22-1401 Exhibit F - EA-18-004 - Mitigated Negative Declaration — Fresno City Council, September 15, 2022

Exhibit "F"
Environmental Assessment No. EA-18-004,
Mitigated Negative Declaration dated May 18, 2018

CITY OF FRESNO

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Intent was filed
with:

RESNO COUNTY
CLERK
2221 Kern Street
Fresno, California 93721
on
M
ay 18, 2018
The full Initial Study and the Fresno
General Plan Master Environmental
Impact Report are on file in the
Planning and Development
Department,
Fresno City Hall, 3rd Floor
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, California 93721
(559) 621-8277

ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT NUMBER:

EA-18
-004
APPLICANT:

City of Fresno
Public Works Department
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, California 93721
PROJECT LOCATION:

West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm
Avenues
Assessor’s Parcel Books and Pages: 328- 07, 08, 09, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17, 23 & 329-02, 16, 22
S
ite Latitude: 36° 41' 31.9" N
Site Longitude: 119° 49' 04.2" W
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The City of Fresno Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division has submitted Official Plan Lines (OPL) for West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenue for purposes of establishing the ultimate alignment and widths for future public street rights -of-way in accordance with the circulation element of the Fresno General Plan. The designated major street segment is approximately three miles located within the City of Fresno and County of Fresno. The project area is located within Growth Area 1 as depicted in Figure IM -2 (Sequencing of Development) of the Fresno General Plan and is along the Sphere of Influence (SOI) limits . The proposed project will require future acquisition and dedications for public street rights -of-way as well as the installation and construction of both public and private facilities and infrastructure in accordance with the standards, specifications and policies of the City of Fresno. In some segments, along West North Avenue, right-of-way vacations will be required. Timelines for future construction of the public street segment will be contingent upon development; occurring incrementally, as growth is proposed in the area in accordance with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Fresno General Plan.

The City of Fresno has conducted an initial study and proposes to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above- described project. The environmental analysis contained in the Initial Study and this Mitigated Negative Declaration is tiered from the Master Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2012111015) prepared for the Fresno General Plan (“MEIR”). A copy of the MEIR may be reviewed in the City of Fresno Planning and Development ( f.k.a., Development and Resource Management) Department as noted above. The proposed project has been determined to be a subsequent project that is not fully within the scope of the Master Environmental Impact Report ("MEIR) prepared for the Fresno General Plan. Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21157.1 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §15177, this project has been evaluated with respect to each item on the attached environmental checklist to determine whether this project may cause any additional significant effect on t he environment which was not previously examined in the MEIR. After conducting a review of the adequacy of the MEIR pursuant to Public Resources Code, Section 21157.6(b)(1), the Planning and Development (f.k.a., Development and Resource Management) Department, as lead agency, finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified and that no new information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the MEIR was certifie d as complete, has become available. A public notice of the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment Application No. EA -18-004 was published on May 18, 2018, prior to the certification of the Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), with no comments or appeals received to date. Staffing issues have delayed the project longer than anticipated but the project description has not changed, and the technical review and conclusions of the environmental assessment still remain valid.

Although the proposed adoption of the Official Plan Lines for North Avenue will not involve any acquisition of lands for additional rights -of-way at this time, in order to ensure the preliminary assumptions of the original analysis were correct, on June 21, 2019, a preliminary Notice of Intent to consider the location of public improvements within agricultural land conservation contract lands pursuant to the provisions of §51291 et seq. of the Government Code, was mailed to the California Department of Conservation as well as the County of Fresno (as the local governing body responsible for the administration of the preserves). The City of Fresno received no response from the California Department of Conservation. The City of Fresno did receive a response from the County of Fresno on September 29, 2019, indicating that the County of Fresno had, “no comments.” Therefore, no new
project revisions have been added in response to written or verbal comments on the project’s effects identified in the proposed mitigated negative declaration which are new avoidable significant effects.

Pursuant to §15073.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency is required to recirculate a negative declaration when the document must be substantially revised after public notice of its availability has previously been given pursuant to Section 15072, but prior to its adoption. Notice of recirculation s hall comply with Sections 15072 and 15073. As no additional comments were received from the California Department of Conservation or the County of Fresno in response to the Notice of Intent provided pursuant to §51291 of the California Government Code or the explanation of the preliminary consideration of §51292 of the Government Code utilized for purposes of this environmental analysis, it has been determined that no new significant effect has been identified beyond those originally considered and analyze d and therefore, no new mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce a new effect to insignificance. Furthermore, it has not been determined that the originally proposed mitigation measures will not reduce potential effects to less than significance
and/or that new measures or revisions must be required. No mitigation measures have been replaced and no new conditions of project approval have been added after circulation of the negative declaration which are required by CEQA an d/or which would create new significant effects and are necessary to mitigate an avoidable significant effect. This constitutes new information added to the negative declaration which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the negative declaration, and which does not require recirculation pursuant to § 15073.5(c) et seq. of the CEQA Guidelines.

This completed environmental impact checklist form, its associated narrative, and proposed mitigation measures reflect applicable commen ts of responsible and trustee agencies and research and analys es conducted to examine the interrelationship between the proposed project and the physical environment. The information contained in the project application and its related environmental asses sment application, responses to requests for comment, checklist, initial study

M ODIFIED APPENDIX G/INITIAL STUDY TO ANALYZE

SUBSEQUENT PROJECT IDENTIFIED IN CERTIFIED MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (MEIR) SCH NO. 2012111015
E
nvironmental Checklist Form for:

For EA No. EA-18-004

1. Project title:

Official Plan Lines (OPL) for West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenue.

2. Lead agency name and address:

City of Fresno
Development and Resource Management Department
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721

3. Contact person and phone number:

Will Tackett, Supervising Planner
City of Fresno
Development & Resource Management Department
(559) 621-8063

4. Project location:

West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenues Site Latitude: 36° 41' 31.9" N
Site Longitude: 119° 49' 04.2" W
Assessor’s Parcel Books & Pages: 328-07, 08, 09, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17, 23 & 329-02, 16, 22

5. Project sponsor's name and address:

City of Fresno
Public Works Department
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721

6. General & Community plan land use designation:

Existing: Major (Arterial) Street
Proposed: Major (Arterial) Street

7. Zoning:

Existing: N/A (Public Street)
Proposed: N/A (Public Street)

8. Description of project:

The proposed project will require future acquisition and dedications for public street rights -of-way as well as the installation and construction of both public and private facilities and infrastructure in accordance with the standards, specifications and policies of the City of Fresno. In some segments, along West North Avenue, right -of-way va cations will be required. Timelines for future construction of the public street segment will be contingent upon development; occurring incrementally, as growth is proposed in the area in accordance with the goals, objective and policies of the Fresno General Plan.

Several properties located along the major street alignment continue to be utilized for agricultural purposes and have been sparsely developed with single family residences and commercial properties throughout the segment with a higher concentration towards the east, closer to City limits. Located along the segment is a regional park approximately 110 acre, a nurser y approximately 18 acre, and a slaughterhouse of approximate 56 acre.

9. Surrounding land uses and setting:

Planned Land Use Existing Zoning Existing Land Use
North
Residential Medium-
Low Density,
Residential Medium
Density,
Commercial
Community,
Public Facility,
Open Space-Regional
Park
RS-5 (Residential Single-Family;
Medium Density);
RS-4 (Residential Single-Family;
Medium-Low Density);
CC (Commercial Community);
O (Office);
PR (Park and Recreation);
M1 (Light Manufacturing-Fresno
County);
AE20 (Exclusive Agricultural-Fresno
County);
Regional Park,
Light Industrial,
Commercial,
Agricultural, Rural
Residential,
Church,
Vacant
East
Commercial
Community,
Business Park
CC (Commercial Community);
AE20 (Exclusive Agricultural-Fresno
County)
Vacant,
Commercial
South
Business Park,
Residential Medium
Density,
Commercial
Community,
County of Fresno
AE20 (Exclusive Agricultural-Fresno
County);
IH (Heavy Industrial)
BP (Business Park);
Industrial,
Agricultural,
Rural Residential,
Vacant
West County of Fresno AE20 (Exclusive Agricultural-Fresno County)
Vacant,
Agricultural

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement):

City of Fresno (COF) Development and Resource Management Department, COF Department of Public Works; COF Department of Public Utilities; County of Fresno, Department of Public Works and Planning.

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Pub lic Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See PRC section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

The Development and Resource Management Department has received a request in writing from two California Native American tribes, Dumna Wo Wah Tribal Government and Table Mountain Rancheria Tribal Government, that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project to be formally notified of proposed projects in the geographic area that it may be traditionally and culturally affiliated with, pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1(b). The lead agency, City of Fresno, sent the notification letter for West North Avenue Official Plan Line (OPL) dated March 15, 2018 to the two tribes via certified mail and email as requested by the tribes. The Dumna Wo Wah Tribe declined a consultation on March 19, 2018. The Table Mountain Rancheria Tribe declined a consultation on April 20, 2018.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

A
esthetics A
griculture and
Forestry Resources
A
ir Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology /Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population / Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural
Resources
Ut ilities / Service
Mandatory Findings
of Significance
D
ETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

significant impact related to the threshold under consideration that was not previously examined in the MEIR, however, with the mitigation incorporated into the project, the impact is less than significant.

d. “Potentially Significant Impact” means there is an additional potentially significant effect related to the threshold under consideration that was not previously examined in the MEIR.

2. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact " answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

3. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

4. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than signif icant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

5. A "Finding of Conformity" is a determination based on an initial study that the proposed project is a subsequent project identified in the MEIR and that it is fully within the scope of the MEIR because it would have no additional significant effects that were not examined in the MEIR.

6. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).

7. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant t o the tiering, program EIR or M EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the MEIR or another earlier document pursuant to applicable l egal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures w hich were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

8. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impac ts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances).

Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

9. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

10. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

11. The explanation of each issue should identify:

a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

I. AESTHETICS -- Would the
project:

a) Have a substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista?

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?

c) Substantially degrade the
existing visual character or
quality of the site and its
surroundings?

d) Create a new source of
substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?

The proposed public street alignment is located within an area which is planned for residential, commercial, business park, and open space uses in the Sphere of Influence of the City and light manufacturing and agricultural uses in the County of Fresno.

Properties located along the north side of the proposed major street alignment are vacant, agricultural, and rural residential; properties to th e east are vacant and commercial; properties to the south are vacant, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and rural residential; and properties to the west are vacant and agricultural.

No identified or designated public or scenic vistas will be obstructed by the proposed project and no scenic resources will be damaged or removed. The proposed Official Plan Lines will identify ultimate public street rights -of-way for West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenues. Aside from future lighting and tree planting within the proposed rights -of-way, future construction of the major street segment will not result in significant vertical development wit h potential to obstruct views.

The proposed project to identify a future public street alignment and ultimate right -of- way widths will ultimately facilitate public street improvements which will afford public accessibility. However, with consideration to the relatively flat topography of the area, existing agricultural operations occurring in the project area, and the poor air quality that reduces existing views within the project area as a whole, the proposed future project corridor provides no potential vantage point to public view s and will result in a less than significant impact to views of highly valued features such as the Sierra Nevada foothills.

The proposed street location, alignment and widths identified by the proposed OPL are consistent with Figure MT -1: Circulation Diag ram of the Fresno General Plan, which designates the planned roadway network of the General Plan as described within Section XVII Transportation herein below.

Future development of the site will create a new source of substantial light or glare within the area. However, public improvements including but not included to street lights within the proposed future street rights -of-way will comply with adopted City of Fresno Standards and will therefore not result in impacts beyond that which was considered by the MEIR. Furthermore, through the entitlement processes for future developments within the area, staff will ensure that lights are located in areas that will minimize light sources to the neighboring properties as may be required pursuant to the provisions of the Fresno Municipal Code and in accordance with mitigation measures of the MEIR. As a result, the project will have no impact on aesthetics.

In conclusion, with MEIR mitigation measures incorporated, the project will not result in any aesthetic resource impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
RESOURCES: In determining
whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared
by the California Dept. of
Conservation as an optional model to
use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. -- Would
the project:

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?

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
X

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?

Based upon the upon the 2014 Rural Mapping Edition: Fresno County Important Farmland Map of the California Department of Conservation, lands adjacent to the street alignment are designated under the following categories:

• “Prime Farmland,” defined as land having the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.

• “Farmland of Local Importance,” defined as all farmable lands within Fresno County that do not meet the definitions of Prime, Statewide, or Unique. This includes land that is or has been us ed for irrigated pasture, dryland farming, confined livestock and dairy, poultry facilities, aquaculture and grazing land.

• “Semi-Agricultural and Rural Commercial Land, ” defined as land including farmsteads, agricultural storage and packing sheds, unpave d parking areas, composting facilities, equine facilities, firewood lots and campgrounds.

• “Urban and Built-Up Land,” defined as land occupied by structures with a building density of a least 1 unit to 1. 5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10- acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, and water control structures.

The Fresno General Plan MEIR analyzed “project specific” impacts associated with future development within the Planning Area (Sphere of Influence) as well as the cumulative impacts factored from future development in areas outside of the Planning Area. The MEIR identifies locations within the Planning Area that have been designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance through the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California Department of Conservation. The analysis of impacts contained within the MEIR acknowledges that Fresno General Plan implementation anticipates all of the FMMP-designated farmland within the Planning Area being converted to uses other than agriculture. Furthermore, the MEIR acknowledges that the anticipated conversion is a significant impact on agricultural resources at both the project and cumulative level; and, that no feasible mitigation measures are available.

Although no feasible mitigation measures were identified in the MEIR to reduce potential project -specific impacts on agricultural uses, the General Plan incorporates objectives and policies, which include but are not limited to the following:

G-5 Objective: While recognizing that the County of Fresno retains the primary responsibility for agricultural land use polic ies and the protection and advancement of farming operations, the City of Fresno will support efforts to preserve agricultural land outside of the area planned for urbanization and outside of the City’s public service delivery capacity by being responsible in its land use plans, public service delivery plans, and development policies.

G-5-b. Policy: Plan for the location and intensity of urban development in a manner that efficiently utilizes land area located within the planned urban boundary, including the North and Southeast Growth Areas, while promoting compatibility with agricultural uses located outside of the planned urban area.

G-5-f. Policy: Oppose lot splits and development proposals in unincorporated areas within and outside the City General Plan boundary when these proposals would do any of the following:

• Make it difficult or infeasible to implement the general plan; or,

• Contribute to the premature conversion of agricultural, open space, or grazing lands; or constitute a detriment t o the management of resources and/or facilities important to the metropolitan area (such as air quality, water quantity and quality, traffic circulation, and riparian habitat).

The MEIR recognizes that despite implementation of the objectives and policies of the Fresno General Plan, project and cumulative impacts on agricultural resources will remain significant. Therefore, i n 2014, through passage of Council Resolution No. 2014-225, the City of Fresno adopted Findings of Fact related to Significant and Unavoidable Effects as well as Statements of Overriding Considerations in order to certify MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for purposes of adoption of the Fresno General Plan. Section 15093 of the California Environmental Quality Act requires the lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project.

The adopted Statements of Overriding Considerations for the MEIR addressed Findings of Significant Unavoidable Impacts wit hin the categories/areas of Agricultural Resources; citing specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers as project goals, each and all of which were deemed and considered by the Fresno City Council to be benefits, which outweighed the unavoidable adverse environmental effects attributed to development occurring within the City of Fresno Sphere of Influence (SOI), consistent with the land uses, densities, and intensities set forth in the Fresno General Plan.

The City of Fresno Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division has submitted Official Plan Lines (OPL) for a segment of West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenues for purposes of establishing ultimate alignment and w idths for future public street rights -of-way in accordance with the circulation element of the Fresno General Plan. The subject street segment is three miles in length and is currently located within the boundaries of both the City of Fresno and County of Fresno.

The project area is located within Growth Area 1 as depicted in Figure IM -2 (Sequencing of Development) of the Fresno General Plan and is along the southwest boundary of the City of Fresno Sphere of Influence (SOI) limits . The respective segment of North Avenue is designated as a major (Arterial) street within the circulation element of the Fresno General Plan.

Several properties located along the major street alignment continue to be utilized for agricultural purposes and have been sparsely developed with single family residences and commercial properties throughout the segment with a higher concentration towards the east, closer to City limits. Located along the segment is a regional park approximately 110 acres in size, a nurser y approximately 18 acres in size, and a slaughterhouse of approximate 56 acres in size. The northern portion of the 3 mile

street segment is mostly located within unincorporated areas which have not yet been developed but are planned for future dev elopment in a manner which is consistent with the Fresno General Plan. Most of the southern portion of the 3 mile segment is located outside of the SOI and remains mostly vacant or utilized for agricultural purposes.

The street segment for West North Aven ue between South Marks and South Elm Avenues is designated an arterial within the circulation element of the Fresno General Plan. The Official Plan Lines are proposed strictly for purposes of facilitating a planned alignment and widths for the respective street segment. Construction of the public street segment will occur incrementally with future development in the area in a manner consistent with the goals, objective and policies of the Fresno General Plan as referenced herein above.

The street alignm ent is adjacent to properties that are subject to California Land Conservation (Williamson Act) Contract No s. 7502, 2534, 7289, 7256, 4347, 5241, 7161, and 7129; all contracted parcels are unincorporated land. The Williamson Act is a contract intended to preserve agricultural and open space by restricting the use of the land. As part of the Williamson Act, no use may be approved for contracted land that will significantly compromise the long- term productive agricultural capability of the parcel under contract. Furthermore, future uses of contacted lands may not significantly displace or impair current or reasonably foreseeable agricultural operations. There are certain uses that may be deemed compatible; such uses are directly related to agriculture and production, the act offers a list of uses deemed compatible.

As proposed, the West North Avenue OPL project would eventually acquire only minor portions of adjacent private properties. No future necessitated actions would result in the condemnation of the fee title of an entire parcel of land subject to a contract filed.

On average the land acquisition would be approximately 6 feet in width for street segments and 14 feet in width at street intersections. In some cases, between South Hughes and South West Av enues and between South Newman and South Elm Avenues, no acquisitions for rights -of-way will be required; and/or, property along the proposed alignment will be vacated. The total acquisition of right -of-way would ultimately be approximately 2.5 acres of land across the 3 mile span.

The project as proposed will not change the primary use of those parcels under a Williamson Act Contract; in some cases it may potentially affect the row of trees nearest to the road. However, based upon the limits of rights -of-way acquisitions which would be required to implement the street alignments and widths proposed with the OPL (as described herein below), such acquisitions for public street rights -of-way would not be considered or determined to be a significant displaceme nt or impairment of agricultural operations on the adjacent contracted parcels.

Pursuant to §51291 et seq. of the California Government Code, whenever it appears that land within an agricultural preserve may be required by a public agency or person for a public use, the public agency or person shall advise the Director of Conservation

and the local governing body responsible for the administration of the preserve of its intention to consider the location of a public improvement within the preserve.

The Director of Conservation shall forward to the Secretary of Food and Agriculture, a copy of any material received from the public agency or person relating to the proposed acquisition. Within 30 days thereafter, the Director of Conservation and the loc al governing body shall forward to the appropriate public agency or person concerned their comments with respect to the effect of the location of the public improvements on the land within the agricultural preserve and those comments shall be considered by the public agency or person. In preparing those comments, the Director of Conservation shall consider issues related to agricultural land use, including but not limited to, matters related to the effects of the proposal on the conversion of adjacent or nearby agricultural land to nonagricultural uses, and shall consult with, and incorporate the comments of, the Secretary of Food and Agriculture on any other matters related to agricultural operations.

In addition to a general description of the agricultur al preserve lands proposed for acquisition, and copies of the applicable contacts for the adjacent lands, the notice shall include an explanation of the preliminary consideration of §51292 of the Government Code, as utilized for purposes of this analysis, which provides as follows:

No public agency or person shall locate a public improvement within an agricultural preserve unless the following findings are made:

(a) The location is not based primarily on a consideration of the lower cost of acquiring land in an agricultural preserve; and,

(b) If the land is agricultural land covered under a contract pursuant to this chapter for any public improvement, that there is no other land within or outside the preserve on which it is reasonably feasible to locate the public improvement.

The City of Fresno’s preliminary consideration of §51292 has been analyzed as follows:

Figure MT-1: Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan designates the planned roadway network of the General Plan. In Fresno, the roadway system c onfiguration has been primarily based on a traditional grid pattern. Outside of the Downtown Area the grid is based on a north-south orientation based on Township, Range and Section lines.

Almost all of the Arterial and Collector Streets (roadways) withi n the Metropolitan Area are regularly spaced at half -mile intervals. The planned North Avenue major street alignment adheres to this planned one- half mile grid pattern; and, the centerline of the proposed OPL for the subject segment is designed and based from section line.

neighborhoods and to and from freeways and expressways. The adopted City of Fresno standard cross -sections for Arterial streets range from 100- 110 feet in width.

The OPL for West North Avenue is a 72- foot wide street cross-section planned for three lanes; one lane in each direction (east and west) and a left turning center lane. The OPL, which proposes a future street right -of-way width that is narrower than typical City of Fresno Arterial Standards, was designed with consideration to minimizing impacts on adjacent lands; including those utilized for agricultural production.

The proposed street alignment which follows section line and the existing, traditional, street pattern and grid (as well as property title) minimizes obstruction to agricultural operations. Lands with existing agricultural land conservation contracts are located along both north and south street frontages. Therefore, alternative alignments would not utilize existing dedicated public street right -of-way widths where agricultural operations due not currently occur; and, which are not described as portions of land subject to the agricultural land conservation contracts. Such alternatives would have a greater adverse impact to agricultural production as well as operations and are therefore not considered feasible.

With consideration to the provisions of Government Code Section §51292, the proposed location of the future street pursuant to the OPL is based upon an alignment which most efficiently utilizes existing public rights-of-way and non-preserve land thereby minimizing impacts to adjacent preserve lands, production and operations. Therefore, the City of Fresno finds as follows: (a) The location is based upon minimization of adverse impacts to preserve lands and not the consideration of the lower cost of acquiring land in an agricultural preserve; and, (b) There is no other land within or outside the preserve on which it is reasonably feasible to locate the public improvement without creating a more adverse impact to agricultural production and operations.

While the proposed adoption of the OPL for West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenues will not, in and of itself, result in acquisition of lands within an agricultural preserve, it defines and memorializes the limits f or which such acquisitions may occur for public street use purposes in the future.

The City of Fresno acknowledges that if/when land in an agricultural preserve is acquired by a public entity, the public entity shall notify the Director of Conservation within 10 working days.

Therefore, the project will not result in the conversion of active farmland to non- agricultural use; result in the premature conversion of agricultural lands; or, constitute a detriment to the management of agricultural resources and/or facilities important to the metropolitan area beyond that which has been previously analyzed and evaluated within the MEIR.

Prior to approving future development on adjacent contract lands or prior to acquiring portions of adjacent contracted parcels for public street rights -of-way, a Williamson Act

Contract cancellation is required either for the entire parcel or for respective portions of the adjacent contracted lands. For the purposes of future proposed project s, this analysis considers the fact that only a portion of the contracted parcels would need a contract cancellation in order to acquire additional rights -of-way pursuant to the proposed Official Plan Lines . If existing agricultural contracts are still in effect, a property owner may request cancellation of the contract. This process would remove the land from agricultural preserve status.

In order to petition a cancellation of a Williamson Act Contract, an application must be filed with the Planning and Development Department. The petition of cancellation is also sent to the Director of Conservation, consistent with Section 51284.1. A Planning Commission Public Hearing is held and a recommendation to the City Council is made.

The City Council must make all of the findings under one of the following two sections below, in order to approve the petition to cancel.

1. The cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act as evidenced by the following:
a. Cancellation is for land on which a Notice of Non -renewal has been served.
b. Cancellation is not likely to result in removal of adjacent lands f rom agricultural use.
c. That cancellation is for an alternative use which is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Fresno General Plan.
d. Cancellation will not result in discontinuous patterns of urban development.
e. There is no proximate uncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contracted land be p ut, or that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development of proximate non-contracted land.

2. The cancellation is in the public interest as evidenced by the following:
a. Other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of the Williamson Act.
b. There is no proximate non- contracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contract land should be put, or that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than deve lopment of proximate non- contracted land.

After a tentative petition granting is made by the City Council, the following steps are required to complete the cancellation.

1. The City Clerk shall record a Certificate of Tentative Cancellation with the County Recorder.

2. The Planning and Development Department shall publish a Notice of its decision

within 30 days.

3. The City Clerk shall record a Certificate of Cancellation once the landowner has met all the conditions placed on the petition.

Prior to approving future development or land acquisition, the contract shall be cancelled either for the entire parcel or the respective portion of land needed for rights - of-way pursuant to the proposed Official Plan Lines. As proposed, it is recognized that the proposed Official Plan Lines will require future acquisition and dedications for public street rights-of-way at the time a future development project on contracted lands may be proposed. Therefore, in accordance with the objectives and policies of the Fresno General Plan, future development projects shall implement mitigation measures through future contract cancellations of the Williamson Act Contract to reduce the agricultural impact.

The proposed project is not located in or near forest land, therefore will not conflict with any forest land or Timberland Production or result in any loss of forest land.

Mitigating Measures

1. Future development projects shall implement and incorporate the agricultural and forestry related mitigation measures as identified in the attached Project Specific Mitigation Monitoring Checklist dated May 18, 2018.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

III. AIR QUALITY AND GLOBAL
CLIMATE CHANGE - (Where
available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air
quality management or air pollution
control district may be relied upon to
make the following determinations.) -
Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan ( e.g., by having potential
emissions of regulated criterion
pollutants which exceed the San
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
Districts (SJVAPCD) adopted
thresholds for these pollutants)?

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing
or projected air quality violation?

c) 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)?

d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?

e) Create objectionable odors
affecting a substantial number of
people?

Setting

The subject site is located along the Sphere of Influence and within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). This region has had chronic non- attainment of federal and state clean air standards for ozone/oxidants and particulate matter due to a combination of topography and climate. The San Joaquin Valley (Valley) is hemmed in on three sides by mountain ranges, with prevailing winds carrying pollutants and pollutant precursors from urbanized areas to the north (and in turn contributing pollutants and precursors to downwind air basins). The Mediterranean climat e of this region, with a high number of sunny days and little or no measurable precipitation for several months of the year, fosters photochemical reactions in the atmosphere, creating ozone and particulate matter.

Regional factors affect the accumulation and dispersion of air pollutants within the SJVAB. Air pollutant emissions overall are fairly constant throughout the year, yet the concentrations of pollutants in the air vary from day to day and even hour to hour. This variability is due to complex interactions of weather, climate, and topography. These factors affect the ability of the atmosphere to disperse pollutants. Conditions that move and mix the atmosphere help disperse pollutants, while conditions that cause the

atmosphere to stagnate allow pollutants to concentrate. Local climatological effects, including topography, wind speed and direction, temperature, inversion layers, precipitation, and fog can exacerbate the air quality problem in the SJVAB.

The SJVAB is approximately 250 miles long and averages 35 miles wide, and is the second largest air basin in the state. The SJVAB is defined by the Sierra Nevada in the east (8,000 to 14,000 feet in elevation), the Coast Ranges in the west (averaging 3,000 feet in elevation), and the Tehachapi mountains in the south (6,000 to 8,000 feet in elevation). The Valley is basically flat with a slight downward gradient to the northwest.

The Valley opens to the sea at the Carquinez Straits where the San Joaquin- Sacramento Delta empties into San Francisco Bay. The Valley, thus, could be considered a “bowl” open only to the north.

During the summer, wind speed and direction data indicate that summer wind usually originates at the north end of the Valley and flows in a south- southeasterly direction through the Valley, through Tehachapi pass, into the Southeast Desert Air Basin. In addition, the Altamont Pass also serves as a funnel for pollutant transport from the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin into the region.

During the winter, wind speed and direction data indicate that wind occasionally originates from the south end of the Valley and flows in a north- northwesterly direction.

Also during the winter months, the Valley generally experiences light, variable winds (less than 10 mph). Low wind speeds, combined with low inversion layers in the winter, create a climate conducive to high carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) concentrations. The SJVAB has an “Inland Mediterranean” climate averaging over 260 sunny days per year. The Valley floor is characterized by warm, dry summers and cooler winters. For the entire Valley, high daily temperature readings in summer average 95ºF. Temperatures below freezing are unusual. Average high temperatures in the winter are in the 50s, but highs in the 30s and 40s can occur on days with persistent fog and low cloudiness. The average daily low temperature is 45ºF.

The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the Valley is limited by the presence of persistent temperature inversions. Solar energy heats up the Earth’s surface, which in turn radiates heat and warms the lower atmosphere. Therefore, as altitude increases, the air temperature usually decreases due to increasing distance from the source of heat. A reversal of this atmospheric state, where the air temperature increases with height, is termed an inversion. Inversions can exist at the surface or at any height above the ground, and tend to act as a lid on the Valley, holding in the pollutants that are generated here.

Regulations

The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is the local regional jurisdictional entity charged with attainment planning, rulemaking, rule enforcement, and

monitoring under Federal and State Clean Air Acts and Clean Air Act Amendments.

The SJVAPCD has adopted rules and regulations spec ifically designed to reduce the impacts of growth on the applicable air quality plans. For example, Rule 9510‐ Indirect Source Review was adopted to provide emission reductions needed by the SJVAPCD to demonstrate attainment of the federal PM10 standard and contributed reductions that assist in attaining federal ozone standards. Rule 9510 also contributes toward attainment of state standards for these pollutants. The District’s Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions requires controls for sources of particulate matter necessary for attaining the federal PM10 standards and achievin g progress toward attaining the state PM10 standards. Rule 2201 – New and Modified Stationary Source Review requires new and modified stationary/industrial sources provide emission controls and offsets that ensure that stationary sources decline over time and do not impact the applicable air quality plans.

The Fresno General Plan MEIR No. 2012111025 evaluated the impacts from implementing the General Plan and potential conflict s with or obstruct ions to the implementation of applicable attainment plans based upon build out of the Project Area.

For this purpose, “build out” was predicted to occur at historically robust growth rates consistent with those used by the SJVAPCD to develop plans for all nonattainment pollutants in the SJVAB (i.e., the amount of growth predicted for the General Plan Update is accommodated by the SJVAPCD’s attainment plan and would allow the air basin to attain the 8‐hour ozone standard by the 2023 attainment date).

The growth rate used for the MEIR analysis resulted in build out by the year 2056. The assessment used two tests to determine if build out would conflict or obstruct the applicable air quality plans. First, if development proposed by the General Plan exceeds the growth projections used in the applicable attainment plan, it would produce a potentially significant impact. Second, if the project includes goals, policies, and development standards that are in conflict with the development related control measures in the attainment plans, the project would be potentially significant.

As shown in the operational emissions analysis in Impact AIR ‐3, reductions anticipated from existing regulations and adopted control measures will result in emissions continuing to decline even though development and population will increase because the emission rates for the most important sources of pollutants substantially decrease from 2010 levels due to SJVAPCD and state regulations. Furthermore, the General Plan increases the City’s sustainability efforts that reduce motor vehicle use and energy consumption. This is accomplished with more compact development achieved by increasing development density and by providing a land use pattern and transportation infrastructure more supportive of public transportation, walking, and bicycling.

Review of the proposed goals and policies of the General Plan found them to be consistent with the applicable control measures of the SJVAPCD attainment plan. The

General Plan include d numerous policies that would reduce operational air p ollutant emissions and increase energy efficiency. The City also participates in regional planning efforts such as the San Joaquin Val ley Blueprint Project and works closely with Fresno COG in developing Regional T ransportation Plans and capital improvement plans and capital improvement plans (see Policy MT ‐1‐a). These effor ts contribute to the attainment strategy for the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.

With consideration given to the objectives and policies of the F resno General Plan and the findings contained within the MEIR it was determined that the General Plan supports the implementation of SJVAPCD’s attainment plans and successfully met the applicable test. Under these tests, the anticipated build out was determined to not have a significant impact.

The major street segment for West North Avenue between South Marks and South Elm Avenue is designated within the circulation element of the Fresno General Plan. The Official Plan Lines are proposed to be adopted for purposes of identifying the ultimate planned alignment and widths for the respective street segment in order to implement the circulation element and facilitate future development consistent with the General Plan.

Based upon the information and analyses referenced herein above, the project will not occur at a scale or scope with potential to contribute substantially or cumulatively to existing or projected air quality violations, impacts, or increases of criteria pollutants for which the San Joaquin Valley region is under an applica ble federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). The proposed project will comply with all applicable air quality plans. Therefore, no violations of air quality st andards will occur and no net increase of pollutants will occur.

In conclusion, with the MEIR Mitigation Measures incorporated, the project will not result in any air quality impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -
- Would the project:

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
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X

b) Have a substantial adverse
effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by
the California Department of Fish
and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X

c) Have a s ubstantial adverse
effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
X

d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
X

e) Conflict with any local policies
or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
X

f) Conflict with the provisions of
an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
X

The proposed project would not directly affect any sensitive, special status, or candidate species, nor would it modify any habitat that supports them. There is no riparian habitat or any other sensitive natural community identified in the vicinity of the proposed project by the California Department of Fish and Game or the US Fish and Wildlife Service. No federally protected wetlands are located within the proposed public street alignment.

Therefore, there would be no impacts to species, riparian habit at or other sensitive communities and wetlands. There are also no natural or permanent bodies of water within the proposed public street alignment or in the immediate vicinity of project area.

The proposed project would have no impact on the movement of m igratory fish or wildlife species or on established wildlife corridors or wildlife nursery sites. No local policies regarding biological resources are applicable to the subject site and there would be no impacts with regard to those plans.

No habitat c onservation plans or natural community conservation plans in the region pertain to the natural resources that exist on the subject site or in its immediate vicinity.

Finally, no actions or activities resulting from the implementation of the proposed proj ect would have the potential to affect floral, or faunal species; or, their habitat. Therefore, there would be no impacts.

In conclusion, with MEIR mitigation measures incorporated, the project will not result in any biological resource impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES --
Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in
'15064.5?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
'15064.5?
X

c) Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
X

d) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
X

The City’s Architectural Historian conducted an evaluation for potential impacts on historic resources in the project area. The evaluation shows no existing structures within the proposed public street alignment that are listed in the National or Local Register of Historic Places, and the street alignment is not within a designated historic district. The evaluation also addressed properties that may be a “historical resource” even though they are not listed in the National Register, California Register, or in a local register. A portion of the project is located in the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) which identified four properties that may be eligible for the federal, state, or local register list: a church at 1104 West North Avenue, two separate residences at 2945 South Walnut Avenue and 126 West North Avenue, and a commercial building at 2993-2995 South Elm Avenue.

Although 2945 S outh Walnut Avenue was identified as a residential property in the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan EIR, a site visit confirmed that this property is an active orchard and no building is present. The evaluation reviewed building permits which confirm that 126 West North Avenue was constructed in 2008 and is therefore less than 50 years old and thus can be excluded as a potential historic resource. The proposed OPL for North Avenue will not change the existing right -of-way in front of 1104 W North Avenue and all project work will take place within the proposed right -of-way; therefore will not negatively impact the church. The commercial building located at 2993- 2995 South Elm Avenue will be impacted by the widening of North Avenue and was evaluated as a potential historic resource. The commercial building was originally built in 1959. Since its original cons truction, additions to the property have substantially impacted the integrity of design, materials, and workmanship of the building. T herefore, the historical evaluation has determined t his building is not eligible for the National, State, or Local Register and is not a historic resource for the purposes of CEQA.

There are no known archaeological or paleontological resources that exist within the project area. There is no evidence that cultural resources of any type (including historical, archaeological, paleontological, or unique geologic features) exist within the project area. Past record searches for the region have not revealed the likelihood of cultural resources within the proposed street alignment or in its immediate vicinity.

Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project may impact cultural resources. It should be noted however, that lack of surface evidence of historical resources does not preclude the subsurface existence of archaeological resources. Furthermore, previously unknown paleontological resources or undiscovered human remains could be disturbed during project construction.

Therefore, due to the ground disturbing activities that will ultimately occur in the future within the proposed street alignment , the measures within the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan, Mitigation Monitoring Checklist to address archaeological resources, paleontological resources, and human remains will be employed to guarantee that should archaeological and/or animal fossil material be encountered during project excavations, then work shall stop immediately; and, that qualified professionals in the respective field are contacted and consulted in order t o ensure that the activities of the proposed project will not involve physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of historic, archaeological, or paleontological resources.

In conclusion, with MEIR mitigation measures incorporated, the project will not result in any cultural resource impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would
the project:

a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X

iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
X

iv) Landslides? X

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
X

c) Be located on a geologic unit or
soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X

d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18- 1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
X

e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
X

There are no geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions known to exist within the

proposed public street alignment . The existing topography is flat with no apparent unique or significant land forms such as vernal pools. Future development of the planned major street will require compliance with grading and drainage standards of the City of Fresno and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) Standards.

Fresno has no known active earthquake faults and is not in any Alquist -Priolo Special Studies Zones. The immediate Fresno area has extremely low seismic activity levels, although shaking may be felt from earthquakes whose epicenters lie to the east, west, and south. Known major faults are over 50 miles distant and include the San Andreas Fault, Coalinga area blind thrust fault(s), and the Long Valley, Owens Valley, and White Wolf/Tehachapi fault systems. The most serious threat to Fresno from a major earthquake in the Eastern Sierra would be flooding that could be caused by damage to dams on the upper reaches of the San Joaquin River.

Fresno is classified by the State as being in a moderate seismic risk zone, Category “C” or “D,” depending on the soils underlying the specific location being categorized and that location’s proximity to the nearest known fault lines. All new structures are required to conform to current seismic protection standards in the California Building Code.

Seismic upgrade/retrofit requirements are imposed on older structures by the City’s Development and Resource Management Department as may be applicable to building modification and rehabilitation projects.

No adverse environmental effects related to topography, soils or geology are expected as a result of this project.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in any geology or soil environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

VII. GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS -- Would the project:

a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?

The proposed project will not occur at a scale or scope with potential to contribute substantially or cumulatively to the generation of greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly.

The General Plan and MEIR rely upon a Greenhouse Gas Reducti on Plan that provides a comprehensive assessment of the benefits of city policies and proposed code changes, existing plans, programs, and initiatives that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The plan demonstrates that even though there is increased growth, the City would still be reducing greenhouse gas emissions through 2020 and per capita emission rates drop substantially. The benefits of adopted regulations become flat in later years and growth starts to exceed the reductions from all regulations and measures. Although it is highly likely that regulations will be updated to provide additional reductions, none are reflected in the analysis since only the effect of ad opted regulations is included. See Section III, Air Quality and Global Climate Change, for a full discussion of air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in any greenhouse gas emission environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIAL -- Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X

c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one- quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
X

d) Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5
and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X

e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
X

f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project
area?
X

g) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences
are intermixed with wildlands?
X

Pursuant to Policy 1- 6-a of the Fresno General Plan, hazardous materials will be defined as those that, because of their quantity, concentration, physical or chemical characteristics, pose significant potential hazards to human health, safety, or the environment. Specific federal, state and local definitions and listings of hazardous materials will be used by the City of Fresno.

According to the California State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker, t here is one site listed as hazardous within the pro posed public street alignment. The North and Elm Excavation (SL0601990145) case was a Cleanup Program Site and the case was closed on August 6, 2003. The project is for purposes of facilitating a future roadway and will not involve development of facilities or improvements with potential to create a significant hazard to the public beyond that previously analyzed in the MEIR. Future construction on adjacent private property will implement necessary control or mitigation measures in accordance with the Fres no General Plan, the associated MEIR and the California Environmental Quality Act at the time of development.

The project is not located near any wildland fire hazard zones, and poses no interference with the City’s or County’s Hazard Mitigation Plans or emergency response plans.

Therefore, the proposed project will have no environmental impacts related to potential hazards or hazardous materials as identified above.

The project area is not located within the vicinity of an airport. Therefore, the OP L which is proposed to be adopted consistent with the major street segment identified in the Fresno General Plan will avoid any potential concentration of persons which might result from future vehicle generation and street capacity within proximity to the airport.

No risks or hazards would result from constructing the project in the proposed location.

In conclusion, with MEIR mitigation measures incorporated, the project will not result in any hazard and hazardous materials resource impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY -- Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements?
X
b) Substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume
or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre- existing
nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support
existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been
granted)?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner
which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
X
d) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
X

e) Create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
X
f) Otherwise substantially
degrade water quality? X
g) Place housing within a 100-
year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
X
h) Place within a 100 -year flood
hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood
flows?
X
i) Expose people or structures to
a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure
of a levee or dam?
X
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami,
or mudflow? X

Fresno is one of the largest cities in the United States still relying primarily on groundwater for its public water supply. Surface water treatment and distribution has been implemented in the northeastern part of the City, but the city is still subject to an EPA Sole Source Aquifer designation. While the aquifer underlying Fresno typically exceeds a depth of 300 feet and is capacious enough to provide adequate quantities of safe drinking water to the metropolitan area well into the twenty -first century, groundwater degradation, increasingly stringent water quality regulations, and an historic trend of high consumptive use of water on a per capita basis (some 250 gallons per day per capita), have resulted in a general decline in aquifer levels, increased cost to provide potable water, and localized water supply limitations.

The MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 prepared for the Fresno General Plan, contains measures to mitigate projects' individual and cumulative impacts to groundwater

resources and to reverse the groundwater basin's overdraft conditions.

Fresno has attempted to address these issues through metering and revisions to the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) which was recently adopted in 2015.

The Fresno Metropolitan Water Resource Management Plan, which has been adopted and the accompanying Final EIR (SCH #95022029) certified, is also under revision. The purpose of these management plans is to provide safe, adequate, and dependable water supplies in order to meet the future needs of the metropolitan area in an economical manner; protect groundwater quality from further degradation and overdraft; and, provide a plan of reasonably implementable measures and facilities. City water wells, pump stations, recharge facilities, water treatment and distribution syste ms have been expanded incrementally to mitigate increased water demands and respond to groundwater quality challenges.

In response to the need for a comprehensive long- range water supply and distribution strategy, the Fresno General Plan recognizes the Ki ngs Basin's Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, Fresno- Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan, and City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resource Management Plan and cites the findings of the City of Fresno UWMP. The purpose of these management plans is to provide safe, adequate, and dependable water supplies to meet the future needs of the Kings Basin regions and the Fresno- Clovis metropolitan area in an economical manner; protect groundwater quality from further degradation and overdraft; and, provi de a plan of reasonably implementable measures and facilities.

The City has indicated that groundwater wells, pump stations, recharge facilities, water treatment and distribution systems shall be expanded incrementally to mitigate increased water demands. One of the primary objectives of Fresno's future water supply plans detailed in Fresno's current UWMP is to balance groundwater operations through a host of strategies. Through careful planning, Fresno has designed a comprehensive plan to accomplish this objective by increasing surface water supplies and surface water treatment facilities, intentional recharge, and conservation, thereby reducing groundwater pumping. The City continually monitors impacts of land use changes and development project proposals on water supply facilities by assigning fixed demand allocations to each parcel by land use as currently zoned or proposed to be rezoned.

The UWMP was made available for public review together with the MND for the proposed project.

Until 2004, groundwater was the sole source of water for the City. In June 2004, a $32 million Surface Water Treatment Facility ("SWTF") began providing Fresno with water treated to drinking water standards to meet demands anticipated by the growth implicit in the 2025 Fresno General Plan. Surface water is used to replace lost groundwater through Fresno's artificial recharge program at the City -owned Leaky Acres and smaller facilities in Southeast Fresno. Fresno holds entitlements to surface water from Millerton Lake and Pine F lat Reservoir. In 2006, Fresno renewed its contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation, through the year 2045, which entitles the City to 60,000

acre-feet per year of Class 1 water. This water supply has further increased the reliability of Fresno's water supply.

Also, in 2006, Fresno updated its Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan designed to ensure the Fresno metro area has a reliable water supply through 2050.

The plan implements a conjunctive use program, combining groundwater, treat ed surface water, artificial recharge and an enhanced water conservation program.

In the near future, groundwater will continue to be an important part of the City's supply but will not be relied upon as heavily as has historically been the case. The Cit y is planning to rely on expanding their delivery and treatment of surface water supplies and groundwater recharge activities.

In addition, the General Plan policies require the City to maintain a comprehensive conservation program to help reduce per capita water usage, and includes conservation programs such as landscaping standards for drought tolerance, irrigation control

devices, leak detection and retrofits, water audits, public education and implementing US Bureau of Reclamation Best Management Prac tices for water conservation to maintain surface water entitlements.

Implementation of the Fresno General Plan policies, the Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, City of Fresno UWMP, Fresno- Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan, and City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resource Management Plan and the applicable mitigation measures of approved environmental review documents will address the issues of providing an adequate, reliable, and sustainable water supply for the project's urban domestic and public safety consumptive purposes. The recently adopted 2015 UWMP analyzed the Fresno General Plans land use capacity.

The applicant will be required to comply with all requirements of the City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities that will reduce the project's water impacts to less than significant. When development permits are issued, the subject site will be required to pay drainage fees pursuant to the Drainage Fee Ordinance. The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control Distr ict (FMFCD) has stated that the FMFCD system can accommodate the proposed request subject to several conditions of approval.

Fresno continues to periodically update its water management plans to ensure the cost - effective use of water resources and conti nued availability of groundwater and surface water supplies.

In accordance with the provisions of the Fresno General Plan and MEIR No. 2012111015 mitigation measures, project specific water supply and distribution requirements must assure that an adequate source of water is available to serve the project.

The Department of Public Utilities works with FMFCD to utilize suitable FMFCD ponding (drainage) basins for the groundwater recharge program, and works with the Fresno Irrigation District to ensure that the City’s allotment of surface water is put to the best possible use for recharge.

The proposed project for future public street purposes does not involve development of a use or facility with a demand for water or which would degrade water quality or availability in the area.

In conclusion, with MEIR mitigation measures incorporated, the project will not result in any hydrology and water quality resource impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -
Would the project:

a) Physically divide an established
community?
X

b) Conflict with any applicable land
use plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to
the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X

c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
X

In Fresno, the roadway system configuration has been primarily based on a traditional grid pattern. Outside of the Downtown Area the grid is based on a north- south orientation based on Township, Range and Section lines. Almost all of the Arterial and Collector Streets (roadways) within the Metropolitan Area are regularly spaced at half - mile intervals. This roadway pattern has been modified in the past several decades to include several curvilinear and diagonal alignments, and neighborhood street patterns have sometimes deviated from the grid patterns.

Figure MT-1: Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan designates the planned roadway network of the General Plan. The planned roadway system focuses primarily upon roadways, which includes the Expressway, Superarterial, Arterial, and Collector Streets. For some roadways, especially in areas that are not yet developed with urban uses, the diagram indicates the future and not the present character of the road. The construction of planned roadways occurs during the course of a general plan’s implementation through the execution of the City’s capital improvements program utilizing funds from a variety of sources. In addition, portions of roadways are constructed by private property owners and developers in accordance with applicable development standards.

The General Plan establishes a refined street classification system to categorize roadways and other transportation facilities, as shown in Figure MT -1: Circulation Diagram. Each classification reflects the character of the facility as well as its function within the context of the entire transportation system. Each classification has standards considering a facility’s relation to surrounding land uses, existing rights -of-way, accessibility via other roadways, and appropriate travel speeds. While roadway classification types were originally based upon a priority given to various types and lengths of motor vehicle trips, they now give substantial consideration to the accommodation of multiple travel modes and trips (public transportation, bicycle, pedestrian). This classification system is used for engineering design and traffic operation standards.

Arterial Streets are typically designed to accommodate f our- to six-lane divided (median island separation) roadways, with somewhat limited motor vehicle access to abutting properties, and with the primary purpose of moving traffic within and between neighborhoods and to and from freeways and expressways. The OPL for West North Avenue is planned for three lanes; one lane in each direction (east and west) and a left turning center lane. In addition to major street intersections, appropriately designed and spaced local street intersections may allow lef t-turn movements to and from other arterial streets.

Fresno General Plan Goals, Objectives and Policies

As proposed, the project will be consistent with the following Fresno General Plan goals and objectives related to Mobility and Transportation:

Goals:
• Emphasize and plan for all modes of travel on local and Major Streets in Fresno.

Objectives & Policies:

• Objective MT-1: Create and maintain a transportation system that is safe, efficient, provides access in an equitable manner, and optimizes travel by all modes.

Policy MT -1-a: Continue to review loc al, regional and inter -regional transportation plans and capital improvement plans, and advocate for the approval and funding of State highway and rail projects, consistent with the General Plan and discourage projects inconsistent with the plan.

Policy M T-1-b: Design and construct planned streets and highways that complement and enhance the existing network, as well as future improvements to the network consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan, as shown on the Circulation Di agram (Figure MT -1), to ensure that each new and existing roadway continues to function as intended.

Policy MT -1-c: Prepare and adopt Official Plan Lines, or other appropriate documentation such as Director Determinations, for transportation corridors, roadways, and bicycle/pedestrian paths/trails, as necessary to preserve and/or obtain rights-of-way needed for planned circulation improvements.

Policy MT -1-g: Provide transportation facilities based upon a Complete Streets concept that facilitates the balanced use of all viable travel modes (pedestrian, bicyclists, motor vehicle and transit users), meting the transportation needs of all ages, income groups, and abilities and providing mobility for a variety of trip purpose, while also supporting other City goals.

These Goals, Objectives and Policies contribute to the establishment of a comprehensive city -wide lan d use planning strategy to f acilitate travel by walking, biking, transit, and motor vehicle with interconnected and linked neighborhoods, districts, major campuses and public facilities, shopping centers and other service centers, and regional transportation such as air, rail, bus and highways.

The designated major street segment is located within an incorporated area if the City of Fresno and an unincorporated area of the County of Fresno. The project area is located along the boundary of Growth Area 1 as depicted in Figure IM-2 (Sequencing of Development) of the Fresno General Plan and is planned for urban development.

The project will require future acquisition and dedications for public street rights -of-way as well as the installation and construction of both public and private facilities and infrastructure in accordance with the standards, specifications and policies of the City of Fresno. Timelines for future construction of the public street segment will be contingent upon development; occurring incrementally, as growth is proposed in the area in accordance with the goals, objective and policies of the Fresno General Plan.

The public street alignment will contribute to the completion of missing roadway and infrastructure improvements within the area in a manner which is consistent with the land use designations and circulation element of the Fresno General Plan.

The Official Plan Line is consistent with the planned major street segment designated on the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan.

Therefore it is staff’s opinion that the proposed proj ect is consistent with respective general and community plan objectives and policies and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of the City of Fresno. Furthermore, the proposed project, including the design and improvement of the major street segment , is found; (1) To be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the applicable Fresno General Plan; (2) To be s uitable for the type and densit y of development planned within the project area; (3) To be safe from po tential cause or introduction of serious public health problems; and, (4) To not conflict with any public interests in the subject property or adjacent lands.

The project will not conflict with any conservation plans since it is not located within any conservation plan areas.

In conclusion, the project is fully within the scope of the Fresno General Plan and will not result in any land use and planning impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XI. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would
the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of
a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X

b) Result in the loss of availability of
a locally -important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X

The public street alignment is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery, therefore, will not result in the loss of availability of a known

mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state.

Lands adjacent to the major street segment are not delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan as a locally -important mineral resource recovery site; therefore it will not result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in any mineral resource environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XII. NOISE -- Would the project result
in:

a) Exposure of persons to or
generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
X

b) Exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
X

c) A substantial permanent increase
in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
X

d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise
levels?
X

f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise
levels?
X

Generally, the three primary sources of substantial noise that affect the City of Fresno and its residents are transportation- related and consist of major streets and regional highways; airport operations at the Fresno Yosemite International, the Fresno- Chandler Downtown, and the Sierra Sky Park Airports; and railroad operations along the BNSF Railway and the Union Pacific Railroad lines.

In developed areas of the community, noise conflicts often occur when a noise sensitive land use is located adjacent or in proximity to a noise generator. Noise in these situations frequently stems from on -site operations, use of outdoor equipment, uses where large numbers of persons assemble, and vehicular traffic. Some land uses, such as residential dwellings hospitals, office buildings and schools, are considered noise sensitive receptors a nd involve land uses associated with indoor and/or outdoor activities that may be subject to stress and/or significant interference from noise.

Stationary noise sources can also have an effect on the population, and unlike mobile, transportation-related noise sources, these sources generally have a more permanent and consistent impact on people. These stationary noise sources involve a wide spectrum of uses and activities, including various industrial uses, commercial operations, agricultural production, school playgrounds, high school football games, HVAC units, generators, lawn maintenance equipment and swimming pool pumps.

The Noise Element of the Fresno General Plan establishes a land use compatibility criterion of 60dB DNL as being “desirable” for exterior noise levels in outdoor areas of noise-sensitive land uses. However, the General Plan accepts 65dB DNL as being in

the “normally acceptable” range for noise due to the number of transportation sources located in proximity to urban residential areas. The intent of the exterior noise level requirement is to provide an acceptable noise environment for outdoor activities and recreation. Furthermore, the Noise Element also requires that interior noise levels attributable to exterior noise sources not exceed 45 dB DNL. The intent of the interior noise level standard is to provide an acceptable noise environment for indoor communication and sleep.

For stationary noise sources, the noise element establishes noise compatibility criteria in terms of the exterior hourly equivalent sound level (L eq) and maximum sound level
(Lmax). The standards are more restrictive during the nighttime hours, defined as 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. The standards may be adjusted upward (less restrictive) if the existing ambient noise level without the source of interest already exceeds these standards. The Noise Element standards for stationary noise sources are: (1) 50 dBA L
eq for the daytime and 45 dBA Leq for the nighttime hourly equivalent sound levels; and, (2) 70 dBA L max for the daytime and 65 dBA L max for the nighttime maximum sound levels.

Noise created by new proposed stationary noise sour ces or existing stationary noise sources which undergo modification that may increase noise levels shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the noise level standards of Table 9 (Table 5.11- 8 of the MEIR) at noise sensitive land uses. If the existing ambient noise levels equal or exceed these levels, mitigation is required to limit noise to the ambient noise level plus 5 dB.

The project includes the identification and adoption of Official Plan Lines (OPL) for the West North Avenue street segment located between South Marks and South Elm Avenues for purposes of establishing the ultimate alignment and widths for future public street rights-of-way in accordance with the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan. No permanent stationary noise sources will occur from the proposed project.

The project will require fut ure acquisition and dedications, in some cases vacations, for public street rights-of-way as well as the installation and construction of both public and private facilities and infrastructure in accordance with the standards, specifications and policies of the City of Fresno.

Therefore, noise sources from the proposed project would occur primarily from transportation-related roadway noise following construction of the planned major street.

Pursuant to Policy H -1-b of the Fresno General Plan, for purposes of City analyses of noise impacts, and for determining appropriate noise mitigation, a significant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project causes ambient noise levels to exceed the following: (1) The ambient noise level is less than 60 db Ldn and the project increase noise levels by 5 dB or more; (2) The ambient noise level is 60- 65 dB Ldn and the project increases noise levels by 3 dB or more; or, (3) The ambient noise level is greater than 65 dB Ldn and the project increases noise levels by 1.5 dB or more.

Policy NS-1-j of the Fresno G eneral Plan provides for Mitigation by New Development.

Acoustical analyses are required where new development of industrial, commercial or other noise generating land uses (including transportation facilities such as roadways, railroads, and airports) may result in noise levels that exceed the noise level exposure criteria established by Table 9- 2 and 9- 3 of the Fresno General Plan as a condition of permit approval through appropriate means.

Noise mitigation measures may include:
• The screening of noise s ources such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment;
• Providing increased setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings; • Installation of walls and landscaping that serve as noise barriers; • Installation of soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows; and, • Regulating operations, such as hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup.

Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level reduction may be approved by the City, provided a qualified Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative de signs will achieve and maintain the specific t arget for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces. As a last resort, developers may propose to construct noise walls along roadways when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character. This would be a developer responsibility with no City funding.

The construction of planned roadways occurs during the course of a general plan’ s implementation through the execution of the City’s capital improvements program utilizing funds from a variety of sources. In addition, portions of roadways are constructed by private property owners and developers in accordance with applicable development standards.

Timelines for future construction of the public street segment will be contingent upon development; occurring incrementally, as growth is proposed in the area in accordance with the goals, objective and policies of the Fresno General Plan and, including but not limited to those related to noise included herein above.

Policy NS -1-m of the Fresno General Plan states that for projects subject to City approval require that the project sponsor mitigate noise created by new transpor tation and transpor tation-related stationary noise sources, including roadway improvement projects, so that the resulting noise levels do not exceed the City’s adopted standards for noise-sensitive land uses. Prior to issuance of permits, future development proj ects which will facilitate construction of any portion of the planned major street segment will be required to submit acoustical analyses and implement noise mitigation measures to reduce transportation- related impacts from the roadway to acceptable standards for adjacent sensitive uses.

In accordance with Policy NS -1-o of the General Plan, acoustical studies and noise mitigation measures for projects shall specify the heights, materials and design for sound walls and other noise barriers. For purposes of City analyses of noise impacts, and for determining appropriate noise mitigation, a significant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project causes ambient noise levels to exceed the following: (1) The ambient noise level is less than 60 db Ldn and the project increase noise levels by 5 dB or more; (2) The ambient noise level is 60- 65 dB Ldn and the project increases noise levels by 3 dB or more; or, (3) The ambient noise level is greater than 65 dB Ldn and the project increases noise levels by 1.5 dB or more.

Lands adjacent to the major street alignment are primarily undeveloped; primarily being utilized for agricultural purpose with the exception of a few scattered rural residences.

Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that future construction of the proposed roadway will result in an increase in temporary and/or periodic ambient noise levels on the subject property above existing levels.

Short Tern Noise Impacts

The construction of a project involves both short -term, construction related noise, and long term noise potentially generated by increases in area traffic, nearby stationary sources, or other transportation sources. The Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) allows for construction noise in excess of standards if it complies with the section below ( Chapter 10, Article 1, Section 10- 109 – Exemptions). It states that the provisions of Article 1 – Noise Regulations of the FMC shall not apply to:

Construction, repair or remodeling work accomplished pursuant to a building, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or other construction permit issued by the city or other governmental agency, or to site preparation and grading, provided such work takes place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday.

Thus, construction activity would be exempt from City of Fresno noise regulations, as long as such activity is conducted pursuant to an applicable construction permit and occurs between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., excluding Sunday. Therefore, short -term construction impacts associated with the exposure of persons to or the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies would be less than significant.

Groundborne Vibrations and Groundborne Noise Impacts

The construction of the project could involve short-term, construction related groundborne vibrations and groundborne noise. The FMC does not set standards for groundborne vibration. The MEIR for the Fresno General Plan references Caltrans standards to determine impacts . Caltrans considers a peak -particle velocity (ppv) threshold of .04 inches per second (in/sec) for continuous vibration as the minimum

perceptible level for human annoyance of groundborne vibration. Cont inuous/frequent vibrations in excess of .10 in/sec ppv is defined as distinctly perceptible, with levels of .4 in/sec ppv can be expected to result in severe annoyance to people. Ground vibration generated by common construction equipment, including large tractors and loaded trucks, ranges from 0.089 ppv (in/sec) to 0.003 ppv (in/sec) at 25 feet. Given that much of the construction will take place more than 25 feet away from neighboring properties and the threshold for severe annoyance is so much higher than what is expected of construction equipment (.4 compared to .089) the project’s impact of groundborne vibrations is less than significant.

Long Term Noise Impacts

Although the project will create additional activity in the area, the project will be r equired to comply with all noise policies and mitigation measures identified within the Fresno General Plan and MEIR as well as the noise ordinance of the FMC.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in any noise environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -
- Would the project:

a) Induce substantial population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads
or other infrastructure)?
X

b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X

c) Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X

The project includes the identification and adoption of OPL for the West North Avenue street segment for purposes of establishing the ultimate alignment and widths for future public street rights -of-way in accordance with the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan.

The proposed project will require future acquisition and dedications , and in some cases vacations, for public street rights -of-way as well as the installation and construction of both public and private facilities and infrastructure in accordance with the standards, specifications and policies of the City of Fresno. Timelines for future construction o f the public street segment will be contingent upon development; occurring incrementally, as growth is proposed in the area in accordance with the goals, objective and policies of the Fresno General Plan.

Extensions of the planned major street concurren t with future development will contribute to the completion of missing roadway and infrastructure improvements within the area in a manner which is consistent with the planned sequencing of development of the land use designations and circulation element included within the Fresno General Plan.

Thus, the proposed project will not facilitate an additional intensification of uses beyond that which would be allowed by the planned land use designation or circulation element beyond that previously conceived by the Fresno General Plan or MEIR.

Therefore, the project will create a less than significant impact on population.

Furthermore, the public street alignment avoids all existing structures and residences within the project area . Therefore, the project does not have the potential to displace person’s residences as a result of future development.

No population and housing impacts will result from the proposed project beyond what was analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES --

a) Would the project result in
substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:

Fire protection? X

Police protection? X

Drainage and flood control? X

Parks? X

Schools? X

Other public services? X

The project includes the identification and adoption of (OPL) for the West North Avenue street segment for purposes of establishing the ultimate alignment and widths for future public street rights -of-way in accordance with the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan.

The project for future public street purposes does not involve development of a use or facility with a demand for sewer or water capacity. However, installation of sanitary sewer and water main infrastructure will occur with future development within the project area and construction of the roadway. Development of public facilities will not occur

until acquisitions for public rights -of-way have occurred. Therefore, the proposed project will ultimately contribute to completion of public services for the area.

The future public street facilities and construction will also contribute to the provision of permanent drainage service through completion of Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) Master Plan Facilities, which will provide storage and convey runoff for future development of the area. When development permits are issued, the project sponsor will be required to pay drainage fees pursuant to the Drainage Fee Ordinance.

City police and fire protection services will also be made available to serve the proposed project area through implementation of a complete streets network affording future connectivity and public hydrants for fire service.

Development occurring as a result of the project may not have an effect on the School District’s student housing capacity.

No public service impacts will result from the proposed project beyond what was analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XV. RECREATION --

a) Would the project increase the use
of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
X

b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
X

The project will not result in the physical deterioration of existing parks or recreational facilities; and, will not require expansion of existing recreational facilities or affect recreational services beyond what was analyzed in the MEIR for the Fresno General Plan.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in any recreation environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -
- Would the project:

a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation
system, taking into account all modes
of transportation including mass
transit and non- motorized travel and
relevant comp onents of the
circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets,
highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths and mass transit?
X

b) Conflict with an applicable
congestion management program,
including but not limited to level of
service standards and travel demand
measures or other standards
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated
roads or highways?
X

c) Result in a change in air traffic
patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in
location that result in substantial
safety risks?
X

d) Substantially increase hazards
due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

e) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X

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

The Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Fresno General Plan contribute to the establishment of a comprehensive city -wide lan d use planning strategy to f acilitate travel by walking, biking, transit, and motor vehicle with interconnected and linked neighborhoods, districts, major campuses and public facilities, shopping centers and other service centers, and regional transportation such as air, rail, bus and highways.

In Fresno, the roadway system configuration has been primarily based on a traditional grid pattern. Outside of the Downtown Area the grid is based on a north- south orientation based on Township, Range and Section lines. Almost all of the Art erial and Collector Streets (roadways) within the Metropolitan Area are regularly spaced at half - mile intervals. This roadway pattern has been modified in the past several decades to include several curvilinear and diagonal alignments, and neighborhood st reet patterns have sometimes deviated from the grid patterns.

considering a facility’s relation to surrounding land uses, existing rights -of-way, accessibility via other roadways, and appropriate travel speeds. While ro adway classification types were originally based upon a priority given to various types and lengths of motor vehicle trips, they now give substantial consideration to the accommodation of multiple travel modes and trips (public transportation, bicycle, pedestrian). This classification system is used for engineering design and traffic operation standards.

Arterial Streets are typically designed to accommodate four - to six-lane divided (median island separation) roadways, with somewhat limited motor vehicle access to abutting properties, and with the primary purpose of moving traffic within and between neighborhoods and to and from freeways and expressways. The OPL for West North Avenue is planned for three lanes; one lane in each direction (east and west) and a left turning center lane. In addition to major street intersections, appropriately designed and spaced local street intersections may allow left -turn movements to and from other arterial streets.

The project includes the identification and adoption of Official Plan Lines (OPL) for the West North Avenue street segment for purposes of establishing the ultimate alignment and widths for future public street rights -of-way in accordance with the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan.

The proposed project will require future acquisition and dedications for public street rights-of-way as well as the installation and construction of both public and private facilities and infrastructure in accordance with the standards, specifications and policies of the City of Fresno. In some cases, between South Hughes and South West Avenues and between South Newman and South Elm Avenues, no acquisition will be done; property along the proposed alignment will be vacated from the right-of-way.

The Official Plan Lines are consistent with the planned major street segment designated on the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan. The public street alignment proposed for adoption will contribute to the completion of missing roadway and infrastructure improvements within the area in a manner which is consistent with the land use designations and circulation element of the Fresno General Plan.

Therefore, the proposed project will facilitate future connectivity through both vehicular, bicycle a nd pedestrian integration with adjacent land for future development through utilization of the concept of Complete Streets; and, through utilization of the Fresno General Plan classification system for engineering design and traffic operation standards.

The proposed project is located within Traffic Impact Zone III pursuant to Figure MT-4 of the Fresno General Plan, which generally represents areas near or outside the City Limits but within the SOI as of December 31, 2012.

The analysis of traffic oper ations within the MEIR was conducted based on roadway segments representative of the City overall transportation network. Analyses of traffic volumes on the selected roadway segments are based on traffic counts taken at single location or link, which was intended to be representative of the entire segment. A link connects two intersections; a segment is a series of links. Traffic operations on the study roadway segments were measured using a qualitative measure called Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a general measure of traffic operating conditions whereby a letter grade, from “A” (the best) to “F” (the worst), is assigned. These grades represent the perspective of drivers and are an indication of the comfort and convenience associated with driving, as w ell as speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, and freedom to maneuver.

The threshold established by the Fresno General Plan in TIZ III is Level of Service (LOS) “D” representing conditions at or near capacity. Speeds are reduced to a low but relatively uniform value. Freedom to maneuver is difficult with users experiencing frustration and poor comfort and convenience. Unstable operation is frequent, and minor disturbances in traffic flow can cause breakdown conditions.

In accordance with Fresno General Plan Policy MT -2-I, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) will be required to assess the impacts of the new development on existing and planned streets. These assessments will evaluate the impacts of future development projects by analyzing the study intersections and segments in the vicinity of the project during the AM and PM peak hours for the Existing Conditions; Existing plus Project Conditions; Near Term Plus Project Conditions; and, Cumulative Year 2035 plus Project Condi tions study scenarios.

Development projects generating traffic volumes resulting in study segments and intersections operating below the TIZ III LOS D standard under various scenarios will be required to implement mitigation for public street improvements as necessary to reduce levels of service to acceptable standards; thereby, completing the planned circulation network identified within the Fresno General Plan.

It must be noted however that the General Plan accepts lower LOS values. This reflects a change in policy for the City of Fresno to acknowledge that transportation planning based solely on roadway LOS, which considers only driver comfort and convenience, is not desirable since it fails to acknowledge other users of the circulation system and other community values. In evaluating the roadway system, a lower LOS may be desired when balanced against other community values related to resource protection, social equity, economic development, and consideration of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. In addition, roadway LOS is directly linked to roadway infrastructure costs. A higher LOS results in greater expenditure of infrastructure for

wider roadways that do not necessarily serve all users of the circulation system and may compete with other policies of the General Plan.

Based upon the findings contained within the MEIR, with implementation of the Fresno General Plan goals, objectives and policies, impacts to roadways within TIZ III would be less than significant if development occurs at the intensity and scope evaluated by the MEIR. The OPL is consistent with the planned major street segment designated on the Circulation Diagram of the Fr esno General Plan; and, have been designed and engineered in compliance with traffic operations standards based upon the designated street classification system of the circulation element of the Fresno General Plan.

The MEIR evaluated the potential traffi c related impacts from build- out of the Fresno General Plan based upon the designated street classification system and development occurring an intensity and scale consistent with the land use and circulation map. The MEIR finds that the planned major str eet network will be able to accommodate the quantity and kind of traffic which may be potentially generated through build-out.

The area street plans are the product of careful planning that projects traffic capacity needs based on the densities and intens ities of planned land uses anticipated at build- out of the planned area. These streets will provide adequate access to, and recognize the traffic generating characteristics of, individual properties and, at the same time, afford the community an adequate and efficient circulation system; no substantial increase in transportation or traffic is expected to result.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in any transportation/traffic environmental impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS -- Would the project:

a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
X

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

b) Require or result in the
construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X

c) Require or result in the
construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
X

d) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources,
or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
X

e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that
it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X

f) Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid
waste disposal needs?
X

g) Comply with federal, state, and
local statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
X

The project includes the identification and adoption of Official Plan Lines (OPL) for the West North Avenue street segment located between South Marks and South Elm Avenue for purposes of establishing the ultimate alignment and widths for future public

street rights-of-way in accordance with the Circulation Diagram of the Fresno General Plan.

The project, for future public street purposes , does not involve development of a use or facility with a demand for sewer or water capacity or other utility service. However, installation of sanitary sewer and water main infrastructure will occur with future development within the project area and construction of the roadway Development of public facilities will not occur until acquisitions for public rights -of-way have occurred.

Therefore, the proposed project will ultimately contribute to completion of public services for the area.

The future public street facilities and construction will also contribute to the provision of permanent drainage service through completion of Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District Master Plan Facilities, which will provide storage and convey runoff for future development of the area. When development permits are issued, the project sponsor will be required to pay drainage fees pursuant to the Drainage Fee Ordinance.

The project will not generate a need for City of Fresno solid waste service.

The proposed project will not generate wastewater exceed treatment requirements of the applicable Region al Water Quality Control Board. The impact to storm drainage facilities will be less than significant given that future development will be required to provide drainage ser vices and convey runoff to Master Plan Facilities in accordance with Fresno General Plan policies and the standard specifications of the City of Fresno.

In conclusion, with MEIR mitigation incorporated, the project will not result in any utilities and service system impacts beyond those analyzed in MEIR SCH No. 2012111015.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF

SIGNIFICANCE --

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

a) Does the project have the potential
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self -sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X

b) Does the project have impacts that
are
individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the e ffects of
probable future projects)?
X

c) Does the project have
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X

The project is considered to be proposed at a size and scope which is neither a direct or indirect detriment to the quality of the environment through reductions in habitat, populations, or examples of local history (through either individual or cumulative impacts). Furthermore, the proposed project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment or reduce the habitat of wildlife species and will not threaten plant communities or endanger any floral or faunal species. Furthermore the project has no potential to eliminate important examples of major periods in history.

Therefore, as noted in preceding sections of this Initial Study, there is no evidence in the record to indicate that incremental environmental impacts facilitated by this project would be cumulatively significant. There is also no evidence in the record that the project would have any adverse impacts directly, or indirectly, on human beings.

I
n summary, given the mitigation measures required of the project and the analysis detailed in the preceding Initial Study, the proposed project:
 D
oes not have environmental impacts which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly nor indirectly.
 D
oes not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish/wildlife or native plant species (or cause their population to drop below self-sustaining levels), does not threaten to eliminate a native plant or animal community, and does not threaten or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal.
 D
oes not eliminate important examples of elements of California history or prehistory.
 D
oes not have impacts which would be cumulatively considerable even though individually limited.

T
herefore, there are no mandatory findings of significance and preparation of an Environmental Impact Report is not warranted for this project.

MEIR Mitigation Measure Monitoring Checklist for EA No. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

INCORPORATING MEASURES FROM THE MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (MEIR) CERTIFIED FOR THE CITY OF FRESNO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE (SCH No. 2012111015) A - Incorporated into Project
B - Mitigated
C - Mitigation in Progress
D - Responsible Agency Contacted
E - Part of City-wide Program
F - Not Applicable

The timing of implementing each mitigation measure is identified in in the checklist, as well as identifies the entity responsible for verifying that the mitigation measures applied to a project are performed. Project applicant s are responsible for providing evidence that mitigation measures are implemented. As lead agency, the City of Fresno is responsible for verifying that miti gation is performed/completed.

Page 1 ends

This mitigation measure m onitoring and reporting checklist was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (C EQA) Guidelines Section 15097 and Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (PRC). It was certified as part of the Fresno City Council’s approval of the MEIR for the Fresno General Plan update (Fresno City Council Resolution 2014-225, adopted December 18, 2014).

Letter designations to the right of each MEIR mitigation measure listed in this Exhibit note how the mitigation measure relates to the environmental assessment of the ab ove-listed project, according to the key found at right and at the bottoms of the following pages:

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F
Aesthetics:

AES-1. Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences.

Verification comments : Review of specific lighting systems and locations to occur with right -of-way improvement plans prior to construction of any porti on of the planned public street segment.

Prior to issuance
of building
permits
Public Works
Department
(PW) and
Development &
Resource
Management
Dept. (DARM)

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 2 ends

Aesthetics (continued):

AES-2: Lighting systems for public facilities such as ac tive play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties.

Verification comments : Review of specific lighting systems and locat ions to occur with right -of-way improvement plans prior to construction of any portion of the planned public street segment.

Prior to issuance
of building
permits

DARM X

AES-3: Lighting systems for non- residential uses, not
including public faci lities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur.

Prior to issuance
of building
permits

DARM X

AES-4: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot Lamberts (FT -L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0
horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT -L when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater.

Prior to issuance
of building
permits

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 3 ends

Aesthetics (continued):

AES-5: Materials used on building facades shall be non- reflective.

Prior to
development
project approval

DARM X

Air Quality:

AIR-1: Projects that include five or more heavy -duty truck deliveries per day with sensitive receptors located within 300 feet of the truck loading area shall provide a screening analysis to determine if the project has the potential to exceed criteria pollutant concentration based standards and
thresholds for NO2 and PM2.5. If projects exceed screening criteria, refined dispersion modeling and health risk
assessment shall be accomplished and i f needed, mitigation measures to reduce impacts shall be included in the project to reduce the impacts to the extent feasible. Mitigation
measures include but are not limited to:
• Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. • Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less.

Prior to
development
project approval

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 4 ends

Air Quality (continued):

AIR-2: Projects that result in an increased cancer risk of 10 in a million or exceed criteria pollutant ambient air quality standards shall implement site- specific measures that reduce toxic air contaminant (TAC) exposure to reduce excess cancer risk to less than 10 in a million. Possible control measures include but are not limited to:
• Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. • Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less • Construct block walls to reduce the flow of emissions toward sensitive receptors
• Install a vegetative barrier downwind from the TAC source that can absorb a portion of the diesel PM emissions
• For projects proposing to locate a new building containing sensitive receptors near existing sources of TAC emissions, install HEPA filters in HVAC systems to reduce TAC emission levels exceeding risk thresholds.
• Install heating and cooling services at truck stops to eliminate the need for idling during overnight stops to run onboard systems.
(continued on next page)

Prior to
development
project approval

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 5 ends

Air Quality (continued):

AIR-2 (continued from previous page)
• For large distribution centers where the owner controls the vehicle fleet, provide facilities to support alternative fueled trucks powered by fuels such as natural gas or bio-diesel • Utilize electric powered material handling equipment where feasible for the weight and volume of material to be moved.

Verification comments : Capital Improvement Projects for future roadway construction shall assess and implement site- specific measures as necessary to reduce toxic air contaminant (TAC) exposure to reduce excess cancer risk to less than 10 in a million, when/where applicable.

[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

AIR-3: Require developers proposing projects on ARB’s list of projects in its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (Handbook) warranting special c onsideration to prepare a cumulative health risk assessment when sensitive receptors are located within the distance screening criteria of the facility as listed in the ARB Handbook.

Prior to
development
project approval

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 6 ends

Air Quality (continued):

AIR-4: Require developers of projects containing sensitive receptors to provide a cumulative health risk assessment at project locations exceeding ARB Land Use Handbook
distance screening criteria or newer criteria that may be developed by t he San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).

Prior to
development
project approval

DARM X

AIR-5: Require developers of projects with the potential to generate significant odor impacts as determined through review of SJVAPCD odor complaint history for similar facilities and consultation with the SJVAPCD to prepare an odor
impact assessment and to implement odor control measures recommended by the SJVAPCD or the City to the extent
needed to reduce the impact to less than significant.

Prior to
development
project approval

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 7 ends

Biological Resources:

BIO-1: Construction of a proposed project should avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special -status species known to occur within the Planning Area. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special - status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special - status species. If a special-status species are determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and
minimization measures shall be incorporated into the
construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a listed species to the greatest extent feasible.

Prior to
development
project approval
DARM
X

BIO-2: Direct or incidental take of any state or federally listed species should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will r esult in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resources agencies and/or additional permitting may be
required. Agency consultation through the C alifornia
Department of Fish and Wildlife (C DFW) 2081 and U.S. Fish and Wil dlife Service ( USFWS) Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that (continued on next page)
Prior to
development
project approval
DARM
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 8 ends

Biological Resources (continued):

BIO-2 (continued from previous page)
may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species.

Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case- by-case basis through agency consultation.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

BIO-3: Development within the Planning Area should avoid, where possible, special -status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special-status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special-status natural community or suitable habitat for special -status species, compensatory habitat -based mitigation is required under CEQA and the California
Endangered Species Act ( CESA). Mitigation will consist of preserving on- site habitat, restoring similar habitat or purchasing off-site credits from an approved mitigation bank.

Compensatory mitigation will be determined through
consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be agreed upon by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special-status natural communities to a less than significant (continued on next page)
Prior to
development
project approval
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 9 ends

Biological Resources (continued):

BIO-3 (continued from previous page):
level. Agreed-upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special -status species. The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

BIO-4: Proposed projects within the Planning Area should avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species
protected under Fish and Game Code 3500 and the Migrat ory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre- construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500-feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Project activities (continued on next page)

Prior to
development
project approval
and during
construction
activities
DARM
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 10 ends

Biological Resources (continued):

BIO-4 (continued from previous page):
may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]
BIO-5: If a proposed project will result in the removal or impact to any riparian habitat and/or a special -status natural community with potential to occur in the Planning Area, compensatory habitat -based mitigation shall be required to reduce project impacts. Compensatory mitigation must
involve the preservation or restorat ion or the purchase of off - site mitigation credits for impacts to riparian habitat and/or a special-status natural community. Mitigation must be
conducted in-kind or within an approved mitigation bank in the region. The specific mitigation ratio for habi tat-based mitigation will be determined through consultation with the appropriate agency ( i.e., CDFW or USFWS) on a case- by- case basis.

Prior to
development
project approval
DARM
X

BIO-6: Project impacts that occur to riparian habitat may also result in significant impacts to streambeds or waterways protected under Section 1600 of Fish and Wildlife Code and Section 404 of the CWA. CDFW and/or USACE consultation, determination of mitigation strategy, and regulatory permitting to reduce impacts, as required for projects that remove riparian habitat and/or alter a streambed or waterway, shall be implemented.

Prior to
development
project approval
DARM
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 11 ends

Biological Resources (continued):

BIO-7: Project-related impacts to riparian habitat or a special- status natural community may result in direct or incidental impacts to special -status species associated with riparian or wetland habitats. Project impacts to special -status species associated with riparian habitat shall be mitigated through agency consultation, development of a mitigation strategy, and/or issuing incidental take permits for the specific special - status species, as determined by the CDFW and/or USFWS.

Prior to
development
project approval
DARM
X

BIO-8: If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts. Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of a wetland mit igation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the Planning Area. Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the
impacted wetland.

Prior to
development
project approval
DARM
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 12 ends

Biological Resources (continued):

BIO-9: In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and
construction phase of the project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland. Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage and incorporating detention basins shall assist in ensuring project - related impacts to wetland habitat are minim ized to the greatest extent feasible.

Prior to
development
project approval;
but for long-term
operational
BMPs, prior to
issuance of
occupancy

DARM X

Cultural Resources:

CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered
before or during gr ading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified historical resources specialist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified historical resources specialist shal l make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s
Historic Preservation Ordinance.
(continued on next page)
Prior to
commencement
of, and during,
construction
activities

DARM X

Cultural Resources (continued):

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 13 ends

CUL-1 (continued from previous page)
If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.

No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these.

Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City -approved institution or person who is capable of providing long- germ preservation to allow future scientific study.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

CUL-2: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for prehistoric archaeological resources shall be conduct ed. The following procedures shall be followed.

If prehistoric resour ces are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that buried prehistoric (continued on next page)
Prior to
commencement
of, and during,
construction
activities

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 14 ends

Cultural Resources (continued):

CUL-2 (continued from previous page)
archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, constructio n shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make
recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

If the resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency.

Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided (continued on next page)
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 15 ends

Cultural Resources (continued):

CUL-2 (further continued from previous two pages)
to a City -approved institution or person who is capable of providing long- term preservation to allow future scientific study.

If prehistoric resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried using appropriate State record forms and submit the f orms to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. The
resources shall be evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, measures shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.

In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and
construction ac tivities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include an archaeological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified archaeologist. If additional prehistoric archaeological resources are found during
(continued on next page)
[see Page 13] [see Page 13]

Cultural Resources (continued):

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 16 ends

CUL-2 (further continued from previous three pages)
excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
[see Page 13] [see Page 13]

CUL-3: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be
conducted. The following procedures shall be followed:

If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that unique paleontological/geological resources are
discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered (continued on next page)
Prior to
commencement
of, and during,
construction
activities

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 17 ends

CUL-3 (continued from previous page)
resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds. If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City -approved institution or person who is capable of providing long- term preservation to allow future scientific study.

If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or l iterature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery
excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the (continued on next page)

[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 18 ends

Cultural Resources (continued):

CUL-3 (further continued from previous two pages)
resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include a paleontological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist. If additional paleontological/geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unkno wn resources shall be followed.
[see Page 16] [see Page 16]

CUL-4: In the event that human remains are unearthed
during excavation and grading activities of any future
development project, all activity shall cease immediately.

Pursuant to Health and S afety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, t he coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most (continued on next page)
Prior to
commencement
of, and during,
construction
activities

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 19 ends

Cultural Resources (continued):

CUL-4 (continued from previous page)
likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains.

Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or
disturbed by further development activit y until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants al l reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 20 ends

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1: Re-designate the existing vacant land proposed for low density residential located northwest of the intersection of East Garland Avenue and North Dearing Avenue and located within Fresno Yosemite International Airport Zone 1-RPZ, to Open Space.

Prior to
development
approvals

DARM X

HAZ-2: Limit the proposed low density residential (1 to 3 dwelling units per acre) located northwest of the airport , and located within Fresno Yosemite International Airport
Zone 3-Inner Turning Area, to 2 dwelling units per acre or less.

Prior to
development
approvals

DARM X

HAZ-3: Re -designate the current area within Fresno
Yosemite International Airport Zone 5-Sideline located
northeast of the airport to Public Facilities -Airport or Open Space.

Prior to
development
approvals

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 21 ends

Hazards and Hazardous Materials (continued):

HAZ-4: Re-designate the current vacant lots at the northeast corner of Kearney Boulevard and South Thorne Avenue to
Public Facilities-Airport or Open Space.

Prior to
development
approvals

DARM X

HAZ-5: Prohibit residential uses within S afety Zone 1 northwest of the Hawes Avenue and South Thorne Avenue
intersection.

Prior to
development
approvals

DARM X

HAZ-6: Establish an alternative Emergency Operations
Center in the event the current Emergency Operations Center is under redevelopment or blocked.

Prior to
redevelopment
of the current
Emergency
Operations
Center
Fresno Fire
Department
and Mayor/
City Manager’s
Office
X X

Hydrology and Water Quality
HYD-1: The City shall develop and implement water
conservation measures to reduce the per capita water use to 215 gallons per capita per day.

Prior to water
demand
exceeding water
supply
Department of
Public Utilities
(DPU)
X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 22 ends

HYD-2: The City shall continue to be an active participant in the Kings Water Authority and the implementation of the Kings Basin IRWMP.

Ongoing DPU X X

HYD-5.1: The City and partnering agencies shall implement the following measures to reduce the impacts on the capacity of existing or planned storm drainage Master Plan c ollection systems to less than significant.
• Implement the existing Storm Drainage Master Plan
(SDMP) for collection systems in drainage areas where the amount of imperviousness is unaffected by the change in land uses.
• Update the SDMP in those drainage area s where the
amount of imperviousness increased due to the change in land uses to determine the changes in the collection
systems that would need to occur to provide adequate
capacity for the stormwater runoff from the increased
imperviousness.
• Implement t he updated SDMP to provide stormwater
collection systems that have sufficient capacity to convey the peak runoff rates from the areas of increased
imperviousness.
(continued on next page)
Prior to
exceedance of
capacity of
existing
stormwater
drainage
facilities
Fresno
Metropolitan
Flood Control
District
(FMFCD),
DARM, and
PW
X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 23 ends

Hydrology and Water Quality (continued):

HYD-5.1 (continued from previous page)
Require developments that increase site imperviousness to install, operate, and maintai n FMFCD approved on- site detention systems to reduce the peak runoff rates resulting from the increased imperviousness to the peak runoff rates that will not exceed the capacity of the existing stormwater collection systems.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

HYD-5.2: The City and partnering agencies shall implement the following measures to reduce the impacts on the capacity of existing or planned storm drainage Master Plan retention basins to less than significant:

Consult the SDMP to analyze the impacts to existing and planned retention basins to determine remedial measures required to reduce the impact on retention basin capacity to less than significant. Remedial measures would include:
• Increase the size of the retention basin through the
purchase of more land or deepening the basin or a
combination for planned retention basins.
• Increase the size of the emergency relief pump
capacity required to pump excess runoff volume out of
the basin and into adjacent canal that convey the
stormwater to a d isposal facility for existing retention basins.

Prior to
exceedance of
capacity of
existing retention
basin facilities
FMFCD,
DARM, and
PW
X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 24 ends

• Require developments that increase runoff volume to
install, operate, and maintain, Low Impact Development
(LID) measures to reduce runoff volume to the runoff
volume that will not exceed the capacity of the existing retention basins.

Hydrology and Water Quality (continued):

HYD-5.3: The City and partnering agencies shall implement the following measures to reduce the impacts on the capacity of existing or planned storm drainage Master Plan urban detention (stormwater quality) basins to less than significant.

Consult the SDMP to determine the impacts to the urban
detention basin weir overflow rates and determine remedial measures required to reduce the impact on the detention basin capacity to less than significant. Remedial measures would include:
• Modify overflow weir to maintain the suspended solids removal rates adopted by the FMFCD Board of
Directors.
• Increase the size of the urban detention basin to
increase residence time by purchasing more land. The
existing detention basins are already at the adopted
design depth.

Prior to
development
approvals in the
Southeast
Development
Area
FMFCD,
DARM, and
PW
X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 25 ends

• Require developments that increase runoff volume to
install, operate, and maintain, Low Impact Development
(LID) measures to reduce peak runoff rates and runoff
volume to the runoff rates and volumes that will not
exceed the weir overflow rates of the existing urban
detention basins.

HYD-5.4: The City shall implement the following measures to reduce the impacts on the capacity of existing or planned storm drainage Master Plan pump disposal systems to less than significant.
• Consult the SDMP to determine the extent and degree to which the capacity of the existing pump system will be exceeded.
• Require new developments to install, operate, and maintain FMFCD design standard on-site detention facilities to reduce peak stormwater runoff rates to existing planned peak runoff rates.
• Provide additional pump system capacity to maximum
allowed by existing permitting to increase the capacity to match or exceed the peak runoff rates determined by the SDMP.

Prior to
exceedance of
capacity of
existing pump
disposal systems

FMFCD,
DARM, and
PW
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 26 ends

Hydrology and Water Quality (continued):

HYD-5.5: The City shall work with FMFCD to develop and adopt an update to the SDMP for the Southeast Development Area that would be adequately designed to collect, convey and dispose of runoff at the rates and volumes which would be generated by the planned land uses in that area.

Prior to
development
approvals in the
Southeast
Development
Area
FMFCD,
DARM, and
PW
X

HYD-5.5: The City shall wo rk with FMFCD to develop and adopt an update to the SDMP for the Southeast Development Area that would be adequately designed to collect, convey and dispose of runoff at the rates and volumes which would be generated by the planned land uses in that area.

Prior to
development
approvals in the
Southeast
Development
Area
FMFCD,
DARM, and
PW
X

Public Services:

PS-1: As future fire facilities are planned, the fire department shall evaluate if specific environmental effects would occur.

Typical impa cts from fire facilities include noise, traffic, and lighting. Typical mitigation to reduce these impacts includes:
• Noise: Barriers and setbacks on the fire department
sites.
• Traffic: Traffic devices for circulation and a “keep clear zone” during emergency responses.

During the
planning process
for future fire
department
facilities

DARM X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 27 ends

• Lighting: Provision of hoods and deflectors on lighting fixtures on the fire department sites.

Public Services (continued):

PS-2: As future police faci lities are planned, the police department shall evaluate if specific environmental effects would occur. Typical impacts from police facilities include noise, traffic, and lighting. Typical mitigation to reduce potential impacts from police department facilities includes:
• Noise: Barriers and setbacks on the police department sites.
• Traffic: Traffic devices for circulation.
• Lighting: Provision of hoods and deflectors on lighting fixtures on the fire department sites.

During the
planning process
for future Police
Department
facilities

DARM X

PS-3: As future public and private school facilities are planned, school districts shall evaluate if specific
environmental effects would occur with regard to public schools, and DARM shall evaluate other schoo l facilities .

Typical impacts from school facilities include noise, traffic, and lighting. Typical mitigation to reduce potential impacts from school facilities includes:
(continued on next page)
During the
planning process
for future school
facilities
DARM, local
school districts,
and the
Division of the
State Architect
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 28 ends

Public Services (continued):

PS-3 (continued from previous page)
• Noise: Barriers and setbacks placed on school sites.
• Traffic: Traffic devices for circulation.
• Lighting: Provision of hoods and deflectors on lighting fixtures for stadium lights.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

PS-4: As future parks and recreational facilities are planned, the City shall evaluate if specific environmental effects would occur. Typ ical impacts from school facilities include noise, traffic, and lighting. Typical mitigation to reduce potential impacts from park and recreational facilities includes:
• Noise: Barriers and setbacks placed on school sites.
• Traffic: Traffic devices for circulation.
• Lighting: Provision of hoods and deflectors on lighting fixtures for outdoor play area/field lights.

During the
planning process
for future park
and recreation
facilities

DARM X

PS-5: As future detention, court, library, and hospital f acilities are planned, the appropriate agencies shall evaluate if specific environmental effects would occur. Typical impacts from court, library, and hospital facilities include noise, traffic, and lighting. Typical mitigation to reduce potential impact s includes:
• Noise: Barriers and setbacks placed on school sites.

During the
planning process
for future
detention, court,
library, and
hospital facilities
DARM, to the
extent that
agencies
constructing
these facilities
are subject to
City of Fresno
regulation
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 29 ends

• Traffic: Traffic devices for circulation.
• Lighting: Provision of hoods and deflectors on outdoor lighting fixtures
Utilities and Service Systems
USS-1: The City shall develop and implement a wastewater master plan update.

Prior to
wastewater
conveyance and
treatment
demand
exceeding
capacity

DPU X

USS-2: Prior to exceeding existing wastewater treatment capacity, the City shall evaluate the wastewater system and shall not approve additional development that contributes wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility that could exceed capacity until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the City shall construct the following improvements:
• Construct an approximately 70 MGD expansion of the
Regional Wast ewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the
generation of wastewater is increased.
• Construct an approximately 0.49 MGD expansion of the
Prior to
exceeding
existing
wastewater
treatment
capacity

DPU X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 30 ends

North Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

USS-3: Prior to exceeding existing wastewater treatment capacity, the City shall evaluate the wastewater system and shall not approve additional development that contributes wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility that could exceed capacity until additional capacity is provided. After approximately the year 2025, the City shall construct the following improvements:
• Construct an approximately 24 MGD wastewater
treatment facility within the Southeast Development
Area and obtain revised waste discharge requirements
as the generation of wastewater is increased.
• Construct an approximately 9.6 MGD expansion of the
Regional Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation
Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as
the generation of wastewater is increased.

Prior to
exceeding
existing
wastewater
treatment
capacity

DPU X

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 31 ends

USS-4: Prior to construction, a Traffic Control/Traffic Management Plan to address traffic impacts during
construction of water and sewer facilities shall be prepared and implemented, subject to approval by the City (and Fresno County, when work is being done in unin corporated area roadways). The plan shall identify access and parking
restrictions, pavement markings and signage, and hours of construction and for deliveries . It shall include haul routes , the notification plan, and coordinat ion with emergency service providers and schools.

Prior to
construction of
water and sewer
facilities
PW for work in
the City; PW
and Fresno
County Public
Works and
Planning when
unincorporated
area roadways
are involved
X

USS-5: Prior to exce eding capacity within the existing wastewater collection system facilities, the City shall evaluate the wastewater collection system and shall not approve
additional development that would generate additional
wastewater and exceed the capacity of a facilit y until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the following capacity improvements shall be provided. • Orange Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be
improved between Dakota and Jensen Avenues.

Approximately 37,240 feet of new sewer main shall be
installed and approximately 5,760 feet of existing sewer main shall be rehabilitated. The size of the new sewer
main shall range from 27 inches to 42 inches in
(continued on next page)

Prior to
exceeding
capacity within
the existing
wastewater
collection system
facilities

DPU

X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 32 ends

diameter. The associated project designations i n the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are RS03A, RL02, C01- REP,
C02-REP, C03 -REP , C04-REP, C05 -REP , C06-REL and
C07-REP.
• Marks Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Clinton Avenue and Kearney Boulevard.

Approximately 12,150 feet of new sewer main shall be
installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 33 inches to 60 inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are
CM1-REP and CM2-REP.
• North Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shal l be improved between Polk and Fruit Avenues and also between Orange
and Maple Avenues. Approximately 25,700 feet of new
sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 48 inches to 66 inches in diameter.

The associated proj e
ct designations in the 2006
Wastewater Master Plan are CN1-REL1 and CN3-REL1.
• Ashlan Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Hughes and West Avenues and also between
Fruit and Blackstone Avenues. Approximately 9,260 feet of new sewer m ain shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 24 inches to 36 inches in
diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CA1-REL and CA2-REP.

[see previous
page]

[see previous
page]
MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 33 ends

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

USS-6: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing 28 pipeline segments shown in Figures 1 an d 2 in Appendix J -1, the City shall evaluate the wastewater collection system and shall not approve additional development that would generate additional wastewater and exceed the capacity of one of the 28 pipeline segments until additional capacity is provided.

Prior to
exceeding
capacity within
the existing 28
pipeline seg-
ments shown in
Figures 1 and 2
in Appendix J-1
of the MEIR

DPU X

USS-7: Prior to exceeding existing water supply capacity, the City shall evaluate the water supply system and shall not approve additional development that demand additional water until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the following capacity improvements shall be provided.
• Construct an approximately 80 million gallon per day
(MGD) surface water treatment facility near the intersection of Armstrong and Olive Avenues, in accordance with
Chapter 9 and Figure 9-1 of the City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan Update (2014 Metro
Plan Update) Phase 2 Report, dated January 2012.
(continued on next page)
Prior to
exceeding
existing water
supply capacity

DPU X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 34 ends

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

USS-7 (continued from previous page)
• Construct an approximately 30 MGD expansion of the
existing northeast surface water treatment facility for a total capacity of 60 MGD, in accordance with Chapter 9 and
Figure 9-1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update.
• Construct an approximately 20 MGD surface water
treatment facility in the southwest portion of the City, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9- 1 of the 2014
Metro Plan Update.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

USS-8: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing water conveyance facilities, the City shall evaluate the water conveyance system and shall n
ot approve additional
development that would demand additional water and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided.

The following capacity improvements shall be provided by approximately 2025.
• Construct 65 new groundwater wel ls, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9-1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update. (continued on next page)
Prior to
exceeding
capacity within
the existing
water
conveyance
facilities

DPU X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 35 ends

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

USS-8 (continued from previous page)
• Construct a 2.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T2) near the intersection of Clovis and
California Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and
Figure 9-1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update.
• Construct a 3.0 million gal lon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T3) near the intersection of Temperance and
Dakota Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9-1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update.
• Construct a 3.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T4) in the Down town Planning Area, in
accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9- 1 of the 2014
Metro Plan Update.
• Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T5) near the intersection of Ashlan and
Chestnut Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and
Figure 9-1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update.
• Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T6) near the intersection of Ashlan Avenue and Highway 99, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9- 1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update.
(continued on next page)

[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 36 ends

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

USS-8 (continued from previous two pages)
• Construct 50.3 miles of regional water transmission
mains ranging in size from 24-inch to 48-inch diameter, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9- 1 of the 2014
Metro Plan Update.
• Construct 95.9 miles of 16- inch diameter transmission grid mains, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9- 1 of the 2014 Metro Plan Update.

Verification comments:

[see Page 34] [see Page 34]

USS-9: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing water conveyance facilities, the City shall evaluate the water conveyance system and shall not approve additional
development that would demand additional water and exceed the capacity of a facili ty until additional capacity is provided.

The following capacity improvements shall be provided after approximately the year 2025 and additional water conveyance facilities shall be provided prior to exceedance of capacity within the water conveyance faci lities to accommodate full buildout of the General Plan Update.
(continued on next page)
Prior to
exceeding
capacity within
the existing
water
conveyance
facilities

DPU X X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 37 ends

Utilities and Service Systems (continued):

USS-9 (continued from previous page)
• Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (SEDA Reservoir 1) within the northern part of the
Southeast Development Area.
• Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (SEDA Reservoir 2) within the southern part of the
Southeast Development Area.

Additional water conveyance facilities shall be provided prior to exceedance of capacity within the water conveyance
facilities to accommodate full buildout of the General Plan Update.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

Utilities and Service Systems - Hydrology and Water Quality USS-10: In order to maintain Fresno Irrigation District canal operability, FMFCD shall m aintain operational intermittent flows during the dry season, within defined channel capacity and downstream capture capabilities, for recharge.

During the dry
season
Fresno
Irrigation
District (FID)
X

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources:

USS-11: When FMFCD proposes to provide drainage service outside of urbanized areas:
(a) FMFCD shall conduct preliminary investigations on
undeveloped lands outside of highly urbanized areas.

Prior to
development
approvals
outside of highly
California
Regional
Water Quality
Control Board
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 38 ends

These investigations shall examine wetland hydrology,
vegetation and soil types. These preliminary
investigations shall be the basis for making a
determination on whether or not more in- depth wetland
studies shall be necessary. If the proposed project site does not exhibit wetland hydrology, support a
prevalence of wetland vegetation and wetland soil types then no further action is required.
(b) Where proposed activ ities could have an impact on
areas verified by the Corps as jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the U.S. (urban and rural streams, seasonal
wetlands, and vernal pools), FMFCD shall obtain the
necessary Clean Water Act, Section 404 permits for
activities where fill material shall be placed in a wetland, obstruct the flow or circulation of waters of the United States, impair or reduce the reach of such waters . A s part of FMFCD’s Memorandum of Understanding with
CDFG, Section 404 and 401 permits would be obt ained
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and from the
(continued on next page)

urbanized areas (RWQCB), and
USACE

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 39 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-11 (continued from previous page)
Regional Water Quality Control Board f or any activity
involving filling of jurisdictional waters). At a minimum, to meet “no net loss policy,” the permits shall require replacement of wetland habitat at a 1:1 ratio.
(c) Where proposed activities could have an impact on
areas verified by the Corps as jurisdictional wetlands or waters of the U.S. (urban and rural streams, seasonal
wetlands, and vernal pools), FMFCD shall submit and
implement a wetland mitigation plan based on the
wetland acreage verified by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. The wetland mitigation plan shall be
prepared by a qualified biologist or wetland scientist
experienced in wetland creation, and shall incl ude the following or equally effective elements:
i. Specific location, size, and existing hydrology and
soils within the wetland creation area.
ii. Wetland mitigation techniques, seed source,
planting specifications, and required buffer
setbacks. In addition, the mitigation plan shall
ensure adequate water supply is provided to the
created wetlands in order to maintain the proper
(continued on next page)
[see page 37] [see page 37]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 40 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-11 (continued from previous two pages)
hydrologic regimes required by the different types
of wetlands created. Provisions to ensure the
wetland water supply is maintained in perpetuity
shall be included in the plan.
iii. A monitoring program for restored, enhanced,
created, and preserved wetlands on the project
site. A monitoring program is required to meet three
objectives; 1) establish a wetland creation success
criteria to be met ; 2) to specify monitoring
methodology; 3) to identify as far as is possible,
specific remedial actions that will be required in
order to achieve the success criteria; and 4) to
document the degree of success achieved in
establishing wetland vegetation.
(d) A monitoring plan shall be developed and implemented by a qualified biologist to moni tor results of any on- site wetland restoration and creation for five years. The
monitoring plan shall include specific success criteria, frequency and timing of monitoring, and assessment of
whether or not maintenance activities are being carried out and how these shall be adjusted if necessary.
(continued on next page)

[see Page 37] [see Page 37]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 41 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-11 (continued from previous three pages)
If monitoring reveals that success criteria ar e not being met, remedial habitat creation or restoration should be designed and implemented by a qualified biologist and
subject to five years of monitoring as described above.

Or
(e) In lieu of developing a mitigation plan that outlines the avoidance, purchase, or creation of wetlands, FMFCD
could purchase mitigation credits through a Corps
approved Mitigation Bank.
[see Page 37] [see Page 37]

USS-12: When FMFCD proposes to provide drainage service outside in areas that support seasonal wetlands or v ernal pools:
(a) During facility design and prior to initiation of ground disturbing activities in areas that support seasonal
wetlands or vernal pools, FMFCD shall conduct a
preliminary rare plant assessment. The assessment will determine the likelihood on w hether or not the project site could support rare plants. If it is determined that the project site would not support rare plants, then no further (continued on next page)
During facility
design and prior
to initiation of
ground
disturbing
activities in
areas that
support seasonal
wetlands or
vernal pools
California
Department of
Fish & Wildlife
(CDFW) and
U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service
(USFWS)
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 42 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-12 (continued from previous page)
action is required. However, if the project site has the potential to support rare plants; then a rare plant survey shall be conducted. Rare plant surveys shall be
conducted by qualified biologists in accordance with the most current CDFG/USFWS gui delines or protocols and
shall be conducted at the time of year when the plants in question are identifiable.
(b) Based on the results of the survey, prior to design approval, FMFCD shall coordinate with CDFG and/or
implement a Section 7 consultation with USFWS, shall
determine whether the project facility would result in a significant impact to any special status plant species.

Evaluation of project impacts shall consider the
following:
• The status of the species in question ( e.g., officially listed by the State or Federal Endangered Species
Acts).
• The relative density and distribution of the on- site occurrence versus typical occurrences of the
species in question.
(continued on next page)
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 43 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-12 (continued from previous two pages)
• The habitat quality of the on- site occurrence relative to historic, current or potential distribution of the
population.
(c) Prior to design approval, and in consultation with the CDFG and/or the USFWS, FMFCD shall prepare and
implement a mitigation plan, in accordance with any
applicable State and/or federal statutes or laws, that
reduces impacts to a less than significant level.
[see Page 41] [see Page 41]

USS-13: When FMFCD proposes to provide drainage service outside in areas that support seasonal wetlands or vernal pools:
(a) During facility design and prior to initiation of ground disturbing activities in areas that support seasonal
wetlands or vernal pools, FMFCD shal l conduct a
preliminary survey to determine the presence of listed
vernal pool crustaceans.
(continued on next page)
During facility
design and prior
to initiation of
ground
disturbing
activities in
areas that
support seasonal
wetlands or
vernal pools
CDFW and
USFWS
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 44 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-13 (continued from previous page)
(b) If potential habitat (vernal pools, seasonally inundated areas) or fairy shrimp exist within areas proposed to be disturbed, FMFCD shall complete the first and second
phase of fairy shrimp presence or absence surveys. If an absence finding is determined and accepted by the
USFWS, then no further mitigation shall be required for fairy shrimp.
(c) If fairy shrimp are found to be present within vernal pools or other areas of inundation to be impacted by the
implementation of storm drainage facilities, FMFCD shall mitigate impacts on fairy shrimp habitat in accordance
with the USFWS requirements of the Programmatic
Biological Opini on. This shall include on- site or off -site creation and/or preservation of fairy shrimp habitat at ratios ranging from 3:1 to 5:1 depending on the habitat impacted and the choice of on- site or off -site mitigation.

Or mitigation shall be the purchase of mi tigation credit through an accredited mitigation bank.
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 45 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-14: When FMFCD proposes to construct drainage
facilities in an area where elderberry bushes may occur:
(a) During facility design and prior to initiation of
construction activities, FMFCD shall conduct a project - specific survey for all potential Valley Elderberry
Longhorn Beetle (VELB) habitats (elderberry shrubs),
including a stem count and an assessment of historic or current VELB habitat.
(b) FMFCD shall avoid and protect all potential identified VELB habitat where feasible.
(c) Where avoidance is infeasible, develop and implement a VELB mitigation plan in accordance with the most
current USFWS mitigation guidelines for unavoidable
take of VELB habitat pursuant to either Section 7 or
Section 10(a) of the Federal Endangered Species Act.

The mitigation plan shall include, but might not be limited to, relocation of elderberry shrubs, pl anting of elderberry shrubs, and monitoring of relocated and planted
elderberry shrubs.

During facility
design and prior
to initiation of
construction
activities
CDFW and
USFWS
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 46 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-15: Prior to ground disturbing activities during nesting season (March through July) for a project that supports bird nesting habitat, FMFCD shall conduct a survey of trees. If nests are found during the survey, a qualified biologist shall assess the nesting activity on the project site. If active nests are located, no construction activities shall be allowed within 250 feet of the nest until the young have fledged. If
construction activities are planned during the no n- breeding period (August t hrough February), a nest survey is not necessary.

Prior to ground
disturbing
activities during
nesting season
(March through
July) for a
project that
supports bird
nesting habitat
CDFW and
USFWS
X

USS-16: When FMFCD proposes to construct drain age
facilities in an area that supports bird nesting habitat:
(a) FMFCD shall conduct a pre- construction breeding-
season survey (approximately February 1 through August
31) of proposed project sites in suitable habitat (levee and canal berms, open grassland s with suitable burrows) during the same calendar year that construction is
planned to begin. If phased construction procedures are planned for the proposed project, the results of the above survey shall be valid only for the season when it is
conducted.
(continued on next page)
Prior to ground
disturbing
activities during
nesting season
(March through
July) for a
project that
supports bird
nesting habitat
CDFW and
USFWS
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 47 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-16 (continued from previous page)
(b) During the construction stage, FMFCD shall avoid all burrowing owl nest sites potentially disturbed by project construction during the breeding season while the nest is occupied with adults and/or young. The occupied nest
site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist to
determine when the nest is no longer used. Avoidance
shall include the establishment of a 160- foot diameter non-disturbance buffer zone around the nest site.

Disturbance of any nest sites shall only occur outside of the breeding season and when the nests are unoccupied
based on monitoring by a qualified biologist. The buffer zone shall be delineated by highly visible temporary
construction fencing.

Based on approval by CDFG, pre- construction and pre-
breeding season exclusion measures may be implemented to preclude burrowing owl occupation of the project site prior to project-related disturbance. Burrowing owls can be passively excluded from potential nest sites in the construction area, either by clos ing the burrows or placing one- way doors in the burrows according to current CDFG protocol. Burrows shall be examined not more than 30 days before construction to
ensure that no owls have recolonized the area of construction. (continued on next page)
[see previous
page]
[see previous
page]

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 48 ends

Utilities and Service Systems - Biological Resources (continued):

USS-16 (continued from previous two pages)
For each burrow destroyed, a new burrow shall be created (by installing artificial burrows at a ratio of 2:1 on protected lands nearby.
[see Page 46] [see Page 46]

USS-17: When FMFCD proposes to construct drainage
facilities in the San Joaquin River corridor:
(a) FMFCD shall not conduct instream activities in the San Joaquin River between October 15 and April 1 5. If this is not feasible, FMFCD shall consult with the National
Marine Fisheries Service and CDFW on the appropriate
measures to be implemented in order to protect listed
salmonids in the San Joaquin River.
(b) Riparian vegetation shading the main channel that is removed or damaged shall be replaced at a ratio and
quantity sufficient to maintain the existing shading of the channel. The location of replacement trees on or within FMFCD berms, detention ponds or river channels shall
be approved by FMFCD an d the Central Valley Flood
Protection Board.

During instream
activities
conducted
between
October 15 and
April 15
National
Marine
Fisheries
Service
(NMFS),
CDFW, and
Central Valley
Flood
Protection
Board
(CVFPB)
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 49 ends

Utilities and Service Systems – Recreation / Trails:

USS-18: When FMFCD updates its District Service Plan:

Prior to final design approval of all elements of the District Services Plan, FMFCD shall consult with Fresno County, City of Fresno, and City of Clovis to determine if any element would temporarily disrupt or permanently displace adopted existing or planned trails and associated recreational facilities as a result of the proposed District Services Plan. If the proposed project would not temporarily disrupt or permanently displace adopted existing or planned trails, no further mitigation is necessary. If the proposed project would have an effect on the trails and associated facilities, FMFCD shall implement the following:
(a) If short- term disruption of adopted existing or plann ed trails and associated recreational facilities occur,
FMFCD shall consult and coordinate with Fresno
County, City of Fresno, and City of Clovis to temporarily re-route the trails and associated facilities.
(b) If permanent displacement of the adopted existi ng or planned trails and associated recreational facilities
occur, the appropriate design modifications to prevent
permanent displacement shall be implemented in the
final project design or FMFCD shall replace these
facilities.

Prior to final
design approval
of all elements of
the District
Services Plan

DARM, PW,
City of Clovis,
and County of
Fresno
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F

A - Incorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 50 ends

Utilities and Service Systems – Air Quality:

USS-19: When District drainage facilities are constructed, FMFCD shall:
(a) Minimize idling time of construction equipment vehicles to no more than ten minutes, or require that engines be shut off when not in use.
(b) Construction shall be curtailed as much as possible when the Air Quality Index (AQI) is above 150. AQI forecasts can be found on the SJVAPCD web site.
(c) Off-road trucks should be equipped with on-road engines if possible.
(d) Construction equipment should have engines that meet the current off-road engine emission standard (as certified by CARB), or be re- powered with an engine that meets
this standard.

During storm
water drainage
facility
construction
activities
Fresno
Metropolitan
Flood Control
District and

SJVAPCD
X

Utilities and Service Systems – Adequacy of Storm Water Drainage Facilities:

USS-20: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing storm water drainage facilities, the City shall coordinate with FMFCD to evaluate the storm water drainage system and shall not approve additional development that would convey additional storm water to a facility that would experience an exceedance of capacity until the necessary additional capacity is provided.

Prior to
exceeding
capacity within
the existing storm
water drainage
facilities

FMFCD, PW,
and DARM
X

MEIR MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING CHECKLIST FOR EA NO. EA-18-004 May 18, 2018

MITIGATION MEASURE WHEN

IMPLEMENTED

COMPLIANCE

VERIFIED BY A B C D E F
A - I
ncorporated into Project C - Mitigation in Process E - Part of City-Wide Program B - Mitigated D - Responsible Agency Contacted F - Not Applicable

Page 51 ends

Utilities and Service Systems – Adequacy of Water Supply Capacity:

USS-21: Prior to exceeding existing water supply capacity, the City shall evaluate the water supply system and shall not approve additional development that demand additional water until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the City s hall construct an approximately 25,000 AF/year tertiary recycled water expansion to the Fresno- Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility in
accordance with the 2013 Recycled Water Master Plan and the 201 4 City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources
Management Plan update.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure USS -5 is also required prior to approximately the year 2025.

Prior to
exceeding
existing water
supply capacity
DPU and
DARM
X
Utilities and Service Systems – Adequacy of Landfill Capacity:

USS-22: Prior to exceeding landfill capacity, the City shall evaluate additional landfill locations and shall not approve additional development that could contribute solid waste to a landfill that is at capacity until additional capacity is provided.

Prior to
exceeding
landfill capacity
DPU and
DARM
X

EXHIBIT D-CITY OF FRESNO

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

PROJECT SPECIFIC MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. EA-18-004
Project/EA No. EA-18-004 Date: May 18, 2018
Project Specific Monitoring Checklist Page 1
Environmental Assessment No. EA-18-004

Mitigation Measure Implemented
By
When Implemented

Verified By
II-Agriculture and
F
orestry
Resources
II.1 In accordance with Objective G -5 and Policy G-5-b of the Fresno General Plan, support efforts to preserve agricultural land inside and/or outside of the area planned for urbanization and inside or outside of the City’s public service delivery capacity by planning for the location and intensity of urban development in a manner that promotes compatibility with agricultural uses inside or outside of the planned urban area.

In accordance with Policy G-5-f of the Fresno General Plan, Oppose lot splits and development proposals in unincorporated areas within and outside the City General Plan boundary when these proposals would do any of the following: (1) Make it difficult or infeasible to implement the General Plan; or, (2) Contribute to the premature conversion of agricultural
, open space, or grazing lands, or
constitute a detriment to the management of resources and/or facilities important to the metropolitan area (such as air quality, water quantity and quality, traffic circulation, and riparian habitat).

City of
Fresno
Prior to approval of a
development or
subdivision proposal
on/for adjacent
agricultural land
conservation
(“Williamson Act”)
contracted lands.

City of Fresno II-Agriculture and
F
orestry
Resources
II.2 Any applicant for individual projects proposed to be developed on par
cels subject to agricultural land conservation (“Williamson Act”) contracted lands adjacent to the proposed North Avenue Official Plan Lines, or requiring acquisition of rights-of-way for public street purposes within the limits of the proposed North Avenue Official Plan lines , shall file a petition of cancellation of the respective Williamson Act Contract for either the entire parcel, or for the respective portions of the adjacent contracted land proposed for development or acquisition of street rights-of-way purposes, to the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department.

Applicant Prior to approval of a
development or
subdivision proposal
on/for adjacent
agricultural land
conservation
(“Williamson Act”)
contracted lands.

City of Fresno, County of
Fresno, California
Department of Conservation
II-Agriculture and
F
orestry
II.3 In accordance with the provisions of Section 51291 of the California Government Code, w henever it appears that land within an agricultural preserve may be required by a public agency or person City of
Fresno
Prior to acceptance of
dedication or acquisition
of public rights-of-way by
City of Fresno Development
& Resource Management
and Public Works
Departments, County of

EXHIBIT D-CITY OF FRESNO

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

Mitigation Measure Implemented
By
When Implemented

Verified By
Resources for public use, the public agency shall advise the Director of Conservation and the local governing body responsible for the administration of the preserve (County of Fresno) of its intention to consider the location of a public improvement within the preserve.

Provide not ice of the preliminary consideration of Environmental Assessment No. EA18-004 for purposes of the North Avenue OPL in accordance with Section 51292 of the California Government Code
the City of Fresno for
any lands or portions of
land located in an
agricultural preserve
(e.g., land subject to an
agricultural land
conservation/”Williamson
Act” contract).

Fresno, California
Department of Conservation

Fresno City CouncilSeptember 15, 2022

Fresno City Council
September 15, 2022