plurality standard that the USACE jurisdiction is limited to WOTUS that are “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water” that can be described in ordinary parlance as “streams, oceans, rivers, and lakes.” The Supreme Court further affirmed that wetlands can be considered WOTUS when a continuous surface connection to bodies that are WOTUS are present and that no clear boundary exists between WOTUS and wetlands. Sackett further revised the CWA by removing interstate wetlands from consideration as WOTUS.

On September 8, 2023, the USACE published a final rule conforming the January 2023 rule with the Sackett decision, removing the “significant nexus” standard. The amended rule is operative in California. Features currently included in the definition of WOTUS per 33 CFR 328.3(b) include:
(1) Waters which are:
(i) Currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
(ii) The territorial seas; or
(iii) Interstate waters;
(2) Impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition, other than impoundments of waters identified under paragraph (a)(5) of this section
(3) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water (4) Wetlands adjacent to the following waters
(i) Waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, or (ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section and with a continuous surface connection to those waters
(5) Intrastate lakes and ponds, streams, or wetlands not identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section that are relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water with a continuous surface connection to the waters identified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(3) of this section

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 188
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 31
Features currently excluded from identification as WOTUS per 33 CFR 328.3(b) include:
• Intrastate streams and wetlands.
• Waste treatment systems, including treatment ponds or lagoons, designed to meet the requirements of
the CWA.
• Prior converted cropland designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. The exclusion would cease upon a change
of use, which means that the area is no longer available for the production of agricultural commodities. Notwithstanding the determination of an area’s status as prior converted cropland by any other federal agency, for the purposes of the CWA, the final authority regarding CWA jurisdiction remains with the USEPA. • Ditches (including roadside ditches) excavated wholly in and draining only dry land and that do not carry a relatively
permanent flow of water.
• Artificially irrigated areas that would revert to dry land if the irrigation ceased. • Artificial lakes or ponds created by excavating or diking dry land to collect and retain water and used exclusively
for such purposes as stock watering, irrigation, settling basins, or rice growing. • Artificial reflecting or swimming pools or other small ornamental bodies of water created by excavating or
diking dry land to retain water for primarily aesthetic reasons. • Water-filled depressions created in dry land incidental to construction activity and pits excavated in dry land for the purpose of obtaining fill, sand, or gravel, unless and until the construction or excavation operation is abandoned and the resulting body of water meets the definition of WOTUS.

Swales and erosional features (e.g., gullies, small washes) characterized by low-volume, Infrequent, or short-duration flow.

In general, a USACE permit must be obtained before placing fill or grading in jurisdictional wetlands or other WOTUS. The USACE will be required to consult with the USFWS and/or National Marine Fisheries Services under Section 7 of the FESA if the action subject to CWA permitting could result in take of federally listed species.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

The federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) prohibits the taking, hunting, killing, selling, purchasing, etc. of migratory birds, parts of migratory birds, and their eggs and nests. As used in the MBTA, the term “take” is defined as “to pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, kill, or attempt to pursue, hunt, shoot, capture, collect, or kill, unless the context otherwise requires.” This act covers all bird species native to the United States.

California Endangered Species Act.

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has jurisdiction over State-listed endangered, threatened, and rare plant and animal species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA).

In addition, species designated as “candidates” for listing under CESA are protected by its provisions.

CDFW also maintains a list of Species of Special Concern, defined as species that appear to be vulnerable to extinction because of declining populations, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats.

Species of Special Concern are not afforded legal protection under CESA.

Fish and Game Code Section 86 defines “take” as to “Hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.”
California Fish and Game Code.

CDFW is also responsible for enforcing the California Fish and Game Code, which contains several provisions potentially relevant to construction projects. For example, Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code governs CDFW’s issuance of Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements. Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements are required whenever proposed project activities would substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake designated as such by CDFW.

The California Fish and Game Code also designates some animal species as fully protected, which may not be taken or possessed without a permit from the California Fish and Game Commission and/or CDFW. These take permits do not allow “incidental take” (except in limited circumstances) and are more restrictive than the take allowed under Section 2081 of the CESA. Fully protected species are listed in Sections 3511 (birds), 4700 (mammals), 5050 (reptiles and amphibians), and 5515 (fish) of the California Fish and Game Code.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 189
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 32
Section 3503 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibits the take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird. Subsection 3503.5 specifically prohibits the take, possession, or destruction of any birds in the order of Falconiformes (hawks and eagles) or Strigiformes (owls) and their nests. These provisions, along with the federal MBTA, essentially serve To protect nesting native birds. Nonnative species are not afforded any protection under the MBTA or California Fish and Game Code (except that hunting regulations apply to some nonnative species listed as gamebirds).

California Environmental Quality Act.

CEQA applies to “projects” proposed to be undertaken or requiring approval by State or local government agencies. Projects are defined as having the potential to have physical impact on the environment.

Special-Status Species
For the purposes of CEQA and this assessment, special-status species are defined as follows:
• Species that are listed, formally proposed, or designated as candidates for listing as threatened or endangered under the FESA;
• Species that are listed, or designated as candidates for listing, as rare, threatened, or endangered under the CESA;
• Wildlife
species designated as Species of Special Concern or Fully Protected by the CDFW; • Species that meet the definition of rare, threatened, or endangered under Section 15380 of the CEQA guidelines; or
• Species
that are considered a taxa of special concern by local agencies.

Riparian Habitat and Other Sensitive Natural Communities.

The California Wildlife Conservation Board defines riparian areas as “transitional zones between terrestrial and aquatic systems that exhibit characteristics of both systems. They are typically vegetated with lush growths of grasses, forbs, shrubs, and trees that are tolerant of periodic flooding and have sediments that are rich in nutrients and organic matter.” CDFW tracks the occurrences of natural plant communities that are of limited distribution statewide, or within a county or region where they are often vulnerable to the effects of development projects. In the most recent list of vegetation alliances/natural communities recognized in California, alliances with a NatureServe State ranking code of S1 through S3 are “highly imperiled” and impacts to “high-quality occurrences” of these communities may be considered significant under CEQA. Whether a natural plant community is imperiled or not can be determined by checking CDFW’s List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (CDFW 2010). Some imperiled vegetation associations can be difficult to distinguish from common plant communities without a quantitative vegetation description. For example, patches of native grassland comprising at least 15 percent relative cover in a grassland area are considered a sensitive natural community by CDFW.

City of Fremont Municipal Code
The City of Fremont’s municipal code has many performance standards for development. Measures addressing biological resources that may be relevant to this proposed project are in section

18.218.050 b) and include:
• (1) Burrowing Owl
• (2) Nesting Birds
• (3) Roosting Bats
• (4) California Tiger Salamander

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 190
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 33

1.4.2 Discussion
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 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The LSA
Biological Resources Assessment characterized the existing biological conditions through records searches and a field survey, including the potential for sensitive or special-status species and habitats that could be impacted by the proposed project.

The site is
largely developed with buildings and associated parking lots. There is maintained ornamental landscaping around the buildings and along roadsides. There is a grassy field on the southern side of the site that showed evidence of being used as a homeless encampment in places but was unoccupied at the time. A portion of the field was surrounded by chain link fencing and had construction equipment and materials.

The LSA Biological
Resources Assessment concludes that due to its disturbed condition, dense cover of invasive species, and the lack of suitable soil substrates (e.g., salt marsh, open water, vernal pools, chaparral, saline or alkaline substrates), the project site does not provide suitable habitat for any special- status plant species. No special-status wildlife species or their sign were detected. Based upon analysis of the record of occurrences, conditions observed during the surveys, and an analysis of habitat requirements for individual species, only two special-status wildlife species were determined to have some potential to occur: burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) and white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus).

Standard development requirements related to burrowing owl FMC 18.218.050(b)(1) and nesting birds

18.218.050(b)(2) would therefore apply.

FMC 18.218.050(b)(1)
Burrowing Owl. New development projects with the potential to impact burrowing owl habitat through grading, demolition, and/or new construction shall implement the following measures prior to grading or ground disturbing activities:
(A) Preconstruction Surveys. Preconstruction surveys for burrowing owls shall be conducted prior to the initiation of all project activities within potential burrowing owl nesting and roosting habitat (i.e., agricultural habitat with burrows of California ground squirrels) to determine if suitable burrowing owl habitat is present. Surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in conformance with the most recent requirements and guidelines of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The biologist shall determine the number and time frame (prior to construction) of surveys to be conducted.
(B) Implement Buffer Zones. Areas currently occupied by burrowing owls shall be avoided for the duration of residing on site and/or the nesting period (February 1st through August 31st). The biologist will recommend a suitable buffer zone distance for avoidance of nesting or roosting habitat. (C) Passive Relocation. If burrowing owls cannot be avoided by the proposed project, then additional measures, such as passive relocation during the nonbreeding season, may be utilized to reduce any potential impacts. Measures for successful relocation shall be recommended by a qualified biologist in conformance with CDFW requirements and guidelines. (D) Initiation of Construction Activities. When a qualified biologist is able to determine that burrowing owls are no longer occupying the site and passive relocation is deemed successful, construction activities may continue. The applicant shall submit the determination of the biologist to the planning manager for authorization to continue.

FMC 18.218.050(b)(2)
Nesting Birds . New development projects with the potential to impact nesting birds through tree or shrub removal shall implement the following measures prior to removal of any trees/shrubs, grading, or ground disturbing activities:

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 191
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 34
(A) Avoidance. Proposed projects shall avoid construction activities during the bird nesting season (February 1st through August 31st).
(B) Preconstruction Surveys. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey to identify any potential nesting activity. The biologist shall determine the number and time frame (prior to construction) of surveys to be conducted.
(C) Protective Buffer Zone(s). If the survey indicates the presence of nesting birds, protective buffer zones shall be established around the nests. The size of the buffer zone shall be recommended by the biologist in consultation with the CDFW depending on the species of nesting bird and level of potential disturbance.
(D) Initiation of Construction Activities. The buffer zones shall remain in place until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. A qualified biologist shall monitor the nests closely until it is determined the nests are no longer active, at which time construction activities may commence within the buffer area.

The LSA
Biological Resources Assessment determined that special-status bats and California tiger salamander do not have the potential to occur on site and therefore related SDRs under FMC

18.218.050(b) would not be applicable to the project.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding special-status species. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Have
a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The project site is located within a built-up urban area. There are no nearby identified riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, polices, or regulations. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have also not identified any riparian or other sensitive habitat in the vicinity of the proposed project. The proposed project would drain into existing flood control channels, after treating stormwater runoff onsite, which are not natural watercourses which eventually flow to the San Francisco Bay. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on riparian or other sensitive community and no mitigation would be required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding riparian or other sensitive natural community. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR
Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
c) Have
a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
A total of 0.987 acre of an isolated seasonal wetland was mapped in the review area as shown in the LSA Aquatic Resources Delineation study. The depression may have ponded water ephemerally, following heavy rainstorms in the winter. Even in normal or heavy rainfall years, the ponding would not be permanent or even relatively permanent. The presence of debris from an encampment within the wetland area also indicates it does not flood for any significant amount of time.

This depression is isolated from possibly being tributary to or otherwise connecting to any larger

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 192
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 35
water bodies or traditional navigable waters by the berm that surrounds the entire study area.

The wetland does not meet the definition of a WOTUS that would be regulated or protected under the CWA for the following reasons:
(1) (i) The wetland has not been used nor is it susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, nor is it subject to the ebb and flow of the tide; (ii) It is not a territorial seas;
(iii) it is wholly within California and not an interstate water; (2) The
wetland is not an impoundments of waters otherwise defined as WOTUS; (3) The
wetland is not tributary to any of waters described in (1) or (2) above that are relatively permanent, standing or
continuously flowing bodies of water
(4) The wetland is separated by a berm and distance and therefore not adjacent to or have a continuous surface connection with the following waters:
(i) Waters identified in paragraph (1) above, or
(ii) Relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water identified in paragraph (2) or (3) above.
(5) The wetland is not relatively permanent and it does not have a continuous surface connection to the waters identified in paragraph (1) or (3) above.

Due to the isolated nature of the depression on the site and the absence of any overland connection to traditional navigable waters or other waters of the U.S., this isolated depression is a not a jurisdictional wetland and therefore not federally protected. The project would not have a significant impact on state or federally protected wetlands.

There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding state or federally protected wetlands. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
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?
The proposed project site is located on an existing developed office site. The project site is within an urban area and there are no native fish or wildlife species in the immediate vicinity No special-status plant or animal species were detected on the site during the April 2, 2024 field inspection. No bat roosts, bird rookeries, or other wildlife nurseries are present on the site. Only two special-status wildlife species, burrowing owl and white-tailed kite, have any potential to occur on the site.

The proposed project
would not directly impact the lagoons or marsh habitat associated with the adjacent East Bay Regional Park District lands. Waterfowl, shorebirds, and other birds that migrate through, forage and/or nest in the park are likely habituated to disturbance caused by park users and the existing commercial activities on the site and would tolerate some level of nearby construction-related disturbance. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact and no mitigation is required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding the movement of fish or wildlife species or migratory wildlife corridors, or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 193
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 36
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
As discussed under items a) through d) above, the project would comply with applicable regulations and standard development requirements of the City Municipal Code.

Chapter 18.215 Tree Preservation of the City of Fremont’s Municipal Code requires a tree removal permit for removing, damaging, or relocating the following trees on private property:

1. A tree having a diameter at breast height (DBH) of 6 inches or more and located on a vacant or underdeveloped lot;

2. A tree having a DBH of 6 inches or more and located on a developed lot, which is the subject of a contemplated or pending application for a development project;

3. A native tree or tree of exceptional adaptability to the Fremont area having a DBH of 10 inches or more;

4. A tree having a DBH of 18 inches or more;

5. A tree that was required by the City to be planted or retained as mitigation for the removal of a tree;

6. A tree planted or retained as a condition of any City ‐conferred development project approval, including approvals conferred prior to adoption of this chapter; or

7. One of six or more trees of the same species that are located on the same lot and that each have 6 or more inches in DBH.

The site currently contains 372 trees of various species and size. 353 of these trees would be removed. A total of 523 new trees would be planted within the site’s perimeter landscape easement, within the project’s parking fields, and in open space amenity areas proposed adjacent to each project building.

Tree removal would be done in accordance with the City of Fremont Tree Preservation Ordinance (FMC

18.215). Removed trees would be replaced on site with new trees. Any trees removed and not replaced would be subject to tree mitigation fees to add to the urban canopy elsewhere in the City. The project would include the planting of 523 new trees, which is anticipated to satisfy tree removal permit requirements. There are no other local policies or ordinances related to biological resources that could be applicable to the project site. The project would have a less than significant impact related to local biological resources policies or ordinances.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
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?
The project site is not located within the limits of a conservation plan and therefore would not conflict with any adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. Therefore the project has no potential impact resulting from a conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan and no mitigation is required.

Potential Impact: No Impact
Mitigation: None required
References

1. City of Fremont, 2023. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning. Available online at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fremont/.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 194
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 37

2. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Community Character Element. Adopted December 2011. Available: https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning- building-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan

3. Vegetation Classification Reports and Maps, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Accessed November 20, 2023. https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Reports-and-Maps

4. LSA Biological Resources Assessment prepared May 2024.

5. LSA Aquatic Resources Delineation prepared July 2024.

6. Project Plans. Prepared for the City of Fremont.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 195
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 38

1.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
SU, even with
MM
Cutural-1
 ☐ - LTS
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
LTS with MM
Cultural-2
 ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(d)(2)
Accidental Discovery
of Cultural Resources,

SDR FMC

18.218.050(d)(3):

Archaeological
Monitoring
LTS with
SDR
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
LTS with MM
Cultura-4
 SDR FMC

18.218.050(d)(2):

Accidental Discovery
of Cultural Resources
LTS with
SDR

1.5.1 Environmental Setting
The project site would develop five new light industrial buildings totaling 407,250 square feet and renovation of an existing 43,172-square-foot light industrial building on the 24.2-acre site bounded by Paseo Padre Parkway, Ardenwood Boulevard, and Commerce Drive in the Ardenwood Forest—New Town Planned District (P-81-15) and North Fremont Community Plan Area. Two existing light industrial buildings along the Ardenwood Boulevard frontage (34175 and 34325 Ardenwood Boulevard) would remain unmodified by the project.

A Cultural
Resources Study conducted by LSA consisted of background research (consisting of a records search at the Northwest Information Center [NWIC], a review of historical maps and aerial photographs, and a review of published geological information), a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) at the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and an archaeological field survey. The following environmental Setting was informed by this study.

The project is along the southeast edge of San Francisco Bay (Bay), a region characterized by estuaries, coastal marsh lands, coastal prairie, and willow groves (Byrd and Allen 2010). During the historic period, multiple creeks passed through or near the project area before draining into marshes and then the Bay. One of these, Ardenwood Creek, bisected the project area and was bordered by willow groves.

Bay Area environments
historically contained varied animal resources such as fish, shellfish, large mammals, and a range of plant resources. Native large mammals like Tule elk (Cervus elaphus nannodes), pronghorn (Antilocapra americana), and grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) were hunted out by the 1900s. Most of the bay marsh lands were destroyed by landfill projects and construction.

The project
area currently sits 10 feet above sea level on the valley floor, about 0.4 mile southeast of Alameda Creek/Coyote Hills Slough and 0.1 mile east of an unnamed stream. Holocene-age alluvial gravel, sand, and clay (Qa) comprise the surficial valley sediments in the area. Geotechnical exploration of the project area (consisting of five cone penetration tests that sampled the northern and southern portions) indicates these alluvial deposits

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 196
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 39
are very thick, extending at least 45 to 50 feet below the surface (Ohlsen 2023). The soil consists of Omni silty clay loam, which forms on floodplains and typically features silty clay loam (0─6 inches below ground surface [bgs]) overlying clay (6─52 inches bgs) and stratified clay loam to silty clay (52 to at least 60 inches bgs) (NRCS 2024). The typical profile for the Omni series includes buried A horizons (paleosols) from approximately 2 to 3.5 feet below surface (A11bg and A12bg) and from approximately 4 feet below surface to the base of the profile (IIIA1bg and IIIACb3g).

Two archaeological
resources were previously documented within the project area, south of the existing industrial building. Resource P-01-000171 (CA-ALA-449H) was originally recorded as light artifact scatters and a possible cistern near introduced trees that possibly related to a ca. 1850s–1860s farmhouse on land owned by A. Ross (Anastasio and Guedon 1984a). The house and associated structures had been destroyed by the time the site was recorded in 1984 following grading for the existing industrial park. Resource P-01-000170 (CA-ALA- 000448H) was recorded as a light artifact scatter possibly relating to a ca. 1850s–1860s farmhouse on land owned by W. Imlay (Anastasio and Guedon 1984b). By the time the site was recorded in 1984 following grading for the existing industrial park and Paseo Padre Parkway, the house had been moved to Ardenwood Regional Preserve and any other structures had been destroyed. At the time of recording, both sites were considered to be not significant, presumably due to their heavily impacted condition.

Historical maps and aerial
photographs from the 1940s and later show two centrally located structures (adjacent to the current industrial building location) that may correspond to the ca.1850s–1860s farmhouses. By 1948, these structures were separated by a road (the old Patterson Ranch Road) that bisected the project area from southwest to northeast. Other historical maps show a single structure in the southeast portion of the project area from at least 1899 to 1915. By the mid-1940s and continuing through the early 1980s, the project area contained predominantly agricultural land bisected by rural roads that surrounded a central area of trees and residential or farm structures. Archaeological site records indicate the two ca. 1850s–1860s farmhouses were relocated or destroyed by 1984. The current configuration of industrial buildings and roads within and around the project area was established by 1987.

During the
archaeological survey, LSA discovered several historic-period artifacts scattered across the west half of the open field in the southern end of the project area. Manufacture dates for the artifacts overlap the time frame (ca. 1850s to 1860s) identified for the two farmhouse sites previously recorded just to the north in the center of the project area. Although the artifacts were found outside the recorded site locations, this temporal relationship suggests the artifacts were originally associated with those sites and were subsequently re-deposited through years of plowing the field. The artifacts were recorded in an update for archaeological site P-01-000171 (CA-ALA- 449H), the recorded site closest to the isolates.

LSA also
noted sparse shell fragments at different locations within the project area, all within disturbed landscaped or plowed contexts. No pre-contact archaeological evidence was observed near the shell, or anywhere else in the project area.

1.5.2 Discussion
a) Cause
a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
The current configuration of industrial buildings and roads within and around the project area was established around 1987. The project does not propose demolition of existing buildings and none of the existing buildings in the project area are historic age (50 years or more). Therefore the project would not have a significant impact with respect to historical resources. (Historic-period archaeological resources are addressed below.)
There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding historical resources. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 197
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 40
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Based on the previous recording of the two historic-period farmhouse sites and the discovery of associated re-deposited artifacts during LSA’s survey, the project area has sensitivity for historic-period archaeological resources. Although the surface evidence of the recorded sites appears to have been removed during construction of the existing industrial park, it is possible that buried in situ features (such as wells or privies) and deposits remain within the project area. The project area also has potential for pre-contact archaeological resources given the extensive underlying Holocene-age alluvium, proximity to historical Ardenwood Creek and willow groves, and the presence of recorded pre-contact archaeological sites nearby in the same environmental context.

The overall
archaeological sensitivity of project area is lessened by past land uses that included historic- period reclamation efforts (likely consisting of grading and/or filling of Ardenwood Creek and the adjacent floodplain) for agricultural purposes, years of plowing, and grading for and construction of the existing industrial park and adjacent roadways. The depth of these landscape modifications in the project area is not known. Beneath the zone of disturbance, however, there may remain intact buried archaeological resources.

FMC Section 18.218.050(d)(2): Accidental
Discovery of Cultural Resources (which supersedes General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure Cultural-2) details requirements to address the potential for accidental discovery of cultural resources during ground disturbing excavation. Because the site-specific LSA Cultural Resources Study determined the sensitivity of the site warranted monitoring, FMC

18.218.050(d)(3)
Archaeological Monitoring would
additionally require archaeologist monitoring of all site-disturbing construction activities. These SDRs would minimize the potential impacts related to accidental discovery of archaeological resources and additional project-specific mitigation is not required.

FMC 18.218.050(d)(2)
Accidental Discovery
of Cultural Resources. The following requirements shall be met to address the potential for accidental discovery of cultural resources during ground disturbing excavation:
(A) The project proponent shall include a note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation that there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources. (B) The project proponent shall retain a professional archaeologist to provide a preconstruction briefing to supervisory personnel of any excavation contractor to alert them to the possibility of exposing buried cultural resources, including significant prehistoric archaeological resources. The briefing shall discuss any cultural resources, including archaeological objects, that could be exposed, the need to stop excavation at the discovery, and the procedures to follow regarding discovery protection and notification of the project proponent and archaeological team. (C) In
the event that any human remains or historical, archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during ground disturbing excavation, the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.5(e) and (f), and of subsection (c)(2)(D) of this section, requiring cessation of work, notification, and immediate evaluation shall be followed.
(D) If resources
are discovered during ground disturbing activities that may be classified as historical, unique archaeological, or tribal cultural resources, ground disturbing activities shall cease immediately, and the planning manager shall be notified. The resources will be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and, in the planning manager’s discretion, a tribal cultural monitor. If the resources are determined to be historical, unique archaeological, or tribal cultural resources, then a plan for avoiding the resources shall be prepared. If avoidance is infeasible, then all significant cultural materials recovered shall be, as necessary and at the discretion of the consulting archaeologist, subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and documentation according to current professional standards. Any plan for avoidance or mitigation shall be subject to the approval of the planning manager.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 198
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 41
(E) As used herein, “historical resource” means a historical resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a); “unique archaeological resource” means unique archaeological resource as defined by Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21083.2(g); and “tribal cultural resource” means tribal cultural resource as defined by Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21074. Collectively, these terms describe “significant cultural materials.”
FMC 18.218.050(d)(3)
Archaeological Monitoring .

New development projects with the potential to impact subsurface archaeological or cultural resources through grading, demolition, and/or new construction, if so determined by a site-specific study prepared by an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualifications standards for archaeology, shall implement the following measures prior to any grubbing, grading, or ground disturbing activities:

An archaeologist
shall monitor construction-related ground disturbance within the vicinity of project site features identified as having the potential to include subsurface archaeological, cultural, or tribal cultural resources that could be impacted through ground-disturbing activities related to the construction of the project. Monitoring should continue until the archaeologist determines that there is a low potential for encountering subsurface archaeological, cultural, or tribal cultural resources. An archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualifications standards for archaeology shall oversee the monitoring. Any compensation for time and expenses related to this activity shall be borne by the project proponent.

The project
would be required to abide by these standard development requirements to protect any potential cultural resources within the project site inadvertently discovered during the course of development. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on historic resources and no mitigation is required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding archaeological resources. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
c) Disturb
any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? While there are no known human remains at the project site, any ground disturbance includes the potential for accidental discovery. As discussed under item a) above, FMC Section 18.218.050(d)(2):

Accidental Discovery of Cultural Resources (which supersedes General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure Cultural-4) details requirements to address the potential for accidental discovery, including for human remains.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding human remains. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required.

References

1. City of Fremont, 2023. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning. Available online at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fremont/.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 199
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 42

2. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Community Character Element. Adopted December 2011. Available: https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning- building-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan

3. Cultural Resource Study LSA August 2024.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 200
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 43

1.6 ENERGY
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
N/A  ☐ - LTS
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
N/A  ☐ - LTS
The General Plan Update EIR did not include an Energy analysis.

1.6.1 Environmental Setting
The project site is within the service territory of Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), total electricity consumption in the PG&E service area in 2022 was 77,887 gigawatt-hours (GWh) or 77,886,999,998 kilowatt-hours (kWh). Of this total, Alameda County consumed 10,395 GWh or 10,395,384,395 kWh.

PG&E is the natural gas service provider for the proposed project site. According to the CEC, total natural gas consumption in the PG&E service area in 2022 was 4,422 million therms (4,422,630,060 therms). Of this total, Alameda County consumed 377 million therms or 377,309,788 therms.

The average fuel economy for light‐duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and SUVs) in the United States has steadily increased from about 14.9 miles per gallon (mpg) in 1980 to 22.9 mpg in 2021.

The average fuel economy for heavy-duty trucks in the United States has also steadily increased, from 5.7 mpg in 2013 to a projected 8.0 mpg in 2021. Based on fuel consumption obtained from the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) California Emissions Factor Model, Version 2021 (EMFAC2021), approximately 540.5 million gallons of gasoline and approximately 156.2 million gallons of diesel will be consumed from vehicle trips in Alameda County in 2024.

Regulatory Framework:

Federal and State agencies regulate energy use and consumption through various means and programs.

On the federal level, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) are three federal agencies with substantial influence over energy policies and programs. Generally, federal agencies influence and regulate transportation energy consumption through establishment and enforcement of fuel economy standards for automobiles and light trucks, through funding of energy-related research and development projects, and through funding for transportation infrastructure improvements. On the State level, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the CEC are two agencies with authority over different aspects of energy.

The CPUC
regulates privately owned electric, natural gas, telecommunications, water, railroad, rail transit, and passenger transportation companies and serves the public interest by protecting consumers and ensuring the provision of safe, reliable utility service and infrastructure at reasonable rates, with a commitment to environmental enhancement and a healthy California economy.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 201
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 44
The CEC is the State's primary energy policy and planning agency. The CEC forecasts future energy needs, promotes energy efficiency, supports energy research, develops renewable energy resources, and plans for/directs state response to energy emergencies. The applicable federal, State, regional, and local regulatory framework is discussed in the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas memo prepared for the City of Fremont by LSA Associates.

1.6.2 Discussion
a) Result
in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
The proposed project would be subject to the Green Building Code (Title 24) and as such, would be required to meet minimum energy efficiency standards, thereby reducing overall energy use during the life of the project. City Standard Development Requirements to Address Resource Protection (Chapter

18.218 of the Fremont Municipal Code) include a provision to limit idling of construction equipment during the construction phase. The Fremont Zoning Ordinance contains provisions to limit the intensity of outdoor lighting for this type of development, thereby helping to reduce energy consumption. The Fremont General Plan Conservation Element (Chapter 7 of the Fremont General Plan) contains policies to support energy efficiency through building/site design. These policies include measures such as public information on energy efficiency, support of PG&E energy efficiency programs, and regional cooperation on energy efficiency. The City’s Landscape Development Review Policies implement the State’s Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO) which requires the project to reduce landscape water consumption through design. Because of the required measures the project would have to take as part of the design and operation of the project, the proposed project would have a less than significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. Therefore, no mitigation would be required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Conflict
with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency In 2002, the Legislature passed SB 1389, which required the CEC to develop an integrated energy plan every 2 years for electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuels for the Integrated Energy Policy Report.

The plan calls for the State to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy costs. To further this policy, the plan identifies a number of strategies, including assistance to public agencies and fleet operators in implementing incentive programs for ZEVs and their infrastructure needs, and encouragement of urban designs that reduce VMT and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access.

The CEC’s
2023 Integrated Energy Policy Report provides the results of the CEC’s assessments of a variety of energy issues facing California. As indicated above, energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the overall use in Alameda County. In addition, energy usage associated with operation of the proposed project would be relatively small in comparison to the overall use in Alameda County, and the State’s available energy resources. Therefore, energy impacts at the regional level would be negligible. Because California’s energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the proposed project’s total impact on regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct California’s energy conservation plans as described in the CEC’s Integrated Energy Policy Report. Additionally, as demonstrated above, the proposed project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 202
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 45
There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding conflicts with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off- site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
References

1. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Conservation Element. Adopted December 2011.

Available: https://fremont.gov/generalplan.

2. City of Fremont, 2024. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 15, Buildings and Construction. Available online at www.fremont.gov/fmc.

3. LSA Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Memo February 7, 2024, prepared for the City of Fremont by LSA Associates.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 203
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 46

1.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 204
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 47
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? (Refer to
California Geological Survey Special
Publication 42.)?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? LTS  ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(e):

Geology and Soil
LTS with
SDR
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
LTS  ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(e):

Geology and Soil
LTS with
SDR
iv) Landslides? LTS  ☐ - LTS
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
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?
LTS  ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(e):

Geology and Soil
LTS with
SDR
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994, as updated),
creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
LTS  ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(e):

Geology and Soil
LTS with
SDR
e) 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?
LTS  ☐ - No Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
LTS with MM
Cultural-3
 ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(d)(2):

Accidental Discovery
of Cultural Resources
LTS with
SDR

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 205
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 48

1.7.1 Environmental Setting
The Hayward Fault is located approximately 23,00 feet to the southeast of the project site. The project site is located in an earthquake induced landslide zone. As with any land in the San Francisco Bay Area, the project site could be subject to strong shaking during a major seismic event along one of the faults located in Northern California.

1.7.2 Discussion
a) Directly
or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to California Geological Survey Special Publication 42.)
There are
no known earthquake faults traveling through the project site. The nearest known earthquake fault is located approximately 23,000 feet from the edge of the project site.

Therefore, the project potential substantial adverse effects from the rupture of a known earthquake fault would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

There is
nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding rupture of a known earthquake fault. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
ii) Strong
seismic ground shaking?
As with many sites in the San Francisco Bay Area, the project site has the potential for moderate to severe seismic ground shaking. The proposed building would be designed to withstand this level of seismic shaking and would be reviewed and inspected by the City’s Building Division for conformance with the applicable building codes.

A geotechnical
investigation is required for all development projects and would identify measures to address site-specific conditions, including seismic ground shaking, as detailed in standard development requirement FMC 18.218.050(e): Geology and Soil.

SDR FMC 18.218.050(e):

Geology and Soils. New development projects with the potential to expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death due to seismic activity and potential seismic‐related ground shaking including liquefaction, if so determined by a site ‐specific geotechnical study prepared to the satisfaction of the city engineer or his/her designee, shall implement the following measures prior to or during project construction, as applicable.
(A) The project geotechnical consultant shall review all geotechnical aspects of the project building and grading plans (i.e., site preparation and grading, site drainage improvements, and design parameters for foundations, and retaining walls). The consultant shall verify that their recommendations, including those regarding the need for further evaluation for potential liquefaction and the presence and lateral extent of any undocumented fill as well as laboratory testing for corrosive soil, have been properly conducted and any necessary design measures are incorporated into the construction plans. The results of the plan review shall be

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 206
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 49
summarized by the geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the city engineer prior to issuance of building permits for the project.
(B) The project geotechnical consultant shall inspect, test (as needed), and approve all geotechnical aspects of project construction. The inspections shall include, but not necessarily be limited to site preparation and grading, site surface and subsurface drainage improvements, and excavations for foundations and retaining walls prior to the placement of steel and concrete. The results of these inspections and the as‐built conditions of the project shall be summarized by the project geotechnical consultant in a letter and submitted to the city building official/city engineer for review prior to final (as‐built) project approval.

Therefore, the
potential for substantial adverse effects would be less than significant and, as such, no mitigation would be required.

There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding strong seismic ground shaking. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.
iii) Seismic-related
ground failure, including liquefaction?
The proposed project is located in an earthquake induced liquefaction zone according to the City of Fremont’s maps. The proposed project would be subject to the California Building Code and would be required to submit a geotechnical report through the building permit process. A geotechnical investigation is required for all development projects and would identify measures to address site-specific conditions, including seismic-related ground failure, as detailed in standard development requirement FMC 18.218.050(e): Geology and Soil included under item a)iii) above.

The City
peer reviews all geotechnical reports submitted and the City’s Engineering division reviews all grading plans. A building permit will not be issued until the project foundation conforms to the recommendations in the soils report. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact related to seismic-related ground failure.

There is
nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR iv) Landslides?
The project
site is not located in an area prone to landslides according to the City of Fremont’s maps. The site is nearly flat and not near any slopes or hillsides. Therefore, the potential for landslides is less than significant and no mitigation is required.

There is
nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding landslides. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Result
in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Construction of the project would involve grading of the site. Grading has the potential to cause erosion and loss of topsoil. An erosion control plan would be required with plans submitted for grading and/or building permits to ensure that the project would not result in substantial soil erosion during grading and construction activities. Because disturbance to the site would be greater than one acre, it would require

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 207
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 50
coverage under the Statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activities Stormwater Permit.

To obtain coverage under the General Permit, submission of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would be required, which outlines Best Management Practices (BMPs) required to reduce the potential construction impacts related to erosion and topsoil loss to less than significant. BMPs to minimize erosion and topsoil would include, but would not be limited to, physical barriers to prevent erosion and sedimentation, construction of sedimentation basins, limitations on work periods during storm events, use of infiltration swales, protection of stockpiled materials, and a variety of other measures that would substantially reduce or prevent erosion from occurring during construction. The C3 Technical Guidance Manual, provided through the Alameda Countywide Clean Water Program, of which the City of Fremont is a member (Clean Water Program, 2015) provides further details of specific BMPs, including measures for site design, source control, stormwater treatment, and hydromodification. With adherence to the state, county and local requirements described above, impacts to life or property associated with soil erosion would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
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?
The project is located in a liquefaction zone. The proposed project would be subject to the California Building Code and would be required to submit a geotechnical report through the building permit process.

A geotechnical investigation is required for all development projects and would identify measures to address site-specific conditions, including soil instability or landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse, as detailed in standard development requirement FMC 18.218.050(e): Geology and Soil included under item a)iii) above. The City peer reviews all geotechnical reports submitted and the City’s Engineering division reviews all grading plans. A building permit will not be issued until the project foundation conforms to the recommendations in the soils report. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact related to soil instability or landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding soil instability or landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on- site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
d) Be
located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? The proposed project would be subject to the California Building Code and would be required to submit a geotechnical report through the building permit process. A geotechnical investigation is required for all development projects and would identify measures to address site-specific conditions, including expansive soil, as detailed in standard development requirement FMC 18.218.050(e): Geology and Soil included under item a)iii) above. The City peer reviews all geotechnical reports submitted and the City’s Engineering division reviews all grading plans. A building permit will not be issued until the project foundation conforms to the recommendations in the soils report. Therefore, the project would have a less

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 208
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 51
than significant impact related to soil instability or landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.

There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding expansive soil creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
e) 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?
The project would be served by the local sanitary sewer system operated by Union Sanitary District. No on-site septic system would be required nor is one proposed for this project. Therefore, there would be no impact and no mitigation would be required. There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding soils capable of supporting septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

Potential Impact: No Impact
Mitigation: None required
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The project site is generally flat and already fully developed; there are no unique geologic features at the site. There are no known paleontological resources in the immediate vicinity. According to the LSA Cultural Resources Study, the project site is underlain by Holocene-age alluvial deposits, which are generally considered too young to contain significant fossils.5 There are no recorded vertebrate or invertebrate fossils that have been found within Holocene-age soils in Alameda County.

While there
are no known paleontological resources at the project site, any ground disturbance includes the potential for accidental discovery. As discussed under item a) in Section 1.5 Cultural Resources, FMC Section 18.218.050(d)(2): Accidental Discovery of Cultural Resources (which supersedes General Plan EIR Mitigation Measure Cultural-3) details requirements to address the potential for accidental discovery, including for paleontological resources. There would be no significant impact to paleontological resources or unique geologic features and no mitigation is required.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding paleontological resources or unique geologic features. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
References
5 Helley and Graymer, 1997, Quaternary Geology of Alameda County and Surrounding Areas, California.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 209
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 52

1. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Community Character Element. Adopted December 2011. Available: https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning- building-permit-services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan.

2. City of Fremont, 2024. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning. Available online at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fremont/

3. City of Fremont, 2024. SACGISA. Fremont Mapping. Available online at http://egis.fremont.gov/apps/public/.

4. Project Plans. Prepared for the City of Fremont.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 210
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 53

1.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
SU  ☐ - LTS
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for reducing
emissions of greenhouse gas?
LTS  ☐ - LTS

1.8.1 Environmental Setting
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are:
 Carbon dioxide (CO2);
 Methane (CH4);
 Nitrous oxide (N2O);
 Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs);
 Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and
 Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

GHG emissions associated with the project would occur over the short-term from construction activities, consisting primarily of emissions from equipment exhaust. There would also be long-term GHG emissions associated with project-related area sources, energy consumption, water conveyance and treatment, and waste generation.

Regulatory Framework:

Federal Regulations
While there currently are
no adopted federal regulations for the control or reduction of GHG emissions, the USEPA commenced several actions in 2009 to implement a regulatory approach to global climate change, including the 2009 USEPA final rule for mandatory reporting of GHGs from large GHG emission sources in the United States. Additionally, the USEPA Administrator signed an endangerment finding action in 2009 under the CAA, finding that seven GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, NF3, PFCs, and SF6) constitute a threat to public health and welfare, and that the combined emissions from motor vehicles cause and contribute to global climate change, leading to national GHG emission standards.

State Regulations
The CARB
is the lead agency for implementing climate change regulations in the State. Since its formation, the CARB has worked with the public, the business sector, and local governments to find solutions to California’s air pollution problems.

Regional Regulations
The BAAQMD is the regional government agency that regulates sources of air pollution within the nine Bay Area counties.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 211
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 54
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines. The BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines identify applicable GHG significance thresholds. The BAAQMD recommends these thresholds of significance for use in determining whether a proposed project will have a significant impact related to climate change. These thresholds evaluate a project based on its effect on California’s efforts to meet the State’s long-term climate goals. Applying this approach, the BAAQMD identifies and provides supporting documentation outlining the requirements that new land use development projects must comply with to achieve California’s long-term climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. Based on this research, the BAAQMD has determined that new land use development projects need to incorporate design elements to contribute the “fair share” towards implementation of the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. If a project is designed and built to incorporate the identified design elements, then it will contribute its portion of what is necessary to achieve California’s long-term climate goals—its “fair share”—and an agency reviewing the project under CEQA can conclude that the project will not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. According to BAAQMD thresholds, consistency with a local qualifying GHG reduction plan can instead be used to determine that a project would have a less than significant impact.

Local Regulations
The City
passed its first Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2012 with the goal of reducing municipal and community-wide GHG emissions 25 percent by 2020 from a 2005 baseline level. Some implementation successes include improving bike and pedestrian infrastructure, upgrading City streetlights with high- efficiency light emitting diode (LED) lighting, requiring all businesses to recycle, and establishing mandatory solar requirements for new residential construction.

In 2023,
the City adopted Climate Ready Fremont, an update to the City’s Climate Action Plan, to address major sources of GHG emissions to meet the goals of reducing GHG emissions by 55 percent below the 2005 baseline and becoming carbon neutral by 2045, meeting and exceeding SB 32 targets. Climate Ready Fremont includes eight focus areas, each of which includes has strategies, measures, and actions designed to reduce GHG emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change: Buildings and Energy (shortened to “BU”), Infrastructure and Equipment (IN), Land Use and Mobility (LU), Materials and Waste (MW), Natural and Urban Landscapes (NL), Adaptation and Resiliency (AR), Green and Circular Economy (GE), and Public Participation and Engagement (PE).

In addition, as discussed
in Climate Ready Fremont, new development projects that are consistent with the growth projections and applicable GHG reduction measures in Climate Ready Fremont are eligible for CEQA streamlining, per the provisions of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5. Under these provisions, a project that is subject to discretionary review and is consistent with the City’s General Plan growth projections can show consistency with applicable GHG reduction measures in Climate Ready Fremont, and the level of analysis for the project required under CEQA can be streamlined. Furthermore, a project’s incremental contribution to cumulative GHG emissions may be determined not to be cumulatively considerable in such cases.

1.8.2 Discussion
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
As discussed above, a project would have a less than significant impact related to GHG emissions if it would include the project design elements related to natural gas, energy, VMT, and electric vehicles required by the BAAQMD or if it would be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). As discussed above, the City’s CAP, Climate Ready Fremont, meets the requirements for a Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy and is designed to streamline environmental review of future development projects in the City, consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). Therefore, the proposed project is evaluated for consistency with applicable GHG reduction measures in Climate Ready Fremont as demonstrated in Table F of the LSA Air Quality, Energy, Greenhous Gas Emissions Memo dated February 7 th, 2024. Table F demonstrates the proposed project would be consistent with applicable strategies from the Climate Ready Fremont. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant effect on the environment.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 212
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 55
There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding GHG emissions. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Conflict
with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As discussed above, the proposed project is consistent with the City’s CAP, Climate Ready Fremont.

Absent any other local or regional Climate Action Plan, the proposed project was analyzed for consistency with the goals of the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO B-30-15, SB 32, and AB 197.

EO B-30-15 added the immediate target of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. CARB released a second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan, to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in EO B-30-15. SB 32 builds on AB 32 and keeps California on the path toward achieving the State’s 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 intended to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by CARB was posted in December 2016.

In addition, the 2022 Scoping Plan assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities.

The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on building clean energy production and distribution infrastructure for a carbon-neutral future, including transitioning existing energy production and transmission infrastructure to produce zero-carbon electricity and hydrogen, and utilizing biogas resulting from wildfire management or landfill and dairy operations, among other substitutes. The 2022 Scoping Plan states that in almost all sectors, electrification will play an important role. The 2022 Scoping Plan evaluates clean energy and technology options and the transition away from fossil fuels, including adding four times the solar and wind capacity by 2045 and about 1,700 times the amount of current hydrogen supply. As discussed in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO N-79-20 requires that all new passenger vehicles sold in California will be zero-emission by 2035, and all other fleets will have transitioned to zero-emission as fully possible by 2045, which will reduce the percentage of fossil fuel combustion vehicles.

Energy efficient measures are intended to maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings. The proposed project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the CCR, established by the CEC, regarding energy conservation and green building standards. In addition, as mentioned above, the proposed project would be all-electric, and no natural gas demand is anticipated during construction or operation of the proposed project. The elimination of natural gas in new development would help projects implement their “fair share” of achieving long-term 2045 carbon neutrality consistent State goals. As such, if a project does not utilize natural gas, a lead agency can conclude that it would be consistent with achieving the 2045 neutrality goal and will not have a cumulative considerable impact on climate change.23 Therefore, the proposed

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 213
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 56
project would comply with applicable energy measures.

Water conservation and efficiency measures are intended to continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water. Increasing the efficiency of water transport and reducing water use would reduce GHG emissions. As noted above, the project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 standards of the CCR, which includes a variety of different measures, including reduction of wastewater and water use. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with the California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the water conservation and efficiency measures.

The goal of transportation and motor vehicle measures is to develop regional GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles. Specific regional emission targets for transportation emissions would not directly apply to the proposed project. The second phase of Pavley standards will reduce GHG emissions from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025. Vehicles traveling to the project site would comply with the Pavley II (LEV III) Advanced Clean Cars Program. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the identified transportation and motor vehicle measures.

Therefore, the proposed project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve the overall GHG emissions reduction goals identified in EO B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, and AB 1279, and would be consistent with applicable plans and programs designed to reduce GHG emissions.

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

There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding GHG reduction plans. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: None.

Mitigation: None required.

References

1. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Adopted December 2011. Available:
https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning-building-permit- services/plans-maps-guidelines/general-plan.

2. City of Fremont, 2024. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning. Available online at https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Fremont/.

3. City of Fremont Climate Action Plan Update 2023. Available online at https://www.fremont.gov/about/sustainability/climate-action-plan-update.

4. LSA Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Memo February 7, 2024, prepared for the City of Fremont by LSA Associates.

5. Project Plans. Prepared for the City of Fremont.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 214
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 57

1.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and/or
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
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?
LTS  ☐ SDR FMC

18.218.050(c):

Construction
Management Plan
LTS with
SDR
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  ☐ - No Impact
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
LTS  ☐ - LTS
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires?
LTS  ☐ - LTS

1.9.1 Environmental Setting
The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group, in March of 2023 presented the environmental setting of the site as it relates to hazards and hazardous materials.

The site historically was used for agricultural purposes and also occupied by what appear to have been two residences and outbuildings (e.g. barns and sheds). The existing commercial building was

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 215
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 58
constructed in the mid-1980s and occupied by a series of manufacturing and research and development businesses.

1.9.2 Discussion
The analysis in this section is supported by a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Cornerstone Earth Group, in March of 2023.
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Project construction would involve the transport, use, and disposal of typical construction-related hazardous materials such as gasoline, diesel fuel, oils and lubricants, paints and solvents, and other substances. Use of such fluids would be required to conform to Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, US Department of Transportation, State of California, and local laws and ordinances related to their routine handling. The use of such chemicals would not be particular to the project or represent a significant risk of site contamination.

Operationally, the
proposed project would be anticipated to utilize amounts consistent with our zoning ordinance of hazardous materials. The City of Fremont has a hazardous material uses ordinance FMC

18.19.220 that regulates the use of hazardous materials. Uses also would be subject to all applicable building and fire codes. As such the use of such chemicals would not be particular to the project or represent a significant risk of site contamination.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
A Phase I ESA was prepared in 2023 for the project. The ESA was performed to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs) associated with the project site such as past, current, or material threats of the release of hazardous materials or petroleum hydrocarbons to the buildings, soil, and groundwater at the site. The past agricultural use is associated with RECs related to potential for residual pesticides in soils, particularly near barns and sheds where the chemicals were mixed; and the potential for contamination with lead-based paint in soils near where old structures were located.

The City’s
SDR FMC 18.218.050(c): Construction Management Plan requires projects to submit a construction management plan that outlines how the project would minimize potential construction impacts, including the potential for disturbance of hazardous materials.

SDR FMC

18.218.050(c):

Construction Management Plan. Prior to the issuance of the first construction-related permit for a new development project, the project applicant and his/her general contractor shall submit a construction management plan (CMP) for review and approval by the planning and building divisions and other relevant city departments, such as the fire department and the public works department, as directed.

The CMP shall contain measures to minimize potential construction impacts including measures to comply with all construction-related conditions of approval (and mitigation measures if applicable) such as dust control, construction emissions, hazardous materials, construction days/hours, construction traffic control, waste reduction and recycling, erosion and sedimentation control, storm water pollution prevention, noise control, complaint management, and cultural and tribal cultural

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 216
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 59
resource management as applicable. The CMP shall provide project-specific information including descriptive procedures, approval documentation, and drawings (such as a site logistics plan, fire safety plan, construction phasing plan, proposed truck routes, traffic control plan, complaint management plan, construction worker parking plan, and litter/debris clean-up plan) that specify how potential construction impacts will be minimized and how each construction-related requirement will be satisfied throughout construction of the project.

The following
Condition of Approval specifies how this SDR would be implemented with respect to the identified potential site contaminants:

Condition of Approval – Soil Testing and Removal or Remediation if Necessary: Prior to earth disturbance at the site, soils will be tested for the presence of pesticides and lead-based paint consistent with recommendations of the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and removed or remediated as determined appropriate.

The project
would implement SDR FMC 18.218.050(c): Construction Management Plan including addressing any contaminants found at the site and the project would have a less than significant impact related to exposure of sensitive receptors.

Prior agricultural
use is common in the area. There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding GHG release of hazardous materials. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
b) Emit
hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The nearest existing or proposed schools are located approximately 3,600 feet northeast (Forest Park Elementary) and 4000 feet southwest (Challenger School) of the site.

There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding hazardous materials near schools. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
c) Be
located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The Phase I ESA prepared for the project details that the project site is not a hazardous materials site as listed on the “Cortese List” pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts related to public or environmental hazards pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 217
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 60
would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
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?
There are
no airports in the vicinity of the project site, therefore the proposed project would not have the potential to result in an impact related to airport hazards.

Potential Impact: No impact
Mitigation: None required
e) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The proposed project would not alter or otherwise detrimentally impact any streets in the project vicinity.

The existing roadway widths of Fremont Boulevard and Mowry Avenue, which border the site to the east and west, respectively, would remain unchanged by implementation of the project. Emergency vehicle access easements (EVAEs) deemed adequate by the Fremont Fire Department would overlay drive aisles. As a result, the project would provide adequate emergency access to on-site improvements, maintain emergency access to off-site improvements in the vicinity of the proposed building, and not conflict with any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

There is nothing
peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding emergency response or evacuation plans. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
f) Expose
people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
The project site is located on nearly flat land within an urbanized area of the City that is not subject to wildfires or wildfire risks. See Section 1.20 Wildfire for additional information. As such, the project would not result in significant impacts related to exposure of people or structures to wildland fires.

There is nothing peculiar to the proposed project or its site that would result in a conclusion different than that found in the General Plan Update EIR regarding wildland fires. The proposed project would result in no new significant effects, on-site, off-site or cumulative, for this topic and there is no new information indicating a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the General Plan Update EIR.

Potential Impact: Less than significant
Mitigation: None required
References

1. City of Fremont, 2014. City of Fremont Standard Details for Improvements in Public Right of Way. Available online: https://fremont.gov/235/Standard-Details.

2. City of Fremont, 2007. Local Response Area (LRA) Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the City of Fremont (FMC 7-13102). City Ordinance 33-2007.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 218
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 61

3. City of Fremont, 2024. City of Fremont Municipal Code, Chapter 18, Planning and Zoning. Available online at www.fremont.gov/fmc.

4. City of Fremont, 2011. City of Fremont General Plan. Safety Element. Adopted December 2011. Available:
https://fremont.gov/generalplan.

5. City of Fremont, 2024. SACGISA. Fremont Mapping. Available online at https://www.fremont.gov/government/departments/gis.

6. Cornerstone Earth Group. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment . March 24, 2023. Provided for the City of Fremont.

7. Project Plans. Prepared for the City of Fremont.

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 219
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 62

1.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Relationship to GP EIR
Findings: Project Conclusions:

Would the Project:

GP EIR
Findings
Equal or
Less
Severe
New or
Substantial
Increase in
Severity
Applicable Mitigation,
Standard Requirements
Resulting
Level
of
Significance
a): Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface
or groundwater quality?
LTS  ☐ LTS
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
LTS  ☐ LTS
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:

LTS  ☐ LTS
i) Result in substantial on- or offsite
erosion or siltation;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite
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? LTS with MM
Hydo-1
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
LTS  ☐ - No Impact
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
LTS  ☐ - No Impact

1.10.1 Environmental Setting

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 220
Attachment: PLN2025-00163 Informational Item No. 2 - CEQA Environmental Consistency Checklist (5398 : Ardenwood at Paseo Appeal) City of Fremont 63
The project site is currently developed for commercial activity and is flat with impervious and pervious surfaces throughout. Stormwater currently drains controlled to existing stormwater drains on site that connects to the current stormwater drain systems. Storm water in Fremont ends up in inlets into a concrete flood control channel controlled by the Alameda County Flood Control district.

The project
area overlies the Niles Cone groundwater subbasin. Niles Cone has a series of relatively flat lying aquifers separated by extensive clay aquitards (Alameda County Water District, 2017). About sixteen wells are used to extract water from the groundwater basin. Together, these wells can produce up to 47.5 million gallons of water per day. This water is blended with San Francisco Regional Water System supplies before being delivered to customers (Alameda County Water District, 2023).

The project site is located within Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel No. 06001C0440G. According to this FIRM, the project site is located within an Unshaded Zone X, which is an area of minimal flood hazard higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent- annual-chance flood. The project site is not within a designated FEMA 100-year floodplain. The project is not located near any large, enclosed bodies of water.

Fremont City CouncilMay 6, 2025

Fremont City Council
May 6, 2025