Exhibit H
538166v1
CITY OF FRESNO ADDENDUM TO
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. R-17-020
Addendum prepared in accordance with Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
This addendum was
not circulated for
public review
pursuant to Section
15164(c) of the
CEQA Guidelines.
The full Initial Study and the Master
Environmental Impact Report SCH No.
2012111015 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:
P24-02150
APPLICANT:
Luke Risner
Precision Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
PROJECT LOCATION:
Located on south side of West San Jose Avenue between
North Maroa and North College Avenues, Fresno, CA
(approx. 1.89 acres)
Latitude: 36.811571 & Longitude: -119.797714
Assessor’s Parcel Number(s): 417-251-04, -55, -56
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Annexation Application No. P24-02150 (Project) was filed by Luke Risner of Precision Civil Engineering, Inc., on behalf of Jeff Roberts of Namak Properties, LLC , and pertains to approximately 1.89 acres of property located along the south side of West San Jose Avenue between North Maroa and North College Avenues . Annexation Application No. P24 -02150 proposes to initiate annexation proceedings for the San Jose -Maroa Reorganization No. 2 proposing incorporation of properties within the City of Fresno, and detachment from the Kings River Conservation District and North Central Fire Protection District. The project does not propose any new development in conjunction with the annexation, beyond the multi-family housing evaluated in Environmental Assessment No. R -17-020.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
It should be noted that one of the three parcels within the annexation area is vacant and the other two properties are developed with one single-family home on each of the two properties.
Environmental Assessment No. R-17-020, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (Prior MND) dated April 20, 2018, was prepared for a project that included Pre-zone Application No. R-17-020. The Prior MND was tiered from the General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (“MEIR” SCH No. 2012111015). This Addendum is to the Prior MND which addresses the environmental effects associated with the Project to determine if there are any new or increased environmental impacts due to implementation of the Project within the current regulatory and environmental setting. The conclusions of the analysis in this Addendum remain consistent with those made in the Prior MND . No new significant impacts will r esult, and no substantial increase in severity of impacts will result from those previously identified in the Prior MND.
Checklist Evaluation Categories
Conclusion in Prior MND – This analysis provides a cross reference to the section of the Prior MND where the conclusion may be found relative to the environmental issue listed under each topic.
Do Proposed Changes Involve New Impacts? – Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(1), this column indicates whether the changes represented by the revised Project are substantial in nature and will require major revisions of the Prior MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental impacts not previously identified or mitigated by the Prior MND, or whether the changes will result in a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact.
New Circumstances Involving New Impacts? – Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(2), this column indicates where there have been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that will require major revisions to the Prior MND, due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
New Information Requiring Analysis or Verification? – Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3)(a)-(d), this column indicates whether new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Prior MND was adopted, shows any of the following: (a) The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Prior MND; (b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the Prior MND; (c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the Project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (d) Mitigation measures or alternative which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Prior MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
Prior MND Mitigation Measures – This column indicates whether the Prior MND provides mitigation measures to address potentially significant effects in the related impact category.
1. Aesthetics
Environmental Issue
Area
Prior
MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial
adverse effect on
a scenic vista?
No Impact. No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
None.
b. Substantially
damage scenic
resources,
including, but not
limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings,
and historic
buildings within a
state scenic
highway?
No Impact No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
c. In non-urbanized
areas,
substantially
degrade
the existing visual
character or
quality of public
views of the site
and its
surroundings?
(Public
views are those
that are
experienced from
publicly accessible
vantage point). If
the project
is in an urbanized
area, would the
project
conflict with
applicable zoning
and other
regulations
governing scenic
quality?
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The Project
site conditions
are substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
None
d. Create a new
source of
substantial light or
glare which would
adversely affect
day or nighttime
views in the area?
Less Than
Significant
Impact.
No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts to aesthetic resources. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the Project impact remains less than significant. Please see the MMRP adopted with the Prior MND for the MEIR mitigation measures incorporated by reference.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
2. Agricultural And Forestry Resources
Environmental Issue
Area
Prior
MND
Conclusion
Do
Proposed
Changes
Involve
New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis
or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
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?
No Impact. No. The only
change to
the Project
is to
effectuate
the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The project
will continue to
not remove any
land from
agricultural
production.
The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
proposed
project remains
the same
concerning
agricultural
resources. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act
contract?
No Impact. No. The only
change to
the Project
is to
effectuate
the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The project
will continue to
not remove any
land from
agricultural
production.
The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
proposed
project remains
the same
concerning
agricultural
resources. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
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))?
No Impact. No. The only
change to
the Project
is to
effectuate
the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The
Project site
does not have
any forest land
or timberland,
and was
prezoned from
Single-Family
Residential to
Corridor Mixed
Use/Urban
Growth
Management
along with
adoption of the
Prior MND.
This remains
the applicable
City zoning.
No. The
proposed
project remains
the same
concerning
forest-land and
timberland. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
d. Result in the loss of
forest land or
conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
No Impact. No. The only
change to
the Project
is to
effectuate
the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. There is no
forest land on
site. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There is no
forest land on
site. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
e. Involve other changes
in the existing
environment which,
due to their location or
nature, could result in
conversion of
Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or
conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
No
Impact.
No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The project
will continue to
not remove
any land from
agricultural
production or
forest land. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
No. The project
will not remove
any land from
agricultural
production or
forest land. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
The previously adopted MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impact to agricultural or forestry resources. The site is designated and zoned for residential uses. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the adopted MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. Therefore, there remains no impact.
Conclusion
The Project will have no impact on agricultural or forestry resources.
3. Air Quality
Environmental Issue
Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do
Proposed
Changes
Involve
New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or
obstruct
implementation of
the applicable air
quality plan?
Less than
Significant
Impact
No. The project
would not
create new
significant
increases in air
emissions that
would conflict
or obstruct
implementation
of an available
air quality plan.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
No. The project
would not create
new significant
increases in air
emissions that
would conflict
or obstruct
implementation
of an available
air quality plan.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
No. The project
would not
result in a
cumulatively
considerable
net increase of
any criteria
pollutant for
which the
project region is
nonattainment
under an
applicable
federal or state
ambient air
quality
standard. No
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
Prior MND Prior MND. The
only change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into the
City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
b. Result in a
cumulatively
considerable net
increase of any
criteria pollutant for
which the project
region is
nonattainment
under an applicable
federal or state
ambient air quality
standard?
Less than
Significant
Impact
No. The project
would not
result in a
cumulatively
considerable
net increase of
any criteria
pollutant for
which the
project region is
nonattainment
under an
applicable
federal or state
ambient air
quality
standard. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result
in a
cumulatively
considerable net
increase of any
criteria pollutant
for which the
project region is
nonattainment
under an
applicable
federal or state
ambient air
quality
standard. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into the
City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
result in a
cumulatively
considerable
net increase of
any criteria
pollutant for
which the
project region is
nonattainment
under an
applicable
federal or state
ambient air
quality
standard. No
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations.
Less Than No. The project
would not
expose
sensitive
receptors to
substantial
pollutant
concentrations.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
No. The project
would not
expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial
pollutant
concentrations.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
No. The project
would not
expose sensitive
receptors to
substantial
pollutant
concentrations.
No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
None.
Significant
Impact.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
discussed in the
Prior MND
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into the
City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
d. Result in other
emissions (such as
those leading to
odors) adversely
affecting a
substantial number
of people?
No
Impact.
No. The project
would not result
in other
emissions that
would affect a
substantial
number of
people. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result in
other emissions
that would affect a
substantial
number of
people. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into the
City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not result
in other
emissions that
would affect a
substantial
number of
people. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts on air quality. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND.
There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. Therefore, there remains no impact. Please see the MMRP adopted with the Prior MND for the MEIR mitigation measures incorporated by reference.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
4. Biological Resources
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
Environmental Issue
Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
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?
No Impact. No. There are no
changes to the
Project
description that
would result in an
increase in
biological impacts
from the Prior
MND. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The Project
site conditions
are substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There are no
changes to the
Project description
that would result in
an increase in
biological impacts
from the previous
MND. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None.
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
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
No Impact. No. The site
does not contain
any biologically
unique or
riparian habitat.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The site
does not contain
any biologically
unique or riparian
habitat. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The site does
not contain any
biologically unique
or riparian habitat.
No new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies new
potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Have a substantial
adverse effect on state
or federally protected
wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act
(including, but not
limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct
removal, filling,
hydrological
interruption, or other
means?
No Impact. No. The site
does not contain
any wetlands or
other waters that
would be
impacted. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The site
does not contain
any wetlands or
other waters that
would be
impacted. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The site does
not contain any
wetlands or other
waters that would
be impacted. No
new information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None.
d. Interfere substantially
with the movement of
No Impact. No. The project
will not interfere
No. The project
will not interfere
No. The project will
not interfere with any
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
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?
with any fish or
wildlife
movement or
corridors. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
with any fish or
wildlife movement
or corridors. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
fish or wildlife
movement or
corridors. No new
information has been
found since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies new
potentially significant
impacts or mitigation
measures.
.
e. Conflict with any local
policies or ordinances
protecting biological
resources, such as a
tree preservation policy
or
ordinance?
No impact. No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The Project
site conditions
are substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None
f. Conflict with the
provisions of an
adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan,
Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or
other approved local,
regional, or state
habitat conservation
plan?
No Impact. No. The Project
is not subject to
any adopted
biological
conservation
plans. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The Project
is not subject to
any adopted
biological
conservation
plans. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The Project is
not subject to any
adopted biological
conservation plans.
No new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts on biological resources. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, there remains no impact. Please see the MMRP adopted with the Prior MND for the MEIR mitigation measures incorporated by reference.
Conclusion
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
5. Cultural Resources
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a
historical resource as
defined in §15064.5?
No Impact. No. There are
no known
historic or
archaeological
resources exist
on site. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no known
historic or
archaeological
resources exist
on site. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no known
historic or
archaeological
resources exist
on site. No new
information has
been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
No Impact. No. The
project will not
cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance of
an
archaeological
resource. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The
project will not
cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance of
an
archaeological
resource. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
will not cause a
substantial
adverse
change in the
significance of
an
archaeological
resource. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Disturb any human
remains, including
those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation.
No. The
project is not
likely to disturb
any human
remains. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
No. The
project is not
likely to disturb
any human
remains. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
No. The project
is not likely to
disturb any
human
remains. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
CUL - 1
CUL – 2
CUL – 3
CUL – 4
CUL - 5
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts with mitigation on cultural resources. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Prior MND Mitigation Measures
CUL - 1CUL – 2, CUL – 3, CUL – 4 CUL – 5
CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered before or during grading 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 r equires further study. The qualified historical resources specialist 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 Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.
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 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-term preservation to allow future scientific study.
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 conducted. The following procedures shall be followed.
If prehistoric resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
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 disc overed 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 s ignificant 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 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 forms to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. The resources shall be eval uated 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 activities 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 excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
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 paleont ological/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 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 Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
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 paleontol ogical/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 literature 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 a ddition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vi cinity of the 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 unknown resources shall be followed.
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 Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occ ur 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, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most 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 acc epted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity 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 all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment.
CUL-5 :The project applicant or subsequent developer shall retain the Dumna Wo Wah Tribal Government to observe and monitor all earth -moving, grading, boring, and sub -surface activities on all undisturbed land. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, evidence shall be provided for placement in the Project file that a Native American monitor has been retained. In the event that subsurface archaeological resources/human remains are encountered during the course of grading and/or excavation, all development sha ll temporarily cease in these areas until the archaeological resources are properly assessed and subsequent recommendations are determined by a qualified archaeologist. In the event that human remains are discovered, there shall be no disposition of such h uman remains, other than in Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. These code provisions require notification of the County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commi ssion, who in turn must notify those persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American for appropriate disposition of the remains. Excavation or disturbance may continue in other areas of the Project Site that are not reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains or archaeological resources. Copies of a subsequent archaeological study or report, detailing the nature of any archaeological discovery, remedial actions taken, and disposition of any accessioned remains shall be submitted to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center at CSU Bakersfield
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
6. Energy
Environmental Issue
Area
Conclusion Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Result in
potentially
significant
environmental
impact due to
wasteful,
inefficient or
unnecessary
consumption of
energy resources,
during project
construction or
operation?
No impact. No. The Project
will not result
in inefficient or
wasteful use of
energy during
construction or
operation. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The Project
will not result
in inefficient or
wasteful use of
energy during
construction or
operation. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The Project
will not result in
inefficient or
wasteful use of
energy during
construction or
operation. No
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Conflict with or
obstruct a state or
local plan for
renewable energy
or energy
efficiency?
No impact. No. The Project
does not
conflict with
any applicable
energy use
plans. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
No. The Project
does not
conflict with
any applicable
energy use
plans. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
No. The Project
does not conflict
with any
applicable
energy use
plans. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? The proposed project does not propose any new development or construction not already analyzed in the Prior MND. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Therefore, the project would have no impact. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? The proposed project would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11) and the California Energy Code (CCR Title 24, Part 6), which includes provisions related to insulation and design aimed at minimizing energy consumption.
California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) . AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Under AB 32, CARB must adopt regulations by January 1, 2011 to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 emission cap by 2020. On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted its initial Scoping Plan, which functions as a roadmap of CARB’s plans to achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32 through subsequently enacted regulations. CARB’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan builds on the efforts and plans encompassed in the initial Scoping Plan.
The current plan has identified new policies and actions to accomplish the State’s 2030 GHG limit. Below is a list of applicable strategies in the Scoping Plan and the Project’s consistency with those strategies. • Energy Efficiency – Pursuit of comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. Maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards.
o The Project is consistent with this reduction measure. Though this measure applies to the State to increase its energy standards, the Project would comply with this measure through existing regulations applicable to the Project. The Project would not conflict with or obstruct this reduction measure.
The proposed project does not propose any new development or construction beyond that analyzed in the Prior MND . The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict or obstruct state and local plans for energy efficiency and renewable energy, and the impact would be no impact.
7. Geology and Soils
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Directly or indirectly
cause potential
substantial adverse
effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the
most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State
Geologist for the
area or based on
other substantial
evidence of a
known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines
and Geology
Special Publication
42. No Impact No. The
project would
not be
exposed to
fault rupture.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not be
exposed to
fault rupture.
However,
current
building code
regulations
will be
required to be
implemented
to address
potential
ground
shaking. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
not be
exposed to
fault rupture.
However,
current
building code
regulations
will be
required to be
implemented
to address
potential
ground
shaking. No
new
information
has been
found since
adoption of
the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
ii. Strong seismic
ground shaking?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
increase
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
exposure to
risks
associated
with strong
seismic
ground
shaking.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
risks
associated
with strong
seismic
ground
shaking.
However,
current
building code
regulations
will be
required to be
implemented
to address
potential
ground
shaking. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
risks
associated
with strong
seismic
ground
shaking.
However,
current
building code
regulations will
be required to
be
implemented
to address
potential
ground
shaking. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
iii. Seismic-related
ground failure,
including liquefaction?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
increase
exposure to
seismic-
related ground
failure
including
liquefaction.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
seismic-
related ground
failure including
liquefaction.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
seismic-
related
ground failure
including
liquefaction. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
iv. Landslides?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
increase
exposure to
landslides.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
landslides. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
landslides. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Result in substantial
soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
result in soil
erosion or
the loss of
topsoil. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not result in
soil erosion or
the loss of
topsoil. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not result in
soil erosion or
the loss of
topsoil. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
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?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
increase
exposure to
risks
associated
with
unstable
geologic units
or soils. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
risks
associated
with unstable
geologic units
or soils. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
risks
associated
with unstable
geologic units
or soils. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
mitigation
measures.
d. Be located on expansive
soil, as defined in Table
18- 1-B of the most
recently adopted
Uniform Building Code
creating substantial
risks to life or property?
No Impact. No. The
project would
not increase
exposure to
risks
associated
with
expansive
soil. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
increase
exposure to
risks
associated with
expansive soil.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
increase
exposure to
risks
associated with
expansive soil.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
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?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
implement
septic tanks
or
alternative
wastewater
disposal
systems. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not implement
septic tanks or
alternative
wastewater
disposal
systems. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not
implement
septic tanks or
alternative
wastewater
disposal
systems. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
f. Directly or
indirectly destroy a
unique
paleontological
resource or site or
unique geologic
feature?
No impact. No. The
Project would
not destroy a
paleontological
resource or
geologic
feature. The
only change to
the Project is
No. The
project would
not destroy a
paleontological
resource or
geologic
feature. The
Project site
conditions are
No. The
project would
not destroy a
paleontological
resource or
geologic
feature. No
new
information has
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts with on Geology and Soils.
No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, there remain no impacts.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Generate
greenhouse gas
emissions, either
directly or indirectly,
that may have a
significant impact on
the environment?
Less Than
Significant.
No. The
project would
not generate a
significant
amount of
greenhouse
gas emissions.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
generate a
significant
amount of
greenhouse gas
emissions. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
generate a
significant
amount of
greenhouse gas
emissions. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Conflict with an
applicable plan, policy
No Impact. No. The
project would
not conflict
No. The project
would not
conflict with an
No. The project
would not
conflict with an
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
or regulation adopted
for the purpose of
reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
with an
applicable
GHG
reduction
plan. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
applicable
GHG reduction
plan. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
applicable
GHG reduction
plan. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts regarding greenhouse gas emissions . No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the adopted MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion Do Proposed
Changes Involve
New Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Create a significant
hazard to the public or
the environment
through the routine
transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous
materials?
No Impact. No. The project
would not create
new or increased
impact involving
hazardous
materials. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not create
new or increased
impact involving
hazardous
materials. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
create new or
increased
impact involving
hazardous
materials. No
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
measures.
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?
No Impact.. No. The project
would not create
additional
significant
hazard to the
public or
environmental
through
reasonably
foreseeable
upset and
accident
conditions. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not create
additional
significant
hazard to the
public or
environmental
through
reasonably
foreseeable
upset and
accident
conditions. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
create
additional
significant
hazard to the
public or
environmental
through
reasonably
foreseeable
upset and
accident
conditions. No
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Emit hazardous
emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,
substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile
of an existing or
proposed school?
No Impact. No. There
continues to be
no school within
one-quarter mile
of the site. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. There
continues to be
no school within
one-quarter mile
of the site. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There
continues to be
no school within
one-quarter
mile of the site.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
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?
No Impact. No. The project
is not designated
as a site which
is included on a
list of hazardous
materials sites
compiled
pursuant to
Government
Code Section
65962.5. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
is not designated
as a site which is
included on a list
of hazardous
materials sites
compiled
pursuant to
Government
Code Section
65962.5. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
is not
designated as a
site which is
included on a
list of
hazardous
materials sites
compiled
pursuant to
Government
Code Section
65962.5. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
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?
No Impact. No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
is not within an
airport land use
plan area. No
new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
f. Impair implementation
of or physically
interfere with an
adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan?
No Impact. No. The project
would not impair
emergency
evacuation or
response. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not impair
emergency
evacuation or
response. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not impair
emergency
evacuation or
response. No
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
mitigation
measures.
g. Expose people or
structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland
fires?
No Impact. No. The project
site is not
located in an
area susceptible
to extreme fire
hazards or
wildland fires.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
site is not
located in an
area susceptible
to extreme fire
hazards or
wildland fires.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project site is
not located in
an area
susceptible to
extreme fire
hazards or
wildland fires.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts with hazard and hazards material beyond those analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, there remain no impacts. Please see the MMRP adopted with the Prior MND for the MEIR mitigation measures incorporated by reference.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
10. Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
a. Violate any water quality
standards or waste
discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground
water quality?
No Impact. No. The
project would
not violate
water quality
standards or
waste
discharge
requirements.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not violate
water quality
standards or
waste
discharge
requirements.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not violate
water quality
standards or
waste
discharge
requirements.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
b. Substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Less than
Significant
Impact.
No. The project
would not
substantially
deplete
groundwater
resources or
impair
groundwater
recharge. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
substantially
deplete
groundwater
resources or
impair
groundwater
recharge. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
substantially
deplete
groundwater
resources or
impair
groundwater
recharge. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
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:
No Impact.
i. result in
substantial erosion
or siltation on- or
off-site?
No Impact. No. The project
would not
substantially
alter the
existing site
drainage
pattern and it
would not alter
No. The project
would not
substantially
alter the
existing site
drainage
pattern and it
would not alter
No. The project
would not
substantially
alter the
existing site
drainage
pattern and it
would not alter
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
the course of a
stream or river
or result in
erosion or
siltation on or
off site. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
the course of a
stream or river
or result in
erosion or
siltation on or
off site. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
the course of a
stream or river
or result in
erosion or
siltation on or
off site. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
ii. substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or
off-site?
Less than
significant
Impact.
No. The project
would not
substantially
increase the
rate of runoff in
a manner that
would result in
flooding on- or
off- site. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
substantially
increase the
rate of runoff in
a manner that
would result in
flooding on- or
off- site. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
substantially
increase the
rate of runoff in
a manner that
would result in
flooding on- or
off- site. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
iii. Create or
contribute runoff
water which would
exceed the
capacity of
existing or
planned
stormwater
drainage systems
or provide
substantial
additional sources
of polluted runoff?
Less than
significant
impact.
No. The project
would not
increase the
rate of runoff in
a manner that
would exceed
the capacity of
existing or
planned
stormwater
drainage
systems or
provide
substantial
additional
sources of
polluted runoff.
The only change
No. The project
would not
increase the
rate of runoff in
a manner that
would result in
flooding on- or
off- site. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
increase the
rate of runoff in
a manner that
would result in
flooding on- or
off- site. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
iv. Impede or redirect
flood flows?
No Impact.
No. The project
would not
impede or
redirect flood
flows. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
impede or
redirect flood
flows. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
impede or
redirect flood
flows. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
d. In flood hazard,
tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of
pollutants due to
project
inundation?
Less than
Significant
Impact.
No. The project
would not
release
pollutants due
to project
inundation. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
release
pollutants due
to project
inundation. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
release
pollutants due
to project
inundation. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
e. Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of
a water quality control
plan or sustainable
groundwater
management plan?
Less than
Significant
Impact.
No. The project
would not
conflict with or
obstruct
implementation
of a water
quality control
plan or
sustainable
groundwater
management
plan. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
No. The project
would not
conflict with or
obstruct
implementation
of a water
quality control
plan or
sustainable
groundwater
management.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
No. The project
would not
conflict with or
obstruct
implementation
of a water
quality control
plan or
sustainable
groundwater
management
plan. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts with hydrology and water quality beyond those analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remains less than significant. Please see the MMRP adopted with the Prior MND for the MEIR mitigation measures incorporated by reference.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
11. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstance
s Involving
New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an
established
community?
No Impact. No. The
project would
not divide an
established
community.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not divide an
established
community.
The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior MND.
No. The
project would
not divide an
established
community. No
new
information
has been
found since
adoption of the
Prior MND
which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Cause a significant
environmental impact
due to a conflict with
any land use plan,
Less Than
Significant
Impact.
No. The
project is
consistent
No. The
project is
consistent
No. The
project is
consistent
None
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
policy, or regulation
adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an
environmental effect?
with the
allowable
land use. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND.
with the
allowable
land use. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior MND.
with the
allowable
land use. No
new
information
has been
found since
adoption of the
Prior MND
which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts with land use and planning beyond those analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
12. Mineral Resources
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
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?
No
Impact.
No. The
project would
not result in
the loss of
known
mineral
resources.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
No. The
project would
not result in
the loss of
known
mineral
resources. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed
at the time of
No. The
project would
not result in
the loss of
known
mineral
resources. No
new
information
has been
found since
adoption of
the Prior MND
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
already
discussed in
the Prior MND
adoption of the
Prior MND.
which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
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?
No
Impact.
No. The
project would
not result in
the loss of
known
mineral
resources.
The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior MND
No. The
project would
not result in
the loss of
known
mineral
resources.
The Project
site conditions
are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
not result in
the loss of
known
mineral
resources. No
new
information
has been
found since
adoption of
the Prior MND
which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts on mineral resources beyond those analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, there remain no impacts.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
13. Noise
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes Involve
New Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior
MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
a. Generation of a
substantial temporary
or permanent increase
in the ambient noise
levels in vicinity of the
project in excess of
standards established
in the local general
plan or noise
ordinance, or
applicable standards of
other agencies?
Less Than
Significant..
No. The project
would not
expose persons
to or generate
noise levels in
excess of
standards
established by
the local general
plan or noise
ordinance, or
applicable
standards of
other agencies.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not expose
persons to or
generate noise
levels in excess
of standards
established by
the local general
plan or noise
ordinance, or
applicable
standards of
other agencies.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not expose
persons to or
generate noise
levels in excess
of standards
established by
the local general
plan or noise
ordinance, or
applicable
standards of
other agencies.
No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Generation of
excessive ground
borne vibration or
ground borne noise
levels?
Less Than
Significant.
No. The project
would not
expose persons
to excessive
ground borne
vibration or
ground borne
noise levels. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not
expose persons
to excessive
ground borne
vibration or
ground borne
noise. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
expose persons
to excessive
ground borne
vibration or
ground borne
noise. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
c. For a project located
within a private airstrip
or airport land use
plan or, where such a
plan has not been
adopted, within two
miles of a public
airport or public use
airport, would the
project expose people
residing or working in
the project area to
excessive noise levels?
No Impact. No. The project
is not within the
established
airport noise
contour. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
is not within the
established
airport noise
contour. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
is not within the
established
airport noise
contour. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts . No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
14. Population and Housing
Environmental Issue Area
Prior
MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes Involve
New Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial
unplanned population
growth in an area,
either directly (for
example, by proposing
new homes and
businesses) or
indirectly (for example,
through extension of
roads or other
infrastructure)?
Less Than
Significant.
No. The project
would not
induce
substantial
unplanned
growth in the
project area.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not
induce
substantial
unplanned
growth in the
project area.
The Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
induce
substantial
unplanned
growth in the
project area. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
b. Displace substantial
numbers of existing
people or housing,
necessitating the
construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere?
No
Impact.
No. The project
will not displace
existing people or
housing. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
will not displace
existing people
housing. The
Project site
conditions are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
will not displace
existing people
housing. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant . No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
15. Public Services
Environmental Issue Area
Prior
MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes Involve
New Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
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?
No Impact. No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded fire
protection
facilities. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded fire
protection
facilities. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded fire
protection
facilities. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
Police protection?
No Impact. No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded police
protection
facilities. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or
expanded police
protection
facilities. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
No. The project
would not
result in a need
for new or
expanded
police
protection
facilities. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
None
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
Schools?
No Impact. No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or expanded
school facilities
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result
in a need for
new or expanded
school facilities.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not result
in a need
for new or
expanded
school facilities.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
Parks?
Less Than
Significant.
No. The project
would not result
in a need for new
or expanded
park
facilities. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result
in a need for new
or expanded
park
facilities. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding areas
are substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not result in
a need for new or
expanded park
facilities. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None
Other public
facilities?
No Impact. No. The project
would not result
in a need for new
or expanded
other
facilities. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND
No. The project
would not result
in a need for new
or expanded
other
facilities. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding areas
are substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
No. The project
would not result in
a need for new or
expanded other
facilities. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant impacts
or mitigation
measures.
None
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
Prior MND.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts on Public Services beyond those analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant. Please see the MMRP adopted with the Prior MND for the MEIR mitigation measures incorporated by reference.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
16. Recreation
Environmental Issue Area
Prior
MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Would the project
increase the use of
existing neighborhood
and regional parks or
other recreational
facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the
facility would occur or
be accelerated?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
result in the
deterioration
of an
existing
park. The
only change
to the
Project is to
effectuate
the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
not result in
the
deterioration
of an existing
park. The
Project site
conditions
and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
not result in
the
deterioration
of an existing
park. No new
information
has been
found since
adoption of
the Prior MND
which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
b. Does the project
include recreational
facilities or require the
construction or
expansion of
recreational facilities
which might have an
adverse physical
effect
on the environment?
No Impact. No. The
project
would not
result in a
need for
new or
expanded
park
facilities. The
only change
to the Project
is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
not result in a
need for new
or expanded
park facilities.
The Project
site conditions
and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
not result in a
need for new
or expanded
park facilities.
No new
information
has been
found since
adoption of
the Prior MND
which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the adopted MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, there remain no impacts.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
17. Transportation/Traffic
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Conflict with an
applicable plan,
ordinance or policy
addressing the
circulation system,
including transit,
roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
Less Than
Significant.
No. The project
would not
conflict with an
applicable plan,
ordinance or
policy
regarding the
circulation
system. The
only change to
the Project is to
No. The project
would not
conflict with an
applicable plan,
ordinance or
policy
regarding the
circulation
system. The
Project site
conditions and
No. The project
would not
conflict with an
applicable plan,
ordinance or
policy
regarding the
circulation
system. No new
information has
been found
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
b. Conflict or be
inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
No Impact
No. Please see
discussion
below. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
discussion
below. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
discussion
below. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Substantially increase
hazards due to a
design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or
dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses
(e.g., farm
equipment)?
No Impact.
No. The project
would not
increase
hazards due to
a design
feature. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
increase
hazards due to
a design
feature. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
increase
hazards due to
a design
feature. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
d. Result in inadequate
emergency access?
No Impact.
No. The project
would not
result in
inadequate
emergency
access. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
result in
inadequate
emergency
access. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
No. The project
would not
result in
inadequate
emergency
access. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
adoption of the
Prior MND.
mitigation
measures.
Discussion
Senate Bill (SB) 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of Level of Service (LOS). VMT measures how much actual auto travel (additional miles driven) a pr oposed project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads, the project may cause a significant transportation impact.
The State CEQA Guidelines were amended to implement SB 743, by adding Section 15064.3. Among its provisions, Section 15064.3 confirms that, except with respect to transportation projects, a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. Therefore, LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities is no longer a relevant CEQA threshold for transportation impacts.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(4) states that “[a] lead agency has discretion to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency ma y use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence.
Any assumptions used to estimate used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revision to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project.
The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.”
After adoption of the Prior MND, o n June 25, 2020, the City of Fresno adopted CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds pursuant to Senate Bill 743 to be effective of July 1, 2020. The thresholds described therein are referred to herein as the City of Fresno VMT Thresholds. The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds document was prepared and adopted consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7. The December 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), was utilized as a reference and guidance document in the preparation of the Fresno VMT Thresholds.
The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds Section 3.0 regarding Project Screening discusses a variety of projects that may be screened out of a VMT analysis including specific development and transportation projects. For development projects, conditions may exist that would presume that a development project has a less than significant impact. These may be size, location, proximity to transit, or trip‐making potential.
For transportation projects, the primary attribute to consider with transportation projects is the potential to increase vehicle travel, sometimes referred to as “induced travel.”
The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds Section 3.1 regarding Development Projects states that if a project generates fewer than 500 average daily trips (ADT), then it is eligible to screen out of a VMT analysis.
The only change to this Project at this time is annex the land already discussed in the Prior MND. However, Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
as stated in the Prior MND, the applicant intends to develop this property into multi-family housing at some point in the future. Assuming a maximum housing unit number of 17, as permitted by the zoning, the ADT for this Project would be approximately 160. Therefore, the proposed Project is eligible to screen out of a full VMT analysis.
In conclusion, the proposed project will result in no impact concerning consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts . No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
18. Tribal Cultural Resources
Environmental Issue Area
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis
or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
a. Would the project
cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource,
defined in Public
Resources Code
section 21074 as
either a site, feature,
place, cultural
landscape that is
geographically
defined in terms of
the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred
place, or object with
cultural value to a
California Native
American tribe, and
that is:
No Impact. No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in
the area. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in the
area. The Project
site conditions
and surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in
the area. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
i. Listed or eligible for
listing in the
California Register of
Historical Resources,
or in a local register of
historical resources as
defined in Public
Resources Code
section 5020.1(k), or
No Impact. No. There are
no structures or
historical
resources on
the project site.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no structures or
historical
resources on the
project site. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in
the area. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
ii. A resource determined
by the lead agency, in
its discretion and
supported by
substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant
to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set
forth in subdivision (c)
No Impact.
No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in
the area. The
only change to
the Project is to
effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in the
area. The Project
site conditions
and surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. There are
no identified
Tribal Cultural
Resources in
the area. No
new information
has been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
As previously discussed in Section V, Cultural Resources, the project site does not contain historical resources listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in any local listing for Fresno County or the City of Fresno. Furthermore, the area surrounding the project site does not contain any listed historical resources. The site is currently built up with two Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
single-family, so it is unlikely that unknown cultural resources will be discovered. As a result, no impact would occur.
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
The State requires lead agencies to consider the potential effects of proposed projects and consult with California Native American tribes during the local planning process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Resources through the CEQ A Guidelines. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the proposed project.
Such significant cultura l resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial evidence, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a)(1-2)).
Additional 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.
Assembly Bill (AB) 52, which became law January 1, 2015, requires that, as part of the CEQA review process, public agencies provide early notice of a project to California Native American Tribes to allow for consultation between the tribe and the public ag ency. The purpose of AB 52 is to provide the opportunity for public agencies and tribes to consult and consider potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCR’s), as defined by the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 2107(a). Under AB 52, public agenc ies shall reach out to California Native American Tribes who have requested to be notified of projects in areas within or which may have been affiliated with their tribal geographic range. Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), the Dumna Wo Wah and Table Mountain Rancheria tribes were invited to consult. The contacted Tribes did not provide a response to invitations to consult.
The proposed project does not currently propose new development or construction. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Thus, impacts to unknown archaeological historical resources result in no impact.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
19. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New Information
Requiring
Analysis or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the
relocation or
construction of new or
expanded water,
wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage,
electric power, natural
gas, or
telecommunications
facilities, the
construction or
relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less than
significant
Impact.
No. The only
change to the
Project is to
effectuate the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The Project
site conditions
and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
b. Have sufficient water
supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably
foreseeable future
development
during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
Less than
significant
impact.
No. As
discussed in
the Prior
MND, the
City’s
Department of
Public Utilities
determined
that there are
adequate
sanitary sewer
and water
services
available to
serve the
proposed
Project. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
No. As
discussed in
the Prior
MND, the
City’s
Department of
Public Utilities
determined
that there are
adequate
sanitary sewer
and water
services
available to
serve the
proposed
Project. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
No. As
discussed in the
Prior MND, the
City’s
Department of
Public Utilities
determined that
there are
adequate
sanitary sewer
and water
services
available to
serve the
proposed
Project. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
MND. the Prior
MND.
c. Result in a
determination by the
wastewater treatment
provider which serves or
may serve the project
that it has adequate
capacity to serve the
project’s projected
demand in addition to the
provider’s existing
commitments?
No impact. No. As
discussed in
the Prior
MND, the
City’s
Department of
Public Utilities
determined
that there are
adequate
sanitary sewer
and water
services
available to
serve the
proposed
Project. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. As
discussed in
the Prior MND,
the City’s
Department of
Public Utilities
determined that
there are
adequate
sanitary sewer
and water
services
available to
serve the
proposed
Project. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. As
discussed in the
Prior MND, the
City’s
Department of
Public Utilities
determined that
there are
adequate
sanitary sewer
and water
services
available to
serve the
proposed
Project. No new
information has
been found since
adoption of the
Prior MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
d. Generate solid waste in
excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local
infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the
attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Less Than
Significant.
No. The
project would
not generate
excess solid
waste. The
only change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The project
would not
generate
excess solid
waste. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. The project
would not
generate excess
solid waste. No
new information
has been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
e. Comply with federal, state,
and local management and
reduction statues and
regulations related to solid
waste?
No impact. No. The
project
would
comply with
applicable
statues and
regulations
related to
solid waste. .
The only
change to
the Project is
to effectuate
the
annexation
into the City
already
discussed in
the Prior
MND.
No. The
project would
comply with
applicable
statues and
regulations
related to solid
waste. The
Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to
those which
existed at the
time of
adoption of
the Prior
MND.
No. The project
would comply
with applicable
statues and
regulations
related to solid
waste. No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have no impacts on utilities and service systems beyond those analyzed in the MEIR SCH No. 2012111015 for the Fresno General Plan. No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
20. Wildfire
Environmental Issue Area
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis
or
Verification?
Mitigation
Measures
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
a. Substantially impair an
adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan?
No Impact. No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Due to slope, prevailing
winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of wildfire?
No Impact. No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire
risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing
impacts to the
environment?
No Impact.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
d. Expose people or
structures to significant
risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire instabilities,
or drainage changes?
No impact. No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption of
the Prior MND
which identifies
new potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The City of Fresno’s Police and Fire Departments are tasked with all local emergency response efforts.
In addition, the City’s full-time Emergency Preparedness Officer (EPO) is responsible for ensuring that Fresno’s emergency response plans are up -to-date and implemented properly. The EPO also facilitates cooperation between City departments and other local, State and federal agencies that would be involved in emergency response operations.
The proposed project does not currently include any new construction or development. It is not anticipated that new or different impairments would occur that may physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. All future development projects within the project area will be submitted to the City and reviewed in compliance with Federal, State and local regulations related to emergency access. The project would not result in environmental impacts and therefore, has no impact.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
The subject area is in an urban area and is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).1 The subject area does not possess physical characteristics that would exacerbate wildfire risks. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in
1 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2008. Fresno County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Available online at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire -planning-engineering/wildland-hazards-building- codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/ (accessed June 20, 2023) Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
the Prior MND. Therefore, the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks and potentially expose project occupants to pollutants from a wildfire. The impact would be no impact.
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
The project site is located in a developed area of the City of Fresno, and it would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that would increase the risk of fire or result in temporary or ongoing environmental impacts, outside of what is already implemented according to City plans.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. As a result, no impact would occur.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
The subject area is located on a relatively flat area and is not located adjacent to any hills. In general, the potential for land sliding or slope failure in Fresno is very low and the project site would not be susceptible to landslides. The subject area is also not located on a flood hazard zone and would not be susceptible to flooding because of p ost-fire drainage changes. As discussed above, the subject area is not located within a VHFHSZ . The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation i nto the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, and no impact would occur.
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Issue Area
Prior MND
Conclusion
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Impacts?
New
Circumstances
Involving New
Impacts?
New
Information
Requiring
Analysis
or
Verification?
Prior MND
Mitigation
Measures
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
a. Does the project have
the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate
a plan or animal
community, substantially
reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate
important examples of the
major periods of California
history or prehistory?
No Impact. No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
b. Does the project have
impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively
considerable?
(“Cumulatively
considerable” means that
the incremental effects of a
projects are considerable
when viewed in connection
with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the
effects of probable future
projects.)
Less than
significant
Impact.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
c. Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial
adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Less than
significant
Impact.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The only change
to the Project is
to effectuate the
annexation into
the City already
discussed in the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
The Project site
conditions and
surrounding
areas are
substantially
similar to those
which existed at
the time of
adoption of the
Prior MND.
No. Please see
analysis below.
No new
information has
been found
since adoption
of the Prior
MND which
identifies new
potentially
significant
impacts or
mitigation
measures.
None.
Discussion
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
The Prior MND determined that the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts . No additional construction or operational activities will occur other than as stated in the Prior MND. There are no changes to the Project that would cause an increase in impacts beyond what was previously analyzed.
The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. Therefore, the impacts remain less than significant.
Conclusion
The conclusions from the Prior MND remain unchanged.
Project Conclusion
Environmental Assessment No. R-17-020, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) dated April 20, 2018 was prepared for a project that included a Pre-zone Application No. R-17-020.The Prior MND was tiered from the General Plan Master Environmental Impact Rep ort (“MEIR” SCH No. 2012111015). This Addendum to the Prior MND addresses the environmental effects associated with the annexation component of the Project to determine if there are any new or increased environmental impacts due to implementation of the Project within the current regulatory and environmental setting. The conclusions of the analysis in this Addendum remain consistent with those made in the Prior MND. No new significant impacts will result, and no substantial increase in severity of impacts will result from those previously identified in the Prior MND and MEIR.
This consists of a minor technical change such that an addendum to R-17-020 is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 and Public Resources Code Section 21166.
Therefore, the City of Fresno has determined that an Addendum to Environmental Assessment R-17-020 is appropriate given that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent MND have occurred; and, new information added is only for the purposes of providing minor changes or additions, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines.
CEQA Section 15162 provides that when a mitigated negative declaration has been adopted for a project, no subsequent mitigated negative declaration shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES. (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
Finding
(1):
The analysis above concluded that there are no new significant environmental impacts or substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant effects that would necessitate major revisions to the Prior MND, as there have been no changes to the project or its surrounding environment. The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND.
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substan tial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or,
Finding
(2):
There have been no substantial changes to the surrounding area or project site which would otherwise affect the circumstances under which the project is undertaken. The severity of environmental issues identified in the Prior MND approved on April 20, 2018, have not substantially increased since the preparation of the initial study . The only change to the Project is to effectuate the annexation into the City already discussed in the Prior MND. (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project , but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative ; and, (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration, would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
Finding
(3):
This Addendum is relative to the Prior MND and assesses if there are any new or increased environmental impacts due to implementation of the Project within the current regulatory and environmental setting for the project that was not previously specified in the Prior MND dated April 20, 2018. This addendum did not identify new information regarding significant effects not previously discussed in the Prior MND, and potential effects previously examined are not substantially more severe than originally discussed. No mitigation measures which were previously identified have been found infeasible, nor has it been determined that identified mitigation measures wou ld not substantially reduce significant effects of the project. No mitigation measures have been added or modified, nor are they considerably different from those analyzed in the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Environmental Assessment No. P24-02150
November 19, 2025
The addendum contains no additional information regarding proposed mitigation measures and does not change or effect the previous findings of the Prior MND. Therefore, no new information identifies significant or substantially more severe effects than originally discussed.
ADDENDUM PREPARED BY:
Rob Holt, Supervising Planner
SUBMITTED BY:
Rob Holt, Supervising Planner
CITY OF FRESNO PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: November 19, 2025