2.-T ID 26-269 -Supplemental Packet — Fresno City Council, May 7, 2026 (part 1 of 5)

667595v1

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER CONSERVANCY
LEWIS S. EATON TRAIL SIDEWALK

EXTENSION PROJECT
ADDENDUM #2 TO THE RIVER WEST

FRESNO, EATON TRAIL EXTENSION

PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
NO. 2014061017)

FRESNO, CA
SEPTEMBER 2025

PREPARED FOR:

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER CONSERVANCY
PO BOX 28338, FRESNO, CA 93729

CITY OF FRESNO
2600 FRESNO STREET, FRESNO, CA 93721

PREPARED BY:

PROVOST & PRITCHARD CONSULTING GROUP
455 W. FIR AVENUE, CLOVIS, CA 93611

San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Job No.: 1451-22025

https://us-partner-integrations.egnyte.com/msoffice/wopi/files/f8d8c13f-0da5-4639-aa4f- 9e239a6bf91e/WOPIServiceId_TP_EGNYTE_PLUS/WOPIUserId_94.ppeng.egnyte.com/Attach2- AdminDraftAddendumUpdate CAO CLEAN(667595.1).docx
667595v1

Report Prepared for:

City of Fresno, Department of Public Works
2600 Fresno Street, Room 4016
Fresno, CA 93721

Contact:

Harmanjit Dhaliwal, PE
Direct: (559) 621-8694
Main: (559) 621-8650
[email protected]

San Joaquin River Conservancy
PO Box 28338
Fresno, CA 93729

Contact:

Kari Daniska, Executive Officer
(559) 287-2650
[email protected]

Report Prepared by:

Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Briza Grace Sholars, Principal Environmental Planner, QA/QC Ryan McKelvey, Associate Planner, Lead Technical Author Jackie Lancaster, Senior Project Administrator, Administrative Support Michael Osborn, PE, Project Manager

Contact:
(559) 449-2700

COPYRIGHT 2025 BY PROVOST & PRITCHARD CONSULTING GROUP ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group expressly reserves its common law copyright and other applicable property rights to this document. This document is not to be reproduced, changed, or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to a third party without first obtaining the written permission and consent of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group In the event of unauthorized reuse of the information contained herein by a third party, the third party shall hold the firm of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group harmless, and shall bear the cost of Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group's legal fees associated with defending and enforcing these rights.

San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Job No.: 1451-22025
Page iii
667595v1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 1-1 2 Project Description ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 2-1

2.1 Project Background ..................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.1 Project Title .................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.2 Lead Agency Name and Address ................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.3 Responsible Agency Name and Address ........................................................................ 2-1

2.1.4 Contact Person and Phone Number .............................................................................. 2-1

2.1.5 Project Location ............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.1.6 General Plan Designation and Zoning ............................................................................ 2-1

2.1.7 Description of Project .................................................................................................... 2-2 3 CEQA Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 3-1

3.1 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1.1 Aesthetics ....................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources .............................................................................. 3-1

3.1.3 Air Quality ....................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1.4 Biological Resources....................................................................................................... 3-2

3.1.5 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................... 3-2

3.1.6 Energy............................................................................................................................. 3-2

3.1.7 Geology and Soils ........................................................................................................... 3-2

3.1.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................ 3-2

3.1.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................. 3-3

3.1.10 Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................................... 3-3

3.1.11 Land Use and Planning .............................................................................................. 3-3

3.1.12 Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................... 3-3

3.1.13 Noise .......................................................................................................................... 3-4

3.1.14 Population and Housing ............................................................................................ 3-4

3.1.15 Public Services ........................................................................................................... 3-4

3.1.16 Recreation .................................................................................................................. 3-4

3.1.17 Transportation ........................................................................................................... 3-4

3.1.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... 3-4

3.1.19 Utilities and Service Systems ..................................................................................... 3-5

3.1.20 Wildfire ...................................................................................................................... 3-5

3.1.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .......................................................................... 3-5

3.1.22 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 3-6

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Project Boundary Map ................................................................................................................ 2-3 Figure 2-2: Addendum Area Site Map .......................................................................................................... 2-1 Figure 2-3: Site Plan Design .......................................................................................................................... 2-1

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Project Boundary General Plan Designation and Zoning ............................................................ 2-1

APPENDICES
Appendix A: 2017 EIR
San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Job No.: 1451-22025
Page iv
667595v1
Appendix B: Addendum #1
San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Job No.: 1451-22025
Page v
667595v1

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CEQA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ California Environmental Quality Act City ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- City of Fresno EIR ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Environmental Impact Report FMMP ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Project -------------------------------------------------------------------- Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project SJRC -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- San Joaquin River Conservancy SR ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ State Route

San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section One: Introduction
1-1
667595v1
1 INTRODUCTION
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group (P&P) has prepared this addendum (Addendum #2) for the San Joaquin River Conservancy (SJRC or Conservancy) and the City of Fresno (City). This subsequent CEQA analysis has been prepared as an addendum to a certified Env ironmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2014061017) f or the San Joaquin River Conservancy River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project. The EIR (2017 EIR) was certified by the SJRC Board in 2017. In 2020, Addendum #1 to the 2017 EIR was prepared. The San Joaquin River Conservancy is the CEQA Lead Agency for this Addendum #2.

The Conservancy and the City have reviewed the proposed Project and on the basis of the whole record, have determined that there is substantial evidence to support the determination that the 2017 EIR (Appendix A) remains relevant in considering the environmental impacts of the project changes and that there is no substantial evidence to support a fair argument that the changes to the project, as identified in the attached addendum, would have a significant impact o n the environment beyond that which was evaluated in the 2017 EIR. A subsequent EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ( California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et. seq.). As identified in the preceding paragraph, Addendum #1 to the 2017 EIR was prepared to account for minor changes. These changes did not necessitate the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR (see Appendix B).

This Addendum #2 to the original 2017 EIR has been prepared pursuant to Sections 15162 and 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

A copy of this document and all supportive documentation may be reviewed or obtained at the San Joaquin River Conservancy office and the City of Fresno Department of Public Works office, Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. The San Joaquin River Conservancy office is located at 5469 E. Olive Avenue, Fresno, CA 93727. The City of Fresno Department of Public Works office is located at 2600 Fresno Street, Room 4016, Fresno, CA 93721.

San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section Two: Project Description
2-1
667595v1
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

2.1.1 PROJECT TITLE
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project

2.1.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
San Joaquin River Conservancy
PO Box 28338
Fresno, CA 93729

2.1.3 RESPONSIBLE AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Fresno
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721

2.1.4 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Lead Agency Contact
Kari Daniska, Executive Officer
(559) 253-7324
[email protected]

Responsible Agency Contact
Harmanjit Dhaliwal, PE
(559) 621-8694
[email protected]

CEQA Consultant
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Briza Grace Sholars, Principal Environmental Planner
(559) 449-2700

2.1.5 PROJECT LOCATION
The Project is located in Fresno, California, approximately 150 miles southeast of Sacramento and 108 miles northwest of Bakersfield. The Project site is located at the State Route 41 undercrossing at the end of Perrin Avenue. The centroid of the Project site is 36° 52’ 16.77” N, 119° 47’ 32.18” W.

2.1.6 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING
Table 2-1: Project Boundary General Plan Designation and Zoning Project Area General Plan Designation Zoning District
ONSITE Multi-Use Parks and Recreation , Bluff
Protection, Mining, Urban Growth
Management, Right of Way
ADJACENT LANDS Open Space
Multi-Use
Parks and Recreation , Bluff
Protection, Residential Single-Unit,
Medium Density, Mobile Home Park,
Mining, Urban Growth Management

2.1.7 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT

2.1.7.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
In 2017, the SJRC certified the 2017 EIR. The 2017 EIR proposed to expand the Eaton Trail by constructing a multipurpose trail and providing ancillary recreation support features. The trail extended approximately

2.4 miles, from Perrin Avenue near State Route (SR) 41 on the east to Spano Park on the west. The project provided for low-impact recreational activities, such as hiking, bicycling, equestrian use, fishing, and nature observation consistent with the San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan.

In 2020, an Addendum was prepared for the 2017 EIR (Addendum #1). Addendum #1 included the following modifications to the 2017 EIR:
• “The proposed parking lot will be constructed near the access point at West Riverview Drive instead of the area East of the E Pond and South of the H Pond; • The proposed parking lot will provide parking for 15 vehicles, including 2 American with Disabilities Act (ADA) placard parking spaces;
• The City of Fresno will provide street markings for the parking of 15 vehicles on West Riverview Drive and West Bluff Avenue; and
• Bus access, turn-around, and parking facilities will be constructed by improving the existing gravel road th [at] leads from West Riverview Drive, travels Southwest along the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) stormwater basin, then turn West and travel West between the E Pond and H Pond to an area between the E Pond and O Pond.”

2.1.7.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 2017 EIR for the San Joaquin River Conservancy River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project has the study area ending at the fence on the west side of the existing SR 41 undercrossing.

The proposed Project includes adding sidewalk between the existing curb and the concrete embankment on the south side of the undercrossing of Perrin Ave and adding an accessible curb ramp at the east side to provide a pedestrian connection to the current terminus of the existing Lewis S. Eaton Trail on the east side of SR 41 (see Figure 2-1, Figure 2-2, and Figure 2-3). Because the proposed Project is meant to extend the existing trail which currently ends on the east side of SR 41, a CEQA Addendum to the 2017 EIR is required as this scope of work is outside the 2017 EIR study area & not included in the original project description.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 allows for the Lead Agency to adopt an Addendum to an existing approved CEQA document when some changes or additions to the existing approved CEQA document are necessary but none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred . The proposed project changes are for an additional section of sidewalk, accessible curb and gutter of approximately 320 feet in length that go under SR 41 to connect the trail on both sides of the freeway. It has been determined that these changes to the original project are minor in nature, and do not require preparation of a subsequent EIR. Therefore, this Addendum has been prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164.

Figure 2-1: Project Boundary Map

Figure 2-2: Addendum Area Site Map

Figure 2-3: Site Plan Design

3.1 DISCUSSION
The discussion in this Addendum #2 confirms that the proposed Project changes have been evaluated for potentially significant impacts pursuant to CEQA. The discussion is meaningfully different than a determination that a project is “exempt” from CEQA review, as the proposed Project is not exempt. Rather, the determination here is that the potential impacts of the prop osed Project were analyzed in the previously adopted 2017 EIR which provides a sufficient and adequate analysis of the environmental impacts of the proposed Project. The proposed Project changes analyzed under this Addendum #2 would include the construction of approximately 320 feet in length of an additional section of sidewalk, curb and gutter that would be located under SR 41 which would connect the existing trail on both sides of the freeway, which aligns with the intent of the 2017 EIR . The San Joaquin River Conservancy has determined that an addendum is the appropriate environmental document.

3.1.1 AESTHETICS
The proposed Project would involve adding sidewalk between the existing curb and the concrete embankment on the south side of the undercrossing of Perrin Ave and adding an accessible curb ramp at the east side to provide a pedestrian connection to the current terminus of the existing Lewis S. Eaton Trail on the east side of SR 41 . Project components would be installed within the right-of-way along Perrin Ave which is existing and currently terminates into a field that will ultimately become a parking lot for the trail as analyzed under the 20 17 EIR. The pr oposed improvements would not conflict with the existing visual character of the site as the site contains existing trails and roadway improvements and these improvements would only create greater access for the public to the trail. Further, the Project site is not located in or near a scenic highway, and would not introduce new sources of substantial light or glare. Therefore, the proposed Project would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site or its surroundings. Impacts would remain consistent with the 2017 EIR, which were determined to have a less than significant impact.

3.1.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
The proposed Project area is designated as Urban and Built -Up Land by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). No part of the Project is designated as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is partially un-zoned as it is a roadway, and the remaining portion is zoned for Parks and Recreation. Construction of an additional section of sidewalk , curb and gutter would not conflict with an agricultural zoning designation or land designated as Farmland under the FMMP. The proposed Project would not change or alter existing zoning designations, nor would they result in the loss of forest land, Williamson Act lands, or agricultural lands. Additionally, there would be no significant changes to the existing environment as a result. As such, impacts to agricultural resources would be the same as the approved 2017 EIR, which found that no impacts would occur.

3.1.3 AIR QUALITY
Emissions of ozone precursor pollutants during the construction period would not exceed significance thresholds for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and would therefore not contribute to air quality violations in conflict with attainment plans. Exposure to construction emissions would be short- term and temporary. Operational pollutant exposures would remain minimal, consisting only of maintenance vehicles driving to and from the site for ad-hoc maintenance. The approved 2017 EIR identified that air quality impacts to the region would be less than significant, with no mitigation required.

Given the minor nature of the changes, the proposed Project would not substantially change the air quality impacts; therefore, impacts would be consistent with the 2017 EIR. As such, impacts would continue to be less than significant.

3.1.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The proposed Project site is primarily developed and disturbed with roadway pavement and the existing concrete embankment that is part of the SR 41 overhead crossing. As identified in the 2017 EIR, mitigation measures were included in the proposed Project to bring impacts to a less than significant level. Although additional sidewalk, curb and gutter, and curb ramp would be constructed, additional mitigation measures would not be warranted, given the existing conditions at the Project site and the minor amount of space to be affected. Therefore, impacts to biological resources would be less than what was identified in the 2017 EIR and mitigation measures included in the 2017 are not necessary for the proposed Project. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.1.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The 2017 EIR found there to be low potential for the proposed Project to result in adverse impacts to significant or unique historical resources or historic properties. However, in the unlikely event that cultural resources are encountered, three mitigation measures (Cultural Resources-1, -2, and -3) were provided to reduce the potential impacts to less than significant . Cultural Resources -1 required that the project identified in the 2017 EIR to perform an Extended Phase I subsurface test, and Cultural Resources-2, which required a cultural resources monitor to be on site during ground disturbance. The 2017 EIR also included mitigation measure Cultural Resources -3, which described the action the project proponent should take should human remains or bones of unknown origin be discovered during construction. The addition of the small stretch of sidewalk and other improvements proposed here is unlikely to turn up previously unknown cultural resources as the maximum depth of excavation would be approximately 12 inches. However, the proposed Projec t will continue to adhere to Cultural Resources -3 should human remains or bones of unknown origin be discovered during construction. Cultural Resources-1 and -2 would not be necessary for the proposed Project.

3.1.6 ENERGY
Increases in the use of energy as a result of the proposed Project would be miniscule. Energy consumption would only take place during the construction phase to operate construction equipment. As the proposed Project would construct approximately 320 feet of sidewalk to connect two existing trails, there would be no need for energy usage once constructed. The proposed Project would not conflict with current State energy efficiency or electricity supply requirements, or any local plans or programs for renewa ble energy or energy efficiency requirements. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.1.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The proposed Project site is located in an area of low seismic activity. Furthermore, the proposed Project elements would be designed and constructed in accordance with accepted engineering standards and methods. The proposed Project area is generally level, and no habitable structures w ould be built as part of the proposed Project. As a result, the proposed Project would not result in or expose people to potential additional impacts involving seismic shaking. The 2017 EIR contained mitigation measure Geology and Soils-

1. This measure is not necessary as it relates to the portion of the original Project which was to be built on the steep slopes of the San Joaquin River Bluff. The updates proposed under this updated Project relate to a small portion of land running under State Route 41, and is not located on the River Bluff. . The proposed Project would not require additional mitigation measures. Impacts would be less than significant and would be less than what was determined in the 2017 EIR.

3.1.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The 2017 EIR determined that the estimated short-term and long-term greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions would result in a less than significant impact, and construction of approximately 320 feet of sidewalk would not alter the 2017 EIR’s determination given the minor nature of the change proposed . Emissions would be predominantly short-term, construction-related impacts, with no operational emissions, beyond those needed for occasional maintenance visits to the site by vehicles . Implementation of the proposed Project San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section Three: CEQA Analysis
3-3
667595v1
is not anticipated to conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation for reducing the emissions of GHGs. Impacts would remain less than significant as a result of the proposed Project.

3.1.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Construction of the proposed Project could involve the use of hazardous materials associated with construction equipment, such as diesel fuel, lubricants, and solvents. However, the contractor is required to comply with all California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations regarding regular maintenance and inspection of equipment, spill prevention, and spill remediation in order to reduce the potential for incidental release of pollutants or hazard ous substances onsite. Furthermore, any p otential accidental hazardous materials spills during construction are the responsibility of the contractor to remediate in accordance with industry best management practices and State and county regulations. The operational phase of the proposed Project w ould not involve the use or transport of hazardous materials , given that operation would primarily be use of the site as a recreational facility for the general public .

Additionally, the proposed Project does not involve land that is listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and is not included on a list compiled by the Department of Toxic Control Substances. The proposed Project does not involve the construction of any habitable structures; therefore, the proposed Pro ject would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project area. While the proposed Project is in relatively close proximity to urban development, the nature of the proposed Project is very minor in terms of development and woul d not amplify wildfire risks.

Furthermore, the proposed Project would implement BMPs during construction for wildfire reduction which involves vegetation management and proper site control. The 2017 EIR included several wildfire prevention related mitigation measures; however, those will not be necessary for the proposed Project as the proposed Project site is relatively small and developed, limiting the amount of wildfire fuel. I mpacts would be less than significant and would be less than what was determined in the 2017 EIR.

3.1.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The 2017 EIR included mitigation measures to reduce any potentially significant hydrology and water quality impacts to a less than significant level. The proposed Project would have no impact on hydrology or water quality as it would extend the sidewalk of the existing trail system. Implementation of the proposed Project would not impact the groundwater supply, nor would it degrade groundwater or surface water quality. Construction activities would be required to continue best management practices such as implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Despite the installation of new impervious surfaces in the area, given the minor nature of the changes, drainage patterns would not change as a result of proposed Project implementation, and the proposed Project would not alter the run -off from the surrounding areas. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency National Flood Insurance Program Flood Insurance Rate Map, the additional sidewalk section would not be located within the 100 - year Flood Zone. There would be no additional impacts to hydrology and water quality as a result of the changes proposed to the Project here.

3.1.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
The General Plan and zoning designation for the site would remain unchanged. The proposed Project would not divide an established community, nor would it conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. In fact, the proposed Project would connect two areas by providing a connection between two trail terminuses. Thus, impacts to land use and planning are consistent with the 2017 EIR, and impacts would be less than significant.

3.1.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
The Project area is not located in a Mineral Resource Zone. The proposed Project would not result in the loss of a known available mineral resource. Furthermore, the Project area has not been designated as a San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section Three: CEQA Analysis
3-4
667595v1
locally important mineral resource recovery site by a general plan, specific plan, or land use plan. Therefore, impacts to mineral resources are consistent with the 2017 EIR, and no impacts would occur.

3.1.13 NOISE
Construction of the proposed Project would result in a short -term, temporary increase in ambient noise levels originating predominately from construction equipment, such as concrete mixers, screeds, graders, compactors, loaders, and hauling trucks. The proposed Project area is located under the SR 41 overpass, which is an area that generates substantial noise due to the vehicles passing by. The temporary noise generated during construction would not significantly increase noise levels above baseline conditi ons.

Furthermore, the proposed Project would comply the City of Fresno Municipal Code, where applicable.

Impacts to noise are consistent with the 2017 EIR. Impacts would remain less than significant.

3.1.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
The proposed Project involves adding additional sidewalk, curb and gutter, and curb ramp to connect two trail systems together. The proposed Project would be consistent with the 2017 EIR, which found that the proposed Project would not induce population growth. No new housing or businesses would be a part of the proposed Project, and no housing or people would be displaced as a result of the Project. Thus, there would be no impact.

3.1.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
The proposed Project would continue to not significantly impact public services in the jurisdiction related to fire protection, police protection, parks, or landfill facilities. The proposed Project does not involve new housing or businesses, nor does it i nvolve new infrastructure that could induce population growth.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not induce population growth. The proposed Project would also not displace housing or people or require construction of new public facilities related to fire, police, or schools.

The proposed Project would have no impact just as determined in the 2017 EIR.

3.1.16 RECREATION
The proposed Project would connect the River West Eaton Trail extension by 320 feet to the original Lewis S. Eaton Trail. The proposed Project has been designed to provide additional recreational opportunities in a local and regional area with documented recreational needs. The additional 320 feet would be negligible compared to the project identified in the 2017 EIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts.

3.1.17 TRANSPORTATION
The proposed Project would not result in a significant increase in vehicle miles traveled given that the facilities being built only include a small stretch of sidewalk for pedestrian use, and the vehicles used during construction would be in line with smaller projects like that proposed here. The additional small section of sidewalk, curb and gutter would be constructed along Perrin Ave underneath the SR 41 overpass. The proposed Project would have no impact to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 Subdivision ( b), and the proposed Project would still not result in inadequate emergency access. Project impacts to transportation would remain the same as described in the 2017 EIR which was identified as less than significant or no impact. There would be no additional impacts.

3.1.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The proposed Project is located in an area that has been previously disturbed. The 2017 EIR did not analyze Tribal Cultural Resources because the notice of preparation for the Project was filed prior to July 1, 2015 and thus the requirements of AB 52 were not yet a required component of CEQA, as stated under Section 11(c) of AB 52. Nonetheless, it is not anticipated that tribal cultural resources will be affected by the changes proposed to the Project here given their minor nature and the low depth (12 inches) of excavation expected. However, as seen in Section 3.1.5 Cultural Resources, mitigation measure Cultural Resources-3, which was included in the 2017 EIR, will continue to be implemented for the proposed Project. Cultural San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section Three: CEQA Analysis
3-5
667595v1
Resources-3 describes the required steps to take should human remains or bones of unknown origin be discovered during proposed Project construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant within mitigation incorporated.

3.1.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to utilities and service systems. The proposed Project would not require the construction or relocation of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities . There would be no need for water during proposed Project operations and minor amounts of water for dust control purposes would be used during construction. Impacts would remain less than significant as determined in the 2017 EIR.

3.1.20 WILDFIRE
The proposed Project would not disrupt the operations or implementation of the Fresno County Emergency Operations Plan. The proposed Project would be constructed on disturbed land with little vegetation that could be used as fuel for a fire. No new structures would need to be constructed to reduce fire risks as a result of the proposed Project, and no people or structures would be exposed to flooding or landslides as a result of the proposed Project. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.1.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Similar to what was noted in the 2017 EIR, the proposed Project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. One mitigation measure that was included in the 2017 EIR, Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources-3, would continue to be implemented to lessen the significance of potential impacts. This mitigation measure would be expected of other projects in the surrounding area. Consequently, the incremental effects of the updated proposed Project, after mitigation, would not contribute to an adverse cumulative impact on these resources. Therefore, the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

As described this Addendum, Cultural Resources -3, which was originally implemented in the 2017 EIR, would be implemented to reduce cultural resources and tribal cultural resources to a less-than-significant level. All planned projects in the vicinity of the proposed Project would be subject to review in separate environmental documents and required to conform to the Fresno County or City of Fresno general plans, applicable development codes, mitigate for project-specific impacts, and provide appropriate engineering to ensure the project meets all applicable federal, State and local regulations and codes. As currently designed, and with compliance of the recommended mitigation measure, the proposed Project would not contribute to a cumulative impact. Consistent with the 2017 EIR, the cumulative impacts of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects would be less than cumulatively considerable.

The ways in which people can be subject to substantial adverse effects from projects include potential exposure to significant levels of local air pollutants; potential exposure to seismic and flooding hazards; potential exposure to contamination from hazardous materials; potential exposure to traffic hazards; and potential exposure to excessive noise levels. The risks from these potential hazards would be avoided or reduced to less than significant levels through compliance with existing laws, regulations, or requirements.

All of the proposed Project’s impacts, both direct and indirect, that are attributable to the proposed Project were identified and mitigated to a less than significant level.

San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section Three: CEQA Analysis
3-6
667595v1
Consistent with the 2017 EIR, the proposed Project would not either directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects on human beings because all potentially adverse direct impacts of the proposed Project are identified as having no impact, less tha n significant impact, or less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

3.1.22 CONCLUSION
The following identifies the standards set forth in Section 15162 as they relate to the proposed Project. The text in italics follows the provisions of the law.

1. No substantial changes are proposed in the project which would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

The proposed Project would include connecting the existing River West Eaton Trail extension by approximately 320 feet to the existing Lewis S. Eaton Trail. This would include adding sidewalk between the existing curb and the concrete embankment on the south side of the undercrossing of State Route 41 and adding an accessible curb ramp at the east side to provide a pedestrian connection to the current terminus of the existing Lewis S. Eaton Trail on the east side of SR 41 . The additional sidewalk would result in an increased construction footprint, but no additional changes would be needed with the proposed Project.

One mitigation measure adopted with the EIR, Cultural Resources-3, would apply to this project and reduce any impacts to less than significant.

2. No substantial changes have occurred with respect to circumstances under which the project is undertaken that would require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effect or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

The proposed Project would construct additional sidewalk between the existing curb and the concrete embankment on the south side of the undercrossing of SR 41 and would add an accessible curb ramp at the east side to provide a pedestrian connection to the current terminus of the existing Lewis S. Eaton Trail on the east side of SR 41. The increased amount of sidewalk would be the only change in terms of impacts.

The site would be visually consistent with existing conditions and would not substantially obstr uct views.

No new development has occurred since the certification of the 2017 EIR which would have changed the physical circumstances of the site. The impact would not be significant or substantial in nature.

3. No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or adopted, shows any of the following:

• The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;

As the proposed Project’s required construction equipment and construction time will stay approximately the same as discussed in the 2017 EIR, and the changes to the project are minor, as previously discussed, and would not result in additional hazards , no new information has been discovered as a result of this analysis which show any new potentially significant effects.

• Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;

San Joaquin River Conservancy September 2025
Lewis S. Eaton Trail Sidewalk Extension Project – Addendum #2 to the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project Section Three: CEQA Analysis
3-7
667595v1
As concluded in this Addendum #2, the increased amount of sidewalk would not substantially increase risk or result in more severe impacts than evaluated in the 2017 EIR. All other operational characteristics of the proposed Project remain unchanged from those evaluated in the 2017 EIR.

• 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;

One mitigation measure , Cultural Resources -3, would apply to the proposed Project. No new mitigation measures are necessary as a result of the proposed changes.

• Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the 2017 EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

The existing mitigation measures in the 2017 EIR reduce all impacts from the original Project to less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are warranted as a result of the proposed changes.

As indicated in this Addendum #2, the impacts of the proposed Project do not represent a substantial change to the 2017 EIR, nor has it uncovered any substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the proposed Project is undertaken, that would require major revisions to the 2017 EIR.

Analysis of the proposed Project shows that there are no new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects as a result of the propose d Project.

Impacts beyond those identified and analyzed in the 2017 EIR would not be expected to occur as a result of the proposed Project. The proposed Project would include one mitigation measures from the 2017 EIR, Cultural Resources -3. The proposed Project would not result in any new information of substantial importance that show new, more severe impacts, require new mitigation measures, or require new or revised alternatives from what was identified in the 2017 EIR.

Based on the record as a whole, there is no substantial evidence that the proposed Project would result in significant environmental impacts not previously studied and mitigated in the 2017 EIR and, accordingly, the proposed Project changes would not result in any conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration. Thus, a supplemental or subsequent EIR or EIR is not required for the proposed Project.

667595v1

APPENDIX A: 2017 EIR

VOLUME I
Draft Final Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2014061017

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Fresno,
Eaton Trail Extension Project

Prepared for:

San Joaquin River Conservancy

February November 2017

1r~~~-=~~-=--~-""':'--,.---. ~-----~-""'ll..- -r"!- ::---..i m•~•~ -111•---r.tw __ _ l!lwu.i~ ,.,.,.,_ • ..._. __ ....._ __
- ~~.:'..""',~
AECOM

VOLUME I
Draft Final Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse No. 2014061017
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Fresno,
Eaton Trail Extension Project
Prepared for:

San Joaquin River Conservancy
5469 E. Olive Avenue
Fresno, CA 93727
Contact:

Melinda Marks, Executive Officer
[email protected]
Prepared by:

AECOM
1360 E. Spruce Avenue, Suite 101
Fresno, CA 93720
Contact:

David Young
559.490.8324
February November 2017

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page i

.
....................................................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ...................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................ ..................................................
................................................................ ............................................................... .............................................................................................. ................................................................................ ........................................................ ............................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ .......................................................................................................... .............................................................................................. ............................................................. ....................................................
......................................................................................... ............................................................................. .................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................... .......................................................... ............................................................................................... ..........
.......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................... ................................................................................. .......................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... .................................................................................... ......................................................................................................... ......................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. .............................................................................. ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. .......................................................................................................................

Table of Contents
Preface xv

Chapter 1. Executive Summary 1-1

1.1 Introduction 1-1

1.2 Project Description 1-2

1.3 Project Location 1-3

1.4 Project Objectives 1-4

1.5 Potential Areas of Concern and Issues to be Resolved 1-4

1.6 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1-5

1.7 Unavoidable Significant Environmental Effects 1-5

1.8 Alternatives to the Project 1-33

1.8.1 Description of Alternatives 1-33

1.8.2 Comparison of Alternatives to the Project 1-34
Chapter 2. Project Description 2-1

2.1 Overview 2-1

2.2 Project Objectives 2-2

2.3 Project Location 2-2

2.4 Project Description 2-5

2.4.1 Multipurpose Trail 2-5

2.4.2 Parking Lot 2-6

2.4.3 Recreation Access 2-6

2.4.4 Recreation Amenities and Landscaping 2-6

2.5 Project Management, Operations, and Maintenance 2-11

2.5.1 Project Management 2-11

2.5.2 Best Management Practices 2-12

2.6 Background 2-21

2.7 Scoping 2-22

2.8 Areas of Controversy and Issues to be Resolved 2-22

2.9 Intended Uses of the EIR 2-23
Chapter 3. Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures 3-1

3.1 Overview 3-1

3.1.1 Environmental Setting 3-1

3.1.2 Local Jurisdictional Setting 3-4

3.1.3 Study Area 3-6

3.1.4 Impact Analysis 3-6

3.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 3-9

3.2.1 Introduction 3-9

3.2.2 Environmental Setting 3-9

3.2.3 Regulatory Setting 3-12

3.2.4 Impact Analysis 3-14

3.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 3-17

3.3.1 Introduction 3-17

3.3.2 Environmental Setting 3-18

3.3.3 Regulatory Setting 3-20

3.3.4 Impact Analysis 3-21

3.4 Air Quality 3-22
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page ii
....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. ..................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. .......................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. .......................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................. ............................................................................... ..................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ..................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ................................................................................................ ..................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................ ..................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ..................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................... .............................................................................................................

3.4.1 Introduction 3-22

3.4.2 Environmental Setting 3-23

3.4.3 Regulatory Setting 3-33

3.4.4 Impact Analysis 3-37

3.5 Biological Resources 3-42

3.5.1 Introduction 3-42

3.5.2 Environmental Setting 3-42

3.5.3 Regulatory Setting 3-57

3.5.4 Impact Analysis 3-63

3.6 Cultural Resources 3-73

3.6.1 Introduction 3-73

3.6.2 Environmental Setting 3-73

3.6.3 Regulatory Setting 3-75

3.6.4 Impact Analysis 3-77

3.7 Geology and Soils 3-81

3.7.1 Introduction 3-81

3.7.2 Environmental Setting 3-81

3.7.3 Regulatory Setting 3-84

3.7.4 Impact Analysis 3-86

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3-91

3.8.1 Introduction 3-91

3.8.2 Environmental Setting 3-91

3.8.3 Regulatory Setting 3-94

3.8.4 Impact Analysis 3-98

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3-103

3.9.1 Introduction 3-103

3.9.2 Environmental Setting 3-103

3.9.3 Regulatory Setting 3-104

3.9.4 Impact Analysis 3-109

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 3-114

3.10.1 Introduction 3-114

3.10.2 Environmental Setting 3-114

3.10.3 Regulatory Setting 3-121

3.10.4 Impact Analysis 3-130

3.11 Land Use and Planning 3-142

3.11.1 Introduction 3-142

3.11.2 Environmental Setting 3-142

3.11.3 Regulatory Setting 3-143

3.11.4 Impact Analysis 3-151

3.12 Mineral Resources 3-153

3.12.1 Introduction 3-153

3.12.2 Environmental Setting 3-153

3.12.3 Regulatory Setting 3-154

3.12.4 Impact Analysis 3-154

3.13 Noise 3-155

3.13.1 Introduction 3-155

3.13.2 Environmental Setting 3-156

3.13.3 Regulatory Setting 3-157

3.13.4 Impact Analysis 3-160

3.14 Population and Housing 3-165

3.14.1 Introduction 3-165

3.14.2 Environmental Setting 3-165

3.14.3 Regulatory Setting 3-166

3.14.4 Impact Analysis 3-166

3.15 Public Services 3-167
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page iii
.
.
.................................................................................................. .............
............................................................................................. .......................................................................... ......................................................................... ............................................................................................................ .......................................................................................... ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ............................................................................. ......................................................................................... ............................................................................ ..................................................................................... ................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... .........................
...................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ...................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................ ................................................................................ ............................................................. ............................................................ ............................................................................................................................ ...................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................ ...................................................................................................................... .................................................................................... ........................................................................................... .........................................................................................

3.15.1 Introduction 3-167

3.15.2 Environmental Setting 3-167

3.15.3 Regulatory Setting 3-168

3.15.4 Impact Analysis 3-168

3.16 Recreation 3-170

3.16.1 Introduction 3-170

3.16.2 Environmental Setting 3-170

3.16.3 Regulatory Setting 3-173

3.16.4 Impact Analysis 3-174

3.17 Transportation 3-175

3.17.1 Introduction 3-175

3.17.2 Environmental Setting 3-176

3.17.3 Regulatory Setting 3-179

3.17.4 Impact Analysis 3-184

3.18 Utilities and Service Systems 3-187

3.18.1 Introduction 3-187

3.18.2 Environmental Setting 3-188

3.18.3 Regulatory Setting 3-189

3.18.4 Impact Analysis 3-190
Chapter 4. Other CEQA Requirements 4-1

4.1 Cumulative Impacts 4-1

4.1.1 Analysis of Cumulative Impacts 4-6

4.1.2 Aesthetic and Visual Resources 4-7

4.1.3 Air Quality 4-9

4.1.4 Biological Resources 4-9

4.1.5 Cultural Resources 4-10

4.1.6 Geology and Soils 4-11

4.1.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4-11

4.1.8 Hazardous Materials 4-12

4.1.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 4-13

4.1.10 Land Use and Planning 4-14

4.1.11 Noise 4-14

4.1.12 Recreation 4-15

4.1.13 Transportation 4-15

4.2 Environmental Justice Considerations—Disadvantaged Communities 4-17

4.2.1 Regulatory Framework 4-21

4.2.2 CEQA’s Purposes 4-23

4.2.3 Methodology 4-23

4.2.4 Assessment 4-26

4.3 Growth-Inducing Impacts 4-29

4.4 Energy 4-30

4.5 Effects Not Found to be Significant 4-30

4.6 Unavoidable Significant Environmental Effects 4-30

4.7 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes 4-31 Chapter 5. Alternatives 5-1

5.1 Introduction 5-1

5.2 Regulatory Requirements 5-1

5.3 Project Objectives 5-2

5.4 Alternatives 5-3

5.5 Alternative Development Process 5-3

5.6 Alternative 1: Added Parking 5-4

5.6.1 Environmental Setting 5-5
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page iv
..
..................................................................................... .......
..................................................................................... ................................................................................................................. .................................................................................... .................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ............................................................................ .......................................................................................... .............................................................. ..................................................................... .............
......................................................
............................................................................................................ ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ............................................................................. .................................................................... ............................................................................ ................................................................................. ....................................................................................... ..................................................................... ................................................................. .......................................................................................................... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ............................................................................. .................................................................... ............................................................................ ..................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................................. .................................................................................... .................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ............................................................................ .......................................................................................... .............................................................. ................................................................... ....................................................................................... ..................................................................... ................................................................. .......................................................................................................... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ............................................................................. .................................................................... ............................................................................ ..................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................................. ....................................................................................

5.6.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 5-9

5.6.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5-9

5.6.4 Air Quality 5-9

5.6.5 Biological Resources 5-10

5.6.6 Cultural Resources 5-11

5.6.7 Geology and Soils 5-11

5.6.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5-11

5.6.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5-12

5.6.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 5-13

5.6.11 Land Use and Planning 5-16

5.6.12 Mineral Resources 5-16

5.6.13 Noise 5-16

5.6.14 Population and Housing 5-17

5.6.15 Public Services 5-17

5.6.16 Recreation 5-17

5.6.17 Transportation 5-17

5.6.18 Utilities and Service Systems 5-19

5.6.19 Cumulative Impacts 5-19

5.6.20 Environmental Justice Considerations 5-20

5.7 Alternative 2: Bluff Trail Alignment 5-21

5.7.1 Environmental Setting 5-22

5.7.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 5-22

5.7.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5-22

5.7.4 Air Quality 5-25

5.7.5 Biological Resources 5-25

5.7.6 Cultural Resources 5-25

5.7.7 Geology and Soils 5-25

5.7.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5-26

5.7.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5-26

5.7.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 5-27

5.7.11 Land Use and Planning 5-30

5.7.12 Mineral Resources 5-30

5.7.13 Noise 5-30

5.7.14 Population and Housing 5-30

5.7.15 Public Services 5-30

5.7.16 Recreation 5-31

5.7.17 Transportation 5-31

5.7.18 Utilities and Service Systems 5-31

5.7.19 Cumulative Impacts 5-31

5.7.20 Environmental Justice Considerations 5-32

5.8 Alternative 3: River’s Edge Trail Alignment 5-32

5.8.1 Environmental Setting 5-33

5.8.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 5-33

5.8.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5-34

5.8.4 Air Quality 5-34

5.8.5 Biological Resources 5-34

5.8.6 Cultural Resources 5-39

5.8.7 Geology and Soils 5-39

5.8.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5-40

5.8.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5-40

5.8.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 5-41

5.8.11 Land Use and Planning 5-44

5.8.12 Mineral Resources 5-44

5.8.13 Noise 5-45

5.8.14 Population and Housing 5-45
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page v

.
............................................................................................... ....................................................................................... ..................................................................... ................................................................. .......................................................................................................... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ............................................................................. .................................................................... ............................................................................ ..................................................................................... ............................................................................................ ................................................................................................................. .................................................................................... .................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ............................................................................ .......................................................................................... .............................................................. ................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................... ................................................................................................... ............................................................................ .......................................................................................... .............................................................. ........................................................................... ....................................................................................... ..................................................................... ................................................................. .......................................................................................................... ........................................................................................ ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................. ............................................................................. .................................................................... ............................................................................ ..................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... .................................................................................. ................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... .......................................................................... ........................................................................................ ............................................................ ................................................................. ..................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ........................................................................ ................................................................... ............................................................... ........................................................................................................

5.8.15 Public Services 5-45

5.8.16 Recreation 5-45

5.8.17 Transportation 5-45

5.8.18 Utilities and Service Systems 5-45

5.8.19 Cumulative Impacts 5-45

5.8.20 Environmental Justice Considerations 5-46

5.9 Alternative 4: No Parking 5-47

5.9.1 Environmental Setting 5-48

5.9.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 5-48

5.9.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5-51

5.9.4 Air Quality 5-51

5.9.5 Biological Resources 5-52

5.9.6 Cultural Resources 5-52

5.9.7 Geology and Soils 5-53

5.9.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5-53

5.9.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5-54

5.9.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 5-55

5.9.11 Land Use and Planning 5-57

5.9.12 Mineral Resources 5-57

5.9.13 Noise 5-57

5.9.14 Population and Housing 5-58

5.9.15 Public Services 5-58

5.9.16 Recreation 5-58

5.9.17 Transportation 5-59

5.9.18 Utilities and Service Systems 5-59

5.9.19 Cumulative Impacts 5-60

5.9.20 Environmental Justice Considerations 5-60

5.10 Alternative 5: Palm and Nees Access 5-61

5.10.1 Environmental Setting 5-75

5.10.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 5-85

5.10.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5-85

5.10.4 Air Quality 5-85

5.10.5 Biological Resources 5-86

5.10.6 Cultural Resources 5-88

5.10.7 Geology and Soils 5-89

5.10.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5-89

5.10.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5-90

5.10.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 5-95

5.10.11 Land Use and Planning 5-99

5.10.12 Mineral Resources 5-100

5.10.13 Noise 5-100

5.10.14 Population and Housing 5-100

5.10.15 Public Services 5-100

5.10.16 Recreation 5-100

5.10.17 Transportation Traffic 5-101

5.10.18 Utilities and Service Systems 5-102

5.10.19 Cumulative Impacts 5-102

5.10.20 Environmental Justice Considerations 5-103

5.11 Alternative 5B: North Palm Avenue Access 5-104

5.11.1 Environmental Setting 5-111

5.11.2 Past Land Uses 5-112

5.11.3 Environmental Consequences 5-119

5.11.4 Aesthetics and Visual Resources 5-119

5.11.5 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 5-119

5.11.6 Air Quality 5-119
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page vi
...................................................................................... ......................................................................................... ........................................................................................... ........................................................................... .................................................................. .......................................................................... ................................................................................... .......................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... .................................................................................. ................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................... ................................................................................................ .......................................................................... ........................................................................................ ............................................................ .
.............................................................................................. ............................................................ .......................................................................... ............................................
.........................................
...................................................
.......................................................................................... .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... .................................................................................................. ................................................................................ ..................................................................... ...................................
............................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ...................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................ .....................................................................................................

5.11.7 Biological Resources 5-121

5.11.8 Cultural Resources 5-122

5.11.9 Geology and Soils 5-123

5.11.10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 5-124

5.11.11 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 5-127

5.11.12 Hydrology and Water Quality 5-131

5.11.13 Land Use and Planning 5-136

5.11.14 Mineral Resources 5-137

5.11.15 Noise 5-137

5.11.16 Population and Housing 5-137

5.11.17 Public Services 5-137

5.11.18 Recreation 5-137

5.11.19 Transportation . 5-138

5.11.20 Utilities and Service Systems 5-141

5.11.21 Cumulative Impacts 5-141

5.11.22 Environmental Justice Considerations 5-142

5.12 Alternative 6: No Project 5-142

5.13 Comparison of Alternatives and to the Project 5-143

5.13.1 Mitigated Significant Impacts 5-144

5.13.2 Alternatives with Additional Mitigation Measures 5-144

5.13.3 Alternatives with Unavoidable Significant Impacts 5-144

5.13.4 Alternatives Not Meeting Project Objectives 5-145

5.14 Comparison of Alternatives 5-156

5.14.1 Alternative 1 5-156

5.14.2 Alternative 2 5-157

5.14.3 Alternative 3 5-157

5.14.4 Alternative 4 5-158

5.14.5 Alternative 5 5-158

5.14.6 Alternative 5B 5-158

5.14.7 Alternative 6 (No Project) 5-159

5.15 Environmentally Superior Alternative 5-159

5.15.1 Conclusion: Environmentally Superior Alternative 5-161 Chapter 6. References 6-1
Chapter 7. Preparers 7-1

7.1 San Joaquin River Conservancy 7-1

7.2 AECOM 7-1

7.3 J and R Environmental 7-2

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page vii
Appendices (presented in Volume III of this FEIR)
Appendix A Notice of Preparation for the DEIR
Appendix AA A2 No tice of Availability for the Partially Revised DEIR Appendix B San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan (Recompiled 2000) Appendix C Emissions Modeling
Appendix BB C2 CalEEM od Emission Estimates Emissions Modeling, Alternative 5B Appendix D 2011 Lewis Eaton Trail Biotic Study and the 2014 Biological Resources Report Update Technical Reports
Appendix E Phase I Archaeological Survey Report and Phase II Archaeological Survey Report Appendix F Phase I Hazardous Materials and Wastes
Appendix G Water Quality Technical Report
Appendix H Traffic Report
Appendix DD H2 Supplement al Traffic Report
Appendix EE I Blair, Church & Flynn Technical Report Palm Bluffs River Access Schematic Design Report
Appendix CC J Fresno County Health Services Landfill Closure Letters Appendix K Attachment s to Comment Letters on the DEIR and Partially Revised DEIR and Appendices to the Responses to Comments

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page viii
.
....................................
........................................................................... ...............................
.....
...............
........................................................ ............................................................................................. .............................
...............
.........................................
...................................................................... ................
............................................................ ........................................................... ..........................
.....................................
.......................................
..................
.................................
....................................................................................... ........................................................... ..............................................
....................................................... .....................................
......................................................................... ..........................................
..............................................
................
.............................................
......................
............................................
..............................................
...............................................
...........................................
....................
...................................................
...............................
.............................................................................................. ......................................................................................... ..........
................................................................................................................... ............................................................ .................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................. ....................................................
....................................
.................................................................................................

Tables
Table 1.6-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1-6

Table 2.4-1 Summary of Project Components by Length and Area 2-11 Table 2.9-1 Applicable Permit and Regulatory Requirements 2-25 Table 3.1-1 Existing Land Use, Zoning, and Ownership in the Study Area 3-7 Table 3.3-1 Soil Classifications in the Study Area 3-18 Table 3.3-2 Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Designation 3-19 Table 3.4-1 National and California Ambient Air Quality Standards 3-28 Table 3.4-2 Ambient Air Quality Summary—Fresno–1st Street Air Monitoring Station 3-30 Table 3.4-3 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Attainment Designations 3-31 Table 3.4-4 SJVAPCD-Adopted Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Pollutants 3-36 Table 3.4-5 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Construction Emissions 3-39 Table 3.4-6 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Operational Emissions 3-40 Table 3.5-1 Potential Occurrence of Special-Status Plant Species 3-45 Table 3.5-2 Potential Occurrence of Special-Status Wildlife Species 3-49 Table 3.5-3 Occurrence of Fish Species in Gravel Mining Ponds within Study Area 3-57 Table 3.5-4 Summary of San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies Relating to Biological Resources in the Project Area 3-62 Table 3.7-1 Fresno County and Regional Faults 3-83
Table 3.8-1 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with the Project 3-100 Table 3.10-1 Project Components within the 100-year Floodplain and Designated Floodway 3-119 Table 3.10-2 Summary of San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies Relating to Hydrology and Water Resources in the Project Area 3-127 Table 3.11-1 Bullard Community Plan Consistency Analysis 3-148 Table 3.13-1 Acoustical Terminology 3-156
Table 3.13-2 Human Response to Different Levels of Groundborne Vibration 3-157 Table 3.13-3 State of California Noise Exposure Levels and Land Use Compatibilities 3-159 Table 3.13-4 City of Fresno Noise Ordinance—Ambient Noise Levels 3-160 Table 3.13-5 Construction Equipment Noise Levels 3-162 Table 3.13-6 Maximum Construction Noise Levels at Various Distances from Project 3-162 Table 3.16-1 Weekly Visitor Use by Car, Woodward Park 3-171 Table 3.16-2 Holiday Visitor Use of Woodward Park, 2014 3-172 Table 3.16-3 Visitor Use of Spano Park by Car, Memorial Day Weekend 20141 3-172 Table 3.17-1 Capacity per Hour per Lane for Various Highway Facilities 3-176 Table 3.17-2 Roadways that May Be Used during Project Construction 3-177 Table 3.17-3 Existing Levels of Service, Potential Construction Roadway Segments 3-177 Table 3.17-4 Existing Levels of Service, Project Construction Intersections 3-178 Table 3.17-5 Study Roadway Segments 3-178
Table 3.17-6 Roadway Segment Analysis—Existing Conditions 3-179 Table 3.17-7 Roadway Segment Analysis—Existing plus Project Conditions 3-185 Table 3.17-8 Intersection Operation 3-186
Table 4.1-1 Future and Related Projects 4-2
Table 4.1-2 Roadway Segment Analysis—Project Buildout (2025) No-Project Conditions 4-16 Table 4.1-3 Roadway Segment Analysis—Project Buildout (2025) Base plus Project Conditions 4-17
Table 5.6-1 Summary of Alternative 1 Project Components 5-5 Table 5.6-2 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Construction Emissions—Project vs. Alternative 1 5-10
Table 5.6-3 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Operational Emissions—Project vs. Alternative 1 . 5-10
Table 5.6-4 Acres of Land Disturbed—Project vs. Alternative 1 5-12 Table 5.6-5 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Project vs. Alternative 1 5-12 Table 5.6-6 Project Components of Alternative 1 within the 100-Year Floodplain and Designated Floodway 5-15
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page ix
...................................................................................................................

Table 5.6-7 Roadway Segment Analysis Project Buildout (2025) plus Alternative 1 Conditions 5-18
Table 5.7-1 Summary of Alternative 2 Project Components 5-22 Table 5.7-2 Acres of Land Disturbed—Project vs. Alternative 2 5-26 Table 5.7-3 Project Components of Alternative 2 within the 100-Year Floodplain and Designated Floodway 5-29
Table 5.8-1 Summary of Alternative 3 Project Components 5-33 Table 5.8-2 Acres of Land Disturbed—Project vs. Alte 5-39 Table 5.8-3 Project Components of Alternative 3 within the 100-Year Floodplain and Designated Floodway 5-43
Table 5.9-1 Summary of Alternative 4 Project Components 5-48 Table 5.9-2 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Construction Emissions— Project vs. Alternative 4 5-52

Table 5.9-3 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Operational Emissions— Project vs. Alternative 4 5-52

Table 5.9-4 Acres of Land Disturbed—Project vs. Alternative 4 5-53 Table 5.9-5 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Project vs. Alternative 4 5-54 Table 5.9-6 100-Year Floodplain and Floodway Alternative 4 Components 5-56 Table 5.10-1 Summary of Alternative 5 Project Components 5-67 Table 5.10-2 Alternative 5 Parcels, Sizes, Land Uses, and Owner(s) 5-76 Table 5.10-3 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Construction Emissions— Project vs. Alternative 5 5-86

Table 5.10-4 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Operational Emissions— Project vs. Alternative 5 5-86

Table 5.10-5 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Project vs. Alternative 5 5-90 Table 5.10-6 Project plus Alternative 5 Components within the 100-Year Floodplain and Designated Floodway 5-97

Table 5.10-7 Roadway Segment Analysis Project Buildout (2025) Base plus Alternative 5 Conditions 5-101
Table 5.10-8 Intersection Level of Service Year 2017 Base Condition 5-102 Table 5.10-9 Intersection Level of Service Year 2025 Plus Alternative 5 Condition 5-102 Table 5.11-1 Summary of Alternative 5B Project Components 5-106 Table 5.11-2 Study Area for Alternative 5B: Parcels, Sizes, Land Uses, and Owner(s) 5-111 Table 5.11-3 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Construction Emissions— Proposed Project vs.

Alternative 5B 5-120
Table 5.11-4 Estimated Unmitigated Annual Operational Emissions— Proposed Project vs.

Alternative 5B 5-120
Table 5.11-5 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions—Proposed Project vs. Alternative 5B 5-127 Table 5.11-6 Project plus Alternative 5B Components within the 100-Year Floodplain and Designated Floodway 5-134

Table 5.11-7 Roadway Segment Analysis Project Buildout (2025) Base plus Alternative 5B Conditions 5-139
Table 5.11-8 Intersection Analysis Existing (2017) Base plus Alternative 5B Conditions 5-140 Table 5.125.13-1 Comparison of Environmental Impacts of the Project with Impacts of the Alternatives 5-146

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page x
.....................................
.................................................
....................................................................... ............................................
.............................................
........................
...............
...............
....................................................................................... ............................................................................ ............................................................... ................................................................................................ ....................................................................... ............................................................ ..................................................................... ................................................................................................................ ..................................................................... ...................................................
.................................................................... ......
.......................................................................................... .............................................................................................................................. ..................................
........................................
....................................................
.........................................................

Figures
Figure 2-1 Location of River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project 2-3

Figure 2-2 River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Study Area 2-4 Figure 2-3 Conceptual Design of Proposed Project 2-7
Figure 2-4 Conceptual Design Proposed Perrin Avenue Parking Lot 2-9 Figure 3-1 2013 California Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector 3-94 Figure 3-2 Designated Floodway and 100-year Floodplain in the Project Area 3-118 Figure 4-1 Disadvantaged Community Census Tracts 6019004404 and 6039001000 4-20 . .....................................
..................................
. ........................
......
......................................................................................................................... ...................................................................................

Figure 4-1 Disadvantaged Community Census Tracts 6019004404 and 6039001000 4-25 Figure 5-1 Alternative 1—Added Parking 5-7
Figure 5-2 Alternative 2—Bluff Trail Alignment 5-23
Figure 5-3 Alternative 3—River’s Edge Trail Alignment 5-35 Figure 5-4 No Parking Alternative 5-49
Figure 5-5 Alternative 5—Palm and Nees Access 5-63
Figure 5-6 Palm/Nees Private Access Road Parking Lot 5-65 Figure 5-7 Proposed Alternative Routes: Route 5a 5-69
Figure 5-8 Landfill Sites 5-71
Figure 5-9 Proposed Alternative Routes: Route 5b 5-73
Figure 5-10 Proposed Alternative Routes: Alternative Route 5c 5-77 Figure 5-11 Map of Parcels within Alternative 5 Area 5-79 Figure 5-12 Conceptual Illustrations Comparing Current Bluff Crest with Original Bluff Crest 5-83 Figure 5-13 Alternative 5B Alignment 5-107
Figure 5-14 Planned Access Point and Parking at Palm and Nees Avenue under Alternative 5B 5-109
Figure 5-15 Views of Existing Setting along the Alternative 5B Alignment 5-113 Figure 5-16 Parcels Crossed by the Alternative 5B Project Alignment 5-115 Figure 5-17 Closed Landfills in the Alternative 5B Study Area 5-117 Figure 5-18 Proposed Road Grading under Alternative 5B 5-125

Photographs
Photograph 3-1 Panoramic view of the San Joaquin River from Spano Park 3-10 Photograph 3-2 Panoramic view of the San Joaquin River from the Bluff Trail. 3-10 Photograph 3-3 Panoramic view of the San Joaquin River from SR 41 looking north 3-10 Photograph 5-1 View facing toward the south. The area in the foreground is the toe of the bluff. 5-81 Photograph 5-2 View facing toward the north (facing upstream of the distant San Joaquin River). 5-82
Photograph 5-3 View looking across the San Joaquin River. The individuals are believed to be standing on Parcel 40203067S 5-82

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents Page xi
Acronyms and Other Abbreviations
°F degrees F ahrenheit
AB Ass embly Bill
ADA Americans with D isabilities Act
amsl above mean sea level
APCO Air Pollution Control Officer
ARB California Air Resources Board
ASTM ASTM International
Basin Plan Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins
bgs below ground surface
bluffs San Joaquin River Bluffs
BMP best management practice
BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe
BP Bluff Preservation
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California ambient air quality standards
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalRecycle California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and W ildlife
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cfs cubic feet per second
CH4 methane
City City of Fresno
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL community noise equivalent level
CNPS California Native Plant Society

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents

Page xii
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
Conservancy San Joaquin River Conservancy
Conservancy Act San Joaquin River Conservancy Act
County Background Report Fresno County General Plan Revised Public Review Background Report CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
CVFPB Central Valley Flood Protection Board
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel(s)
dBA A-weighted decibel(s)
DEIR draft environmental impact report
diesel PM di esel particulate matter
DTSC Cal ifornia Department of Toxic Substances Control EIR environmental impact report
EO Executive Order
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Endangered Species Act
Fact Sheet "Environmental Justice at the Local and Regional Level, Legal Background" (California Attorney General’s Office fact sheet) FEIR final environmental impact report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FMFCD Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District
General Plan 2025 2025 Fresno General Plan
General Plan Update 2035 updated Fresno General Plan (approved December 2014) General WDRs State Water Board Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ, “Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredged or Fill Discharges to Waters Deemed by USACE to be Outside Federal Jurisdiction”
GHG greenhouse gas
GWP global warming potential
HRRP habitat restoration and revegetation plan
HWCL Hazardous Waste Control Law
K-12 kindergarten through 12th grade
Ldn day/night noise level
LED light-emitting diode
LOS level of service

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents Page xiii
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MMRP m itigation monitoring and reporting program
mph m iles per hour
MPO metropolitan planning organization
MTCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
NAAQS national ambient air quality standards
N2O nitrous oxide
NO nitric oxide
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOP notice of preparation
NOX oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NTU nephelometric turbidity unit
O3 ozone
OES Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
OEHHA California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Parkway San Joaquin River Parkway
Parkway Master Plan San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan PM particulate matter
PM2.5 particulate matter equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter PM10 particulate matter equal to or less than 10 micrometers in diameter Porter-Cologne Act Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act PRC California Public Resources Code
project Proposed River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Reporting Rule Final Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule River San Joaquin River
ROG reactive organic gas
RWQCB regional water quality control board
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SB Senate Bill
Scoping Plan Climate Change Scoping Plan
Settlement Act San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act SIP State Implementation Plan
SJKF San Joaquin kit fox
SJRRP San Joaquin River Restoration Program

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Table of Contents Page xiv
SJVAB San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SMARA Sur face Mining and Reclamation Act
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SR State Route
State CEQA Guidelines California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines SWPPP storm water pollution prevention plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TAC toxic air contaminant
Task Force Plan San Joaquin River Parkway Task Force Plan TMDL total maximum daily load
Transportation Plan Short Term Transportation Plan (San Joaquin River Parkway and Conservation Trust)
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USC United States Code
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VdB vibration decibel(s)
VELB valley elderberry longhorn beetle
WDR waste discharge requirement

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Preface
AECOM Page xv
Preface
This final environmental impact report (FEIR) has been prepared for the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project (project). Pursuant to Section 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (State CEQA Guidelines), an FEIR consists of:
 The draft environmental impact report (DEIR) or a revision of the DEIR;  comments and recommendations received on the DEIR, either verbatim or in summary;  a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the DEIR;  the responses of the lead agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and
 any other information added by the lead agency.

The San Joaquin River Conservancy (Conservancy) circulated a DEIR to responsible and trustee agencies, the public, and stakeholders for a 45-day review period that ran from February 15, 2017, to April 15, 2017. The Conservancy received comments on the DEIR, and then prepared and circulated a Partially Revised DEIR that was circulated for review from August 17, 2017, to October 2, 2017.

This FEIR for the proposed project includes the DEIR, with revisions made in the circulated Partially Revised DEIR; comments received during both public review periods; the responses to these comments; and appendices and attachments. The FEIR is presented in three volumes:
 Volume I of this FEIR, the Revised DEIR, presents the original DEIR as revised by the Partially Revised DEIR, along with some minor changes made to clarify information further. The revisions made in the Partially Revised DEIR are shown in revision mode, with deletions shown with strikethrough (
strikethrough) and additions shown with underlining (underlining) as requested by the Conservancy Board.

The additional minor changes to text made after circulation of the DEIR and Partially Revised DEIR are noted with deletions shown in double strikethrough ( double strikethrough) and additions
shown in double underlining (double underlining) to distinguish these recent changes from those changes included in the circulated Partially Revised DEIR. These more recent changes present only minor changes made either as a result of comments received, to clarify text, or to modify text for consistency after the substantive merging of the DEIR and Partially Revised DEIR. These changes are insignificant as the term is used in Section 15088.5(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines and do not require recirculation.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Preface
AECOM Page xvi
 Volume II of this FEIR, the Comments and Responses, presents comment letters (received via U.S. Mail and e-mail), as well as written comments received on comment cards at meetings held on the DEIR and Partially Revised DEIR. Pursuant to Section 15088 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Conservancy, as lead agency, has reviewed and considered all comments received during both public review periods. Responses to all environmental issues raised are contained in Volume II along with an index of commenters.  Volume III of this FEIR, the Appendices, presents a complete set of the appendices to the merged DEIR and Partially Revised DEIR; all attachments included with comment letters on the DEIR and Partially Revised DEIR; and any appendices relevant specifically to the responses to comments.

This FEIR will be used by the Conservancy (as the lead agency) and any responsible agencies, in conjunction with other information developed in the Conservancy’s formal record, to act on the construction and operation of the proposed project.

The Conservancy’s documentation associated with consideration and approval of the project will also include a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). The MMRP, which will provide the mitigation program that will be adopted by the Conservancy pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, will ensure that if the project is developed, all recommended mitigation measures are implemented, thereby minimizing identified environmental effects.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary

Page 1 ends

Chapter 1.

Executive Summary

1.1 Introduction
Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), when discretionary projects are undertaken by public agencies, an environmental impact report (EIR) is required if the lead agency 1 determines that the
project may cause a significant environmental impact. On June 9, 2014, pursuant to Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the San Joaquin River Conservancy (Conservancy) circulated a notice of preparation (NOP) of the draft EIR (DEIR) for the proposed River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project (project) (State Clearinghouse No. 2014061017) to local and State agencies and other interested parties. A public review period was set from June 9 to July 8, 2014. An open house public scoping meeting was held on June 17, 2014, at the Pinedale Community Center, located at 7170 N. San Pablo Avenue in Fresno, California. The purpose of the NOP and the scoping meeting was to solicit guidance from agencies and the public as to the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines.

The NOP provided a description of the project, location, alternatives and identified potential environmental effects. The NOP
, and the agency and public comments received during the scoping period are found in Appendix A of this DEIR. Consistent with California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21092.1 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, the Conservancy subsequently decided to revise and recirculate portions of the DEIR prepared for the proposed River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project. See Appendix AA A2 for the notice of availability for the Partially Revised DEIR for the project.

The purpose of an EIR is to provide full disclosure of the potentially significant environmental effects of the project to the public and the decision-makers and explore the means to mitigate (i.e., reduce, avoid, or eliminate) those impacts through special mitigation measures or alternatives to the project. CEQA intends for preparation of an EIR to be a public process that provides meaningful opportunities for public input regarding environmental effects.

Section 15123 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR contain a brief summary of the proposed action and its consequences. This executive summary is required to identify:
• each significant effect, with proposed mitigation measures and alternatives that would reduce or avoid that effect;
1 The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary

Page 1 ends

• areas of controversy known to the lead agency, including issues raised by agencies and the public; and
• issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate the significant effects.

This DEIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the project, . This DEIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR] Title 14, Section 15000 et seq. [14 CCR Section 15000 et seq.]).

The purpose of this DEIR is to inform public agency decision makers, representatives of affected and responsible agencies, the public, and other interested parties of the potential environmental effects of implementing the project. In addition to identifying potential environmental effects, this DEIR identifies methods by which these impacts can be mitigated, reduced, minimized, or avoided.

1.2 Project Description
The Conservancy proposes to extend the existing Lewis S. Eaton Trail (Eaton Trail) by constructing a multipurpose trail extension with ancillary recreation support features. The Eaton Trail would be extended approximately 2.4 miles, from the Perrin Avenue alignment near State Route (SR) 41 on the east to Spano Park on the west.

The proposed trail would be about 22 feet wide, with a 12-foot-wide paved surface, a parallel 8-foot-wide hard natural surface for equestrian use, and a 2-foot shoulder (opposite the natural surface area) and generally would proceed from SR 41 to a point below the Spano Park overlook.

A parking lot (Perrin Avenue parking lot) for 50 vehicles with a controlled vehicle entrance would be constructed adjacent to SR 41. Vehicle access to the parking lot would be at the Perrin Avenue undercrossing of SR 41. A gate and an unmanned parking pay station would be included to manage vehicle access. The parking lot would accommodate up to three horse trailer stalls and would have a fire hydrant, a drinking fountain, a public information bulletin board, a small pet station, and a two-vault restroom. The trail, restroom and parking lot would be Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible.

The pet station would be located at the Perrin Avenue entrance. Light-emitting diode (LED) light sets with rechargeable batteries and a solar panel would be mounted on light poles, providing sufficient illumination for security and maintenance. The area surrounding the parking lot would be landscaped with native vegetation. Stormwater would be directed into vegetated bioswales. An emergency/service gate would provide access to the trail extension for emergency first responders and maintenance staff. Fire hydrants would be added at three locations if feasible: at the Perrin Avenue parking lot, near the private property parcel, and near the toe of the bluff below Spano Park.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary

Page 1 ends

Pedestrian and bicycle access would be provided at four locations—Perrin Avenue, Spano Park, and the West Riverview Drive and Churchill Avenue entrances to the Bluff Trail. The Bluff Trail is an existing neighborhood trail, located on land owned by the City of Fresno (City). A 12-foot-wide paved connector trail would be constructed to provide access from the Bluff Trail to the trail extension near West Riverview Drive. A wide staircase with bicycle guides would be constructed from Spano Park to the proposed trail.

The Spano Park access and Bluff Trail access would be constructed on the steep slope of the San Joaquin River Bluffs (bluffs).

The trail extension would be landscaped at intervals with native vegetation for habitat enhancement, visual screening, and shade. The landscaping would be irrigated until the vegetation is permanently established. Picnic areas, tables, benches, public safety and information signs, and wildlife observation areas would be provided along the trail extension at various locations. An ADA accessible vault restroom would be added near the toe of Spano Park.

Existing unimproved hiking paths to the riverbank would be connected to the trail extension. These paths would be widened up to 6 feet and overlaid with a permeable surface, such as decomposed gravel.

These hiking paths would not be landscaped.

On completion, the project would provide low-impact public recreational activities along the San Joaquin River (River), such as hiking, bicycling, horse riding, fishing, and nature observation, consistent with the San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan (San Joaquin River Conservancy 1997a) (Parkway Master Plan). A summary of the policies and goals of the Parkway Master Plan are found in Appendix B of this DEIR.

The project would cover approximately 8.9 acres—5.9 acres of paved, impermeable surface and

3.0 acres of unpaved, permeable surfaces (e.g., gravel) within approximately 358 acres of public lands. (See Figure 2-3, “Conceptual Design of Proposed Project,” in Chapter 2.)

1.3 Project Location
The study area
2 is located along the River between SR 41 and Spano Park within the city limits of Fresno (Figure 2-1 in Chapter 2). The boundary extends from the River south to the bluffs and westward from SR 41 to Spano Park, near the intersection of Palm Avenue and Nees Avenue. The project area is sited within Sections 21, 28, and 29 of Township 12S, Range 20E, Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian, Fresno North 7.5-minute series, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic quadrangle. 2 “Study area” and “project site” are interchanged throughout this document in context to the 358-acre project defined in the project description. The term “project area” is used when referring to the project site and the surrounding area.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary

Page 1 ends

The study area that is analyzed in this DEIR is approximately 358 acres and is located on the south side of the River. A majority of the land is owned by the State of California under the management jurisdiction of the Conservancy. Two parcels, owned by the City, are adjacent to Conservancy-owned land.

Implementation of a portion of the project may occur on the city’s parcels.

Three other parcels in the study area are owned by others and would not be part of the project. One parcel, privately owned land located near the center of the study area, is occupied by two residences.

Access to these residences is via a paved road from West Riverview Drive. The other two parcels, owned by Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD), contain stormwater detention basins.

A residential subdivision is located on the bluffs, adjacent to the southern project boundary and on top of the bluffs approximately 60 feet above the project site. The subdivision is within the city limits of Fresno.

1.4 Project Objectives
A primary, broad objective of the Conservancy is to link all public recreational areas and natural reserves between SR 99 and Friant Dam with a continuous, multipurpose trail on land and with canoe put-in, take- out, and rest areas along the river, to create a recreation system with a variety of recreational opportunities within the planned San Joaquin River Parkway (Parkway), and to connect the multipurpose trail with other local and regional trails and bikeways originating in surrounding areas consistent with Parkway Master Plan policies. The objective of the proposed project is to extend the existing Eaton Trail from Woodward Park for about 2.4 miles downstream along the San Joaquin River across State-owned land and provide recreation amenities consistent with the Parkway Master Plan policies.

1.5 Potential Areas of Concern and Issues to be Resolved The State CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR provide a list of issues that are likely to raise controversy and are of particular interest to the public. The following issues are most likely to produce controversy in reviewing and considering the project:
• access to the study area from the Fresno side of the River; • access to the study area via West Riverview Drive;
• access to the study area from the vicinity of Palm Avenue and Nees Avenue; • public access and ADA compliance;
• trail access to the River;
• parking to support access to the project;
• location of the trail extension alignment;

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary

Page 1 ends

• consistency with the Fresno General Plan (2014)
3 ;
• risk of wildland fire extending to the bluffs’ residential area; • public safety (e.g., public nuisances, loitering, crime); • air quality effects associated with the Perrin Avenue vehicular access; • recreational amenities;
• support for specific alternatives; and
• wildlife conservation and viewing.

1.6 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Table 1.6-1 (beginning on the next page) summarizes the impacts of the project (with impact conclusions of either No Impact, Less-than-Significant Impact, or Potentially Significant or Significant Impact) and mitigation measures that would be implemented to reduce these impacts.

1.7 Unavoidable Significant Environmental Effects
A project would result in unavoidable significant environmental effects if the impacts resulting from the project (both construction-related and operational impacts) would be significant and for which no feasible mitigation or only partial mitigation is feasible.
4 Approval and implementation of a project that involves unmitigable significant effects typically require a statement of overriding considerations by the lead agency.

As described in Chapter 3, “Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures,” the proposed River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project would involve multiple potentially significant impacts. However, with the implementation of best management practices (BMPs) that have been incorporated into the project design (refer to Section

2.5.1 2.5.2, “Best Management
Practices”) and with implementation of specific proposed mitigation measures where needed (e.g., for biological resources and aesthetic and visual resources), all potentially significant impacts associated with implementation of the project would be avoided and reduced to less-than-significant levels with the exception of the following resource area presenting a potentially unavoidable significant impact:

Environmental Justice—Disadvantaged Communities, as described in Section 4.2. 3 During preparation of this DEIR, the City of Fresno released the draft Fresno General Plan on July 2, 2014. The Fresno City Council approved the general plan on December 18, 2014 (City of Fresno 2014a). 4 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15126.2(b).

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Table 1.6-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Aesthetics and Visual Resources
Impact 3.2-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Temporary Impact
Less than significant
Temporary Impact
No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.2-1: The project would have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Long-Term Impact Potentially significant
Long-Term Impact
Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1: The Conservancy shall use native plants for landscaping portions of the trail extension to allow for naturalization of these features. Landscaping and recreation facilities shall be designed to create visual buffers and in a manner complementary and/or compatible with the scenic nature of the area.

Newly landscaped vegetation shall be irrigated until permanently established. The Conservancy shall select materials and colors for all facilities (e.g., vault toilet restrooms) that and shall be compatible with the surrounding natural environment.

Long-Term Impact
Less than significant
Impact 3.2-2: The project could
substantially damage scenic resources,
including trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a State scenic
highway.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.2-3: The project would
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

Temporary Impact
Less than significant
Temporary Impact
No mitigation is required.

character or quality of the site and its
Impact 3.2-3: The project would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

Long-Term Impact
Potentially significant
Long-Term Impact
Aesthetics and Visual Resources-2: The Conservancy shall implement Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1.

Long-Term Impact
Less than significant
Impact 3.2-4: The project would create a
new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Temporary Impact
No impact

Impact 3.2-4: The project would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Long-Term Impact
Potentially significant
Long-Term Impact
Aesthetics and Visual Resources-3: The Conservancy shall implement the following measures regarding lighting design features:
• All outdoor lights shall be fully shielded with full cutoff luminaires. • All up-lighting for any purpose shall be avoided.
• Tree-mounted lights shall be avoided unless they are fully shielded and pointing downward toward the ground or shining into dense foliage.

Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-6

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impacts Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation
Mitigation
Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Impact 3.3-1: The project could convert
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, of
Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland) to nonagricultural use.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.3-2: The project could conflict
with existing agricultural zoning or a
Williamson Act contract.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.3-3: The project could conflict
with existing zoning or cause rezoning of
forestland.

No impact
Impact 3.3-4: The project could cause
the loss or conversion of forestland to
nonforest use.

No impact
Impact 3.3-5: The project could involve
other changes that could result in
conversion of farmland to nonagricultural
use or timberland to nonforest use.

No impact
Air Quality
Impact 3.4-1: The project could conflict
with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.4-2: The project could violate
an air quality standard or could contribute
substantially to an existing or projected
air quality violation.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

AECOM Page 1-7

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact 3.4-3: The project could result in
a cumulatively considerable net increase
of a criteria pollutant for which the project
region is nonattainment under an
applicable federal or State ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions that exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors).

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.4-4: The project could expose
sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.4-5: The project could create
objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Biological Resources
Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status Plant
Species
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-1 (Special-Status Plant Species):

Before any ground-disturbing activities, a qualified botanist shall conduct a botanical survey for California satintail and Sanford’s arrowhead during their respective floristic periods (September to May and November to May). If it is determined that suitable habitat for special-status plants is present, the botanist shall conduct a focused survey for special-status plants during the appropriate time of the year to adequately identify special-status plants that could occur in the study area. The surveys shall be performed according to the Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special-Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (DFG 2009). Surveys shall be performed before the final alignment has been established to avoid special-status plants, and if the species are present before the start of construction as well.

One or more of the following measures shall be implemented to avoid and/or minimize impacts on sensitive natural communities and special- status plants as appropriate, per the botanist’s recommendation:
• Flag or otherwise delineate in the field the special-status plant populations and/or sensitive natural communities to be protected.

Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-8

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Clearly mark all such areas to be avoided on construction plans and designate these areas as “no construction” zones.
• Allow adequate buffers around plants or habitat; show the location of the buffer zone on the maintenance design drawings. Mark this exclusion zone in the field with stakes and/or flagging so that it is visible to maintenance personnel, without causing excessive disturbance of the sensitive habitat or population itself (e.g., from installation of fencing).
• Time construction or other activities during dormant and/or noncritical life cycle period.
• Limit the operation of construction equipment to established roads wherever possible.

Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
San Joaquin Kit Fox
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-2 (San Joaquin Kit Fox):

The following measures are summarized from the USFWS Standardize d Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance (USFWS 2011). These measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts on SJKF entering the area during construction:
• An employee education program shall be conducted. The program shall consist of a brief presentation by a qualified wildlife biologist.

The program shall include a description of the SJKF and its habitat needs; a report of SJKF occurrence in the project area; an explanation of the status of the species and its protection under the ESA; and a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts on the species during project construction. A fact sheet conveying this information shall be prepared for distribution to construction personnel.
• A representative shall be appointed to be the contact for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured, or entrapped kit fox. The representative shall be identified during the employee education program and his or her name and telephone number shall be provided to USFWS and CDFW.

Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-9

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
• Project-related vehicles shall observe a daytime speed limit of 15 mph throughout the project site, except on State and federal highways; after dark, the speed limit shall be reduced to 10 mph.

Off-road traffic outside of designated areas shall be prohibited. • Work at night shall not be allowed.
• To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during construction, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than 2 feet deep shall be covered with plywood or similar materials at the end of each work day. If the trenches cannot be closed, one or more escape ramps constructed of earthen fill or wooden planks shall be installed. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be inspected for trapped animals.
• All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4 inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods shall be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe shall not be moved until USFWS or CDFW has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved only once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped. • Holes or trenches more than 8 feet deep shall be covered or fenced at the end of the day.
• All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps shall be disposed of in securely closed containers and removed at least once a week from the project site.
• Firearms shall not be allowed on the project site.
• To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes, or destruction of dens, no pets shall be permitted on the project site.
• Rodenticides and herbicides shall not be used on the project site except to control invasive plant species.

AECOM Page 1-10

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
• Upon completion of the project, all areas subject to temporary ground disturbance, including staging areas, temporary roads, and borrow sites, shall be recontoured if necessary and revegetated to promote restoration of the area to preproject conditions. • Any death, injury, or entrapment of SJKF shall be reported to USFWS and CDFW staff immediately. Written reports shall be submitted within 3 working days of the event.

Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
American Badger
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-3 (American Badger):

The Conservancy shall conduct a preconstruction survey no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days before the beginning of ground- disturbing activities. If active American badger den sites are present, the Conservancy shall consult with CDFW and implement the following measures:
• The entrances to dens shall be blocked for 3-5 days to discourage use.
• After the 3- to 5-day period, the dens shall be hand-excavated with a shovel to prevent reuse during construction.
• No disturbance of active dens shall take place when cubs may be present and dependent on parent care.

Less than significant
Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
Avian Species
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-4 (Avian Species):

If project-related construction must occur during the breeding season (February through mid-September), the Conservancy shall have surveys performed for active nests no more than 30 days before commencing project-related activities. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. A minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet shall be delineated around active nests until the breeding season has ended, a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival, or the biologist determines that the nest is no longer active. The results of the preconstruction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to CDFW.

Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-11

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
Avian Species
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-5 (Bald Eagle):

Before initiating ground-disturbing activities, the Conservancy shall have preconstruction surveys performed for bald eagle nesting habitat and roost sites and foraging areas along the River within 2 miles of the project. Surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the CDFW Bald Eagle Breeding Survey Instructions (DFG 2010) or current guidance. If an active eagle’s nest is found within 0.5 mile of the project, construction shall not occur during the breeding season, typically January through July or August.

If project-related construction must occur during the breeding season, the Conservancy shall have surveys performed for active nests no more than 30 days before commencing project-related activities. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. A minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet shall be delineated around active nests until the breeding season has ended, a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival, or the biologist determines that the nest is no longer active. The results of the preconstruction survey and any subsequent monitoring shall be provided to CDFW.

Less than significant
Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
Burrowing Owl
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-6 (Burrowing Owl):

The Conservancy shall implement the following measures before initiating ground-disturbing activities:
• Focused surveys shall be conducted following the survey methodology developed by the California Department of Fish and Game (now CDFW) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (DFG 2012).
• If burrowing owls are found within the project footprint as a result of the required surveys, the recommendations of the S taff Repor on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (DFG 2012) are mandatory; avoiding nesting sites must include implementation of no-disturbance buffer zones, unless a qualified biologist approved by CDFW verifies through noninvasive methods that either (1) the birds have not begun egg laying and incubation, or (2) juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival.

Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-12

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
• If burrowing owls must be removed, passive relocation is required during the nonbreeding season. A burrowing owl relocation plan to be approved by CDFW shall be developed and implemented, including passive measures such as installing one-way doors in active burrows for up to 4 days, carefully excavating all active burrows after 4 days to ensure that no owls remain underground, and filling all burrows in the construction area to prevent owls from using them. Replacement of burrows with artificial burrows at a ratio of one burrow collapsed to one artificial burrow constructed (1:1) is required.

Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
Swainson’s Hawk
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-7 (Swainson’s Hawk):

The Conservancy shall implement the following measure before construction starts:
• To avoid impacts on Swainson’s hawks, no construction project shall occur between March 1 and August 31 unless a qualified biologist has performed nesting surveys following the survey methodology developed by the Swainson’s Hawk Technical
Advisory Committee (DFG 2000) before the start of project activities. Additional preproject surveys for active nests within a 0.5- mile radius of the project site shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 10 days before the start of project activities and during the appropriate time of day to maximize detectability. A minimum no-disturbance buffer of 0.5 mile shall be delineated around active nests until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival.

Less than significant
Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
Raptors/Migratory
Birds
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-8 (Raptors/Migratory Birds):

If construction begins between February 1 and August 31, the Conservancy shall conduct surveys for nesting birds within 1,000 feet of the trail extension, parking lot, and other construction areas. If active nests are found, a buffer of 250 feet shall be established. A smaller buffer area may be sufficient if, in consultation with CDFW, it is determined sufficient to avoid impacts. Buffers shall be maintained until the young have fledged or the nests become inactive.

Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-13

Special-Status
Wildlife Species—
Silvery Legless
Lizard
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-9 (Silvery Legless Lizard):

The Conservancy shall perform a survey for legless lizard presence and shall evaluate and map specific habitat areas within the riparian habitat along the unimproved hiking paths before construction. The survey shall use standard coverboard techniques for herpetofauna. If silvery legless lizard or specific habitat areas are found, the area shall be avoided.

Less than significant
Impact 3.5-1: The project would have a
substantial adverse effect on a species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special-status species.

Special-Status Fish
Species—Chinook
Salmon
No impact

Impact 3.5-2: The project could have a
substantial adverse effect on riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural
communities.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.5-3: The project could have a
substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.5-4: The project would interfere
substantially with the movement of native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife, or
with established corridors.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Biological Resources-10 (Wildlife Movement):

The Conservancy shall implement the following measures:
• The multiuse trail shall be located outside the riparian corridor in conformance to the buffers established in the Parkway Master Plan. • All ground-disturbing work, including construction and routine maintenance, and routine recreational operating hours shall occur during daylight hours.
• At a minimum, dogs shall be required to be leashed at all times.

Less than significant
Impact 3.5-5: The project could conflict
with a local policy or ordinance protecting
biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance.

No impact
AECOM Page 1-14

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact 3.5-6: The project could 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
Cultural Resources
Impact 3.6-1: The project could cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in CEQA Section 15064.5.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.6-2: The project would cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to CEQA Section
15064.5.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources-1:

The Conservancy shall perform Extended Phase I subsurface testing along the alignment of the trail extension to determine the boundary of site CA-FRE-980 and identify the presence of additional archaeological deposits. The testing shall be performed before the start of any construction.

The Conservancy shall ensure that all cultural resources identified shall be evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR. All additional testing shall be performed by individuals who meet the United States Secretary of the Interior’s professional standards in archaeological history. If archaeological resources are determined to be eligible for the CRHR, and if the impacts of project construction and visitor use of the alignment render these resources as ineligible for the CRHR, the alignment shall be moved a minimum of 100 feet.

Begin double underli
ne. Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources-2
After completing the cultural resources investigations as described in Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources-1, and prior to commencing grading, earth work, or other disturbance of native soil, the Conservancy shall retain and enter into a service contract with a qualified professional for monitoring. The cultural resources monitor shall provide monitoring for all initial ground disturbing activities and earth disturbance on portions of the project site that have not been mined for gravel, including clearing, grubbing, tree removal, grading, trenching, stockpiling materials, rock crushing, etc. The monitor shall have the authority to Less than significant
AECOM Page 1-15

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-16
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
temporarily divert, redirect or halt the ground disturbance activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources. The Conservancy shall provide an opportunity for an appropriate tribal monitor to also enter a service agreement to be on-site during these activities to supplement the project monitor’s services for advisory purposes and to serve the tribe’s interests. End double underline.

Impact 3.6-3: The project could directly
or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.6-4: The project could disturb
human remains, including those interred
outside formal cemeteries.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Cultural Resources-23:

If human remains or bone of unknown origin is found during any future project construction in the planning, all work shall stop in the vicinity of the find and the County Coroner shall be contacted immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission. The Native American Heritage Commission shall notify the person considered to be the most likely descendant. The most likely descendant shall work with the project applicant to develop a program for the reinternment of the human remains and any associated artifacts. No additional work shall take place within the immediate vicinity of the find until the identified appropriate actions have been completed.

Less than significant
Geology and Soils
Impact 3.7-1: The project could expose
people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury or death involving
rupture of a known earthquake fault,
strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-
related ground failure, including
liquefaction, or landslides.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Geology and Soils-1:

The Conservancy shall implement the following measures:
• Grading plans and design shall be signed by a professional engineer and submitted for approval within a reasonable time frame before the start of construction.
• Construction slopes and grading shall be designed to limit the potential for slope instability and minimize the potential for erosion during and after construction.
• In developing grading and construction procedures, the stability of both temporary and permanent cut, fill, and otherwise affected slopes shall be analyzed and properly addressed.
• Development of the project site shall comply with the then-most- recent California Building Standards Code design standards and performance thresholds for construction on steep slopes to avoid or minimize potential damage from erosion.
• Where soft or loose soils are encountered during investigations, design, or project construction, appropriate measures shall be implemented to avoid, accommodate, replace, or improve such soils. Depending on site-specific conditions and permit requirements, these measures may include:
- locating construction facilities and operations away from areas of soft and loose soil;
- overexcavating soft or loose soils and replacing them with engineered backfill materials;
- increasing the density and strength of soft or loose soils through mechanical vibration and/or compaction;
- installing material over construction access roads such as aggregate rock, steel plates, or timber mats; and
- treating soft or loose soils in place with binding or cementing agents.
• At the beginning of each construction day, the proposed staircase and trail along the bluff slope shall be evaluated for slope stability by qualified construction staff.

Less than significant

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary Level of Level of
Significance Before Significance After
Impacts Mitigation Mitigation Measure Mitigation
AECOM Page 1-18
• Fiber rolls shall be placed along the perimeter of the site to prevent sediment and construction-related debris and sediment from leaving the site.
• Silt fences shall be placed downgradient of disturbed areas to slow runoff and sediment.
• During construction, slopes affected by construction activities shall be monitored by qualified construction staff and maintained in a stable condition.
• Construction activities likely to result in slope instability shall be suspended, as necessary, during and immediately following periods of heavy precipitation when unstable slopes are more susceptible to failure.

Impact 3.7-3: The project could be
located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the project, and potentially
could result in on or off-site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.7-4: The project could be
located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial risks to
life or property.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.7-5: The project site could have
soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal
of wastewater.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-19
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact 3.8-1: The project could generate
GHG emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.8-2: The project could conflict
with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of GHGs.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 3.9-1: The project could create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment through routine
transportation, use or disposal of
hazardous materials or through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the
environment.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.9-2: The project could 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

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.9-4: The project could be
located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted,
within 2 miles of a public airport or public
use airport, and the project could result in
a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the study area.

No impact
Impact 3.9-5: The project could be in the
vicinity of a private airstrip, and thus,
project implementation could result in a
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the study area.

No impact
Impact 3.9-6: The project could impair
implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan.

No impact
Impact 3.9-7: The project would expose
people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Hazards and Hazardous Materials-1:

Safe access for emergency and wildland fire suppression equipment and civilian evacuation shall be provided at three entrance points and throughout the site on the paved trail system. Response agency- approved emergency responder access locks shall be maintained on all gates.

Mitigation Measure Hazards and Hazardous Materials-2:

Signs shall be posted that clearly indicate entrances and egresses for the multiuse trail (e.g., Perrin Avenue entrance, West Riverview Drive entrance), to minimize delay in response times to any wildfires that may occur.

Less than significant

Any internal combustion engine that uses hydrocarbon fuels shall not be used on any grass- or brush-covered lands unless the engine is equipped with a spark arrester. All vehicles and construction equipment shall be equipped with an improved muffler.

Mitigation Measure Hazards and Hazardous Materials-4:

Signage containing the following or equally effective language shall be placed at all trail access points:

Wildland fires destroy habitat and can threaten lives and structures— be fire safe! The following prohibitions apply throughout the trail area:
(a) No open fires, campfires, or fireworks.
(b) No burning of any trash, vegetation, brush, stumps, logs, fallen timber, or any other flammable material.
(c) Portable barbecues or grills may not be used.
(d) No smoking.

Mitigation Measure Hazards and Hazardous Materials-5:

The Conservancy shall maintain a fire-defensible firebreak or comply with the standards in the City of Fresno’s weed abatement/fire prevention ordinance by annually disking or mowing at the site. The shoulders of developed trails shall also be mowed or disked no less often than annually. Ladder fuels and fuel loads shall be evaluated periodically and management measures such as trimming and fuel reduction activities shall be implemented in public use areas.

Mitigation Measure Hazards and Hazardous Materials-6:

Before the start of construction, a fire prevention plan for construction activities shall be prepared and implemented in coordination with the appropriate emergency service and/or fire suppression agencies of the applicable local or State jurisdictions. The plan shall describe fire prevention and response methods, including fire precaution, requirements for spark arrestors on equipment, and suppression measures that are consistent with the policies and standards of the affected jurisdictions. If heavy equipment is used for construction during the dry season, a water truck shall be maintained on the construction site. Materials and equipment required to implement the fire prevention

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-22
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
plan shall be available on-site. Before construction begins, all construction personnel shall be trained in fire safety and informed of the contents of the fire prevention plan.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Impact 3.10-1: The project would violate
water quality standards or WDRs.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-1:

Construction staging areas, including hazardous-material storage areas and temporary stockpiles, shall be located outside the 100-year floodplain and designated floodway and away from drainages.

Appropriate BMPs shall be implemented to ensure that runoff from these areas does not directly flow to surface waters. Before construction begins, locations for storage of hazardous materials, temporary stockpiles, and demolition debris piles within staging areas shall be designated outside the 100-year floodplain and designated floodway and away from drainages. Major storage and stockpile areas shall be designated in the SWPPP, as required for NPDES General Permit coverage for construction. Stockpile areas shall be identified in the SWPPP and appropriate BMPs shall be installed accordingly. The mitigation shall be implemented before any ground disturbance and shall continue throughout construction, as conditions require.

Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-2:

The project design shall include structural BMPs for project operation to reduce and treat postconstruction stormwater runoff from the proposed parking lot and other impervious features. The runoff shall be treated through the use of detention basins or other means before it reaches on- site surface waters, wetlands, and the River. The selected BMPs shall minimize the velocity of stormwater flows and disperse the flows to the extent practicable. The selected BMPs also shall serve to infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate, and detain runoff close to its source, and shall enhance on-site recharge of groundwater. The structural BMPs shall be designed in accordance with applicable local and State regulations.

BMPs such as bioswales, surface sand, other media filters, vegetated filter strips, and detention basins may be implemented to treat, detain, and percolate stormwater runoff. The mitigation shall be implemented before project designs are finalized.

Less than significant

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-23
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-3:

The proposed equestrian trails shall be sited, graded, and constructed consistent with Policy RDP11 of the Parkway Master Plan. The equestrian trail and staging area shall drain to detention swales, with no direct discharges to on-site waters or the River. Signage shall be posted, animal waste containers shall be provided, animal waste removal procedures shall be implemented, and the site shall be inspected periodically to determine the effectiveness of the measures. Vault toilets shall be cleaned daily and waste periodically trucked off-site for treatment.

Impact 3.10-2: The project could
substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or could interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge so that a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table could occur.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.10-3: The project would
substantially alter existing drainage
patterns, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site.

Temporary Impact
Less than significant
Long-Term Impact
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-4:

For improvements that require an encroachment permit and approval from the CVFPB, drainage and hydromodification studies shall be performed to evaluate and avoid modifications that would increase flooding in upstream or downstream areas, or that would cause obstructions during flood events. A professional civil engineer shall:
• conduct a drainage and hydromodification study evaluating the location of all existing and proposed drainage features; • perform stormwater calculations for surface drainage flows occurring before and after project construction;
• evaluate the potential for drainage and floodplain modifications to increase erosion on adjacent properties; and
• determine the base flood elevation before and after construction, so that no net displacement of floodwaters shall occur.

As necessary, the filling of floodplain or floodway areas below the base flood elevation shall be compensated for and balanced by excavation of a hydraulically equivalent area, taken from below the base flood elevation, to achieve no net increase in the base flood elevation greater Less than significant

Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-5:

Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-2 shall be implemented as described above, to prevent and reduce potential alterations to drainage patterns that can result in erosion or siltation.

Impact 3.10-4: The project would
substantially alter the drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or
river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-
site.

Temporary Impact
Less than significant
Long-Term Impact
Potentially significant
Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-6:

Mitigation Measures Hydrology and Water Quality-2, Hydrology and Water Quality-4, and Hydrology and Water Quality-5 shall be implemented as described above.

Less than significant
Impact 3.10-5: The project would create
or contribute runoff that would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or would
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-7:

Mitigation Measures Hydrology and Water Quality-1, Hydrology and Water Quality-2, and Hydrology and Water Quality-3 shall be implemented to reduce pollutants in runoff from project construction and postconstruction activities.

Less than significant
Impact 3.10-6: The project would
otherwise substantially degrade water
quality.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-8:

Mitigation Measures Hydrology and Water Quality-1, Hydrology and Water Quality-2, and Hydrology and Water Quality-3 shall be implemented to reduce project-related degradation of water quality.

Less than significant.

Impact 3.10-7: The project could place
housing within a 100-year floodplain
hazard area as mapped on flood hazard
delineation maps.

No impact

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-25
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact 3.10-8: The project would place
structures within a 100-year flood hazard
area that would impede or redirect flood
flows.

Potentially significant Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-9:

Mitigation Measure Hydrology and Water Quality-4 shall be implemented to reduce potential impacts from flood hazards.

Less than significant
Impact 3.10-9: The project could expose
people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving flooding
because of the failure of a levee or dam.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.10-10: The project could cause
inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow.

Seiche/Tsunami
No impact
Mudflow
Less than significant
No mitigation is required.

Land Use and Planning
Impact 3.11-1: The project could
physically divide an established
community.

No impact
Impact 3.11-2: The project could conflict
with an applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.11-3: The project could conflict
with an applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation
plan.

No impact
Mineral Resources
Impact 3.12-1: The project could 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

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-26
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact 3.12-2: The project could 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
Noise
Impact 3.13-1: The project would result
in exposure of persons to or generation
of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies.

Temporary Impact
Potentially significant
Long-Term Impact
Less than significant
Mitigation Measure Noise-1:

The plans, specifications, and bid documents for each construction project shall include noise control measures to reduce noise impacts to the extent feasible. The measures shall include the following:
• The project shall be designed to meet the City of Fresno’s standards for nonscheduled, intermittent, short-term operations of mobile construction equipment (e.g., backhoes, bulldozers, motor graders, and scrapers), and the noise standards for repetitively scheduled and relatively long-term constructions operations of stationary equipment (e.g., compressors and generators). • Muffled construction equipment shall be used whenever possible. • Impact noise associated with construction shall be minimized by using noise control techniques, procedures, and acoustically treated equipment. For example, when practical, bins used to transport excavated material, including rocks and debris, could be constructed of nonmetallic liner to reduce impact noise; similarly, dump trucks could have resilient bed liners installed to minimize impact noise.
• Construction hours shall be restricted to meet City of Fresno standards, which restrict hours of construction to between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and prohibit activity on Sundays and federal holidays.

Less than significant
Impact 3.13-2: The project could result
in exposure of persons or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels.

Temporary Impact
Less than significant
Long-Term Impact
No impact
No mitigation is required.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-27
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact 3.13-3: The project could result
in a substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.13-4: The project could result
in a substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.13-5: The project could expose
people residing or working in the study
area to excessive noise levels because
of having a project location within an
airport land use plan, or where such a
plan has not been adopted, being within
2 miles of a public airport or public use
airport.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.13-6: The project could expose
people residing or working in the study
area to excessive noise levels because it
would be in the vicinity of a private
airstrip.

No impact
Population and Housing
Impact 3.14-1: The project could induce
substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly
(for example, through extension of roads
or other infrastructure).

No impact
Impact 3.14-2: The project could
displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.

No impact

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-28
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impacts Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impact 3.14-3: The project could
displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.

No impact
Public Services
Impact 3.15-1: The project could 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, to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response
times, or other performance objectives
for any of the public services.

No impact
Recreation
Impact 3.16-1: The project could
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.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.16-2: The project could include
recreational facilities or would require
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities that may have an adverse
physical effect on the environment.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-29
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impacts Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Transportation
Impact 3.17-1: The project could conflict
with an applicable plan, ordinance, or
policy.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.17-2: The project could conflict
with an applicable congestion
management program established by the
county’s congestion management
agency for designated roads or
highways.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.17-3: The project could result
in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic
levels or a change in location that would
result in substantial safety risks.

No impact
Impact 3.17-4: The project could
substantially increase hazards because
of a design feature or incompatible uses.

No impact
Impact 3.17-5: The project could result
in inadequate emergency access.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.17-6: The project could conflict
with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities or otherwise could
decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities.

No impact
Utilities and Service Systems
Impact 3.18-1: The project could exceed
wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable RWQCB.

No impact

No impact
Impact 3.18-3: The project could require
or result in construction of new
stormwater drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.

No impact
Impact 3.18-4: The project could have
insufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, and thus
new or expanded entitlements could be
needed.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.18-5: The project could fail to
result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider that
serves or may serve the project, stating it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demands in addition
to the provider’s existing commitments.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.18-6: The project could be
served by a landfill without sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.18-7: The project could fail to
comply with federal, State, or local
statutes or regulations related to solid
waste.

No impact

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-31
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impacts Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Cumulative Impacts
Aesthetic and Visual Resources Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Agriculture and Forestry Resources No impact
Air Quality Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Biological Resources Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Cultural Resources Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Geology and Soils Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Hazardous Materials Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Hydrology and Water Quality Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Land Use and Planning Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Mineral Resources No impact
Noise Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Population and Housing No impact
Public Services No impact
Recreation Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Transportation Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Utilities and Service Systems No impact
Environmental Justice Begin underline. Considerations End underline. Begin deletion. —Disadvantaged Communities End deletion.

Begin deletion.

Impact 4.2-1: Would the proposed
project provide equal access to an
outdoor natural recreational area along
the San Joaquin River from the Fresno
side of the River for residents of nearby
disadvantaged communities, and more
broadly, for residents of the city of
Fresno and Madera County? End deletion. Begin underline.

Access to Parkway End underline.

Begin deletion. Unavoidable
significant impact on
a nearby
disadvantaged
community or census
tract End deletion. Begin underline.

The project does not
have the potential to
result in a
disproportionately
high and adverse
environmental effect
No Begin deletion. feasible End deletion. mitigation Begin deletion. measures are available to reduce this impact End deletion. Begin underline. is required. End underline.

Begin deletion. Unavoidable and
significant End deletion.

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary AECOM Page 1-32
Impacts
Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
Impacts Level of
Significance Before
Mitigation
Mitigation Measure Level of
Significance After
Mitigation
on disadvantaged
communities. The
proposed project’s
single public access
point may result in
less availability of
project benefits to
disadvantaged
communities that may
access the project
benefits by walking or
bicycle. End underline.

Growth-Inducing Impacts
The proposed project would not be
growth inducing.

No impact
Energy
The proposed project would not generate
an increase in demand for electricity and
natural gas relative to existing or future
electrical and natural gas consumption,
and would not cause the inefficient,
wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of
energy.

Less than significant No mitigation is required.

Notes: BMP = best management practice; CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife; CEQA = California Environmental Quality Act; County = Fresno County; CRHR = California Register of Historical Resources; CVFPB = Central Valley Flood Protection Board; ESA= Endangered Species Act; Farmland = Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, of Farmland of Statewide Importance; GHG = greenhouse gas; mph = miles per hour; NPDES = National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; RWQCB = Regional Water Quality Control Board; SJKF = San Joaquin kit fox; SWPPP = storm water pollution prevention plan; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; WDR = waste discharge requirement

1.8.1 Description of Alternatives
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary

1.8 Alternatives to the Project
The purpose of the alternatives analysis in an EIR is to describe a range of reasonable, potentially feasible alternatives to the project that can reasonably attain most of the identified project objectives, but reduce or avoid one or more of the project’s significant impacts, and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6). In this DEIR, five six potentially feasible alternatives are presented that analyze a range of trail alignments and access. Each alternative includes some elements of the proposed project as described in Section 2.4, “Project Description.” Alternative 1, “Added Parking,” was developed to address the potential impacts on air quality and vehicle miles traveled associated with the project, to provide greater, more convenient vehicle access for residents of the Fresno metropolitan area, including providing equal access for disadvantaged communities or census tracts, and to provide more parking capacity. Alternative 1 is an additional on-site alternative that includes the project as described in Section 2.4, “Project Description,” and would provide an additional public entrance at Riverview Drive and parking area near the midpoint of the trail. See Figure 5-1 in Chapter 5.

Alternative 2, “Bluff Trail Alignment,” was developed to reduce the circuitous proposed trail alignment of the proposed trail and may to reduce potential impacts on the riparian habitat and disturbance to nearby residents on the floodplain. Alternative 2 includes the same project improvements as the proposed project, but the trail alignment is closer to the base of the bluffs. See Figure 5-2 in Chapter 5.

Alternative 3, “River’s Edge Trail Alignment,” was developed to provide multiuse trail access close to the River and to possibly reduce the potential effects of wildland fires on the residences located on the bluffs. Alternative 3 includes the same project improvements as the proposed project, but the trail alignment in the western portion of the site follows the riverbank. A bridge or crossing is required for a breach in the riverbank. See Figure 5-3 in Chapter 5.

Alternative 4, “No Parking,” was developed to address the potential significant effects of parking at the project site, including noise, vehicle traffic, and safety. Alternative 4 would include the trail extension, but would not provide a parking area on-site. See Figure 5-4 in Chapter 5.

Alternative 5, “Palm and Nees Access,” was developed to address the potential impacts on air quality and vehicle miles traveled associated with the project, to provide greater, more convenient vehicle access for residents of the Fresno metropolitan area, including providing equal access for disadvantaged communities; and to provide more parking capacity. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[f][2]), Alternative 5 is an added, off-site alternative and includes the project as described

Page 1 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary in Section 2.4, “Project Description.” Alternative 5 would provide an additional entrance proceeding from the intersection of Palm and Nees avenues to an additional parking area located to the west of the project study area. See Figure 5-5 in Chapter 5.

Alternative 5B, “North Palm Avenue Access,” an alternative route that was initially eliminated f rom further examination during the initial DEIR process, was subsequently proposed for further study by the City of Fresno, a responsible agency under CEQA. After initial development of the DEIR, new information was developed by the City and became available regarding the potential feasibility of this alternative. The Conservancy decided these changed circumstances warranted further examination of Alternative 5B as an additional potentially feasible alternative. Alternative 5B was developed to provide greater, more convenient vehicle access for Fresno metropolitan area residents, including increasing opportunities for equal access for disadvantaged communities, and to provide more parking capacity. In accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[f][2]), Alternative 5B is an added off-site alternative and includes the project as described in Section 2.4, “Project Description.” Alternative 5B would provide an additional entrance proceeding from North Palm Avenue through Spano Park with a new access road descending the bluff, and an additional parking area located to the west of the project study area. See Figure 5-13 in Chapter 5.

Alternative 6, the No Project Alternative, is included in accordance with Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Analysis of this alternative considers the effects under which the project would not proceed, and no trail extension, parking, or recreational amenities would be constructed.

1.8.2 Comparison of Alternatives to the Project
The impacts of Alternative 2, the Bluff Trail alignment, would be the same as the impacts of the proposed Project, and would be less than significant. Alternatives 1, 3, 4, and 5, and 5B would each incorporate additional mitigation specific to that alternative, as summarized below. All mitigation measures associated with Alternatives 1, 4, and 5 would reduce the impacts to less than significant for the reasons stated.

However, as explained below, one impact of Alternative 1 and Alternative 3 would be an have unavoidable significant impacts despite mitigation.

Alternative 1 would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to transportation and is not consistent with policies of the City of Fresno General Plan. Alternatives 3, 5, and 5B would require additional mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant. Alternative 3 also conflicts with the Parkway Master Plan policies related to protecting the River’s riparian corridor, while Alternative 5B conflicts with policies of the City’s Bluff Protection Ordinance. Therefore, these alternatives would not be environmentally superior compared to the proposed project. Alternative 4, the No Parking Alternative, would minimize potential impacts by eliminating the parking area, at the expense of consistency with policies of the Parkway Master Plan that encourage parking to support visitor activity. Alternatives 3 and 4

Page 1 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary would result in unavoidable significant cumulative impacts. Alternatives 1, 5, and 5B could improve access to the River for disadvantaged communities by creating an additional convenient vehicular access point from surface streets that would not require traveling north on SR 41 to reach the Perrin Avenue parking lot, as would be required by the proposed project. Each alternative is compared with the proposed project separately below.
• Alternative 1, Added Parking: This alternative would incorporate the following additional mitigation measure:
o Mitigation M ea sure Alt. 1–Traffic-1, if implemented, would reduce the impact of Alternative 1 related to access to the West Riverview Drive entrance and potential for accidents at the Audubon Drive/Del Mar Avenue intersection to less than significant, because the Conservancy would share with the City on a proportionate basis the cost of installing either a traffic signal or other effective traffic control, such as a traffic roundabout.. This mitigation measure requires approval and action by the City of Fresno, and the Conservancy cannot guarantee that these improvements would be implemented because they would be controlled by another agency. Therefore, this impact would be significant a nd unavoidable. If the Conservancy wanted to adopt this alternative, it would be required to adopt a statement of overriding considerations in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, unless this alternative was conditioned such that construction of a vehicle access point at West Riverview Drive was timed to coincide with installation of the intersection improvements.

This
alternative would likely help reduce barriers to access for disadvantaged communities compared to the proposed project by creating an additional convenient vehicular access point from surface streets at West Riverview Drive that would not require traveling north on SR 41. • Alternative 2, Bluff Trail Alignment: This alternative would result in impacts similar to those of the proposed project and does not require any additional mitigation measures.

This alternative would not improve limited access to the River for disadvantaged communities compared to the proposed project.
• Alternative 3, River’s Edge Trail: This alternative would incorporate the following additional mitigation measures to address inconsistencies with policies of the Parkway Master Plan related to setbacks from resources along the River:
o Mitigation Measure Alt. 3–Biological Resources-11 would reduce the impact of Alternative 3 related to wildlife corridors and riparian habitat to less than significant because riparian habitat would be avoided to the extent possible during construction, and trees that are removed would be replaced as required by regulatory permits.

Page 1 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary o Mitigation Measure Alt. 3–Biological Resources-12 is proposed to reduce the impact of Alternative 3 related to a conflict with the policies of the Parkway Master Plan to protect the riparian corridor. However, the narrow berm around the O Pond makes infeasible the setback required by this mitigation measure, which is intended to meet the policies and buffer established in the Parkway Master Plan. Thus, the impacts of Alternative 3 related to a conflicts with policies and ordinances designed to avoid impacts on natural resources (Impact 3.5-5 and Impact 3.11-2, respectively) would be an unavoidable significant impacts.
o Mitigation Measure Alt. 3–Hydrology and Water Quality-10 would reduce the temporary impact of Alternative 3 on water quality to less than significant because compliance with the NPDES program would ensure stormwater pollutants would not substantially degrade water quality.

Similar to the proposed project, many impacts associated with Alternative 3 could be avoided or reduced through application of BMPs and implementation of mitigation. Under Alternative 3, biological resources in the River could be exposed to physical impacts including noise, increased vehicle emissions, debris, and light/glare. When viewed in combination with increased human activity along the River corridor proposed by the draft Fresno Parks Master Plan, Alternative 3 may have an incremental effect that is cumulatively considerable. Thus, cumulative impacts of this alternative would be significant and unavoidable.

This alternative would not improve limited access to the River for disadvantaged communities compared to the proposed project.
• Alternative 4, No Parking: This alternative would incorporate the following additional mitigation measure:
o Mitigation Measure Alt. 4–Recreation-1 would reduce the impact of Alternative 4 related to a lack of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)–compliant accessible parking to less than significant because the Conservancy would provide ADA-compliant accessible parking spaces and passenger loading spaces and would provide access to the trail and recreational amenities via at the Perrin Avenue entrance; however, because adequate on-site parking is a policy in the Parkway Master Plan, and general users traveling by motor vehicle to the trail extension would also require parking, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

This inconsistency with Parkway Master Plan policies related to providing parking sufficient for the desired usage level during peak hours may lead to neighborhood disruption associated with the noise and traffic generated by trail users seeking parking along residential streets. Users of the newly constructed trail segment would seek to park on neighboring streets or in commercial

Page 1 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary lots, which could create conflicts with residents and businesses competing for parking space.

Alternative 4’s incremental contribution would be cumulatively considerable, and a significant unavoidable impact.

Compared to the proposed project, this alternative would reduce access to the project for disadvantaged communities by limiting access to the trail network from surface roadways near the project site.
• Alternative 5, Palm and Nees Access: This alternative would incorporate the following additional mitigation measures:
o Mitigation Measures Alt. 5–Hazards and Hazardous Materials-7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials-8 and Hazards and Hazardous Materials-9 Alt. 5–Hazards and Hazardous Materials-1, and Alt. 5–Hazards and Hazardous Materials-2 would reduce the impact of Alternative 5 related to human health and environmental hazards from construction at the former Kepco Pinedale Landfill to less than significant, because (1) any necessary remedial activities would occur before the start of earthmoving activities; (2) a worker health and safety plan would be implemented should contaminated soil or groundwater be encountered; and (3) a postclosure land use plan approved by regulatory agencies would be implemented before the Conservancy’s acquisition of the land and construction of the project.
o Mitigation Measure Alt. 5–Hydrology and Water Quality-3a would reduce the temporary impact of Alternative 5 on water quality associated with the former Kepco Pinedale Landfill to less than significant because (1) any necessary remedial activities would occur before the start of earthmoving activities; (2) a worker health and safety plan would be implemented should any contaminated soil or groundwater be encountered; and (3) a postclosure land use plan approved by regulatory agencies would be implemented.

This alternative would likely help reduce barriers to access compared to the proposed project by creating an additional convenient vehicular access point from surface streets near the intersection of Palm and Nees avenues that would not require traveling north on SR 41. To implement Alternative 5B, additional property and easement rights would need to be acquired by a public agency from willing landowners and at mutually agreeable terms. • Alternative 5B, North Palm Avenue Access: This alternative would incorporate the following additional mitigation measures:
o Mitigation Measures Alt. 5B—Hazards and Hazardous Materials-1 and Alt. 5B—Hazards and Hazardous Materials-2 would reduce the potential impact related to human health and environmental hazards from construction at the former Kepco Pinedale Landfill to

Page 1 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Executive Summary less than significant because any necessary remedial activities would occur before the property was acquired for public use; a worker health and safety plan would be implemented should contaminated soil or groundwater be encountered; and a postclosure land use plan approved by regulatory agencies would be implemented. o Mitigation Measure Alt. 5B–Hydrology and Water Quality-1 would reduce the potential temporary impact on water quality associated with the former landfills to less than significant because a postclosure land use plan approved by regulatory agencies would be implemented to remediate any hazards before the start of earthmoving activities, and a worker health and safety plan would be implemented should any contaminated soil or groundwater be encountered.
o Mitigation Measure Alt. 5B–Land Use-1 would reduce the land use impact of Alternative 5B to less than significant because the Conservancy would not construct the access road or stairway on the bluff until a variance from the requirements is obtained from the City. The Conservancy would also prepare the required geology and soils report to document that construction of the facility would not destabilize the slope face.

Page 1 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Chapter 2.

Project Description

2.1 Overview
This chapter of the DEIR describes project objectives, location, proposed actions, and agency approvals that may be required.

In 1988, the San Joaquin River Parkway and Conservation Trust 5 began a formal planning process that
produced the San Joaquin River Parkway and Environs Conceptual Plan (Conceptual Plan) (San Joaquin River Parkway and Conservation Trust 1989). Based on the findings in this plan, then-Assemblyman (now U.S. Representative) Jim Costa gained approval to form the San Joaquin River Parkway Task Force (Assembly Bill [AB] 3121). In 1992, the task force, composed of a group of 25 agencies and organizations, held numerous community workshops and crafted the San Joaquin River Parkway Task Force Plan (Task Force Plan). The Task Force Plan included the recommendation to form the San Joaquin River Conservancy.

In 1992, the California Legislature enacted the San Joaquin River Conservancy Act (Conservancy Act), PRC Section 32500 et seq. The Conservancy Act established the Conservancy as a State agency within the California Natural Resources Agency and granted it authority to acquire, develop, and manage public lands to create the San Joaquin River Parkway.
6 The Parkway is a planned 22-mile natural and
recreational area that would provide a harmonious combination of low-impact recreational and educational uses and wildlife protection. The Parkway Master Plan was adopted by the Conservancy in 1997 following certification of the
Final final EIR (FEIR). In July 2000, the San Joaquin River Conservancy approved and adopted the Recompiled San Joaquin River Master Plan. It was prepared to provide a more concise and understandable policy document for the benefit of affected local government agencies and the public. The preface of the Recompiled Master Plan states “…in preparing this recompilation, care has been taken to retain the specific wording from the above referenced source documents. No explicit or implied modifications to guiding goals, objectives, and policies or more specific measures are intended.” 5 The San Joaquin River Parkway & Conservation Trust, Inc., is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, public benefit corporation, created in 1988 to establish a continuous greenway along 33 miles of San Joaquin River in the rapidly urbanizing Fresno-Madera region.
6 The planned Parkway consists of the River and approximately 5,900 acres of public land to be acquired on both sides of the River between Friant Dam and SR 99.

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description In 2013, the Conservancy began preparing a Master Plan Update. 7 However, the planning process is not
complete at this time. For the purpose of this analysis, this DEIR tiers to the Parkway Master Plan.

2.2 Project Objectives
The Parkway Master Plan presents goals, objectives, and policies and envisions future uses, improvements, features, facilities, and management measures for habitat conservation, enhancement, and restoration, and recreational and educational uses including: trails, bikeways, corridors, equestrian areas, and facilities for nonmotorized boating and fishing. In particular, a continuous, multipurpose trail of approximately 22 miles extending from Friant Dam to SR 99 would be established along both sides of the River, with an interconnected trail system and recreational and educational features. The Parkway Master Plan and 1997 Final EIR FEIR continue as the foundation for the phased implementation for future parkway projects. Appendix B summarizes the goals and policies of the Parkway Master Plan.

The key recreation objective, RO3, adopted by the Conservancy and presented in the Parkway Master Plan follows:

Link all recreational areas and natural reserves between Highway 99 and Friant Dam with a continuous, multipurpose trail on land with canoe put-in, take-out, and rest areas along the river to create a recreation system with a variety of recreational opportunities within the Parkway. Connect the multipurpose trail with other local and regional trails and bikeways, originating in surrounding areas.

The project would accomplish an additional segment of the planned Parkway-wide multiuse trail.

2.3 Project Location
The study area is located along the San Joaquin River between SR 41 and Spano Park within the city limits of Fresno (Figure 2-1). The boundary extends from the River south to the San Joaquin River Bluffs and westward from SR 41 to Spano Park, located near the intersection of Palm Avenue and Nees Avenue. The project area is sited within Sections 21, 28, and 29 of Township 12S, Range 20E, Mount Diablo Baseline and Meridian, Fresno North 7.5-minute series USGS topographic quadrangle.

The study area analyzed in this DEIR is approximately 358 acres and is located on the south side of the River (Figure 2-2). A majority of the land is owned by the State of California under the management jurisdiction of the Conservancy (this land is hereinafter referred to as “Conservancy land”). Two parcels, 7 The Conservancy is preparing a draft Master Plan Update and EIR. The NOP for the Master Plan Update EIR was issued on June 17, 2013.

Page 2 ends

3 6
------•• Miles
Project Location
Sacramento
•
■Deta
/!vea
a
4 - Project Study Area -- Fresno City Limits
1360 E Spruce Ave
Fresno, ca
93720
AECOM
-- Clovis City Limits -- State Routes
Location of River West Fresno Eaton Trail
Extention Project
February 24
2016
0 San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Figure 2-1 Location of River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project

Page 2 ends

1360 E Spruce Ate
Fresno , Ca
93720
AECOM
Project Study Area ~ Private P roperty
Proposed Project Area
River West Fresno - Eaton Trail Extension
Project
Nove mber 3
20'15
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Figure 2-2 River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Study Area

Page 2 ends

2.4.1 Multipurpose Trail

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description owned by the City, are adjacent to Conservancy land. The project area also contains State sovereign lands riverward of the River’s low-water mark, owned by the State of California and under the jurisdiction of the California State Lands Commission. Implementation of a portion of the project may occur on Fresno city parcels. Alternative 5, considered in Chapter 5 of this DEIR, also includes privately owned properties lying between the Conservancy land and the intersection of Palm Avenue and Nees Avenue.

Three other parcels in the study area are owned by others and would not be part of the project. One parcel, privately owned land located near the center of the project area, is occupied by two residences.

Access to these residences is via a paved road within an access easement on Conservancy property from West Riverview Drive. The other two parcels, owned by FMFCD, contain stormwater detention basins. The proposed project would not affect these basins.

A residential subdivision is located on the bluffs adjacent to the southern project boundary (Figure 2-2).

The subdivision is within the city limits of Fresno.

Conservancy land within the study area is currently closed to the public in accordance with PRC Section 32511.

2.4 Project Description
The Conservancy proposes to expand the Eaton Trail by constructing a multipurpose trail and providing ancillary recreation support features. The trail would be extended approximately 2.4 miles, from Perrin Avenue near SR 41 on the east to Spano Park on the west. The project would provide for low-impact recreational activities, such as hiking, bicycling, equestrian use, fishing, and nature observation consistent with the Parkway Master Plan.

The trail extension would be about 22 feet wide, with a 12-foot-wide paved surface, a parallel 8-foot-wide hard natural surface for equestrian use, and a 2-foot shoulder (opposite the natural surface area). The trail extension generally would follow the alignment as shown in the conceptual drawing in Figure 2-3, from SR 41 to Spano Park. The trail would provide accessibility in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Three fire hydrants would be added along the trail extension if feasible—at the Perrin Avenue parking lot, near the private property parcel, and near the toe of Spano Park (Figure 2-3).

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description

2.4.2 Parking Lot
A parking lot for 50 vehicles with a controlled vehicle entrance would be constructed adjacent to SR 41 (Figure 2-4). Vehicle access to the parking lot would be from the Perrin Avenue undercrossing of SR 41.

A gate and an unmanned parking pay station would be included to manage vehicle access. The parking lot would accommodate up to three horse trailer stalls and would have a fire hydrant (if feasible), a drinking fountain, a public information bulletin board, a small pet station, and a two-vault restroom. The restroom and parking lot would be ADA accessible. Smart lighting with LED light sets with rechargeable batteries and a solar panel would be mounted on light poles, providing sufficient illumination for security and maintenance. The area surrounding the parking lot would be landscaped with native vegetation. An emergency/service gate or removable bollards would provide access to the trail extension for emergency first responders and maintenance staff.

2.4.3 Recreation Access
Pedestrian and bicycle access would be provided at three locations: Perrin Avenue, Spano Park, and the West Riverview Drive and Churchill Avenue entrances to the Bluff Trail. The Bluff Trail is an existing neighborhood trail, located on a land owned by the City. A 12-foot-wide paved trail would be constructed to provide access from the Bluff Trail to the trail extension near West Riverview Drive. A wide staircase with bicycle guides may be constructed from Spano Park to the trail extension The Spano Park access and Bluff Trail access would be constructed on the steep slope of the bluffs. A pet station would be provided at each trailhead.

2.4.4 Recreation Amenities and Landscaping
The proposed trail extension would be landscaped at intervals with native vegetation for habitat enhancement, visual screening, and shade. The landscaping would be irrigated until the vegetation is permanently established. Picnic areas, tables, benches, public safety and information signs, and wildlife observation areas would be provided along the trail at various locations. Unimproved hiking paths to the riverbank would be connected to the trail. These hiking paths may be widened up to 6 feet and overlaid with a permeable surface such as decomposed gravel. These paths would not be landscaped. On completion, the project would provide low-impact recreational activities along the River, such as hiking, bicycling, horse riding, fishing, and nature observation, consistent with the Parkway Master Plan.

In total, project components described above would cover approximately 7.5 miles of paved and unpaved trails or 10.4 acres. Table 2.4-1 summarizes project components by length and area.

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Figure 2-3 Conceptual Design of Proposed Project

"-- <:, IU qi :=l . ~

11.J Ill J "-- J I- Cl,
oi <
\j\
"
J \j\ J :2: Ill < ;;;, < z ~\f\d~
\j\ , IULU < "' II\"'
\j\ z 1-,\l ,.:, IU LEJzflil2 ,;!. Ill s, .., <1- J <CCI( J ,<'. '5 " "
J IU 11.J < IU i: ,.:,
(I( IU J llJ< Ill=>
"" <$ < s: 'l><
Ol z >-~~<::} :i:z z z - < ~'.:)~ -P~rc. oel'f&-N ::E
"' i=I!\ " ::s "
z <., <:, I- -.I >-- C>'.1- ,,,,_ C'LUJ°'-\f'li < -.I ::s ~Z<C'L ::E IU S, ;: "" "' "'

11.J IU I ritt tfYPAAMT
~ ~ l-
__, ,,,Q'.
l- ~~ IU I- Ol I>'. Z <> Ol IU >-
:~:i > !l..< <:, < I-"' << ,!) W < ... -..'.l ~ 0. < uJZr.llfl < IU,__ u < L • ff.i sr.-.r10H "< i:z ... z - I- ,!) I- .J oc <o:::: .... J Cl. \j\ ._,-.:. <<:,j z C. z < <:," " ILi
"' !IJ" ,.:,-<.._
"'
IU i= _J IIJ IL. ,c;.z t.....lJ' ~ ',f\ L ~ 111 _J ©IU.,_111 tL i.t) 1-- 11.1 r- ;fl_! I-~ ~ .J5 --IIJ ~Ill ,_: 0 P AA~N& PII.Y $1'Af~
z!!. I- I- I-., "' _J 0<(1(._ z:c~ ,: "'" ~~~ "'--' ..,_ Ci_ I- UJ )- I ct: IU IL "'_J "'~ z J IU 'Wl11'1T POL.et;
;; \j\" IU < <:,5 ill< ~<.~~~ IUIUt.. i: UJ- .,-<-< ,ii ~0/. :, 1- ::, ~~~ !U t: < ., \ll" 2: ~3 ~ >< C. < !:IJ~C.,~_J ZU,J,l>u._ .. ::, < "--1- "-- <C " >< !¥.OllLI < ., " \j\
·-fWO---fU, .. 6f'Lrf" UOAA r~a ,u .. IU <IUOC cY."3 :cz __, x"' < ILi<>! ..JD.<~- - "' IU ::E<z -.:.z <:::!i>b.J=> I <11'0< I < '"' "' -"'
ILi < lU _J ::,-., x
lfl,j\
°'
:C<ll<l. <>'. 1- !l.. <l. "'11.1.:i. !l..S:'11 11.J I- > s: ,ii X::<>t'.!l.. ,.Q,<l!JIL'!0. <>'.<O:. > 00-- !l..1- 3.J::::;E << ~ zr.u >IIIO. <II IU I- ~IU N \- ,j1 Ol ,__ tl.!l..'111>. !l..< IIJ l!}f'-'IM WlllANI'.~ '!ii~M:

I (!}Ree-.J...Ard'f''i liSIIH~ .&f.

ID N~/l~Ttvr. flol&NA8~
ffi 6M'(!;f'y /WAIi-NH& 6l6itU£i~
[!I ,P]l:U,r111N.._/N"iD1UoiATIDHA. '!!oli&NAff
-----:6Ro11va.ft t,11~ ~Ae;e
~\\ 10'\(Jll\
l~ . ,--, --~ RIVER iv'EST FRESNO. 1 .. ·
n ~ .. _··. . . PROPOSED PRO. J Ecr LEWIS s. EATO,N TRAIL , . .,. .... \ · ._-,_ ~ EXTENSIONPR0 1 JECT RIR • /\'[l ~ \li
~ ' I ' • , I ■ , , •
A:COM Page 2-7
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description This page intentionally left blank.

A..=t'OM Page 2-8
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Figure 2-4 Conceptual Design Proposed Perrin Avenue Parking Lot

it
i
~ I 'I l~ 1lt~; 1
~ -;,. +--- LEW 1 5 5.

EATON TRA IL
\ ·-+--- HOR5E TRAILER
ANP RV PARK IN€>
ANI' 5 TA01Ne>
;M_----\: --· t--- PUC,L lt. VEHlt.LI!
At.t. E55
--- PARK INb LOT
b~TE
EMERE>ENt.Y
VEHlt.LE

TURNAROUND
PL AN TINE> AREAS
i --- f ~E HYDRAN T
PARK IN€> PAY
5TATION-PARl<.1Nb
l'f'. f'. WILL C>I!
t. HARc,ED
rl--- -t- TREE l5LAND5
TYP.
1--------------i --- 5 T ORMW ATER
INFILTRATION AREN>
PARKINb PAY
5T AT ION-PARK IN€:>
FEE II/ILL C>E:
t,MARbED
--- L l(;,HT POLES
--- EMERe>ENt.Y ANI'
5ERV1t. E 1/EHlt.L E
6ATE
'-;'--- -------- 1---- T WO- VAULT
Re:sn~OOM WITH
PR INKINE> fOUNTAIN5
l!>UL.L.ETIN l)OAf'!.D
--- PET 5TA TION
;r oi , .. \- - 1,- .\- ~ - - - - - --j - EX15T IN€> f ENt.E .. :t'''II... i ~ I + I . >< ~ i':! \ . ,. ~ l I
~ . ,,, . . \. ..
~ I , 'r. . . . , . 1 J \II•\---------- - ~ ~~ILE/?UE5TR IAN ~ ,.., I!! J , . \ L ' \
j ~ l.l x ,. .
!, m 'J . -..1, . I · · ~ . 121"T LEWIS 5 ,
. oo · , ~ ~
I ~ ~ -• '• ;1,: . ·_ · • · . )c ,,_\ 1 lf= I ~rn, L
I:; 1• j - , EATON TRAIL
:,,, , • I • .I , SHOULDER
~ - ~ • i J t • . ,. .
~ ~ -----~ , tl' ·... ~ l
:!': - •• i \I "~ \
i 1 i

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description This page intentionally left blank.

A..=t'OM Page 2-10
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Table 2.4-1 Summary of Project Components by Length and Area Project Component
Proposed Project
Length (miles) Area (acres)
Multiuse Trail
(paved—12 feet wide) 2.4 3.5
Multiuse Trail
(unpaved—10 feet wide) 3.1 3.6
Perrin Avenue Parking
(paved)
(unpaved)
0 0.8

0.9 Bluff Trail
(paved—12 feet wide)

0.3 0.4
Hiking Trails 1.8 1.3
Total 7.6 10.5
Note:
a
Includes the 12-foot-wide paved trail from the Bluff Trail to the proposed trail extension near West Riverview Drive.

Source: Compiled by AECOM in 2016

2.5 Project Management, Operations, and Maintenance
Project management including operations, maintenance, and implementing best management practices (BMPs) may affect the physical environment and is important to consider in this the DEIR. Project management considerations include human use patterns and their potential for impacts on natural systems, maintenance of facilities to protect or restore natural systems, potential for harm to humans from natural conditions influenced by management activities, and potential for conflicts between user groups.

2.5.1 Project Management
The Conservancy manages its projects and lands under its jurisdiction in the Parkway through policies in the Parkway Master Plan. The Parkway Master Plan (Appendix B) contains goals, objectives, and policies that apply to land management in the Parkway.

Long-term management and maintenance is required to assure that project features continue to provide recreation benefits and protect natural resources. The Conservancy conducts outreach to educate visitors regarding the importance of resource protection and to discourage incompatible uses. The Conservancy’s land management and recreation programs address stewardship responsibilities related to protection of natural and cultural resources.

Trails are managed to protect the public’s investment in capital assets and to provide broad access to users to ensure that facilities meet safety needs of all age groups and abilities. The trail design incorporates features to keep through-travelers on the trail surfaces to reduce hazards and protect

I
Ill

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description sensitive resources. Project management also recognizes the high desire for access to vistas and observation points, the River, and other recreational amenities, and provides ways to accommodate that desire.

Rules are developed for project operation, including prohibitions on camping, open fires, smoking, dogs off-leash, and other measures to protect public health and safety. In general, the trails are available for use from dusk until dawn; however, special evening uses may be permitted by the Conservancy on a case-by-case basis.

The Conservancy Act requires that the Conservancy close to the public any of its lands or facilities that it is unable to maintain in a clean and safe manner, and adequately protect wildlife and rights of adjacent property owners from the public (PRC Section 32511). The Conservancy must secure adequate long- term resources to operate and maintain the project.

Internal trails would be designed to provide for management and emergency vehicles. Authorized personnel in motorized vehicles, such as maintenance crews, would occasionally require access on trails and occasionally off-road. To minimize safety concerns caused by mixing nonmotorized and motorized users on the same trails, these vehicles would operate under heightened safety conditions. This could include slow speeds, temporary trail closures, flashing lights, or warning flags or signs. Emergency medical or police/fire personnel requiring vehicle access, and using emergency lights and/or sirens, would use the protected trail surface as the law allows.

The design of the trail system would incorporate BMPs as needed to reduce impacts through ongoing management practices.

Directional and interpretive signing would be provided, and physical barriers (i.e., fencing) would be placed in critical areas to more direct users onto trails and away from protected areas. Targeted plantings may also be used to discourage access.

Other actions include (but may not be limited to) posting of signs educating users regarding trail etiquette and trespass issues; monitoring to reduce litter, trespass, or other problems associated with trail access and parking; and increased use of fencing to better direct users to access points.

2.5.2 Best Management Practices
The following BMPs are drawn from State and local ordinances, Parkway Master Plan mitigation measures, and from other statutory authorities or guidelines. They are incorporated into the project description and would be implemented during project implementation, construction, and operation and maintenance.

I Page 2-12
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description

2.5.2.1 Air Quality
BMP AIR-1. Construction plans and specifications will comply with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD’s) current air quality plans, and with all SJVAPCD rules and regulations as deemed relevant through consultation with SJVAPCD. The following dust control practices will be followed during the construction phase of the project, to mitigate potential impacts from particulate matter (PM) and construction equipment.

Construction of the project will be consistent with the SJVAPCD Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (SJVAPCD 2002).
8 Also, the Conservancy will implement the following measures, as required by Regulation VIII, Rule 4102, and Rule 4641 (SJVAPCD 2014):
• Prewater sites sufficiently to limit visible dust emissions to 20% opacity. • Phase work to reduce the amount of disturbed area at any one time. • During active operations, apply water or chemical/organic stabilizers/suppressants sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20% opacity.
• Construct and maintain wind barriers sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20% opacity. • Apply water or chemical/organic stabilizers/suppressants to unpaved haul/access roads and unpaved vehicle/equipment traffic areas sufficient to limit visible dust emissions to 20% opacity. • During periods of inactivity, restrict vehicular access to the area. • Post 15 miles per hour (mph) speed limit signs at a minimum every 500 feet along unpaved access/haul roads.
• Materials used for chemical/organic stabilization of soils, including petroleum resins, asphaltic emulsions, acrylics, and adhesives will not violate State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) standard for use as a soil stabilizer. Materials accepted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and which meet State water quality standards.
• Use of hygroscopic materials may be prohibited by the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO) in areas in lacking sufficient atmospheric moisture of soils for such materials to efficiently reduce fugitive dust emissions. The atmospheric moisture of soils is considered to be sufficient if it meets the application specifications of the hygroscopic product manufacturer. Use of such materials may be approved in conjunction with sufficient wetting of the controlled area.

If any identified rule, regulation, or guidance referenced herein is updated, compliance with the current requirements will be achieved.

I Page 2-13
8 San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description • Any use of dust suppressants or gravel pads, and paving materials such as asphalt or concrete for paving, will comply with other applicable District Rules. • Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand, or other materials that can be blown by the wind. • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard.
• Sweep daily (with water sweepers) any paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the site.
• Sweep streets on construction routes (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto them.
• Use alternative-fueled construction equipment when feasible. • Minimize idling time (e.g., 5-minute maximum).
• Maintain properly tuned equipment.
• Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use. • Replant vegetation and/or hydroseed disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

BMP AIR-2. Construction plans and specifications will include measures to ensure compliance with SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations, including Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions).

Rule 9510 requires that an air impact assessment be prepared and submitted to the District.

2.5.2.2 Biological Resources
BMP BIO-1. A qualified biologist will conduct preconstruction protocol surveys to determine the presence or absence of listed or special-status species before construction. If present, and in coordination with California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), as needed additional appropriate development or construction-related restrictions to meet the requirements necessary to protect species found within the project area will be developed.

BMP BIO-2. If federally protected waters of the United States or wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) are present and the project may result in fill of those waters or wetlands:
• Coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will occur and a wetland delineation of the area will be prepared. USACE mitigation protocol will be followed regarding jurisdictional waters and wetlands affected by the project. • Appropriate USACE permits will be obtained before implementation of the project.

I Page 2-14
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Cumulatively, Parkway projects should result in beneficial management and protection of waters and wetlands.

BMP BIO-3. A qualified biologist will prepare a worker environmental awareness program to be presented to all construction personnel and employees before any ground-disturbing activities commence at a project site. Special-status species determined to be present will be explained to construction personnel and methods on how best to avoid the accidental take of those species during construction will be described. The program will include a description of special-status species potentially on the project site and their habitat needs; an explanation of the status of the species and their protection under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and the California Fish and Game Code; specific mitigation measures applicable to special-status species; and the penalties for take.

The biologist will explain to construction personnel how to avoid impacts on USACE and CDFW jurisdictional areas. The program will include a description of these respective jurisdictional areas on the site, specifically permitted impacts, avoidance measures to protect jurisdictional areas, and maps or field markers showing the location of jurisdictional areas and permitted impacts.

The worker environmental awareness program will be implemented before the start of ground disturbance and will continue through the construction phase for all construction personnel.

BMP BIO-4. A qualified biologist will determine the presence/absence of sensitive resources in areas where the use of herbicides for invasive species management or habitat restoration is planned. A certified pest control advisor will then prepare a written recommendation including site-specific control methods (including the use of approved herbicides and surfactants), which will include but not be limited to the following:
• All applications of herbicides and adjuvants will occur in accordance with federal and State regulations.
• Herbicide application will not occur when wind conditions may result in drift.

BMP BIO-5. A habitat restoration and revegetation plan (HRRP) will be developed for the project. When feasible vegetation should be reestablished within one growing season of the impacts may be temporarily affected by the proposed project.

Areas over 0.5 acre in size where temporary, construction-related impacts have taken place will be restored in accordance with the HRRP. The plan will prescribe restoration actions needed to treat disturbed soils and vegetation. The HRRP will be developed by a qualified restoration ecologist, knowledgeable in in restoration of habitats dominated by herbaceous vegetation. The HRRP will detail the

I Page 2-15
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description process or processes to be implemented to restore the target habitats and will include the following project-specific information, at a minimum:
• summary of habitat impacts and proposed habitat restoration actions; • location of the restoration sites and existing site conditions; • restoration design, including a proposed restoration site schedule and descriptions of existing and proposed soils and hydrology;
• site preparation requirements (including soil amendments, if required); • invasive species eradication plan if applicable, planting plan, and maintenance plan; • monitoring measures, with performance and success criteria; • monitoring methods, duration, and schedule; and
• contingency measures and remedial actions.

BMP BIO-6. Informational signage will be posted in the parking area to educate the public about the potential for introduction of nonnative invasive species, and measures to be taken to prevent it.

2.5.2.3 Cultural Resources
BMP CULT-1. Construction specifications will include a stop-work order in the event that prehistoric or historic-period cultural materials are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities. All work within 100 feet of the find will be stopped until a qualified archaeologist and Native American representative can assess the significance of the find. Prehistoric materials might include obsidian and chert flaked-stone tools (e.g., projectile points, knives, scrapers) or toolmaking debris; culturally darkened soil (“midden”) containing heat-affected rocks and artifacts; stone milling equipment (e.g., mortars, pestles, handstones, or milling slabs); and battered-stone tools, such as hammerstones and pitted stones. Historic-period materials might include stone, concrete, or adobe footings and walls; filled wells or privies; and deposits of metal, glass, and/or ceramic refuse. If the prehistoric cultural material is determined to be potentially significant, the archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American representative, will develop a treatment plan that could include site avoidance, capping, or data recovery.

BMP CULT-2. PRC Section 5097.98, California Government Code Section 27491, and Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 cover the accidental discovery of archaeological resources during construction.

These regulations mandate the processes to follow in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a project location other than a dedicated cemetery.

In the event of an accidental discovery or disturbance of the remains during ground-disturbing activities, there will be no further excavation or disturbance of the site within a 50-foot radius of the location of such

I Page 2-16
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description discovery, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. The County of Fresno Coroner will be notified and will make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority, he or she will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which will attempt to identify descendants of the deceased Native American. If no satisfactory agreement can be reached as to the disposition of the remains pursuant to State law, then the human remains and items associated with Native American burials on the property will be reinterred in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.

2.5.2.4 Paleontological R esources
BMP PALEO-1. In the event that paleontological resources are discovered, the Conservancy will be notified. A qualified paleontologist will document the discovery. The paleontologist will evaluate the potential resource and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in Section 21083.09 of CEQA. If fossil or fossil-bearing depositions are discovered during construction, evacuations within 50 feet of the find will be temporarily halted or diverted until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist in accordance with the Standard Procedures for the Assessment and Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources (SVP 2010). The paleontologist will notify the appropriate agencies to determine the procedures that will be followed before construction is allowed to resume. If the Conservancy determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist will prepare an excavation plan for mitigating the effects of the project. The plan will be submitted to the Conservancy for review and approval before implementation.

2.5.2.5 Geology and Soils
BMP GEO-1. Project construction will comply with all Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit requirements for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity.

A notice of intent will be submitted to the SWRCB Division of Water Quality. The contractor will also be required to prepare and implement a site-specific storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) for the project. The SWPPP will identify the timing of construction activities, as well as preconstruction and postconstruction BMPs to limit the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff. BMPs will include scheduling excavation and earthmoving so that areas unprotected during construction activities will be as small as possible. The plan also will describe BMP inspection, monitoring, and maintenance procedures.

These BMPs must consider erosion, sedimentation, and pollutant controls during and after construction.

These BMPs will include but not be limited to the following:
• requiring standard erosion control and slope stabilization measures in any area where erosion could lead to sedimentation of a water body;
• controlling mud and gravel tracking on roadways;
• managing borrow material and stockpiles;

I Page 2-17
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description • reusing salvageable topsoil;
• performing major vehicle maintenance, repair jobs, and equipment washing at appropriate off-site locations;
• designating an area of the construction site, well away from streams, for auto and equipment parking and routine vehicle and equipment maintenance;
• regularly maintaining equipment to prevent fluid leaks, with any leaks captured in containers until the equipment is moved to a repair location:
• preparing a spill prevention and response plan before construction and implementing the plan immediately for cleanup of fluid or hazardous materials spills; • cleaning up spilled dry materials immediately, and not “washing away” spills with water or burying them;
• using the minimum amount of water necessary for dust control; • cleaning up liquid spills on paved or impermeable surfaces using “dry” cleanup methods (e.g., absorbent materials such as cat litter, and/or rags);
• cleaning up spills on dirt areas by removing and properly disposing of the contaminated soil; • storing stockpiled materials, wastes, containers, and dumpsters under a temporary roof or secured plastic sheeting where they cannot enter into or be washed by rainfall or runoff into waters of the United States/State or aquatic habitat;
• properly storing containers of paints, chemicals, solvents, and other hazardous materials in garages or sheds with double containment during rainy periods; • applying concrete, asphalt, and seal coat during dry weather, and keeping contaminants from fresh concrete and asphalt out of the storm drains and streams by scheduling paving jobs during periods of dry weather and allowing new pavement to cure before stormwater flows across it; • covering catch basins and manholes when applying seal coat, slurry seal, and fog seal; • operating no equipment in a live stream channel, unless unavoidable and proper approvals are obtained; and
• completing revegetation in accordance with the HRRP, described in BMP BIO-5.

After construction, runoff from new improvements will be retained on-site to the extent practicable.

Engineered grading and drainage plans will be prepared to manage how stormwater through operations of the project. BMPs for treating, detaining, and percolating stormwater runoff, such as bioswales, bioretention areas, and seasonal wetlands, will be implemented.

I Page 2-18
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description The BMPs will be implemented in accordance with the Parkway Master Plan goals, objectives, and policies as described in Appendix B.

BMP GEO-2. Geotechnical investigations will be performed by qualified personnel before approval of final design for each feature to identify geologic or soil characteristics that could result in adverse effects on water quality, for example, highly erodible soils or slope conditions. Siting of project features will avoid areas where potential adverse impacts on water quality could occur through erosion. Control of slope instability will occur in accordance with the Parkway Master Plan goals, objectives, and policies as described in Appendix B.

For activities that last more than 1 day, materials or equipment left on the site overnight will be stored in a manner that avoids erosion, leaks, or other potential impacts on water quality.

All trash that is generated at the project site (e.g., plastic water bottles, plastic lunch bags, cigarettes) will be properly contained and disposed of.

2.5.2.6 Hazardous Materials
BMP Hazards-1. The worksite manager will maintain an inventory of all hazardous materials used (and/or expected to be used) at the worksite and the end products that are produced (and/or expected to be produced) after their use. In addition, the following measures will be implemented during construction:
• As appropriate, containers will be properly labeled with a “Hazardous Waste” label and hazardous waste will be properly recycled or disposed of off-site. • Contact of chemicals with precipitation will be minimized by storing chemicals in watertight containers with appropriate secondary containment to prevent any spillage or leakage. • Quantities of toxic materials, such as equipment fuels and lubricants, will be stored with secondary containment that is capable of containing 110% of the primary container(s). • Petroleum products, chemicals, cement, fuels, lubricants, and non–storm drainage water or water contaminated with the aforementioned materials will not contact soil and will not be allowed to enter surface waters or a storm drainage system.
• All toxic materials, including waste disposal containers, will be covered when they are not in use, and will be located as far away as possible from a direct connection to the storm drainage system or surface water.
• Petroleum products, pesticides or hazardous chemicals will not be stored within the 100-year floodplain.

I Page 2-19
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description • Sanitation facilities (e.g., portable toilets) will be placed on stable ground at least 100 feet away from the bank of a river, water channel, or pond.
• Sanitation facilities will be regularly cleaned and/or replaced, and inspected daily for leaks and spills.

2.5.2.7 Hydrology/Water Quality
BMP HYDRO-1. Trails will be inspected periodically for erosion and damage to adjacent vegetation will be addressed through ongoing maintenance, as needed. A maintenance and repair plan will be implemented in accordance with the Parkway Master Plan policies described in Appendix B.

BMP HYDRO-2. During construction, dewatering will be completed in accordance with local and Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements, to minimize the potential for adverse water quality–related impacts on surface water and groundwater. Provisions may include preparing a dewatering plan that details procedures for removing groundwater, methods of temporary water treatment/retention, and water disposal procedures.

BMP HYDRO-3. Whenever feasible, any work within designated flood zones will conform to provisions established in local ordinances. Any development sited in a designated 100-year floodplain will comply with the regulatory requirements at a minimum and with the FMFCD Riverine Floodplain Policy criteria, where applicable.

BMP HYDRO-4. New water fixtures (e.g., for irrigation) will be designed for low flow and high efficiency.

Parkway landscaped areas will be designed to minimize water demand by using native and/or climate- appropriate plants where possible; limiting turf areas to areas that will be used as multiple-use meadows; and installing smart irrigation systems to avoid excessive water use.

2.5.2.8 Noise
BMP NOISE-1. All construction equipment and vehicles used on-site will be maintained and equipped with mufflers and or sound-dampening apparatuses.

BMP NOISE-2. Construction activities potentially affecting noise-sensitive land uses will comply with the most stringent of the applicable provisions from the City of Fresno’s noise ordinances. Specifically, any construction activities occurring outside of the hours between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m., Monday through Saturday, shall comply with the noise exposure limits for the most noise-sensitive land uses established in Fresno County’s Noise Control Ordinance (see Table 5.8-3 [of the Final EIR FEIR for the Parkway Master Plan]), and with the exposure limits for other (commercial and industrial) land users established in the City of Fresno’s Noise Regulations (see Table 5.8-4 [of the Final EIR FEIR for the Parkway Master
Plan]).

I Page 2-20
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description BMP NOISE-3. The Conservancy shall develop and implement Parkway guidelines to include elements addressing public education regarding appropriate behavior while on Parkway property.

BMP NOISE-4. To the extent feasible, any new access roadways associated with specific projects under the Plan should be located to reduce disturbances from intermittent vehicle passbys at the nearest noise- sensitive land uses. (Master Plan Policy RPS2.)
BMP NOISE-5. Any use of recreational areas within the Planning Area, aside from camping, shall be limited to the hours between sunrise and sunset. Access to these areas shall be limited to these hours.

BMP NOISE-6. A minimum buffer of 300 feet shall be required between any existing, occupied residential property or residential structure and any turf area, picnic areas, dog play area, or permanent outdoor or education area where large groups of people and/or pets may gather.

BMP NOISE-7. At a minimum, the Conservancy will avoid sitting any recreational or educational facilities in any areas exposed to existing or projected future noise levels exceeding applicable noise guidelines (Master Plan Policy RPS3):
a) 75 dBA Ldn/CNEL [community noise equivalent level] for golf courses, equestrian facilities, canoe put-out and take-in facilities and swimming areas.
b) 70 dBA L dn/CNEL for picnic areas, turf and other play areas, and any other daytime gathering areas.
c) 60 dBA Ldn/CNEL for camping areas or indoor educational facilities, although noise exposure up to 70 dBA Ldn may be acceptable for the latter if adequate insulation can be demonstrated.

2.5.2.9 Other Best Management Practices
BMP OTHER-1. All work performed by outside contractors or consultants must possess the required licenses or permits to perform services including but not limited to solid waste disposal, General Construction Permit, and qualified SWPPP developer.

2.6 Background
This section of the DEIR presents a brief historical background of the formation of the Conservancy, CEQA scoping process, areas of controversy, and intended uses of this EIR.

The Conservancy oversees 2,575 acres of State-owned land within the San Joaquin River Parkway for habitat conservation and restoration, public access, recreation, and cultural and historical resource preservation. The Conservancy was established in 1992 to develop, operate, and maintain the Parkway,

I Page 2-21
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description which is planned to encompass a total of 5,900 acres along both sides of the River from Friant Dam to SR 99 in Madera and Fresno counties.

In 1993, local citizens raised funds for the first mile of a trail, the Lewis S. Eaton Trail; the San Joaquin River Parkway and Conservation Trust
9 and the City secured additional funds to complete 3 more miles.

Today, the Eaton Trail begins at the northwest corner of Woodward Park at SR 41 and runs parallel to Friant Road. The trail terminates on the north at the Hallowell River Center. The trail is 4 miles long and provides a convenient location for walking, running, cycling, horseback riding, wheelchair access (some segments), and nature viewing along the bluffs above the San Joaquin River (City of Fresno 2014a).

2.7 Scoping
As lead agency,
10 the Conservancy has determined that an EIR must be prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA requirements. On June 9, 2014, pursuant to Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Conservancy circulated an NOP for the River West Fresno, Eaton Trail Extension Project EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2014061017) to local and State agencies and other interested parties. A public review period was set from June 9 to July 8, 2014. An open house public scoping meeting was held on June 17, 2014, at the Pinedale Community Center, located at 7170 N. San Pablo Avenue in Fresno, California. The purpose of the NOP and scoping meeting was to solicit guidance from agencies and the public to the scope and content of environmental information to be included in the EIR in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines. The NOP provided a description of the project, location, and identified potential environmental effects. The NOP
, agency, and agency and public comments received
during the scoping period are found in Appendix A.

The following two agencies provided comments:
• City of Fresno—City Manager
• County of Madera—Planning Department

2.8 Areas of Controversy and Issues to be Resolved
The State CEQA Guidelines require that each EIR provide a list of issues that are likely to raise controversy and are of particular interest to the public. The following issues are most likely to produce controversy in reviewing and considering the project:
9 The San Joaquin River Parkway & Conservation Trust, Inc. (River Parkway Trust), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, public benefit corporation, was created in 1988 to establish a continuous greenway along 33 miles of river in the rapidly urbanizing Fresno-Madera region.
10 The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.

I Page 2-22
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description • access to the study area from the Fresno side of the River; • access to the study area via West Riverview Drive;
• access to the study area from the vicinity of Palm Avenue and Nees Avenue; • public access and ADA compliance;
• trail access to the River;
• parking to support access to the project;
• location of the trail extension alignment;
• consistency with the Fresno General Plan (2014)
11 ;
• risk of wildland fire extending to the Bluff’s residential area; • public safety (e.g., public nuisances, crime);
• air quality effects associated with the Perrin Avenue vehicular access; • recreational amenities;
• support for specific alternatives; and
• wildlife conservation and viewing.

2.9 Intended Uses of the EIR
The Conservancy is proposing to approve and carry out a discretionary project subject to Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines. This EIR evaluates the potential impacts of implementing the project and proposes mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant where possible. Public agencies other than the Conservancy, including responsible and trustee agencies (as defined under CEQA), may use this EIR during their review of various permits and other discretionary actions. The following agencies might use this EIR for such purposes:
• California Department of Conservation
• CDFW
• California Department of Parks and Recreation
• California Department of Water Resources (DWR)
• California Natural Resources Agency
11 During preparation of this EIR, the City of Fresno released the draft Fresno General Plan on July 2, 2014. The Fresno City Council approved the general plan on December 18, 2014 (City of Fresno 2014a).

I Page 2-23
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description • California State Lands Commission
• California Wildlife Conservation Board
• Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB)
• Central Valley RWQCB and SWRCB
• City of Fresno
• County of Fresno
• County of Madera
• FMFCD
• Native American Heritage Commission
• SJVAPCD
Discretionary approval may include applications for permit approvals, consultation requirements, or other required actions. Table 2.9-1 lists the regulatory agencies, permits, and purposes of the regulatory approvals that may apply to the project.

I Page 2-24
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description Table 2.9-1 Applicable Permit and Regulatory Requirements Regulatory Agency Law/Regulation Purpose Permit/Authorization Type U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Regulates placement of dredged and fill materials into waters of the United States.

Section 404 Permit for Discharge of
Dredged or Fill Materials into Waters of
the United States
Central Valley
Regional Water
Quality Control
Board
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act Requires water quality certification for placement of dredged and fill materials into waters of the United States. Section 401 Water Quality Certification Section 402 of the Clean Water Act Regulates discharges and pollutants.

National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System General
Construction Permit
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control
Act
Regulates discharges of materials to land and protection of beneficial uses of waters of the State. Waste Discharge Requirements California
Department of Fish
and Wildlife
Section 1602 of the Fish and Game
Code
Applies to activities that would substantially modify a river, stream, or lake. The agreement includes reasonable
conditions necessary to protect those resources.

Lake and Streambed Alteration
Agreement Application
California State
Lands Commission Public Trust Easement Reviews projects that encroach or construct improvements on State Sovereign Lands.

Encroachment Easement Application
or Lease
Central Valley Flood
Protection Board Article 3, Title 23 of the Water Code
Requires encroachment permit for any project that may
encroach upon, improve, alter, or affect adopted plans of flood control (including federal/State flood control
systems, regulated streams, and designated floodways
under the board’s jurisdiction).

Encroachment Permit Application
San Joaquin Valley
Air Pollution Control
District
Rules 2010 and 9510 of the Rules and
Regulations of the San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District;
Permit to Construct
Requires permit for construction that emits air pollutants.

Requires permit for a project’s emissions that may affect regional air quality.
2010 Permit to Construct
9510 Indirect Source Review
Source: Compiled by AECOM in 2016

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Project Description This page intentionally left blank

Page 2 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures Chapter 3.

Affected Environment, Environmental
Consequences, and Mitigation Measures

3.1 Overview
The DEIR and the discussions in this chapter have been focused in accordance with the scoping process provided for in PRC Section 21080.4(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, relying on the NOP circulated by the Conservancy and the responses to the NOP by the responsible and trustee agencies.

Discussions of CEQA-required topics not identified by this process as requiring analysis in depth have not been eliminated, but have been appropriately reduced to those essential for environmental analysis. A public scoping meeting to assist in the determination was duly noticed and held by the Conservancy on June 17, 2014 (see Appendix A).

Each topical or technical section in Chapter 3 begins with an introduction that explains the issues to be evaluated; provides a general summary of comments received on the NOP, if any; and identifies the primary sources reviewed to prepare the analysis. The introduction is followed by a description of the project’s environmental and regulatory settings as they pertain to a particular issue. The regulatory setting provides a summary of applicable federal, State, and local regulations, plans, policies, and laws that are relevant to each issue area. The regulatory setting description in each section is followed by a discussion of project-specific impacts. Compliance with applicable laws, policies, and regulations is assumed and is identified in the impact analysis. In many cases, compliance with applicable laws, policies, or regulations would reduce the significance of an impact.

3.1.1 Environmental Setting
According to Section 15125(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must include a description of the existing physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project as they exist at the time the NOP was published (on June 9, 2014).

The following discussion describes the regional physical setting of the project area. This setting, also known as the “environmental setting,” normally constitutes the baseline condition against which project- related impacts are compared. Therefore, the baseline condition for this DEIR, unless noted otherwise, is based on conditions that existed when the NOP was published. The State CEQA Guidelines recognize that the date for establishing an environmental baseline cannot be rigid. Because physical environmental conditions may vary over a range of time, the use of environmental baselines that differ from the date of the NOP is reasonable and appropriate in certain circumstances when doing so results in a more accurate or conservative environmental analysis.

I Page 3-1
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures

3.1.1.1 San Joaquin Valley
The project area is located within the low alluvial plains and fans of the central San Joaquin Valley between the Coast Ranges and the Sierra Nevada. The San Joaquin Valley is approximately 400 miles long and averages 50 miles in width, encompassing approximately 20,000 square miles. It resembles a large asymmetric trough that is bounded by the mostly granitic Sierra Nevada to the east and the metamorphic Coast Ranges to the west. This trough has been filled with as much as 30,000 feet of sediment in the San Joaquin Valley portion to the south, and as much as 60,000 feet of sediment in the Sacramento Valley portion to the north. The age of the sediments range from Jurassic to Holocene and include both marine and lacustrine deposits.

3.1.1.2 San Joaquin River
The San Joaquin River originates in the Sierra Nevada at an elevation of 12,000 feet above mean sea level (amsl). The 366-mile-long river flows through a rich agricultural region before reaching the Pacific Ocean through Suisun Bay and San Francisco Bay. The San Joaquin is among the most heavily dammed and diverted of California’s rivers. Millerton Lake, formed by Friant Dam, is located about 11 miles upstream of the study area and is the largest reservoir on the River. Friant Dam impounds about 520,500 acre-feet and diverts most of the River for irrigation of the San Joaquin Valley. Its secondary uses include flood control and recreation. The River forms the county line that separates Madera and Fresno counties. Inflow to Millerton Lake consists primarily of upper San Joaquin River flows and is influenced by the operation of several upstream hydropower generation projects. Other inflows include local runoff. Millerton Lake typically fills during late spring and early summer, when River flows are high because of snowmelt in the upper watershed. Friant Dam diverts much of the water from the River to contractors within the Central Valley Project Friant Division water service area. Annual water allocations and release schedules are developed with the intent of drawing reservoir storage to minimum levels by the end of September. The operation of Friant Dam changes storage levels in Millerton Lake, which in turn influences River flows through the project area.

3.1.1.3 Project Site
The project site is located on an alluvial floodplain terrace along the south side of the River. The topography of the study area consists of a relatively flat floodplain with interspersed former gravel mining pits and ponds surrounded by relatively steep bluffs. The most prominent landforms within the study area include:
• the River channel running from east to west along the northern boundary of the project area, • steep north- and south-facing bluffs identifying the approximate boundaries of the river floodplain, and

I Page 3-2
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures • numerous gravel mining pits and ponds interrupting the otherwise relatively flat topography of the floodplain.

Ground surface levels in the study area range from 249 feet at the River’s low-water level to 330 feet at the top of the bluffs. The bluff slope ranges between 60% and 80% grade on both the north and south side of the River’s floodplain. The highly erodible face of the bluff and a small area of expansive clay in the northeastern portion of the sphere of influence are the only unstable soil conditions known to exist in the city of Fresno.

Five biotic habitats are present in the study area: disturbed annual grassland, aquatic, riparian, developed landscape, and stormwater detention basins. Disturbed annual grassland habitat composes the majority of the vegetation of the study area. Most of this habitat has been disturbed by previous sand/gravel mining activities, past cattle grazing and agriculture use, and ongoing disturbance caused by unauthorized recreational use.

Four habitat restoration projects sponsored by the Conservancy are in progress at the site. These native plant revegetation projects are designed to complement the proposed project.

3.1.1.4 San Joaquin River Parkway
The regional setting for this DEIR includes the Parkway planning area. The San Joaquin River Conservancy Act sets forth the statutory mission and authorities of the Conservancy. The Conservancy Act’s introductory sections states:

The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the San Joaquin River, its broad corridors, and its prominent bluffs constitute a unique and important environmental, cultural, scientific, agricultural, educational, recreational, scenic, flood water conveyance, and wildlife resource that should be preserved for the enjoyment of, and appreciation by, present and future generations.

The Conservancy Act authorized the acquisition and management of public lands within the planned Parkway (PRC Section 32510). Accordingly, the Parkway planning area “consists of the San Joaquin River and approximately 5,900 acres on both sides of the river between Friant Dam and Highway 99 crossing. Approximately 1,900 acres of Parkway shall be located in Madera County and 4,000 acres shall be located in Fresno County.”
This area is approximately 22 miles long, from river mile 267.6 at the face of Friant Dam to the SR 99 crossing at river mile 243.2, and includes portions of Fresno County, Madera County, and the city of Fresno. The Parkway planning area varies in width from a narrow wildlife corridor where the bluffs are steep and close to the River to extensive floodplains of several hundred acres.

I Page 3-3
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures As of the date of the NOP, June 9, 2014, the Conservancy owned 2,552 acres within the Parkway, including the project site. Other public lands within the Parkway planning area include the County of Fresno’s Lost Lake Park, CDFW’s San Joaquin Fish Hatchery and San Joaquin River Ecological Reserve, and State sovereign lands under the jurisdiction of the California State Lands Commission.

The study area analyzed in this DEIR is about 358 acres, or about 6.0% of the public land area of the planned Parkway.

3.1.1.5 Climate
The climate of the area is typical of inland valleys in California, with hot, dry summers and cool, mild winters. Average summer temperatures in Fresno are in the mid-90s Fahrenheit and can exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). The city has an average annual high temperature of 79°F and an average annual low temperature of 53°F. On average, Fresno receives around 11 inches of precipitation per year, and snowfall occurs rarely (DWR 2006; WRCC 2016a). Most of the precipitation falls in January, which is also the coldest month of the year. The warmest month is July. The city of Fresno typically experiences about 39 days of heavy fog during the winter, with visibility of less than a quarter of a mile (WRCC 2016b). The highest temperature during summer 2014 occurred on June 9, with a high of 110°F. The lowest daytime high temperature during winter 2013 was 49°F on December 5 (AccuWeather.com 2014).

3.1.2 Local Jurisdictional Setting
The following discussion describes the local jurisdictional setting.

The California Legislature created the Conservancy as a State agency with broad powers to develop and manage State lands in the Parkway to accomplish the goals of the Conservancy Act. The Conservancy’s uses on State lands are not subject to local land use ordinances based the well-established principle of sovereign immunity: the State and its agencies are not subject to local regulations when engaging in governmental activities, unless the California Constitution or the Legislature so mandates. Although the Conservancy is not subject to local land use regulation, it has maintained a policy of coordinating with local land use authorities. Lands that are not in State ownership may be involved in development of the project. All zoning and land use regulation over lands involved in the project not owned by the State remain the exclusive authority of the local land use agencies.

Although the State CEQA Guidelines do not require an EIR to describe the regulatory setting, Section 15125(d) states that the EIR shall discuss any inconsistencies between the project and applicable general plans, specific plans, and regional plans. The following section describes local jurisdictions that may have such plans.

I Page 3-4
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures

3.1.2.1 City of Fresno
Fresno is the largest inland city in Central California. According to the Draft General Plan (City of Fresno 2014a), the city’s current population is 545,000, making Fresno the fifth largest city in California and the 34th largest in the nation. The county seat of Fresno County, Fresno occupies an area of approximately 104.4 square miles.

The City owns 6.2 acres of land adjacent to the study area at Spano Park. All 358 acres of the study area are within the city limits of Fresno. The mayor or a designated city council member serves on the board of directors of the Conservancy (PRC Section 32515). The Parkway serves and the proposed project would serve Fresno residents, as well as the regional population of the Parkway’s service area.

3.1.2.2 City of Madera
Just 25 miles north of the study area is the city of Madera. Madera is the largest city in Madera County, with a population of 62,624 as of 2012, and occupies an area of approximately 12.3 square miles. The city is located near the entrance to Yosemite National Park and the Sierra Nevada. Although the study area is not within the jurisdiction of Madera, the Parkway serves and the proposed project would serve Madera residents. The mayor or a designated city council member serves on the board of the Conservancy (PRC Section 32515).

3.1.2.3 City of Clovis
The city of Clovis is located in northeastern Fresno County, about 4 miles east of the study area. As of 2016, the city’s population was 108, 039 (City of Clovis 2016). Clovis occupies an area of approximately 24 square miles. Although the study area is not within the jurisdiction of Clovis, the Parkway serves and the proposed project and would serve Clovis residents.

3.1.2.4 Fresno County
The planned Parkway is partially within Fresno County. The county is one of the largest, fastest growing, and most diverse counties in California. It is the state’s 10th most populous county with an estimated 920,000 residents (County of Fresno 2014a). The Parkway serves and the proposed project would serve Fresno County residents. A member of the County of Fresno Board of Supervisors serves on the board of the Conservancy (PRC Section 32515).

3.1.2.5 Madera County
Madera County is located directly north of the study area. The county has an estimated population of 154,998 residents and occupies an area of 2,156 square miles (California-Demographics 2016). The Parkway serves and the proposed project would serve Madera County residents. A member of the County of Madera Board of Supervisors serves on the board of the Conservancy (PRC Section 32515).

I Page 3-5
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures

3.1.3 Study Area
The study area encompasses the south side of the River to the bluffs and extends westward from SR 41 to Spano Park, located near the intersection of Palm Avenue and Nees Avenue. The study area analyzed in this DEIR encompasses approximately 358 acres on the south side of the river. Most of the land is owned by the State of California under the management jurisdiction of the Conservancy and the California State Lands Commission. Four parcels owned by the City of Fresno are adjacent to Conservancy land. Implementation of some portions of the project may occur on the city properties.

The area comprises 19 parcels, which are owned by the State of California under the management of the Conservancy, FMFCD, and the City of Fresno (Table 3.1-1). One privately owned parcel (40102127S) is within the project boundaries. A second privately owned parcel (40102138S) is located on the Perrin Canal bench of the bluffs near the east side of the study area. Although these parcels are not part of the project, this DEIR analyzes indirect impacts, if any, of the project on these areas. A residential subdivision is located south of the study area on the bluffs. The subdivision is not part of the project; however, this DEIR analyzes indirect impacts, if any, of the project. Parcels in the study area are designated as Open Space/Multiuse and zoned as AE-20 or AE-5 (Table 3.1-1).

Land ownership in the study area totals 357.8 acres, which includes the City of Fresno, 8.03 acres; FMFCD, 7.72 acres; private residence, 20.43 acres; and State of California, 332.9 acres. The project area also contains State sovereign lands lying riverward of the low-water mark under the jurisdiction of the California State Lands Commission.

3.1.4 Impact Analysis
This section of the DEIR addresses topics required by CEQA. Each topic (e.g., air quality, biological resources) describes the existing setting or regulatory conditions to help the reader understand the conditions that could be affected by the project. Each topic includes a description of the impact evaluation criteria and analysis procedures. The impact statement is prefaced by a number for ease of identification.

An explanation of each potential impact and an analysis of its significance follow the impact analysis. All mitigation measures are identified immediately following the impact analysis. The degree to which identified mitigation measures would reduce the impact is also described.

When more than one mitigation measure is recommended for a specific impact, all the measures are required to reduce the impact to a level of insignificance unless the word “or” or “alternatively” appears in the list of mitigation measures. Although not specifically required by CEQA, less-than-significant impacts have also been discussed. No mitigation is mandated by CEQA for less-than-significant impacts.

I Page 3-6
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures Table 3.1-1 Existing Land Use, Zoning, and Ownership in the Study Area Assessor’s
Parcel Number Acres
Existing Land Use
Description
Planned Land Use
Description Zoning Owner
40102127S 19.48 N/A N/A N/A Private
40102132ST 2.09 Vacant Open Space/Multiuse AE-20 State of California 40102133ST 8.90 Vacant Open Space/Multiuse AE-20 State of California 40102134ST 8.37 Vacant Open Space/Multiuse SPLIT: AE-20/AE-5 State of California 40102135ST 59.38 Vacant Open Space/Multiuse SPLIT: AE-20/AE-5 State of California 40102137S 3.80 Vacant Open Space/Multiuse SPLIT: AE-20/AE-5 State of California—Conservancy 40102138S 0.86 Vacant Open Space/Multiuse AE-20 Private 40203024ST 3.91 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse State of California—Conservancy 40203038ST 0.13 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse SPLIT: AE-20/AE-5 FMFCD 40203047ST 2.26 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse SPLIT: AE-20/AE-5 City of Fresno 40203048ST 4.21 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse SPLIT: AE-20/AE-5 City of Fresno 40203052ST 3.76 Ponding Basin Open Space/Multiuse AE-5 FMFCD 40203054ST 3.57 Ponding Basin Open Space/Multiuse AE-5 FMFCD 40203062ST 3.69 Open Space/Multiuse N/A N/A State of California—Conservancy 40203068ST 25.70 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse AE-5 State of California 40203069ST 205.95 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse AE-5 State of California—Conservancy 40252025ST 0.62 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse R-1-C City of Fresno 40253009ST 0.82 Open Space/Multiuse N/A N/A State of California—Conservancy 40253011ST 0.33 Open Space/Multiuse Open Space/Multiuse R-1-C City of Fresno Total Acres 357.8
Notes: Conservancy = San Joaquin River Conservancy; FMFCD = Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District; N/A = not applicable Source: Compiled by AECOM in 2016

Page 3 ends

San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures As lead agency, the Conservancy must comply with the mitigation measures, including all reporting requirements, as a condition of approval of the project. Failure to fully comply with all required mitigation measures is potential cause for enforcement action. When monitoring of mitigation measures is required, the Conservancy shall maintain complete performance records on file for each such measure for trustee or responsible agency review.

Each impact is briefly described (“headed”) and numbered in bold print. An impact discussion and analysis follows. At the end of the impact discussion, mitigation measures are listed and numbered to correspond to the numbered impact. The summary table for this DEIR, Table 1.6-1 in Chapter 1, “Executive Summary,” includes the same text heading and the mitigation measures.

Cumulative impacts of the project are analyzed in Chapter 4 of this DEIR.

3.1.4.1 Determination of Significance
Under CEQA, a significant impact is defined as a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment (PRC Section 21068). The State CEQA Guidelines direct that this determination be based on substantial evidence in light of the whole record. The criteria for determining the significance of a particular impact are identified before the impact discussion in each topical section and are consistent with significance criteria set forth in the State CEQA Guidelines.

3.1.4.2 Terminology Used in the Impact Analysis
This DEIR uses the following terminology to describe the environmental effects of the project:
• Thresholds of Significance. A set of criteria used by the lead agency to determine at what level of “threshold” an impact would be considered significant. Standards of significance used in this DEIR include those derived from questions set forth in the State CEQA Guidelines, which are criteria based on regulatory standards of local, State, and federal agencies. In determining the level of significance, the analysis assumed that the project would comply with relevant federal, State, and local regulations and ordinances.
• Less-than-Significant Impact. A project impact is considered less than significant when it does not reach the standard of significance, indicating that there would be no substantial change in the environment. No mitigation is required for a less-than-significant impact. • Potentially Significant Impact. A potentially significant impact is an environmental effect that could cause a substantial adverse change in the environment; however, additional information is needed regarding the extent of the impact to make the determination of significance. For CEQA purposes, a potentially significant impact is treated as if it were a significant impact.

I Page 3-8
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures • Significant Impact. A project impact is considered significant if it results in a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions of the environment. Significant impacts are identified by the evaluation of project effects in the context of specified significance criteria. When available, potentially feasible mitigation measures and/or project alternatives are identified to reduce these effects on the environment.

3.2 Aesthetics and Visual Resources

3.2.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing environmental and regulatory setting of the project and analyzes the potential impacts of the project on aesthetics and visual resources. This section also describes the criteria used to determine the significance of impacts, the approach to assessing impacts, and possible mitigation measures.

As described in Chapter 2, a public scoping meeting was held on June 17, 2014, to invite comments regarding environmental issues that should be examined in the EIR. Several comments were made that the EIR should evaluate the impacts of the project on aesthetic resources.

3.2.2 Environmental Setting
The San Joaquin River, emerging from the Sierra Nevada foothills, has carved its channel into the landscape of a broad floodplain flanked by bluffs varying in steepness and elevation. The San Joaquin River serves as the boundary between Madera and Fresno counties and is the principal natural scenic feature of the Fresno metropolitan area.

3.2.2.1 Visual Character of the Study Area
Aesthetics and visual resources are the natural and cultural landscape features that people see and that contribute to the public’s enjoyment and appreciation of the environment. Aesthetic and visual resource impacts are generally defined in terms of the extent to which the project’s physical characteristics and visibility would change the perceived visual character and visual quality of the viewed landscape.

The context of the aesthetic/scenic vista of the project comprises a floodplain corridor, the San Joaquin River with year-round flows, riparian vegetation, trees, grassland, and remnants of several surface mining gravel ponds inundated with water. Although there are no designated scenic vistas in the study area, the City recognizes the River as a unique and scenic resource (City of Fresno 2014a). Audubon Drive, a nearby collector road about 1 mile south of the study area, is considered a scenic corridor from Blackstone Avenue to Herndon Avenue. Views of the study area from Audubon Drive are obstructed by a residential subdivision.

I Page 3-9
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures The scenic river vista can be viewed by traffic from SR 41, homeowners of private residences along the river floodplain corridor and on the bluffs, visitors at Spano Park, and pedestrians along the Bluff Trail (see Photographs 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3).

Photograph 3-1 Panoramic view of the San Joaquin River from Spano Park.

Photograph 3-2 Panoramic view of the San Joaquin River from the Bluff Trail.

Photograph 3-3 Panoramic view of the San Joaquin River from SR 41 looking north.

There are no historic buildings in the study area (see Section 3.6, “Cultural Resources,” for a discussion of historic resources). Two private residences are located within the floodplain corridor in the project area. An asphalt road connects a gated entrance at West Riverview Drive with the private residences. Old farm roads and gravel haul roads are present along the floodplain corridor. These roads are unimproved and

A:COM Page 3-10
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures not maintained. The Bluff Trail (a pedestrian trail) is located on the historic 12 Perrin Canal Bench just below
the top of the bluffs.

There are four gravel ponds (mining pits) within the floodplain corridor (Photographs 3-1 and 3-2). These gravel ponds, remnants of past gravel mining operations, are a dominant visual feature of the floodplain corridor. Riparian vegetation present along the River and ruderal grassland are dominant vegetative visual features. Two fenced stormwater basins are present and can be seen from Spano Park or the Bluff Trail near the West Riverview Drive entrance.

3.2.2.2 Viewer Groups
Residents are individuals whose homes are near the study area. Viewer sensitivity is moderately high among residents because they are likely to value their local visual resources, appreciate the visual experience, and be more sensitive to changes in views. The project site is visible to residents whose homes are immediately adjacent to the bluffs and of the two private residences located near the center of the study area.

Recreational users engage in a variety of activities such as walking, jogging, biking, and wildlife viewing.

Viewer sensitivity is moderately high among recreational users although the views are transient in nature.

These viewers are more likely to value the natural environment highly, appreciate the visual experience, and be sensitive to changes in views. Spano Park offers viewers a bluff-top view of the study area. It offers the highest public vantage point in the vicinity of the study area from which to view the San Joaquin River.

Motorists use SR 41 at normal highway speeds. Single views of the study area for southbound motorists are typically of short duration. Motorists who frequently travel SR 41 generally possess low to moderate visual sensitivity to their surroundings. The passing landscape becomes familiar to these viewers, and their attention typically is not focused on the passing views but on the roadway, roadway signs, and the surrounding traffic.

3.2.2.3 Viewing Areas
Residential
The study area can be viewed from the private residences along the floodplain corridor and residences located on the bluffs (south of the study area). The river, riparian vegetation, trees, grassland, stormwater basins, and remnants of surface gravel mining ponds can be seen. Depending on air quality, distant views of the Sierra Nevada can be seen from some homes on the bluffs.

A historic assessment of the Perrin Canal is provided in Section 3.6, “Cultural Resources.”

I Page 3-11
12 San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures Spano Park
Spano Park, a mini park located at Palm and Park Avenues near Nees Avenue in northwest Fresno, overlooks the San Joaquin River. This mini park is a passive park with picnic tables, a grassy area, and a short walking trail that provides a view of the Sierra Nevada and the San Joaquin River. The view from Spano Park is similar to that described above and is illustrated in Photograph 3-1.

Bluff Trail
The Bluff Trail is a neighborhood trail located on a remnant of the Perrin Canal Bench south of the study area. The Bluff Trail is owned and managed by the City of Fresno. Access to the Bluff Trail is controlled by gates that are unlocked in the morning and locked in the evening. The view from the Bluff Trail is similar to that described above and is shown in Photograph 3-2.

3.2.3 Regulatory Setting
This section briefly describes federal, State, and local regulations, permits, and policies pertaining to aesthetics and visual resources, as they apply or may be relevant to the project.

3.2.3.1 Federal Laws, Regulations, and Policies
No federal laws, regulations, or policies related to aesthetics/visual resources apply to the project.

3.2.3.2 State Laws, Regulations, and Policies
California Scenic Highway System
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) administers the California Scenic Highway Program. The goal of the program is to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from changes that would affect the aesthetic value of the land adjacent to highways. Although there are eligible State Scenic Highways in Fresno and Madera counties, none are officially designated and none that are eligible for designation are present in or near the study area (Caltrans 2014a).

San Joaquin River Conservancy Act
As described in Chapter 2, the Conservancy Act (PRC Sections 32500–32520) declares that “the San Joaquin River, its broad corridors, and its prominent bluffs constitute a unique and important environmental, cultural, scientific, agricultural, educational, recreational, scenic, flood water conveyance, and wildlife resource that should be preserved for the enjoyment of, and appreciation by, present and future generations.” The Conservancy Act also establishes the Conservancy to acquire and manage public lands within the planned Parkway.

I Page 3-12
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures San Joaquin River Parkway Master Plan
The Conservancy develops and manages its projects and lands under its jurisdiction in the Parkway through policies in the Parkway Master Plan. The Parkway Master Plan (Appendix B) contains goals, objectives, and policies that apply to the project area, including the following policy relevant to aesthetics/ visual resources:
o Policy BZ9: Lighting associated with development in the riverbottom should be minimized, carefully planned, and regulated. Lighting should not be allowed in the vicinity of the wildlife corridor or a natural reserve, except where public safety necessitates it. The impacts of lighting can be further minimized by planting tall vegetation that acts as a screen between the light source and the corridor or reserve. …assure that [lights] switch off when no longer needed.

These policies do not necessarily avoid impacts but may lessen them.

3.2.3.3 Local Laws, Regulations, and Policies
The City of Fresno updated its draft general plan and development code on July 2, 2014. The Draft Master EIR (Master Environmental Impact Report, General Plan and Development Code Update) was released for public review and comment on July 22, 2014 (State Clearinghouse No. 2012111015). The Final Master EIR was released on December 5, 2014; the City approved the updated Fresno General Plan and Development Code 2035 on December 18, 2014.

The planning process for the updated Fresno General Plan (referred to in this DEIR as the General Plan Update 2035) began in 2011, before the NOP for this EIR was published. Although the General Plan Update 2035 was approved after the publication date of the NOP, it is reasonable and appropriate to consider the policies and objectives of that document as part of the baseline setting for this EIR. In addition, the policies and objectives of the 2025 Fresno General Plan (General Plan 2025) were in effect at the time the NOP was published. Relevant policies of both the General Plan 2025 and the General Plan Update 2035 are presented throughout this
DEIR to provide a more accurate environmental setting.

City of Fresno General Plan 2025
The City’s General Plan 2025 established the following policy guiding the assessment of project impacts on aesthetic and visual resources:
o Policy C-20-f: … Exterior lighting shall not create glare for neighboring properties, but shall provide adequate on-site lighting for safety and security.

I Page 3-13
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures City of Fresno General Plan Update 2035
The City’s General Plan Update 2035 establishes the following goal relevant to the assessment of project impacts on aesthetic and visual resources:

Goal MT-6-k: Path and Trail Buffers. Use landscaping with appropriate and adequate physical and visual barriers (e.g., masonry walls, chain link, wrought-iron, or square-tube fencing) to screen path and trail right-of-ways and separate paths and trails from mining operations, drainage facilities, and similar locations as warranted.

3.2.4 Impact Analysis

3.2.4.1 Thresholds of Significance
The thresholds for determining the significance of impacts for this analysis of aesthetics and visual resources are based on the environmental checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines, as amended. The State CEQA Guidelines define a “significant effect” on the environment to mean a “substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including … objects of historic or aesthetic significance” (14 CCR Section 15382). The project would have a significant impact on aesthetics and visual resources if it would:
• have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
• substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway;
• substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; or • create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

3.2.4.2 Methodology
The analysis of the project’s potential impacts was based on an evaluation of the changes to the existing aesthetic/visual resources that would result from implementing the project. In determining the extent and implications of the aesthetic/visual changes, consideration was given to:
• specific changes in the affected aesthetic/visual environment’s composition, character, and any specially valued qualities;
• the affected aesthetic/visual environment’s context; and • the extent to which the affected environment contains places or features that have been designed in plans and policies for protection or special consideration.

I Page 3-14
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures Visual analyses typically distinguish between three different impact durations: temporary impacts, typically lasting no more than 2 years; short-term impacts, generally lasting no longer than 5 years; and long-term impacts, which last longer than 5 years. In general, short-term impacts are not considered significant.

3.2.4.3 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 3.2-1: The project would have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Temporary Impacts. Although there are no designated scenic vistas in the study area, the San Joaquin River is considered a scenic resource by the City (City of Fresno 2014a). Project construction activities such as site preparation, clearing, grading, installation of new hardscape, and landscaping, and heavy equipment present in the area would be visible to homeowners on the bluffs, the public at Spano Park, visitors along the Bluff Trail, and traffic traveling along SR 41. Such construction activities and equipment would contrast with the existing natural River bottom setting, a scenic resource. Construction would last about 1 year; construction equipment, activities, and personnel would be visible during this period. The temporary impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Long-Term Impacts. The riverine setting includes the presence of two private residences, fenced stormwater basins, legacy gravel-mining pits, and an asphalt/paved road, as well as grassland, ponds, and riparian woodland. The project footprint is small relative to the open space of the project area, but the trail extension, parking lot, recreation amenities, and people using the trail would be at least partially visible during the day after construction. Visitors would be seen from various viewing areas and by viewer groups.

The project includes landscaping with trees in the parking area to screen the area; however, cars parked in the Perrin Avenue parking lot would be at least partially visible to homeowners on the bluffs, the public at Spano Park, visitors along the Bluff Trail, and traffic traveling along SR 41. All of these changes would alter the visual character of the study area. The presence of the trail extension, parking lot, and recreational amenities would alter the natural features of the San Joaquin River floodplain. The long-term presence and use of the trail extension could affect sensitive viewer groups and could be considered a conflict with the unique and scenic resource that is the River. The long-term impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1
The Conservancy shall use native plants for landscaping portions of the trail extension to allow for naturalization of these features. Landscaping and recreation facilities shall be designed to create visual buffers and in a manner complementary and/or compatible with the scenic nature of the area.

Newly landscaped vegetation shall be irrigated until permanently established. The Conservancy shall select materials and colors for all facilities (e.g., vault toilet restrooms) that shall be compatible with the surrounding natural environment.

I Page 3-15
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures Effectiveness of Mitigation Measure
The use of native plants for landscaping portions of the trail extension and selection of naturalized materials and colors for recreation facilities would create visual buffers in a manner that is complementary and/or compatible with the scenic nature of the area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1 would reduce the potential long-term impact on scenic vistas to less than significant.

No additional mitigation is required.

Impact 3.2-2: The project could substantially damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway.

The adjacent SR 41 is not a designated or eligible State scenic highway and no historic buildings or rock outcroppings are present in the study area. Trees located in the project area would be conserved to the extent feasible. The project would not substantially damage scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a State scenic highway. The impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Impact 3.2-3: The project would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

Temporary Impacts. Construction could result in temporary visual disturbances associated with the presence of construction crews and heavy equipment. Construction activities would last about 1 year. The temporary impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Long-Term Impacts. The project would alter the view of the San Joaquin River from the viewing areas. The long-term presence and use of the trail extension could affect sensitive viewer groups and could be considered a conflict with the existing visual character of the River. The long-term impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-2
The Conservancy shall implement Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measure
The use of native plants for landscaping the trail extension and selection of naturalized materials and colors for recreation facilities, as described in Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1, would create visual buffers in a manner that is complementary and/or compatible with the scenic nature of the area. Implementation of Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-1 would reduce the potential long-term impact on the visual character of the San Joaquin River to less than significant. No additional mitigation is required.

I Page 3-16
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures Impact 3.2-4: The project would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Temporary Impacts. Construction and maintenance activities would take place during the day between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m.; therefore, in the short term, no impact would occur.

Long-Term Impacts. Access to the trail extension would be limited to daytime use or occasional evening special even use. The project would include low-level outdoor security lighting in the parking area and restroom facilities that would be fully shielded and would point down toward the ground. This would represent a new source of lighting. Therefore, the long-term impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-3
The Conservancy shall implement the following measures regarding lighting design features:
• All outdoor lights shall be fully shielded with full cutoff luminaires. • All up-lighting for any purpose shall be avoided.
• Tree-mounted lights shall be avoided unless they are fully shielded and pointing downward toward the ground or shining into dense foliage.

Effectiveness of Mitigation Measure
Implementation of Mitigation Measure Aesthetics and Visual Resources-3 would reduce the potential long- term impact to less than significant by using smart lighting and requiring lighting to be fully shielded, which would minimize lighting use and prevent glare and light trespass onto adjacent properties or into wildlife habitat. No additional mitigation is required.

3.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

3.3.1 Introduction
This section describes the existing environmental and regulatory setting of the project area and analyzes the potential impacts of the project on agriculture and forestry resources. This section also describes the criteria for determining the significance of impacts, approach to assessing impacts, and possible mitigation measures.

As described in Chapter 2, a public scoping meeting was held on June 17, 2014, to invite comments regarding environmental issues that should be examined in the DEIR. No comments were made related to impacts on agriculture and forestry.

I Page 3-17
San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures

3.3.2 Environmental Setting

3.3.2.1 Soils
According to the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service, the soils of the study area are composed primarily of Grangeville fine sandy loam, Hesperia sandy loam, Tujunga, and Riverwash (NRCS 2014).

Grangeville is the dominant soil classification. Both Grangeville and Hesperia soils are classified as Prime Farmland if irrigated and drained (NRCS 2014). Table 3.3-1 presents the soil classifications of the study area by acres and percent. The Grangeville soil series (about 185 acres) consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained soils that formed in moderate coarse-textured alluvium dominantly from granitic rock sources. Grangeville soils are found on alluvial fans and floodplains and have slopes ranging from 0 to 2%.

Expansive soils are those that contain significant amounts of clays that expand when wetted and can cause damage to foundations if moisture collects beneath structures. Grangeville soils are not considered expansive soils.

Table 3.3-1 Soil Classifications in the Study Area
Class Name Number of Acres Percent
Grangeville fine sandy loam 131 52
Grangeville fine sandy loam, saline alkali 34 14
Grangeville soils, channeled 21 8
Hanford fine sandy loam 1 1
Hesperia, fine sandy loam 5 2
Hesperia, sandy loam 28 10
Pollasky fine sandy loam, 9 to 15% slopes 3 1
Riverwash 2 1
Terrace escarpments 17 7
Tujunga soils, channeled, 0 to 9% slopes 12 4
Total 254* 100%
* Water as a class name is not included in this table. Gravel ponds represent 104 acres of open water. The total number of acres including the gravel ponds (water) is 358.

Sources: NRCS 2014; compiled by AECOM in 2016

3.3.2.2 Farmland Classification
Data from the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program were reviewed to determine the classification and acres of farmland in the project area (DOC 2014). Parcel data were obtained from the County of Fresno on July 24, 2014 13 (County of Fresno 2014b).

The County of Fresno updated its GIS parcel database on July 23, 2014.

I Page 3-18
13 San Joaquin River Conservancy
River West Eaton Trail Extension Project
Final Environmental Impact Report, Volume I Affected Environment, Environmental Consequences, and Mitigation Measures

Page 3 ends

Fresno City CouncilMay 7, 2026

Fresno City Council
May 7, 2026