121024 CED Housing Element EIR Certification Reso - Exh C Findings of Fact — City Council - Successor Agency

CEQA
Findings of Fact

and
Statement

of
Overriding Considerations

Fullerton Housing Incentive
Overlay Zone Program

State Clearinghouse No.

202390133

DECEMBER
2024

Prepared
by
:

CITY OF

FULLERTON

303 West Commonwealth Avenue

Fullerton, California 92832

Prepared
by
:

225 South Lake Avenue
,
Suite M210

Pasadena, C
alifornia

91101

Printed on 30% post
-
consumer recycled material.

12885

DECEMBER
2024

Table of Contents

SECTION

PAGE NO.

Acronyms and Abbreviations

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

iii

1 Introduction

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

1 1.1

Purpose

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

1 1.2

Organization of the Findings of Fact

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

2 2

Project Description

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

4 2.1

Project Location

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

4 2.2

Project Summary

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

4 2.3

Conditions of Approval

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

4 2.4

Project Objectives

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

12 2.5

Discretionary Actions

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

13 3

CEQA Review and Public Outreach

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

15 3.1

Record of Proceedings

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

15 3.2

Custodian and Location of Records

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

16 4

Impacts Determined Not to be Significant

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

18 4.1

Aesthetics

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

18 4.2

Agriculture and Forestry Resources

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

18 4.3

Air Quality

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

18 4.4

Biological Resources

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

19 4.5

Cultural Resources

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

19 4.6

Energy

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

19 4.7

Geology and Soils

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

19 4.8

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

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

20 4.9

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

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

20 4.10

Hydrology and Water Quality

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

20 4.11

Land Use and Planning

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

21 4.12

Mineral Resources

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

21 4.13

Noise

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

21 4.14

Population and Housing

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

21 4.15

Public Services

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

21 4.16

Recreation

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

22 4.17

Transportation

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

22 4.18

Utilities and Service Systems

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

22 4.20

Wildfire

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

23 4.21

Cumulative Impacts

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

23 FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

DECEMBER
2024

5 Impacts Determined to be Less Than Significant with Mitigation ................................
................................
..

24 5.1

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

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

24 5.2

Land Use and Planning

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

26 5.3

Cumulative Impacts

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

26 6

Impacts Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable

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

28 6.1

Air Quality

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

28 6.2

Population and Housing

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

31 6.3

Tribal Cultural Resources

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

31 6.2

Cumulative Impacts

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

33 7

Other CEQA Findings

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

36 7.1

Findings Regarding Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes

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

36 7.2

Findings Regarding Growth
-
Inducing Impacts

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

37 7.3

Findings Regarding Recirculation

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

38 7.4

Findings Regarding the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

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

39 8

Findings on Alternatives

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

40 8.1

Alternative 1
—

No Project Alternative

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

40 8.2

Alternative 2
—

Reduced Sites

Alternative

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

41 8.3

Modified Alternative 2

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

42 8.4

Alternative 3
—

Reduced Density Alternative

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

43 8.5

Alternative 4
–

Sites Inventory Only

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

44 8.6

Environmentally Superior Alternative

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

45 9

Statement of Overriding Considerations

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

46 ATTACHMENT

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting

Program

12885

iii

DECEMBER
2024

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Acronym/Abbreviation

Definition

Assembly Bill

ACM

asbestos
-
containing material

ADL

aerially deposited lead

AQMP

air quality management plan

ASTM

American Society for Testing and Materials

BMP

best management practice

C
-
G

Commercial Greenbelt

C
-
M

Commercial Manufacturing

CalEEMod

California Emissions Estimator Model

CalEnviroScreen

California Communities Environmental Health
Screening Tool

CARB

California Air Resources Board

CCR

California Code of Regulations

CEQA

California Environmental Quality Act

CHRIS

California Historical Research Information System

City

City of Fullerton

CNEL

Community Noise Equivalent Level

COA

condition of approval

CREC

controlled recognized environmental condition

DAMP

Drainage Area Management Plan

decibel

dBA

A
-
weighted decibel

DTSC

Department of Toxic Substances Control

EPA

U.S. Environmental Protect Agency

ESA

Environmental Site Assessment

G
-
C

General Commercial

HCD

California Department of Housing and Community Development

HIOZ

Housing Incentive Overlay Zone

HPLV

high
-
pressure
-
low
-
volume

HVAC

heating, ventilation, and air conditioning

LBP

lead
-
based paint

M
-
G

Manufacturing General

M
-
P

Manufacturing Park

MERV

Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value

mph

miles per hour

Mitigation Measure

MMRP

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

NAHC

Native American Heritage Commission

NOA

Notice of Availability

NOP

Notice of Preparation

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

DECEMBER
2024

O
-
P

Office Professional

OCFA

Orange County Fire Authority

OCSD

Orange County Sanitation District

PCB

polychlorinated biphenyl

PCR

California Public Resources Code

PEIR

Program
Environmental Impact Report

PRC

Public Resources Code

Program

Housing Incentive Overlay Zone
Program

Project

Housing Incentive Overlay Zone
Program

REC

recognized environmental condition

RHNA

Regional Housing Needs Allocation

RTP

Regional
Transportation Plan

RWQCB

Regional Water Quality Control Board

SCAB

South Coast Air Basin

SCAG

Southern California Association of Governments

SCAQMD

South Coast Air Quality Management District

SCCIC

South Central Coastal Information Center

SCS

Sustainable Communities Strategy

SEER

Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio

SLF

Sacred Lands File

SMP

Soil Management Plan

SWPPP

stormwater pollution prevention plan

SWRCB

State Water Resources Control Board

TCAC

California Tax Credit Allocation
Committee

TCR

tribal cultural resource

TRU

transport refrigeration unit

UWMP

urban water management plan

VEC

vapor encroachment condition

VHFHSZ

Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone

VMT

vehicle miles traveled

VOC

volatile organic compound

WQMP

water quality management plan

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

DECEMBER
2024

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLAN
K

12885

1 DECEMBER
2024

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

This statement of findings addresses the environmental effects associated with th e
Fullerton Housing Incentive
Overlay Zone Program

(
Project or
Program
)
that are described in the
Draft

Program
Environmental Impact Report
(
Draft
PEIR
) for the project. This statement is made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), specifically Public Resources Code Sections 21081 and 21081.6 and the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 150
00 et seq.), specifically Sectio
n
s

15091

and 15093
.

Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 require that the lead agency, in this case the City of
Fullerton

(City), prepare written findings for identified significant impacts, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 states, in part, that:

No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significan
t effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are:

1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.

2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

In accordance with Public Resource Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, whenever significant effects cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance, the decision ‐
making agency is required to balance, as
applicable, the benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effect s, the
adverse effects may be considered “acceptable,” in which case th e lead agency must adopt a formal statement of
overriding considerations.

As required by CEQA, in adopting these findings, the City also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project. The City finds that the MMRP, which is included in the Final PEIR

and is incorporated by
reference and made a part of these findings, meets the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the
project.

As required by CEQA, the City finds that the Final
PEIR

for the project reflects the City’s independent review and judgment. In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City adopts these findings as part of its certification of the Final
PEIR
. The Final
PEIR
, consisting of the
Draft
PEIR
, comments on the
Draft

PEIR
,

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

2 DECEMBER
2024

responses to comments on the
Draft
PEIR
, and revisions to the
Draft

PEIR
, are hereby incorporated by reference
into these findings without limitation.

Through the project review and approval process, a new project alternative was introduced. Th e new alternative,
Alternative 4
–

Sites Inventory Only, reduces the
Planning Area

to mirror the
sites inventory included within the
Housing Element Update.

In November 2024,

Alternative 4 e
liminated 524 sites
from the original project

for a total
of 235 sites within the Planning Area.

Alternative 4 was further revised in December 2024 to reflect the removal of 29 additional sites with a total number of 206 sites within with Planning Area.

technical memorandum has been
prepared which demonstrates the
Alternative
4 , which removes
a total of
553
sites
, does not constitute a significant
change and no recirculation is required.

1.2 Organization of the Findings of Fact

The content and format of this CEQA Findings of Fact is designed to meet the latest CEQA statutes and Guidelines.

The Findings of Fact is organized into the following sections:

Chapter 1, Introduction
outlines the
purpose and
organization of this document.

Chapter 2, Project Description

summarizes the proposed
Program
, including its location, and provides a list
of project objectives.

Chapter 3, CEQA Review and Public Outreach

describes the steps that the City has undertaken to comply with the CEQA statutes and Guidelines as they relate to public input, review, and participation during the preparation of the Draft

and Final
PEIR
s.

This chapter also
identifies the location and custodian of the record of proceedings .

Chapter 4, Impacts Determined Not to be Significant

provides a list of
those environmental issue areas where no
reasonably foreseeable impacts would occur and
provides a list of
those impacts determined to be below the
threshold of significance without the incorporation of mitigation measures.

Chapter 5, Impacts Determined to be Less than Significant with

Mitigation

provides findings for all potentially
significant environmental impacts for which implementation of identified feasible mitigation measures would avoid or substantially reduce the environmental impacts to less than significant levels.

Chapter 6, Impacts Determined to be Significant and Unavoidable

provides

findings for all significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts that would occur as a result of the p
roject and identifie
s

mitigation measures
that would serve to mitigate the impacts

to the extent feasible
.

Chapter
7 , Findings on Project Alternatives

provides a summary of the alternatives
considered for the project and
describes the associated findings.

Chapter
8 , Other CEQA Findings

addresses the City’s findings regarding growth inducing impacts, significant irreversible environmental changes, recirculation, and the MMRP.

Chapter 9, Statement of Overriding Considerations

states in writing the specific reasons to support the lead agency’s action based on the Final
PEIR

and other information in the record.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

3 DECEMBER
2024

Attachment A

consists of the MMRP.

12885

4 DECEMBER
2024

2 Project
Description

2.1 Project Location

The Program is proposed
on select parcels
across the City.

Given the
c
itywide nature, the location of identified
parcels is collectively defined as

the

“Planning Area
.
”
The Planning Area
consists of

759 parcels currently zoned for
non
-
residential uses

with

the following underlying zoning designations: C
-
G (Commercial Greenbelt), C
-
M
(Commercial, Manufacturing), G
-
C (General Commercial), O
-
P (Office Professional), M
-
G (Manufacturing, General),
M
-
P (Manufacturing Park) (100,000 square
-
foot minimum lot size),
and M
-
P (Manufacturing Park) (200,000 square
-
foot minimum lot size)
.

Under existing conditions, the Planning Area contains a variety of commercial (i.e., retail stores, restaurants, shopping centers, etc.), industrial (i.e., warehouse, industrial parks, auto repair, etc.), and office land uses as well as vacant land (e.g.,
parking lots).

For more information on the parcels identified, including each parcel’s Assessor Parcel Number, underlying zoning designation, and
parcel size,
see
Appendix B

of the Draft
PEIR
.

2. 2

Project
Summary

The City’s Housing Element Update identified the Housing Incentive Overlay Zone Program as one policy action to
help facilitate housing production in order to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)

goals
.

The Program would create an overlay zone that allows a property owner to develop multi -
family housing on a parcel
with a non
-
residential underlying zoning classification in exchange for providing a specified percentage of deed -
restricted affordable housing

units.

The Program would not directly result in the construction of the total buildout potential. Rather, the Program would facilitate the construction of housing units with the adoption of this overlay zone.

Implementation of the Program could theoretica
lly result in a buildout potential of
35,611 units.

In
accordance with State Housing Element Law, the Program is anticipated to facilitate housing production within the City for the SCAG’s 6
th

RHNA Cycle ending in
October
2029.

2. 3

Conditions of Approval

The
following measures are from the City’s General Plan Program EIR, which are implemented as conditions of approval (COAs) for the proposed Program:

COA
-
AES
-
1 For future development located in or immediately adjacent to residentially zoned properties, construction documents shall include language that requires all construction contractors to strictly control the staging of construction equipment and the cleanlin ess of construction equipment stored or
driven beyond the limits of the construction work area. Construction equipment shall be parked and staged within the project site, as distant from the residential use, as reasonably possible. Staging areas shall be screened from view from residential properties.

COA
-
AES
-
2 Construction documents shall include language requiring that construction vehicles be kept clean and free of mud and dust prior to leaving the development site. Streets surrounding the development site shall be swept daily and maintained free of dirt and d
ebris.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

5 DECEMBER
2024

COA
-
AES
-
3 Construction worker parking may be located off
-
site with prior approval by the City. On
-
street parking of
construction worker vehicles on
residential streets shall be prohibited.

COA
-
AQ
-
1 Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, the Community Development Director and the Building Official shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403, excessive fugitive dust emissi
ons shall be controlled by regular watering or other
dust prevention measures, as specified in the SCAQMD’s Rules and Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from cr
eating a nuisance off
-
site. Implementation of the following measures would reduce short -
term fugitive
dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors:

1. All active portions of the construction site shall be watered twice daily to prevent excessive amounts of dust;

2. Non
-
toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 20 days or more, assuming no rain), according to manufacturers’ specifications;

3. All
excavating and grading operations shall be suspended when wind gusts (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour;

4. On
-
site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour;

5. All on
-
site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered twice daily, or chemically stabilized;

6. Visible dust beyond the property line which emanates from the project shall be prevented to the maximum extent feasible;

7. All material transported off
-
site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust prior to departing the job site;

8. Track
-
out devices shall be used at all construction site access points;

9. All delivery truck tires shall be watered down and/or scraped down prior to departing the job site;

10. A construction relations officer shall be appointed to act as a community liaison concerning on -
site
construction activity including resolution of issues related to fugitive dust generation;

11. Streets shall be swept at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved public roads and use of SCAQMD Rule 1186 and 1186.1 certified street sweepers or roadway; and

12. Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

COA
-
AQ
-
3 The following measures shall be implemented to reduce VOC emissions resulting from application of architectural coatings:



Contractors shall use high
-
pressure
-
low
-
volume (HPLV) paint applicators with a minimum transfer efficiency of at least 50 percent;



Use required coatings and solvents with a VOC content lower than required under Rule 1113;



Construct/build with materials that do not require painting; and



Use pre
-
painted construction materials
.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

6 DECEMBER
2024

COA
-
AQ
-
6 Each individual implementing development project shall submit a traffic control plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The traffic control plan shall describe in detail safe detours and provide temporary traffic control during construction activit
ies for that project. To reduce traffic congestion, the plan shall include, as necessary, appropriate, and practicable, the following: temporary traffic controls such as a flag person during all phases of construction to maintain smooth traffic fl ow, dedicated turn
lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on -

and off
-
site, scheduling of construction
activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off -
peak hour, consolidating truck deliveries,
rerouting of construction t
rucks away from congested streets or sensitive receptors, and/or signal synchronization to improve traffic flow.

COA
-
AQ
-
9 Proposed developments within the City of Fullerton shall include, to the extent feasible, as a part of construction and building management contracts, the following measures:



All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high efficiency/low polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters.



All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather
-
stripping.



All residential, commercial, and industrial structures shall be required to incorporate light colored roofing materials.

land
uses cannot meet this setback, they shall be designed and conditioned to include mechanical ventilation systems with fresh air filtration. For operable windows or other sources of ambient air filtration, installation of a central heating, ventilation , and air conditioning (HVAC) system that includes
high efficiency filters for particulates (Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value [MERV] 13 or higher) or other similarly effective systems shall be required.

COA
-
BIO
-
1 A land use permit application for a project on a site located within or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat area, as determined by the City of Fullerton Community Development Department, shall provide a Biological Resource Assessment prepared by a qualified biologist for review and approval
by the Community Development Department. The Biological Resource Assessment shall evaluate the impact the proposed development may have on the habitat, and whether the development would be consiste
nt with the biological continuance of the habitat. For those environmentally sensitive habitat areas which are only seasonally occupied, or where the presence of the species can best be determined during a certain season (e.g., annual wildflower species), the field investigation(s) must be conducted
during the appropriate time to maximize detection of the subject species. The report shall identify possible impacts, their significance, measures to avoid possible impacts, mitigation measures required to reduc
e impacts to less than significant levels when impacts cannot be avoided, measures for the restoration of damaged habitats and long
-
term protection of the habitats, and a program for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of such measures.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

7 DECEMBER
2024

COA
-
CR
-
1 Future development projects for properties considered to be sensitive for cultural resources by the City of Fullerton shall conduct a Phase I Cultural Resources Study of the subject property in accordance with the City of Fullerton’s protocol by a qualifie
d professional, which shall be submitted to the City of Fullerton for review and approval. The Phase I Cultural Resources Study shall determine where the subject development project would potentially cause a substantial adverse change to any significant ar
chaeological, paleontological, or historic resources. The Phase I Cultural Resources Study shall be prepared to meet the standards established by the City and shall, at a minimum, including the results of the following:

1. Records searches at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), the National or State Registry of Historic Places, and any appropriate public, private, and tribal archives.

2. Sacred Lands File records search with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), followed by project scoping with the tribes recommended by the NAHC.

3. Field survey of the subject development site.

The proponent of the subject development project and the qualified professional(s) are also encouraged to contact the local Native American tribe (as identified by the NAHC and the City of Fullerton) to obtain input regarding the potential for Native Ameri can resources to occur on the
subject site.

Feasible measures shall be identified in order to mitigate the known and potential significant effects of the subject development project, if any
.

COA
-
CR
-
2 If the Phase I Cultural Resources Study required under Mitigation Measure CR -
1 determines that
monitoring during construction by a professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist is needed for the subject development project, the project proponent shall r etain a professional archaeologist and/or
paleontologist, subject to approval by the City of Fullerton, prior to the issuance of grading permits. The task of the professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist shall be to verify implementation of

the
mitigation measures identified in the City
-
approved Phase I Cultural Resources Study and to monitor the initial ground
-
altering activities, including but not limited to, debris removal, vegetation removal, tree removal, grading, trenching, or other si
te preparation activities. The professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert construction equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. All artifacts and/or fossils discovered at th e subject
development site shall be inventoried and analyzed by the professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist. If any artifacts of Native American origin are discovered, a Native American Tribal monitor shall be asked to help analyze the Native Amer
ican artifacts for identification as everyday life
and/or religious or sacred items, cultural affiliation, temporal placement, and function, as deemed possible. A report of the findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered artifacts and/or fossils ,
shall be prepared and shall include a discussion of the significance and disposition of the recovered artifacts and/or fossils. The report and inventory shall be submitted to the City of Fullerton, signifying completion of the program to mitigate impacts

to archaeological and/or paleontological resources.

activities within a 100
-
foot radius of the area of

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

8 DECEMBER
2024

discovery. If not already retained due to conditions present pursuant to CR -
2, the project proponent
shall retain a qualified professional (i.e., archaeologist, historian, architect, paleontologist, Native American Tribal monitor), subject to approval by t
he City of Fullerton, to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action (refer to Mitigation Measures CR -
1, CR
-
2 and CR
-
4). If
avoidance of the resource(s) is not feasible, salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064
.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately avoided or mitigated, work in the area may resume.

COA
-
CR
-
4 In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur unti l the County coroner has made the necessary
findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Nativ e
American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendant of the deceased Native American, who shall serve as consultant on how to proceed with the remains.

COA
-
HAZ
-
1 Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) shall be developed by a qualified environmental professional. The SMP shall outline procedures for both soil import and export. For soil import, the SMP shall outline the proper screening
and characterization procedures following the
DTSC’s October 2001 Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet. Import soils shall meet regulatory screening levels for residential use (SWRCB Environmental Screening Levels). For so il
export, based on the findings of any and all site investigations (as outlined below), the SMP shall outline the proper screening, characterization, transportation, and disposal procedures for contaminated soils to be removed from the site for future dev
elopment. For properties considered by the City to involve the potential for site contamination, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall be prepared in accordance with ASTM Standards and Standards and Practices for AAI, in order to investigate the po
tential existence of site contamination. Any site specific uses shall be analyzed according to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (i.e., auto service stations, agricultural lands, etc.). The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall identify Speci
fic Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs)
(i.e., asbestos containing materials, lead
-
based paints, polychlorinated biphenyls, etc.), which may require remedial activities prior to construction. The Phase I ESA and SMP shall be provided to the City of
Fullerton Community and Economic Department for review prior to any site grading.

The Project’s contractor shall ensure implementation of the SMP through the contract specifications for all proposed soil import and management of contaminated soils onsite, as applicable. The SMP shall include health and safety and training procedures, ai r monitoring
procedures, and permitting requirements. The SMP shall also include instructions for the identification of potentially
-
impacted soils, procedures for temporary cessation of construction activity and evaluation of the level of environmental co ncern if potentially
-
impacted soils or other
subsurface anomalies are encountered, procedures for characterizing and managing potentially -
impacted soils, and follow
-
up procedures such as confirmation sampling, disposal, and reporting, as necessary. Contami
nated soil shall be managed and disposed of in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Imported soils shall meet all requirements for residential land use. Upon completion of construction activities, proof of compliance with the S MP shall be provided
to the City of Fullerton Community and Economic Department.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

9 DECEMBER
2024

COA
-
HAZ
-
2 Prior to potential remedial excavation and grading activities, impacted areas shall be cleared of all maintenance equipment and materials (e.g., solvents, grease, waste -
oil), construction materials,
miscellaneous stockpiled debris (e.g., scrap metal, palle ts, storage bins, construction parts), above
ground storage tanks, surface trash, piping, excess vegetation and other deleterious materials. These materials shall be removed off
-
site and properly disposed of at an approved disposal facility. Once removed,
a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. In the event concentrations of materials are detected above regulatory cleanup levels during de molition or construction activities,
the project Applicant shall comply with the following measures in accordance with Federal, State, and local requirements:



Excavation and disposal at a permitted, off
-
site facility;



On
-
site remediation, if necessary; or



Other measures as deemed appropriate by the City of Fullerton Fire Department.

COA
-
HAZ
-
3 Prior to structural demolition/renovation activities, should these activities occur, a Certified Environmental Professional shall confirm the presence or absence of ACM’s and LBPs. Should ACMs or LBPs be present, demolition materials containing ACMs and/or

LBPs shall be removed and disposed of
at an appropriate permitted facility.



At least one unobstructed lane shall be maintained in both directions on surrounding roadways.



At any time only a single lane is available, the developer shall provide a temporary traffic signal, signal carriers (i.e., flagpersons), or other appropriate traffic controls to allow travel in both directions.



If construction activities require the complete closure of a roadway segment, the developer shall provide appropriate signage indicating detours/alternative routes.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

10 DECEMBER
2024

COA
-
HYD
-
1 Prior to issuance of any Grading or Building Permit, and as part of the future development’s compliance with the NPDES requirements, a Notice of Intent shall be prepared and submitted to the Santa Ana RWQCB providing notification and intent to comply with
the State of California General Construction
Permit. Also, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Engineering for water quality construction activities on -
site. A copy of the SWPPP shall b
e
available and implemented at the construction site at all times. The SWPPP shall outline the source control and/or treatment control BMPs to avoid or mitigate runoff pollutants at the construction site to the “maximum extent practicable.” All recommendat
ions in the Plan shall be implemented during area
preparation, grading, and construction. The project applicant shall comply with each of the and/or treatment control BMPs to avoid or mitigate runoff pollutants at the construction site to the “maximum exte
nt practicable.” All recommendations in the Plan shall be implemented during area preparation, grading, and construction. The project applicant shall comply with each of the recommendations detailed in the Study, and other such measure(s) as the City deems

necessary to mitigate potential
stormwater runoff impacts.

COA
-
HYD
-
3 Prior to site plan approval, the project owner/developer(s) shall be required to coordinate with the City of Fullerton Engineering Department to determine requirements necessary to mitigate impacts to drainage improvements in order to accommodate storage v olumes and flood protection for existing and
future runoff. Proposed projects shall implement mitigation measures, if required, to the satisfaction of the City of Fullerton Public Works Director. For any new storm drainage projects/studies that h ave the
potential to impact adjacent jurisdictions’ storm drainage systems, the developer shall submit said studies to the applicable jurisdiction for review and approval.

COA
-
N
-
1 Project applicants shall ensure through contract specifications that the following construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels:



Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards and be in good working condition.



Place noise
-
generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, where feasible.



Schedule high noise
-
producing activities between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on any day except Sunday or a City
-
recognized holiday to minimize disruption on sensitive uses.



Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are not limited to, temporary noise barriers or noise blankets around stationary construction noise sources.



Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

11 DECEMBER
2024



Construction
-
related equipment, including heavy
-
duty equipment, motor vehicles, and portable
equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes.



Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow for surrounding owners and residents to contact the job superintendent. If the City or the job superintend ent receives a complaint, the
superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action taken to the reporting party.



Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading or building permit (whichever is issued first).

COA
-
N
-
2 Project applicants shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks used during construction would be routed away from residential streets to the extent feasible. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which

shall be reviewed by the City prior to
issuance of a grading permit.

COA
-
N
-
3 Project applicants shall ensure by contract specifications that construction staging areas along with the operation of earthmoving equipment within the City would be located as far away from vibration and noise sensitive sites as possible. Should construct
ion activities take place within 25 feet of an occupied structure, a project specific vibration impact analysis shall be conducted. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to is suance of a grading
permit.

COA
-
N
-
4 The City shall require future developments to implement the following measures to reduce the potential for human annoyance and architectural/structural damage resulting from elevated groundborne noise and vibration levels:



Pile driving within a 50
-
foot radius of historic structures shall utilize alternative installation methods where possible (e.g., pile cushioning, jetting, predrilling, cast -
in
-
place systems, resonance
-
free
vibratory pile drivers).



The preexisting condition of all designated historic buildings within a 50 -
foot radius of proposed
construction activities shall be evaluated during a preconstruction survey. The preconstruction survey shall determine conditions that exist before construct ion begins for use in evaluating damage
caused by construction activities. Fixtures and finishes within a 50 -
foot radius of construction
activities susceptible to damage shall be documented (photographically and in writing) prior to construction. All damag
e shall be repaired back to its preexisting condition.



FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

12 DECEMBER
2024

of equipment with proper acoustical shielding, and
incorporating the use of parapets into the building design.

COA
-
PUB
-
1 Prior to
the issuance of building permits, individual development project applicants shall submit evidence to the City of Fullerton that legally required school impact mitigation fees have been paid per the mitigation established by the applicable school district.

COA
-
TR
-
1 Prior to approval of any General Plan Amendment and/or Zone Change associated with the focused planning efforts for The Fullerton Plan Focus Areas, the City and/or project proponent shall prepare a detailed multi
-
modal analysis in order to determine specif
ic impacts associated with the proposed
General Plan Amendment and/or Zone Change, and where applicable, identify mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant levels based on City adopted multi -
modal thresholds. The multi
-
modal a
nalysis shall specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Fullerton and surrounding jurisdictions, in accordance with the si
gnificant impact criteria established by the
jurisdiction that controls the affected area.

For any sewer projects/studies that have the potential to impact adjacent jurisdictions’ sewer systems,

the developer shall submit said studies to the applicable jurisdiction for review and approval.

2. 4

Project
Objectives

CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b) requires an
EIR

to include a statement of objectives sought by the
project
.

According to the City’s
Housing Element Update
, the City does not contain sufficient sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate the City’s RHNA allocation
. As such, the proposed Program was identified as a policy action to achieve housing goals for the
6 th

RHNA Cycle
.

The

following Project Objectives have been established to assist the City in developing a reasonable range of alternatives evaluated in the

Draft PEIR.

1. Incorporate land use and zoning changes to increase residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals, including affordable housing.

2. Provide for a diversity of neighborhoods, residential densities, and housing types within opportunity areas and near local amenities to meet the needs of the community.

3. Identify sites that are most likely to be redeveloped given their current underutilization of land.

4. Discourage development within known local hazard zones.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

13 DECEMBER
2024

5. Promote positive economic, educational, and health outcomes for current and future residents of Fullerton by including areas identified within the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee / Housing and Community Development Opportunity Areas.

2. 5

Discretionary
Actions

The City as the lead agency is seeking the following approvals for the Program.



Certification of the Program Environmental Impact Report



Adoption of General Plan Amendment:

Amend the General Plan Land Use Element to ensure consistency with the proposed HIOZ.



Adoption of the Housing Incentive Overlay Zone Program:

Establish Chapter 15.23, Housing Incentive
Overlay Zone, within the City’s Municipal Code, which would include provisions for review and inclusion, approval processes, affordable housing requirements, permitted uses, and development standards.



Adoption of Zoning Code Amendments:

Amend the Citywide Development Standards for
multi
-
family zoning
classifications

and mixed
-
use zoning classifications.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

14 DECEMBER
2024

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

12885

15 DECEMBER
2024

3 CEQA Review and Public Outreach

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) dated
September 8
,
2023
, to the State Clearinghouse, agencies, organizations, and interested parties. The NOP is intended to encourage interagency communication regarding the proposed project so that agencies, organizations, and individuals are afforded an opportunity to respond

with specific comments and/or questions regarding the scope and content of the
PEIR
. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082(a), a cop y of the NOP was posted at
the
Orange

County Clerk’s office
. The NOP was also made available on the
City’s website
during the public scoping
period.

The public scoping period ended on
September 28
, 2023
. The

City
received
6 letters in response to the
NOP.

Copies of these comment letters
are

included in
Appendix A
-
3 of the
Draft
PEIR
.

The
Draft
PEIR

was made available for public review and comment pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15087.

The public review period for the
Draft

PEIR

started
on
May 31, 2024
, and ended on
July 15, 2024
.

The public review
period provided interested public agencies, groups, and individuals the opportunity to comment on the contents of the
Draft

PEIR
.

At the beginning of the public review period, the
Draft
PEIR
,

the Notice of Completion (NOC)
, and the Notice of
Availability (NOA)

were submitted to the State Clearinghouse
, and the NOA was filed at the
Orange

County Clerk
.

The NOA was
also
published in

the
Fullerton Observer
. The NOA

described where the

Draft
PEIR

was available and
how to submit comments on the
Draft
PEIR
. The NOA and
Draft

PEIR

were also made available for public review at
Community and Economic Development Department counter (2 nd

Floor, City Hall, 303 W. Commonwealth Avenue)
,
the Fullerton Public Library (353 W. Commonwealth Avenue) , and on the City’s website. The

public review period
provided interested public agencies, groups, and individuals the opportunity to comment on the contents of the Draft
PEIR
.

During the
Draft

PEIR

public review period, the City received
5 comment letters from agencies

and 5
comment
letters
from individual community members.

The Final
PEIR

contains written responses to these letters. Distribution of the Final
PEIR

entailed providing copies of the Final
PEIR

to public agencies that
commented on the
Draft

PEIR
.

The Final
PEIR

was
also
made available to the public
on the
City’s website
. The Final
PEIR

was prepared and
distributed in accordance with CEQA Guidelines
S
ection 15088(b),
which requires that written responses be
provided to commenting agencies at least 10

days prior to certifying an
PEIR
.

3.1 Record of Proceedings

For the purposes of CEQA, and the Findings herein set forth, the record of proceedings for the project consists of those items listed in CEQA Section 21167.6(e). The record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the proposed project consists of the foll
owing documents, at a minimum, which are incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these findings:



The NOP, NOA, and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the

proposed
Program
;



The
Draft

PEIR

for the proposed
Program

and

all technical appendices and documents relied upon or
incorporated by reference;

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

16 DECEMBER
2024



All written comments submitted by agencies, organizations, or members of the public during the public review period on the
Draft

PEIR

and the City’s responses to those comments;



The Final
PEIR

for the proposed
Program
;



The Technical Memorandum prepared for Modified Alternative 2;



The MMRP for the proposed
Program
;



All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the proposed Program
prepared by the City or consultants to the City with respect to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s action on the proposed Program
;



All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the proposed
Program
, up through the close of the decision hearing for the
Program
;



Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the proposed
Program
;



Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings;



All resolutions adopted by the City
regarding the proposed
Program
, and all staff reports, analyses, and
summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions;



The City’s General Plan and all updates and related environmental analyses;



Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations;



Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above; and any other materials required for the record of proceedings by CEQA Section 21167.6(e )
.

3 .
2 Custodian

and Location of
Recor
ds

The
documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City’s project approval is based are located at the address below:

City of
Fullerton

Community

and Economic

Development Department

303 West Commonwealth Avenue

Fullerton
, California
92832

The City’s
Community
and Economic
Development

Department is the custodian of such documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings. The record of proceedings is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e).

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

17 DECEMBER
2024

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

12885

18 DECEMBER
2024

4 Impacts Determined Not to
be
Significant

This chapter describes impacts that were evaluated in the PEIR

and determined to result in “no impact” or a “less
than significant impact” due to the design, location, and scope of the proposed Program

and/or through adherence
with existing laws, codes, and statutes. Based on the environmental analysis presented in the Draft

PEIR

and the
comments received by the public on the
Draft

PEIR
, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City indicating that the project would have a potentially s ignificant impact with respect to the environmental
categories listed below. Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided throughout Chapter
4 , Environmental Analysis, of the
Draft

PEIR

and in Chapters 2 and 3 of the Final
PEIR
.

4 .1

Aesthetics



Implementat
ion of the
Program would have a less than significant impact on a scenic vistas (Initial Study
p
p
.

13 to
14 ).



Implementation of the Program would have no impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway (Initial Study p
p
.

14 to
15 ).



Implementat
ion of the
Program would have a less than significant impact regarding applicable zoning and regulations governing scenic quality
(Initial Study p
p
.

15 to
16 ).



Implementat
ion of the
Program would have a less than significant impact regarding new source
s

of
substantial light or glare
(Initial Study p.

17 ).

4 .
2 Agriculture and Forestry
Resources



Implementat
ion of the
Program

would have no impact on Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Initial Study p.

18 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact regarding
consistency with
existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract (Initial Study p.

18 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact on forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production
(Initial Study p.

19 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact regarding the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non
-
forest use
(I
nitial Study p.

19 ).



Implementation

of the
Program
would have no impact involving other changes in the existing environment which could result in conversion of Farmland or forest land to non -
agricultural or non
-
forest use
(Initial
Study p.

19 ).

4 .
3 Air
Quality



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact regarding emissions (such as
those
that mig
ht lead to odors
)

adversely affecting a
substantial
number of people (
Initial Study

pp.
23 to
24 ).

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

19 DECEMBER
2024

4 .
4 Biological Resources



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact on candidate, sensitive, or special
-
status species (Initial Study p
p
.

25 to 26
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact on riparian habitats or other
sensitive natural communities
(Initial Study p
p
.

26 to 27
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact on
state or
federally protected
wetlands
(Initial Study p.

27 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact on the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or the use of native wildlife nursery sites
(Initial Study p.

28 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact regarding conflicts with local
policies or ordinances protecting biological resources
(Initial Study p
p
.

28 to 29
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact regarding conflicts with an adopted H
abitat
C
onservation
P
lan
,

N
atural
C
ommunity
C
onservation
P
lan
, or other approved habitat conservation plan
s

(Initial Study p.

28 ).

4 .
5 Cultural Resources



Implementation of the
Program
would have less than significant impacts
on
historical resources (
Initial
Study, pp. 30 to 31
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have less than significant impacts
on

archaeological resources

(
Initial Study, pp. 31 to 32
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have less than significant impacts
on

human remains

(
Initial Study,
pp. 32 to 33
).

4 .
6 Energy



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operation (
Initial Study, pp. 34 to 37
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

state or local
plans for
renewable energy plans or energy efficiency
(
Initial Study, p. 37
).

4 .
7 Geology and Soils



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to rupture of a known
earthquake fault

(Initial Study p.

39 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to strong seismic ground
shaking

(Initial Study p
p. 39 to 40
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact

related to seismic
-
related ground
failure, including liquefaction
(
Initial Study p.

40 ).

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

20 DECEMBER
2024



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact

related to
landslides
(
Initial Study
p.

40 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to
substantial soil erosion
or the loss of
topsoil (
Initial Study p
p. 40 to 41
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to unstable soil
(
Initial
Study p.

41 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to

expansive soil that
could create a substantial risk to li
fe
(
Initial Study p
p
.

41 to 42
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
no

impact
related to

soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems (
Initial Study p.

42 ).

4 .
8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions



Implementation of the project would have
a less than significant impact

related to

greenhouse gas
emissions
(
Draft
PEIR

pp
.

4.2 -
25 to

4.2 -
33 ).



Implementation of the project would have a less than significant impact related to

an applicable plan, policy,
or regulation for reducing greenhouse gas emissions
(Draft
PEIR

pp.

4.2 -
25 to

4.2 -
33 ).

4 .
9 Hazards and
Hazardous

Materials



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to

hazard
s

to the public or
environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials ( Initial Study, pp. 45 to 47
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact related to

safety hazards or
excessive noise for
the public

in the project area as a result of being located within two miles of an airport (Draft EIR p.

4.3 -
41 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to an

adopted emergency
response or evacuation plans
(
Initial Study, pp. 48 to 49
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact related to

exposing people or
structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (
Initial Study, p. 50
).

4 .
10 Hydrology and Water
Quality



Implementa
tion of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to
water quality standards
,

waste discharge requirements
,

and

surface
and

groundwater quality

(
Initial Study, pp.
51 to 53
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to

groundwater supplies
or groundwater recharge
(Draft
P
EIR pp.

4.4 -
11 to 4.4
-
12 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to

erosion or
siltation on
or off site
(
Draft
P
EIR pp.

4.4 -
12 to 4.4
-
14 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
related to

the rate or amount of
surface runoff
(
Draft
P
EIR
pp.

4.4 -
14 ).

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

21 DECEMBER
2024



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to the creation of

runoff
water
in excess of stormwater drainage system capacity or creation of substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff
(
Draft
P
EIR
pp.

4.4 -
14 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact on impeding or redirecting flood flows (
Draft
P
EIR
pp.

4.4 -
14 to 4.4
-
15 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact
related to the release of pollutants due to project
inundation in

flood hazard,
tsunami, or seiche zones
(
Draft
P
EIR
p.

4.4 -
14 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
no

impact

on
water quality control plan
s

or sustainable
groundwater management plan
s

(
Draft
P
EIR
pp.

4.4 -
15 to 4.4
-
16 ).

4 .
11 Land Use and Planning



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

related to

physically dividing an
established community
(
Initial Study

p
.

55 ).

4 .
12 Mineral
Resources



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact on known mineral resources of value to the region or the residents of the state (
Draft PEIR p. 4.6
-
3 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have no impact on locally important mineral resource recovery sites (
Draft PEIR p. 4.6
-
3 ).

4 .
13 Noise



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise levels
(
Draft PEIR
p
p
.

4.7 -
10 to 4.7
-
12 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
relative to

groundborne vibration
and groundborne

noise levels
(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4.7 -
13 to 4.7
-
14 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

exposing
people

to
excessive noise levels as a result of being within the vicinity of a private airstrip , airport,

or airport land use
plan
(
Initial Study
p
p
.

59 to 60
).

4 .
14 Population

and Housing



Implementation of the
Program

would
have
a less than significant

impact
related to
displacement of people
or housing
(
Initial Study

p
p
.

61 to 62
).

4 .
15 Public

Services



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
on fire protection

services

(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4 .9
-
17 to 4.9
-
18 ).

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

22 DECEMBER
2024



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact

on police protection

services
(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4.9 -
18 to 4.9
-
19 ).



Implementation of the project would have
a less than significant

impact

on schools

(
Draft
PEIR

4.9 -
19 to 4.9
-
20 )
.



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact

on parks

(
Draft PEIR
p.

4.9 -
20 to

4.9 -
21 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact

on other public facilities

(
Draft
PEIR

4.2 -
21 ).

4 .
1 6

Recreation



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
on

the use of existing parks or
other recreational facilities (
Draft PEIR
p
p
.

4.10 -
10 to 4.10
-
11 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact regarding construction or expansion of recreational facilities (
Initial Study
p
.
64 ).

4 .
1 7

Transportation



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

conflicts with a
program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system (
Draft
PEIR

p
p.
4 .11
-
15 to 4.11
-
16 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

inconsistencies with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)
(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4.11 -
16 to 4.11
-
17 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

hazards due to
geometric design features or incompatible uses
(
Initial Study

p.
66 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
on emergency access
(
Initial
Study

67 ).

4 .
18 Utilities and Service
Systems



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities
(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4.13 -
9 to 4.13
-
11 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than
significant

impact
on water supplies available to
serve the project during normal, dry, and multiple dry years (
Draft
PEIR

p
.

4.13 -
12 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
on wastewater treatment capacity
(
Draft PEIR p
.

4.13 -
12 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to generation of

solid
waste in excess of state or local standards
,
in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or

in excess of

solid waste reduction goals
(
Draft
PEIR

4.13 -
13 ).

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

23 DECEMBER
2024



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant

impact
related to

compliance with
federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste (
Initial
Study

71 ).

4 .
20 Wildfire



Implementation of the
Program

would have a less than significant impact
on
adopted emergency response
plan
s

emergency evacuation plans (
Initial Study
p
p.
72 to 73
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact
regarding
increased
exposure of
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire

(
Initial Study
p
p
.
73 to 74
).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact
regarding
installation

or
maintenance
of
infrastructure

that may exacerbate fire

risk
or result in ongoing impacts to the environment
(
Initial Study p.
74 ).



Implementation of the
Program

would have
a less than significant impact
regarding exposure of people or
structures to
flooding or landslide
risk
s

from

wild
fire
s

(
Initial Study p.
74 ).

4 .
2 1

Cumulative

Impacts

The proposed
Program

would result in less than significant cumulative impacts or no cumulative impacts for the following environmental issue areas:

G
reenhouse

G
as Emissions (
Draft
PEIR

p
p
.

4.2 -
33 to 4.2
-
34 )
, Hydro
logy and
Water Quality

(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.
4 .4
-
1 6

to 4
.4
-
18 )
,
Mineral Resources (
Draft PEIR
p.

4.6 -
3 ),
Public Services (Draft
PEIR

pp.

4.9 -
22 ),
Recreation (
Draft PEIR p. 4.10
-
11 ),
Transportation

(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4.11 -
17 to 4.11
-
18 )
,
Utilities and
Service Systems

(
Draft
PEIR

p
p.

4.13 -
14 ).

12885

24 DECEMBER
2024

5 Impacts Determined to be Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation

This chapter describes impacts of the
Program

that, without mitigation, would result in significant adverse impacts.

However, upon implementation of the mitigation measures provided in the Draft

PEIR
, these impacts would be
reduced to less
-
than
-
significant levels. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), a specific finding is made for each of these impacts and mitigation measures in the discussions below.

5 .
1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Potential Effects
.

Potentially significant effects were identified for the Program

in the following threshold related to
hazards and hazardous materials
:



The
Program

could
create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment

(Draft
PEIR

pp.

4.3 -
34 to 4.3
-
39 ).



The
Program

could
emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one
-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school

(Draft
PEIR

4.3 -
39 ).



The
Program

would

be located on a site that is listed on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment

(Draft
PEIR

pp.

4.3 -
40 to 4.3
-
41 ).

Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided in Section

4.3 ,
Hazards and
Hazardous Materials,

of the
Draft

PEIR
.

Mitigation Measure
s
.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(1), feasible measures that can minimize significant adverse impacts related to
hazards and hazardous materials

were developed for the
Program
.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the following mitigation measures have been included in a MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings:

MM
-
HAZ
-
1:

Hazardous Materials Survey.

Demolition plans and contract specifications submitted to the City for approval shall incorporate survey and abatement procedures for the identification and removal of materials containing asbestos, lead, polychlorinated biphenyls, hazardous material, haza rdous
wastes, and universal waste items, including decommissioning and removal of aboveground and underground storage tanks and drums. All survey and abatement work shall be done in accordance with federal, state, and
local regulations, including those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (which regulates disposal), Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development, California Occupational Safety and Health Administra
tion (which regulates employee exposure), and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Surveys will be conducted by an environmental professional certified by California Department of Public Health [lead
-
based paint] and/or Contractors State Licens
e Board [asbestos],
and abatement shall be completed by a California
-
Certified or Licensed Contractor prior to
demolition or renovation activities. Transportation of hazardous wastes must also be completed by

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

25 DECEMBER
2024

a licensed transportation company in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations, and disposal will be completed at a permitted facility.

MM
-
HAZ
-
2 Survey for Oil and Gas Features
.

Prior to approval of residential redevelopment for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g. issuance of permits), a survey will be completed to confirm the presence or absence of oil and gas wells, pipelines, or oil/gas field administrative boundaries

on
the proposed development site. The survey will also evaluate the proposed development site’s proximity to methane zones as outlined in the OCFA Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation Guideline C
-

03. The survey
will include review of publicly available documents and databases, aboveground visual inspections, and subsurface surveys (such as ground -
penetrating radar or
other means of subsurface locates). The survey(s) will be completed by a professional company wit
h experience in these types of surveys. Proof of survey completion will be submitted to City of Fullerton as part of the application package.

MM
-
HAZ
-
3 Investigation of RECs, CRECs, and VECs
.

Following completion of a Phase I ESA and prior to
approval of residential redevelopment for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g. issuance of permits), any RECs, CRECs, or VECs identified in the Phase I ESA will be investigated by completion of a
Phase II ESA under the requirements of ASTM E1903
-
19 (or the current applicable standard).

The Phase II ESA will evaluate the presence of contaminants of concern related to RECs, CRECs, and/or VECs found in the Phase I ESA and will include a screening leve l risk evaluation to determine
human health risks are present (i.e. if concentrations exceed current regulatory screening levels applicable at the time of the project (DTSC Screening Levels or RWQCB ESLs)). The investigation shall include consideration of
aerially deposited lead (ADL) adjoining state highways and overpasses. The findings of the Phase II ESA and recommendations will be provided to the City for review prior to approval of residential development.

MM
-
HAZ
-
4 Actions for Contaminated Sites
.

If human health risks are identified (e.g. concentrations of contaminants of concern are above applicable regulatory screening levels) during a Phase I ESA or Phase II ESA that would indicate a risk to residential occupancy or would expose construction wor
kers to contaminants of concern above appliable screening levels, the impacts must be remediated or protections must be in place such that future risk to construction workers, adjacent sensitive receptors, future oc
cupants, or future land uses on site are below current risk -
based
criteria (e.g. applicable regulatory screening levels). Written proof of remediation and/or protective measures would be submitted to the City prior to approval for residential redevelopment

(e.g.
issuance of permits).

If the subject site is determined to be located on or impacted by an open cleanup

site
that is
undergoing active remediation and environmental monitoring, the City

shall require written
confirmation from the overseeing environmental agency to ensure the existing environmental contamination will not significantly impact the health and safety of construction workers, adjacent sensitive receptors, future occupants, or f
uture land uses on the site, and that protections or
remediation completed are adequate to e
nsure future activities and land uses will not be subject to a health risk at the site.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

26 DECEMBER
2024

MM
-
HAZ
-
5 Conditions of Closure.

Prior

to approval of residential redevelopment for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g. issuance of permits), if the proposed development site is located on a site that has received regulatory environmental cleanup, review, or assessment and has receiv ed regulatory
closure by the overseeing environmental agency (federal, state, or local), the closure documents shall be reviewed and conditions or limitations, if any, shall be met. If conditions indicate a risk or limi
tations to future residential development, requirements from the regulatory agency will be implemented and proof of implementation will be provided to the City prior to approval for redevelopment (e.g. issuance of permits).

Finding
.

The

City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce the potentially significant
Program
-
related
impacts

regarding to

hazards and hazardous materials

to less
-
than
-
significant levels.

Accordingly, the City finds that, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Program

that mitigate
or avoid the potentially significant impacts

related to hazards and hazardous materials

identified in the
Draft

PEIR
.

5 .
2 Land Use and Planning

Potential Effects
.

Potentially significant
noise
effects were identified for the project in the following threshold:



Implementation of the Program could cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation, adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect

(
Draft PEIR

pp.

4.5 -
12 to

4.5 -
50 ).

Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided in Section

4.5 ,
Land Use and
Planning
, of the
Draft PEIR
.

Mitigation Measures
.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(1), feasible measures that can minimize the significant adverse impacts related to noise were developed for the project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the following mitigation measure s

have

been included in a MMRP that is to be adopted
concurrently with these findings:

MM
-
AQ
-
1 through MM
-
AQ
-

3. See Section

6.1 ,

Air Quality,

of this document.

MM
-
HAZ
-
1 through MM
-
HAZ
-

5. See Section 5.1, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this document
.

Finding.

The

City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce the potentially
significant impacts

related to land use and planning

to less
-
than
-
significant levels. Accordingly, the City finds that,
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Program

that mitigate or avoid the potentially significant
impacts
related to land use and planning

identified in the
Draft PEIR
.

5 .
3 Cumulative Impacts

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the following findings identify potentially significant cumulative impacts and the project’s incremental contribution to those impacts. For the following environmental resource

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

27 DECEMBER
2024

areas, the project’s incremental effect would not be cumulatively considerable, after implementation of applicable mitigation measures.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Potential Effects
.

The
Program
would result in potentially significant but mitigable impacts related to upset and
accident conditions
. In addition, implementation of the Program may be

located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 .

G
enerally
, these impacts are

site
-
specific
; however,
several sites within the Planning Area may have subsurface hazardous materials conditions .

Concurrent construction with other projects is speculative, and other development projects in the area would be
subject to CEQA
(or have already been reviewed under CEQA)
and would require analysis and, where necessary,

would implement all feasible

mitigation

to reduce
impacts
.

Nevertheless, in the event of concurrent construction
with nearby projects, the
Program’s
impact could be cumulatively significant.

Substantial evidence supporting this
environmental impact conclusion is provided in
Section

4.3 ,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials,

of the
Draft PEIR

(
Draft PEIR
p.

4.3 -
45 ).

Mitigation Measure
.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(1), feasible measures that can minimize significant adverse impacts related to
hazards and hazardous materials

were developed for the
Program
.

Conditions
of Approval
COA
-
HAZ
-
1 through COA
-
HAZ
-
4 are listed in Section 2.3 of this document.

Mitigation Measures
MM
-
HAZ
-
1 through MM
-
HAZ
-
5 are listed in Section 5.1 of this document
.

These

feasible measure
s

would reduce the
Program’s

potential effect
s

regarding to

hazards and hazardous materials

to below a level o
f significance
.

Finding.

The

City finds that mitigation measure
s

MM
-
HAZ
-
1 through MM
-
HAZ
-
5 are

feasible,
are
adopted, and will
reduce the potentially significant
cumulative
impact
s related to hazards and hazardous materials

to less
-
than
-
significant levels. Accordingly, the City finds that, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Program

that mitigate or avoid the potentially significant
cumulative impact
s

of the proposed
Program

in the
category of
hazards and hazardous materials

that is

identified in the
Final
PEIR
.

12885

28 DECEMBER
2024

6 Impacts Determined to be Significant
and Unavoidable

The

following significant environmental impacts of the
p
roject are unavoidable and cannot be feasibly or effectively mitigated to a less than significant level. In accordance with Section 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is set forth below in Section 9 to substantiate the C
i
ty’s decision to accept
these unavoidable substantial, adverse environmental effects because of the benefits afforded by the p
roject.

6.1 Air Quality

Potential Effects
.

The
Program
would have significant and unavoidable
air quality
impact
s

as follows:



Implementation of the Program
would

conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (Draft PEIR pp. 4.1
-
22 to 4.1
-
24).



Implementation of the Program
would

result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non
-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard

(Draft PEIR pp.

4.1 -
24 to 4.1
-
32 ).



Implementation of the Program
would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations

(Draft PEIR pp. 4.1
-
32 to 4.1
-
34 ).

Substantial evidence supporting this environmental impact conclusion is provided in Section

4.1 ,

Air Quality,

of the Draft
PEIR.

Mitigation Measures.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(1), feasible measures that can minimize the significant adverse

air quality

impacts were developed for the
Program
. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091, the following mitigation measures have been included in an MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings:

MM
-
AQ
-
1 Construction Emissions.

If during subsequent project
-
level environmental review, construction
-
related
criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed SCAQMD’s construction mass daily thresholds, the City shall require applicants for new projects that exceed

those thresholds to incorporate
appropriate measures to reduce or minimize air pollutant emissions during construction activities. New projects are required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including but not limited to Rule 403
(Fugitive Dust), Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings), and Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities). Additional measures for projects that exceed SCAQMD’s construction mass daily thresholds may include, but are not limited to, the

following:



Off
-
Road construction equipment with engines that are 50 horsepower or greater shall be rated by the USEPA as having Tier 4 emission limits or better (whichever is the cleanest technology available at time of project development). If it can be demonstrated

to the City that such equipment is not
commercially available or feasible, alternate emissions control devices and/or techniques used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

29 DECEMBER
2024

Level 4 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the California Air Resources Board’s regulations.



Use electric or alternative
-
fueled (i.e., non
-
diesel) construction equipment, if available and feasible, including but not limited to, concrete/industrial saws, pumps, aerial lifts, material hoist, air compressors, forklifts, excavator, wheel loader, and s
oil compactors.



Maintain records of all trucks associated with project construction activities to document that each truck used meets the required emission standards. The Applicant shall provide records for inspection within five business days of request by CARB, SCAQMD,
or the City.



Provide electric vehicle (EV) charging stations or appropriately sized electrical infrastructure and electrical panels. Electrical hookups should be provided for trucks to plug in any onboard auxiliary equipment.



Provide temporary traffic controls such as a flag person, during all phases of significant construction activity to maintain smooth traffic flow, where necessary.



Provide dedicated turn lanes for the movement of construction trucks and equipment on -

and off
-
site,
where applicable.



Ensure vehicle traffic inside the project site is as far away as feasible from sensitive receptors.



Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less.



Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph.



Suspend use of all construction activities that generate air pollutant emissions during first stage smog alerts.



Configure construction parking to minimize traffic interference.



Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials.



Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site for each trip.



Apply non
-
toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).



Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible to minimize dust.



Pave roads and road shoulders, where applicable.



Sweep streets at the end of the day with SCAQMD Rule 1186 and 1186.1 compliant sweepers if visible soil is carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend water sweepers that utilize reclaimed water).



Utilize only super
-
compliant volatile organic compound (VOC) paints for architectural coatings (0 grams per liter to less than 10 grams per liter VOC) during construction activities. If paints and coatings with VOC content of 0 grams/liter to less than 10
grams/liter cannot be utilized, the application of
architectural coatings shall be prohibited during the peak smog season: July, August, and September

Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide the City with the construction contractor’s inclusion of all required measures on applicable construction plans, including grading and/or building plans.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

30 DECEMBER
2024

MM
-
AQ
-
2 Operational Emissions.

If, during subsequent project
-
level environmental review, operation
-
related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed SCAQMD’s operation mass daily thresholds, the City shall require applicants for new projects that exceed thos e
thresholds to incorporate appropriate measures to reduce or minimize air pollutant emissions during operational activities. New projects facilitated by the Fullerton Housing Incentive Overlay Zone are required to comply wit
h all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including but not limited to Rule 445 (Wood Burning Devices), Rule 1401 (New Source of Toxic Air Contaminants), and Rule 1110.2 (Emissions from Gaseous
-

and Liquid
-
Fueled Engines)
.

Additional measures for
projects that exceed SCAQMD’s operation mass daily thresholds may include, but are not limited to, the following:



All the Program’s buildings shall be powered fully by electricity, with no natural gas infrastructure or appliances, including no fireplaces. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Program Applicant or its designee shall provide evidence to the Cit
y that the building design plans include no natural gas infrastructure.



Install Energy Star rated heating, cooling, lighting, and appliances.



Require the use of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment with a Seasonal Energy
Efficiency Ratio (SEER) of 12 or higher.



Install of water heaters with an energy factor of 0.92 or higher.



Install solar water heaters or tank
-
less water heaters.



Use passive solar cooling/heating.



Designate 10
% of parking spaces to be for electric and alternative fuel vehicles .



Install Level 2
electric vehicle

charging stations in 6% of all parking spaces.



Super
-
Compliant volatile organic compound (VOC)
-
content architectural coatings (0 grams per liter to
less than 10 grams per liter VOC) shall be used during operational application of paints and other architectural coatings to reduce ozone precursors for fu ture development projects. If paints and
coatings with VOC content of 0 grams/liter to less than 10 grams/liter cannot be utilized, the developer shall avoid application of architectural coatings during the peak smog season: July, August, and September.



The City shall develop and implement a Low
-
VOC/Green Cleaning Product and Paint
education program, including materials educating how to identify low -
VOC cleaners and
products, that can be provided to applicants, developers, tenants, and residents of develo
pment projects associated with the Program.



At the time of discretionary approval of new
sources of TAC emissions in close proximity to existing sensit
ive land uses
, the
City

shall require de
velopment projects to implement
applicable best
management practices, as necessary and feasible, th
at will reduce exposure to TACs.

Specific
reduction measures will be evaluated and determin
ed depending on
proposed land

use TAC sources
and feasibility
.

Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide the City with appropriate documentation verifying compliance with the required measures.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

31 DECEMBER
2024

MM
-
AQ
-
3 Revised Forecast.

Prior to SCAG’s next update to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, the City shall prepare a revised population, employment and housing forecast for SCAG that reflects anticipated growth generated from the proposed
Program
. The updated forecast provided to SCAG
shall be used to inform the SCAQMD’s update to the Regional Air Quality Strategy and State Implementation Plan. The
City

shall prepare and submit a letter notifying the SCAQMD of this revised forecast for use in the future update to the RAQS and SIP as required.

Finding
. The City finds that the above
-
listed mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce the potentially significant
air quality

impacts of the proposed
Program
to the extent feasible. However, impacts would
remain significant and unavoidable even after implementation of these mitigation measures, and no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce
impacts
, as explained in
Section 4.1, Air Quality,
of the Draft PEIR
and in the Final PEIR.

6. 2

Population and Housing

Potential Effects
.

The
Program
would have a significant and unavoidable impact related to population and housing

as
follows:



Implementation of the Program would induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)

(Draft PEIR pp.

4.8 -
12 to 4.8
-
17 ).

Substantial evidence supporting this environmental impact conclusion is provided in Section

4.8, Population and
Housing
, of the Draft PEIR.

Mitigation Measures.

There are no feasible alternatives or mitigation measures considerably different from others previously analyzed that would clearly lessen the
significant environmental impacts of the Program.

Finding
.

The City has an obligation to meet RHNA obligations in accordance with State Housing Element Law. Given that the Program is identified as a policy action to facilitate sufficient sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate

the state
-
mandated RHNA, no feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce the substantial population growth. As such, impacts related to population and housing would remain significant and unavoidable.

6. 3

Tribal Cultural Resources

Potential Effects
.

The
Program

would have significant and unavoidable impact
s

to
tribal cultural resources

as follows:



Implementation of the Program would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native

American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)

(Draft PEIR pp.

4. 1
2 -
16 to 4.
1 2
-
17 ).



FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

32 DECEMBER
2024

landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical

Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)

(Draft PEIR pp. 4.
1 2
-
16 to 4.
1 2
-
17).

Substantial evidence supporting this environmental impact conclusion is provided in Section

4.12, Tribal Cultural
Resources
, of the Draft PEIR.

Mitigation Measures.

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(1), feasible measures that can minimize the significant adverse impacts related to
tribal cultural resources
were developed for the
Program
.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the following mitigation measures have been included in an MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings:

MM
-
TCR
-
1 Tribal Cultural Resources
.

During subsequent project
-
level environmental review, the City shall
obtain a State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Land Files Search, as appropriate, and comply with all applicable requirements of AB 52. Pursuant to AB 52, the City shall provide formal notification of the project to designated contact of each traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American Tribe that has requested notice. The City shall begin the consult
ation process within 30 days after receiving a Tribe’s request for consultation.

The City shall consider all relevant information available for the property to identify potential tribal cultural resources in the project area, evaluate the project’s potenti al impacts to tribal cultural
resources, and mitigate those potential impacts.

If project impacts to tribal cultural resources are determined to be potentially significant, the City shall require the project to incorporate appropriate measures to avoid or minimize impacts to tribal cultural resources, including but not limited to, th
e measures recommended in Public Resources
Code Section 21084.3, tribal monitoring, or other alternative measures identified in consultation with the California Native American Tribe.

If
an
y cultural
resource
s (
archaeological, historical, paleontological
) are

identified in the
preparation of a Phase I
Cultural Resources Study

(see
COA
-
CR
-
1) or
are inadvertently unearthed
during excavation and grading activities

(see COA
-
CR
-
3)
, the
City
shall consult and coordinate with
a Native American Tribal monitor
who
is

traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the development project
that will

help analyze the Native American artifacts for identification and
to evaluate and

mitigate impacts in accordance with the requirements set forth in COA
-
CR
-
1 through COA
-
CR
-
4 .

Finding
. The City finds that the above
-
listed mitigation measur
e is

feasible,
is

adopted, and will reduce the
potentially significant impacts

to tribal cultural resources

to the extent feasible. However, impacts would remain
significant and unavoidable even after implementation of these mitigation measures, and no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce
impacts
, as explained in
Section 4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources
, of the
Draft PEIR and in the Final PEIR.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

33 DECEMBER
2024

6.2 Cumulative Impacts

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the following findings identify the
Program’s

significant
and
unavoidable
cumulative impacts and the
Program’s

incremental contribution to those impacts.

Air Quality

Potential Effects
.

The cumulative impact of the population increases in South Coast Air Basin would further obstruct implementation of the
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)
, as implementation of the Program would further exceed the demographic growth forecasts in the
Planning Area
.

Additionally
, air pollution by nature is largely a cumulative
impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development, and the SCAQMD develops and implement plans for future attainment of ambient air qua lity standards. The
Program’s

incremental
contribution to increases of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment would be cumulatively considerable.

R
egarding sensitive receptors,
future development
projects under the
Program

would be required to
evaluate existing
toxic air contaminants (TAC)

exposure and incorporate available reduction measures, if necessary.

However,
implementation of future development projects would result in

uncertainty of future sensitive receptor
locations.

More
over, the

addition to growth associated with regional plans could further increase the exposure of air quality pollutants to sensitive receptors.

Substantial evidence supporting this environmental impact conclusion is provided in Section 4.1, Air Quality, of the Draft PEIR (
Draft PEIR
pp.

4.1 -
37 to 4.1
-
38 ).

Mitigation Measure
s
.

Feasible measures have been developed for the proposed project to address its potential effects
related to construction noise
. These measures, MM
-
AQ
-
1 through MM
-
AQ
-
3 , are listed in Section

6.1 of this
document. These feasible measures would reduce the
Program’s
potential incremental effect
on air quality
, but not

to a level
below
significance.

Finding
.

The City finds that
MM
-
AQ
-
1 through MM
-
AQ
-
3 are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce the potentially significant cumulative
air quality

impacts of the proposed
Program
to the extent feasible. However, cumulative
impacts would remain significant and unavoidable even after implementation of these mitigation measures, and no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce impacts
, as explained in
Section 4.1, Air Quality
, of
the Draft
PEIR

and in the Final
PEIR
.

Noise

Potential Effects
.

The proposed
Program

would result in temporary noise increases during construction of future developments. The construction period of future developments under the proposed Program

has the potential to
overlap with the construction of other projects in the
City

and proximate municipalities. Due to the decrease in noise levels with distance and the presence of physical barriers (i.e., intervening buildings and topography), noise due to construction of other projects would not meaningfully combine with future deve lopment under the proposed
Program

to produce a cumulative noise effect during construction. By way of illustration, if there are two concurrent construction projects of comparable sound emission intensity, and the activity nearest to the studied noise -
sen
sitive
receptor is compliant with the
City’s

applicable noise threshold, the other activity could be no closer than three times the distance of the receptor to the nearest activity and not make a cumulatively measurable contribution to the total and still
City
-
compliant noise exposure level. If two concurrent projects were close to a receptor, the cumulative noise would be one of the following:

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

34 DECEMBER
2024



t
he louder (in dBA) of the two concurrent activities; or,



logarithmic sum of the two activity noise levels that, per acoustic principles, cannot be more than 3 dBA greater than the louder of the two individual noise
-
producing activities.

In sum,
significant
cumulative construction noise is likely to be dominated by the closest or loudest activity to the receptor, and the combination will be no more than a barely perceptible difference (i.e., up to a 3 dBA change).

Therefore
, cumulative impacts due to cumulative construction noise could

be
considered significant

under certain
conditions of multiple project proximity to a common noise -
sensitive receiving land use

(Draft PEIR, p. 4.7
-
16)
.

Long
-
term operational noise would result from operation of future development facilitated by the proposed
Program
,
such as permanent on
-
site noise sources (e.g., HVAC equipment). A cumulative impact could result if noise produced resulting from implementation of the
proposed
Program

were to combine with noise produced from the operation of other related projects in the vicinity to create a cumulatively significant permanent increase in ambient noise levels.

T
he operation of future projects implemented under

the
proposed
Program
, along with the operation of other related
projects, would be subject to applicable requirements from the C ity
’s noise ordinance or similar regulations from
neighboring municipalities, which would also limit the exterior noise levels at noise
-
sensitive land uses
. However,
despite compliance with these noise regulations that are based on fixed standards (or are adjusted upwards to match the pre
-
existing outdoor ambient sound level if measured to be higher), there is a potential risk of creating a durable
increase in outdoor ambient sound due to the combination of concurrent stationary noise sources in proximity to a common noise
-
sensitive receptor.

The
combination of two potential nearby operating facilities would generate one of the following outcomes in the absence of a dominant traffic -
related acoustical contribution:



t
he louder (in dBA) of the two concurrent
operating facilities
; or,



logarithmic sum of the two
aggregate stationary source

noise levels that, per acoustic principles, cannot
be more than 3 dBA greater than the louder of the two individual noise -
emitting facilities.

In sum, cumulative stationary operation noise is likely to be dominated by the closest or loudest facility to the receptor, and the combination will be no more than a barely perceptible difference (i.e., up to a 3 dBA change).

Therefore,
c
umulative impacts to outdoor ambient noise levels resulting from proposed Program

stationary sources combining
with another unrelated project
could
result in a
cumulatively considerable

change greater than 3 dBA

(Draft PEIR, pp.

4.7 -
16 to 4.7
-
17)
.

Future residential development facilitated by the proposed Program

along with other related projects would generate
off
-
site traffic noise.

A cumulative impact could result if noise produced from implementation of the proposed Program
were to combine with noise produced from the “with project” traffic of other related projects in the vicinity to create a cumulatively significant permanent increase in ambient noise levels.

The operation of future projects implemented
under the proposed
Program
, along with th
e operation of other related projects, would be subject to applicable requirements from the
City’s

noise ordinance or similar regulations from neighboring municipalities, which would also limit the exterior noise levels at
noise
-
sensitive land uses
.

However, despite compliance with these noise regulations that are based on fixed standards
,
there is a potential risk of creating a durable increase in outdoor ambient sound due to the combination of concurrent
traffic

noise sources in proximity to a common nois
e
-
sensitive receptor.

doubling of traffic volumes is necessary to achieve a change of 3 dBA. Cumulative traffic noise is likely to be dominated by the closest or loudest roadway to the receptor, and the combination will be no more than a barely perceptible difference (i.e., up

to a 3 dBA change). Therefore, cumulative impacts to outdoor ambient noise levels resulting from

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

35 DECEMBER
2024

proposed Project traffic noise sources combining with another unrelated project could result in a cumulatively considerable change greater than 3 dBA.

Substantial evidence supporting this environmental impact conclusion is provided in Section

4.7, Noise,

of the
Draft PEIR.

Mitigation Measures.

Feasible measures have been developed for the proposed
Program
to address its potential
effects related to noise. These measures

(
COA
-
N
-
1, COA
-
N
-
2, COA
-
N
-
5, and COA
-
N
-
6 )

are listed in Section

2.3 of this
document. These feasible measures would reduce the
Program’s
potential incremental effect related to noise, but
not to a level below significance.

Finding
.

The City finds that
COA
-
N
-
1, COA
-
N
-
2, COA
-
N
-
5, and COA
-
N
-
6 are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce the
potentially significant cumulative noise impacts of the proposed Program
to the extent feasible. However,
cumulative impacts would remain significant and unavoidable even after implementation of these mitigation measures, and no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce impacts
, as explained in
Section

4.7, Noise
, of the Draft PEIR and in the Final PEIR.

Population and Housing

Potential Effects
.

The proposed Program would facilitate population growth as a result of proposed zoning changes to allow for approximately 35,611 new residential units within the Planning Area. The City is required to accommodate RHNA through zoning and other land use chan ges, which would facilitate additional housing
development and population growth throughout the City. Furthermore, all Orange County jurisdictions (including the unincorporated County communities and incorporated cities) are required to update their housing elements every
eight years in accordance with State Housing Element law. The Program is identified in the City’s Housing Element
Update
and has a horizon year of 2029; thus, the Program would serve the current 6th Cycle RHNA. The combined effect of this anticipated housing growth, which
would

result in substantial unplanned population growth, represents a significant cumulative impact.

Substantial evidence supporting this environmental impact conclusion is provided in
Section 4.8, Population and Housing,

of the Draft PEIR (pp.

4.8 -
17 ).

Mitigation Measures.

Although the Program would result in a much smaller share of the overall growth anticipated for Orange County, there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the Program -
level impacts to a less
-
than
-
significant level
.

Finding
.

the state
-
mandated RHNA, no feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce the substantial population growth. As the Program would not implement any fair
-
share mitigation, and as impacts at the Program level would be significant, the Program’s incre
mental contribution to i
mpacts related to substantial unplanned population
growth would be cumulatively considerable. As such, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable .

Tribal Cultural Resources

Potential Effects
.

The

development of cumulative projects has the potential to cumulatively affect known and unknown tribal cultural resources. Development of related projects can affect tribal cultural resources if such projects adversely alter or destroy tribal cultural resou rces, such as tribal cultural resources that could contribute

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

36 DECEMBER
2024

to understanding of an overall tribal cultural landscape. Over time, population growth and its accompanying development throughout
the City

has resulted in the destruction of tribal cultural resources during the early settlement days of the region and continuing to this day. Because all tribal cultural resources are unique and nonrenewable members of finite classes of resources that represent

time periods, cultural landscapes, projects
that destroy or alter certain tribal cultural resources have the potenti al to limit or eliminate an opportunity for a
comprehensive understanding of the time periods and cultural landscapes a tribal cultural resource belongs and could result in a cumulatively significant effect on tribal cultural resources.

Therefore, implementation of future
development projects under the Program could result in a cumulatively significant effect on tribal cultural resources.

Even with existing state, and local regulations in place designed to protect tribal cultural resource s, individual triba
l
cultural resources would still have the potential to be impacted or degraded from destruction, relocation, or alteration as a result of new private or public development or redevelopment allowable under cumulative projects.

Therefore, impacts to tribal cultural resources as a result of Program

implementation, in combination with other
development that would occur in the region, would have the potential to result in a significant cumulative

impact to
tribal cultural resources
.

Substantial evidence supporti
ng this environmental impact conclusion is provided in
Section

4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources,

of the Draft PEIR (
Draft PEIR
pp. 4
.12
-
18 to 4
.12
-
19 ).

Mitigation Measures.

Feasible measures have been developed for the proposed
Program
to address its potential
effects to
tribal cultural resources
.

This
measure, MM
-
TCR
-
1 , are listed in Section 6.
3 of this document.

Even with
implementation of MM
-
TCR
-
1, impacts to tribal cultural resources could still occur, and the Program’s incremental contribution would be cumulatively considerable.

These feasible measures would reduce the
Program’s
potential
incremental effect
to tribal cultural resources
, but not to a l
evel below significance.

Finding
.

The City finds that
MM
-
TCR
-
1 is
feasible,
is
adopted, and will reduce the potentially significant cumulative impacts
to tribal cultural resources

to the extent feasible. However, cumulative impacts would remain significant and unavoidable even after implementation of these mitigation measures, and no additional feasible measures are available to further reduce
impacts
, as explained in
Section 4.12, Tribal Cultural Resources
, of the Draft PEIR and
in the Final PEIR.

7 Other CEQA Findings

7.1 Findings Regarding Significant Irreversible
Environmental Changes

Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an PEIR analyze the extent to which a Program’s
primary
and secondary effects would impact the environment and commit nonrenewable resources to uses that future generations will not be able to reverse. Nonrenewable resources that would be used on site during construction and operation include gasoline,
other fossil fuels, water, concrete, steel, and lumber. The Program
would result in
the commitment of such resources

through the implementation of future development projects . Section

5.2 of the
Draft PEIR specifically addresses the extent to whi
ch the
Program
would commit nonrenewable resources. As
substantiated and described in Section

5.2 of the Draft PEIR, the irretrievable commitment of resources associated with the proposed
Program
would therefore be limited to the consumption of nonrenewable resources during construction and operation

of future development projects
. However, as described in Section

5.2 of the Draft PEIR,

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

37 DECEMBER
2024

the use of such resources would be limited through the use of durable, locally sourced building materials; employment of sustainability features and commitments; and, required compliance with various regulations that would serve to reduce
future development project’s
use of certain resources over time, such as electricity from nonrenewable sources, natural gas, gasoline and diesel fuels for vehicles, and water.

While the
Program
would result in increased resource consumption during construction and operation, the Program
would facilitate growth within the Planning Area. While no direct development is proposed as part of the Program, the implementation of Program would accommodate future development (and redevelopment of previously developed areas). The Program woul
d implement a target rezoning program to accommodate the development of 35,611 additional dwelling units, which would meet the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA all ocation. Candidate parcels
identified for rezoning were selected using the following criteria: parcels that are likely to be redeveloped given their current underutilization (economic vitality); areas within California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC )/Housing
and Community Development (HCD) Opportunity Areas, areas outside of local hazard zones; and parcels with local access to community amenities.

Based on the conclusions outlined above and the analysis provided in Section

5.2 of the Draft PEIR, the City finds
that, although irreversible environmental changes would result from the Program
, such changes would not be
considered significant.

7.2 Findings Regarding Growth
-
Inducing Impacts

Pursuant to Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, growth -
inducing impacts of
the
proposed
Program
must
be discussed in the PEIR. Section

4.8 , Population and Housing, and Section

5.3 , Growth
Inducement
, of the Draft
PEIR discuss the potential
growth

inducement of the
Program
.

As explained throughout the PEIR, the proposed
Program is anticipated to indirectly induce

growth through the
removal of obstacle to additional growth and development, such as allowing increased density to occur in residential areas. However, the
Program

does not propose any specific infrastructure improvements that would result in growth. The
Program

does not approve the construction of specific development projects and would largely accommodate growth based on market conditions. However, it would allow in creased development intensity and/or
a more inclusive mix of land uses compared to existing
conditions. Therefore, the Program removes regulatory
obstacles to growth and is considered to be growth
-
inducing.

As such, the proposed
Project
would
in
directly cause
population growth, housing growth, and economic growth
within
the
Planning Area
. As explained in Section

4.8 of
the PEIR, the
Program would increase the number of dwelling units that could occur under buildout conditions and accommodate a greater popul
ation than was envisioned for the General Plan. This population growth could potentially lead to employees moving into the Program area to be proximate to their jobs, therefore increasing the population
.

As discussed in Section 4.
9 , Public Services,

of the Draft PEIR,

as the
Planning Area

continues to develop, it would
require further commitment of public services that could include fire protection, law enforcement, public schools, public recreation, and other services as appropriate. Future development in the Program

area would require an
increased commitment to public services that would be considered a long -
term commitment in order to maintain a
desired level of service. This is considered a growth
-
inducing impact. As the population grows and occupies new dwelling u
nits, these residents
would seek shopping, entertainment, employment, home improvement, vehicle maintenance, and other economic opportunities in the surrounding area. This would facilitate the purchase of

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

38 DECEMBER
2024

economic goods and services and could, therefore, encourage the creation of new businesses and/or the expansion of existing businesses. This is considered a growth
-
inducing impact.

However, approval of the
Program

would not set a precedent that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. Cities and counties in California periodically update their general plans pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65300

et seq.

The

Program

is intended
satisfy State
Housing Element law by accommodating sufficient site for future housing development within the City .

While no
direct development is proposed as part of the
Program
, the implemen
tation of
Program

would accommodate future
development (and redevelopment of previously developed areas).

Pressures to develop in the surrounding cities may derive from regional economic conditions and market demands for housing

that may be directly or indirectly influenced by the
Program
. Although the
Program

does not include
approval of physical development, it creates additional development capacity in the Program

area compared to
existing conditions. Much of this development capacity is limited to targeted areas. Furthermore, development projects would be induced more by market demands than by new developme nt capacity created by land use
changes included in the rezoning program. However, because approval of the Program

could

ultimately result in
subsequent projects that would have their own environmental impacts —
including potentially significant impacts
—
the
Program

is a growth
-
inducing action.

In conclusion, the proposed
Program

would cause economic growth, population growth, and housing growth. Based on the conclusions outlined above and the analysis provided in Section

4.8 and in Section

5.3 of the Draft PEIR, the
City finds that the proposed
Program
would directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth.

7.3 Findings Regarding
Recirculation

The City finds that the Draft PEIR does not require recirculation under CEQA (CEQA Section 21092.1, CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5). CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 requires recirculation of an PEIR prior to certification of the Final PEIR when “significa
nt new information is added to the PEIR after public notice is given of the availability of the Draft PEIR for public review.” As described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5:

New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid su
ch an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that:

1. A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented;

2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance;

3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it;

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

39 DECEMBER
2024

4. The Draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded.

While some revisions and additions to the Draft PEIR were identified in the Final PEIR, none of the revisions resulted in new significant impacts; none of the revisions resulted in a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact identifie
d in the Draft PEIR where mitigation was not adopted to reduce such an impact to insignificance; and none of the revisions introduced a feasible project alternative or mitigation measure that would lessen the Program’s environmental impacts.

In addition, a

technical

memorandum was prepared

in response to
public comment and staff recommendations

revise

Alternative 2, Reduced Sites Alternatives. As such, the technical

memorandum

serves as a supplemental errata to Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft Program EIR, to the
Final

PEIR
.

The revisions provided in
the

memorandum

do not constitute significant new information requiring recirculation of the PEIR as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.

Further, the revisions do not cause the
Draft PEIR to be so fundamentally flawed that it precludes meaningful public review. As none of the CEQA criteria for recirculation have been met, recirculation of the PEIR is not warranted. In addition, CEQA Guideli nes Section
15088.5(b) provides that “recirculation is not required where the new information added to the PEIR merely clarifi es
and amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate PEIR.”

As such, the City makes the following findings:

1. None of the public comments submitted to the City regarding the Draft PEIR present any significant new information that would require the Draft PEIR to be recirculated for public review.

2. No new or modified mitigation measures are proposed that would have the potential to create new significant environmental impacts.

3. The Draft PEIR adequately analyzed alternatives and there are no feasible alternatives or mitigation measures considerably different from others previously analyzed that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the Program.

4. The Draft PEIR was not fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature and did not preclude meaningful public review and comment.

7.4 Findings Regarding the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program

In accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City must adopt a MMRP to ensure that the adopted mitigation measures are implemented. The City adopts, and incorporates as conditions of approval of the Program, the mitigation measures set forth in the

MMRP to reduce the potentially significant impacts of the Program to below a level of significance. The City makes the finding that the measures included in the MMRP constitute changes or alterations which avoid or substantially lessen potentially signifi cant effects on the environment. The MMRP is
attached to these findings as Attachment A.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

40 DECEMBER
2024

8 Findings on Alternatives

Consistent with Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the PEIR

includes consideration of a reasonable range
of alternatives to the
Program

(see Chapter
6 of the D
raft
PEIR
).

A
lternatives
were considered but rejected based
on one or more of the criteria for rejection outlined in Section 15126.6(c) of the Guidelines.

Three

alternatives
were carried forward for detailed consideration in the
Draft
PEIR
, including Alternative

1 (
No Project/Buildout
According to Adopted Plans
)
, Alternative

2 (
Reduced Sites Alte
rnative
)
,
and
Alternative

3 (
Reduced Density
Alternative
)
.

Additionally,
Modified Alternative 2
remove
s

29 additional sites

and adds one site

compared to
Alternative 2.

In compliance with CEQA, these Findings examine these alternatives and the extent to which they lessen or avoid the
Program’s

significant environmental effects while meeting the project objectives. The City finds that a good faith effort was made to evaluate all reasonable alternatives to the Program

that could feasibly
obtain its basic objectives, even when the alternatives might impede the attainment of the objectives or be more costly. The City also finds that all reasonable alternatives were reviewed, analyzed, and discussed in the review
process of the Final
PEIR

and the ultimate decision on the project.

8 .1

Alternative 1
—

No Project Alternative

Section 15126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an PEIR

evaluate the specific alternative of “no project”
along with its impact. As stated in this section of the CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of describing and analyzing a no project alternative is to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the

proposed project with
the impacts of not approving the proposed project.

As specified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A), when a project is the revision of an existing land use or reg ulatory plan or policy or an ongoing operation, the no project alternative will be the continuation of the plan, policy, or operation into the future. Therefore, the no project alternative, as required by the CEQA Guidelines, would analyze the effects of d evelopment consistent with
implementation of the General Plan and existing land use/zoning. Under Alternative 1, the Planning Area would continue to develop in accordance with the City’s General Plan existing land use designations and zoning, as well as in

accordance with General Plan Amendments that have occurred since the adoption of the General Plan.

Alternative 1 is projected to result in 22,430 additional dwelling units, 5,510 additional persons, and 16,083 additional jobs by the 2030 buildout year
.

Environmental Effects.

Overall, Alternative 1 would result in decreased environmental impacts relative to the proposed
Program for the following topics: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Tribal Cultural Resources, and Utilities and Service Systems
.

Moreover, significant and unavoidable impacts related to population and housing and tribal cultural resources would be eliminated. Howev er, impacts would increase for the following
topics: Land Use and Planning and Transportation. Under Alternative 1, impacts to mineral resources would be similar to the Program.

Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided in Section

6.5.1 of the Draft
PEIR

(
Draft PEIR, pp. 6.0
-
5 to 6.0
-
11 ).

Finding.

Alternative
1 would not achieve the underlying purpose of the
Program
or
most

of the project objectives. It
would not

incorporate
land use or zoning changes

to increase residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals.

Implementation of Alternative 1 would continue the existing land use and zoning within the City. Sites within the General Plan Focus Areas would remain. However, further land use changes would be

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

41 DECEMBER
2024

required to facilitate redevelopment of underutilized land within the Planning Area. As a result, this alternative would not diversify
neighborhoods with new residential densities and housing types .

T
he City
finds that Alternative 1 is not feasible and
rejects Alternative
1 .

Alternative 1
fails to meet the project’s
underlying goal of
increas
ing residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals .

Furthermore, Alternative
1 would not meet the project objectives that support this goal.

Alternative 1 would
violate
State Housing Element law without sufficient sites during the 6 th

RHNA Cycle
.

As such, the City
rejects this
alternative and finds that it is

not desirable or f
easible

based on the specific economic, social, and land use policy considerations outlined above.

8 .
2 Alternative
2 —

Reduced
Sites

Alternative

This alternative would be generally similar to the proposed Program
,

except for reduction in the number of sites
included within the Planning Area
.

Under Alternative 2,
eight (8)

sites
with
Assessor Parcel Numbers
(
APN
)

339
-
191
-
01, 339
-
191
-
02, 339
-
191
-
03, 285
-
281
-
05, 285
-
281
-
06, 071
-
323
-
38, 071
-
323
-
40, 338
-
071
-
22 would be
removed from consideration within the Planning Area. These sites would be removed because of their potential to remain as viable commercial developments

within the City
. As such, Alternati
ve 2 would be
implemented on

a
Planning Area
of

751

parcels, totaling

approximately

537

acres.

Similar to the
proposed Program,
this alternative

would have

a maximum density of 60
du/ac

assumed

for all
parcels

across the
Planning Area
.

In addition, Alternative 2 assumes all future development projects would include on
-
site commercial uses with a FAR of 0.12, similar to the proposed Program. Alternative 2 would
have

a maximum
growth potential of
32,234

housing
units

and 2,808,180 square feet of commercial uses on site
.

Thus
, this
alternative would result in
96,711
residents and
4,508

employees (or a net reduction of
5,577

employees

from
the proposed Program’s projections
).

Environmental Effects.

The impacts of Alternative
2 generally would be similar to those of the proposed
Program
.

Although the
number of changed parcels would

slightly
reduce
d
,

the construction scenario would be generally
the same as that of the proposed
Program
. Slight reductions in construction intensity may be achieved through the reduced
buildout under Alternative 2
, but overall, construction
-
related effects would be similar to those of the
proposed
Program
. Substantial evidence supporting these envir
onmental impact conclusions is provided in Chapter

6.5.2 of the
Draft
EIR (pp.

6.0 -
11 to 6.0
-
18 ).

Finding.

Alternative
2 would meet all of the project objectives, although some objectives would have a reduced
ability to meet
those objectives

than the proposed
Program
. Alternative
2 would still achieve the underlying purpose,
as it
would incorporate zoning changes

to increase residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals.

Under this alternative, fewer parcels are considered for future residential development within the Planning Area. However, Alternative 2 would res
ult in a
maximum growth potential of 32,234 housing units.

As
such, Alternative 2 would
achiev
e

the
6 th

RHNA

Cycle

goals.

Moreover,
Alternative 2 would diversify neighborhoods

and
redevelop underutilized
existing non
-
residential land uses with new residential densities and housing types.

The sites under
Alternative 2
would
facilitate
a

buildout on parcels based on the same methodology

as the proposed
Program.

F
uture development under this alternative would be required to comply with the City’s General Plan goals, policies, and Municipal Code regulations designed to discourage development within local hazard zones.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

42 DECEMBER
2024

While Alternative
2 would not
eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts
, the City received comments in
opposition to the
potential redevelopment of select commercial centers. Alternative 2 would remove select sites due to their potential to remain as viable commercial uses within the City. As such, the sites proposed for removal would not be considered underutilized. Thus, t
his alternative
is responsive to those comments/concerns.

In summary, Alternative
2 would achieve the underlying purpose and many of its objectives to a similar
extent
to
the
Program
itself, it would reduce the
potential redevelopment of viable commercial sites within the City , it would
facilitate the development of
housing and affordable housing
consistent with State Housing Element law
.

However,
t
he City has instead decided to adopt
the Modified
Alternative 2; see Section
8 .
3 for details. For these reasons, the
City finds that Alternative
2 is not desirable and
rejects Alternative
2 in favor of
the Modified
Alternative 2.

8 .
3 Modified
Alternative 2

This alternative would be generally similar to
Alternative 2 with the reduction of additional sites included within the Planning Area
.

Under
the
Modified
Alternative 2,
twenty
-
nine

(
29 )

additional

sites
were removed
from consideration
within the
Planning Area

with

the following

Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN
s
)
:

033
-
211
-
03, 033
-
212
-
04, 033
-
212
-
11, 033
-
212
-
12, 033
-
212
-
15, 033
-
212
-
16, 033
-
221
-
08, 073
-
310
-
04, 073
-
310
-
06, 073
-
310
-
11, 073
-
310
-
12,
073
-
310
-
18, 073
-
310
-
22, 073
-
310
-
23, 338
-
101
-
07, 338
-
101
-
08, 338
-
101
-
12, 339
-
161
-
01, 339
-
161
-
02, 339
-
201
-
02, 339
-
201
-
03, 072
-
242
-
08, 072
-
242
-
12, 072
-
242
-
14, 072
-
242
-
15, 072
-
242
-
16, 072
-
242
-
18, 072
-
242
-
19, 296
-
203
-

12. These sites would be removed because of their potential to remain as viable developments within the

City.

Additionally, one site (APN 338
-
071
-
22) was included in the Planning Area for the proposed Program, was removed under Alternative 2, and is added back within Modified Alternative 2.

As such,
the
Modified
Alternative 2
would be implemented on a Planning Area of
722

parcels, totaling approximately
471.8

acres.

Similar to
Alternative 2
,
the Modified Alternative 2

would have
a maximum density of 60 du/ac assumed for all
parcels across the Planning Area. In addition,
the Modified
Alternative 2 assumes all future development projects
would include on
-
site commercial uses with a FAR of 0.12, similar to the proposed Program.

Modified
Alternative 2
would have a maximum growth potential of
29,468

housing units and
2,567,274

square feet of commercial uses
on site
.

Thus, this alternative would result in
85,752

residents an
d
4,121

employees (or a net reduction of
1,398

employees

compared to Alternative 2
).

Environmental Effects.

The impacts of
the
Modified Alternative 2
generally would be similar to those of
Alternative
2 .

Although the number of changed parcels would be reduce
d
, the construction scenario would be generally the
same as that of the proposed Program. Slight reductions in construction intensity may be achieved through the reduced buildout under
the Modified Alternative 2
, but overall, construction
-
related effects would be similar to those
of the proposed Program. Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided in the
Technical Memorandum on Modified Alternative 2
.

Finding.

The Modified Alternative 2

would meet all of the project objectives, although some objectives would have a reduced ability to meet than the proposed Program.

The Modified Alternative 2

would still achieve the underlying
purpose, as it would incorporate zoning changes

to increase residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals.

Under this alternative, fewer parcels are considered for future residential development within the Planning Area. However,
Modified Alter
native 2
would result in a
maximum growth potential
of
29,468

housing units
.

As such,
Modified Alternative 2

would achieve the 6
th

RHNA Cycle goals.

Moreover,
the
Modified Alternative 2
would diversify neighborhoods and redevelop underutilized existing non -
residential land uses

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

43 DECEMBER
2024

with new residential densities and housing types. The sites under the Modified Alternative 2
would facilitate a
buildout on parcels based on the same methodology as the proposed Program

and Alternative 2
. Future
development under this alternative would be required to comply with the City’s General Plan goals, policies, and Municipal Code regulations designed to discourage development within local hazard zones.

While
the Modified Alternative 2

would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts, the City received comments in opposition to the potential redevelopment of select sites within the Planning Area
.

Modified Alternative
2 would remove select sites due to their potential to remain as viable developments

within the City. As such, the
sites proposed for removal would not be considered underutilized. Thus, this alternative is responsive to those comments/concerns.

In summary,
Modified Alternative 2
would achieve the underlying purpose and many of its objectives to a similar extent to the Program itself, it would reduce the potential redevelopment of viable sites within the City, it would facilitate the development of housing and affordable housing co nsistent with State Housing Element law.

The City
has instead decided to adopt Alternative
4 (Sites
Inventory Only
Alternative); see Section
8 .
5 for details. For these
reasons, the City finds that
Modified Alternative 2
not desirable and rejects
Modified Alternative 2
in favor of
Alternative
4 .

8 .
4 Alternative 3
—

Reduced Density
Alternative

CEQA requires that EIRs “describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant e
ffects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives” (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126[a]). The Program would result in significant and unavoidable impacts even with implementation of mitigation measures for the following environmen
tal topic areas: Air Quality, Population and Housing, and Tribal Cultural Resources.

With the exception of Tribal Cultural Resources, significant unavoidable impacts would occur under the proposed Program due to unplanned population growth within the build out year of 2029. Under the Program, a maximum density
of 60 du/ac was assumed for the purposes of analyzing the Program’s maximum potential environmental effects. This methodology was based on the City’s General Plan buildout scenarios for each land use d esignations. The General Plan
includes eight different Focus Areas that identify the High Density Residential land use designation as an applicable land use. The General Plan recommends maximum densities between 45 to 80 du/ac.

Alternative 3
would facilitate a buildout potential at

a reduced maximum density of 45 du/ac,
consistent with the
General Plan,

in order to reduce the environmental impacts associated with population growth and construction activities.

As a result, Alternative 3 would have a total development potential of 26,709 units across the Planning Area. Additionally, implementation of Alternative 3 would include the same commercial development potential with a 0.12 FAR. As such, under this alterna
tive, a total of 3,102,449 square feet of commercial uses, and 4,979 employees (or a net reduction of 6,160 employees) are anticipated at buildout of future development projects
.

Alternative 3 would result in a reduction of 8,902 units, and as a result a reduction of 25,906 residents when compared to the proposed Program.

Environmental Effects.

Overall, Alternative 3 would result in decreased environmental impacts relative to the proposed Program for the following topics: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, Population and Hou sing, Public Services, Recreation, and Utilities
and Service Systems.

Impacts
would
be similar to the Program
for the following topics: Land Use and Planning
,

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

44 DECEMBER
2024

Mineral Resources,

Transportation,
and

Tribal Cultural Resources
.

Generally, impacts of Alternative 3 would be less
than the Program due to the reduced density assumed across the Planning Area. However, specifically for the topics of mineral resources and tribal cultural resources, impacts would remain the same as the s cope of the Planning
Area’s parcels would not change.

Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided in Section 5.2.3 of the Draft
PEIR

(
Draft PEIR
pp.

6. 0
-
18 to

6.0 -
23 ).

Finding.

This alternative would meet most of the objectives; however, it would not meet some to the same degree as the proposed
Program
. This alternative would still
meet the underlying purpose of
incorporating zoning changes

to increase residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals . It would
meet specific
objective
s

to
diversifying neighborhoods, redeveloping underutilized land, and discouraging development within known local hazard zones. Given the reduced density, Alternative 3 would meet specific objectives related to the promotion of positive economic, educational, a
nd health outcomes for current and future residents, while at a reduced ability.

In summary, Alternative 3 would not avoid or substantially reduce the

significant and unavoidable

environmental
impacts identified for the
Program
. The City has instead decided to adopt Alternative
2 (Reduced Sites Alternative
);
see Section
8 .
2 for details. For these reasons, the City finds that Alternative 3 is not desirable and rejects Alternative
3 in favor of Alternative
2 .

8 .
5 Alternative 4
–

S
i
tes Inventory Only

Through the project review and approval process, a new project alternative was introduced. The new alternative, Alternative 4
–

Sites Inventory Only, reduces the
Planning Area

to mirror the sites inventory included within the
Housing Element Update. In November 2024, Alternative 4 eliminated 524 sites for a total of 235 sites within the Planning Area. Alternative 4 was further revised in December 2024 to reflect the removal of 29 additional sites with
a total number of 206 sites within with Planning Area. A

technical memorandum has been prepared which
demonstrates the Alternative 4, which removes a total of 553 sites, does not constitute a significant change and no recirculation is required.

Similar to
the proposed
Program
, Alternative 4

would have
a maximum density of 60 du/ac assumed for all parcels
across the Planning Area. In addition, Alternative
4 assumes all future development projects would include on -
site
commercial uses with a FAR of 0.12, similar to the proposed Program.

Environmental Effects.

The impacts of the
Alternative 4

generally would be similar to those of
th
e proposed Project;
however, on a much smaller scale
.

Although the number of changed parcels would be reduce
d
, the construction
scenario would be generally the same as that of the proposed Program.

R
eductions in construction intensity may
be achieved through the reduced buildout under the
Alternative 4
, but overall, construction
-
related effects would
be similar to those of the proposed Program. Substantial evidence supporting these environmental impact conclusions is provided in the Technical Memorandum on
Alternative 4
.

Finding.

Alternative 4

would meet all of the project objectives, although some objectives would have a reduced ability to meet than the proposed Program.

Alternative 4

would still achieve the underlying purpose, as it would incorporate

land use and

zoning changes

to increase residential capacity within the City to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation goals.

Under this alternative, fewer parcels are considered for future residential development within the Planning Area. However,
Alternative 4

would result in a
maximum growth potential of
14,197

housing units.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

45 DECEMBER
2024

such,
Alternative 4

would
achieve the 6
th

RHNA Cycle goals.

Moreover, the
Alternative 4

would diversify
neighborhoods and redevelop underutilized existing non
-
residential land uses with new residential densities and housing types. The sites under the
Alternative 4

would facilitate a buildout on parcels based on the same methodology as the proposed Program. Future development under this alternative would be required to comply with the City’s General Plan goals, policies, and Municipal Code regulations designed to dis courage developme
nt
within local hazard zones.

While
Alternative 4

would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts, the City received comments in opposition to the potential redevelopment of select sites within the Planning Area.

Alternative 4

would remove select
sites due to their potential to remain as viable developments within the City. As such, the sites proposed for removal would not be considered underutilized. Thus, this alternative is responsive to those comments/concerns.

In summary,
Alternative 4

would achieve the underlying purpose and many of its objectives to a similar extent to the Program itself, it would reduce the potential redevelopment of viable sites within the City, it would facilitate the development of housing and affordable housing co
nsistent with State Housing Element law
, and it would
maintain
ground floor

commercial development

on sites
. The City therefore finds that
Alternative 4

is feasible and is more
desirable than the proposed Program or Alternatives 1
, 2,
Modified
Alternative
2,
and 3. The City has therefore
decided to adopt Alternative
4 .

Because the environmental impacts for
Alternative 4

are generally the same to those identified for the proposed Program, the City finds that the findings identified throughout this document are applicable to both the proposed Program and to the
Alternative 4
. The City finds that inclusion of the same mitigation measures identified for the proposed Program would also avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental effects of Alternative 4

on the environment
.

8.6 Environmentally Superior Alternative

Alternative 1 would result in the fewest environmental impacts. Moreover, this alternative is the only alternative to eliminate a significant unavoidable impact (under Population and Housing). Therefore, Alternative 1 would be considered the Environmentall
y Superior Alternative. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2), if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alterative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.

Alternative 4
–

Sites Inventory Only
, would be the Environmentally Superior Alternative.

Alternative 4

reduces the
development potential more than Alternative 2
,

Modified Alternative 2
,
or Alternative 3
while also meeting
objectives related to the City’s RHNA goals. While
Alternative 4

would result in similar impacts as the proposed
Program related to Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Transportation, and Tribal Cultural Resources, the scale of the reduction of housing units is greater than that of Alternative 2 ,

Modified Alternative 2
, or Alternative 3
.

Moreover,
Alternative 4

would result in similar, although
reduced, impacts across all environmental topic areas
given the slight reduction of parcels from the proposed Planning Area.

12885

46 DECEMBER
2024

9 Statement of
Overriding
Considerations

Pursuant to P
ublic
R
esources
C
ode

Section 21081(b) and State CEQA Guidelines section 15093(a) and (b), the C i
ty
is required to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region -
wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether t
o approve the project. The lead or responsible agency may then approve the project and adopt a “Statement of Overriding Considerations,” which stat es in writing the specific reasons to support the lead
or responsible agency’s action based on the F
inal
PEIR

and other information in the record (CEQA Guidelines section 15093 and 15096(h)). These Statement of Overriding Considerations are based on substantial evidence in the record, including but not limited to the Final
PEIR
, public testimony, and all other materials that constitute the record of proceedings.

After examining the proposed
Housing Incentive Overlay Zone Program

in light of its alternatives, the City has
determined that adoption and implementation of one of the alternatives ( Alternative 4
) is the most desirable,
feasible, and appropriate action.

The
Ci
ty finds and determines that (1) all significant environmental effects of Alternative 4

have been substantially
lessened where feasible; (2)
Alternative 4

will result in certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided or reduced to a less
-
than
-
significant level even with incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures; and (3) there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feas ible
p
roject alternatives that will further mitigate,
avoid, or reduce the remaining significant environmental effects to a less -
than
-
significant level.

The C
i
ty finds that the adoption and implementation of
Alternative 4

will have the economic, social, legal, and other
considerable benefits

listed below
.

The City finds that each of the separate benefits listed below is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants approval of Alternative 4

and outweighs and overrides
the

significant
unavoidable impact
s related to air quality, population and housing, and
tribal cultural resources

described in Section 6
, and thereby justifies approval of
Alternative 4
.

1. Alternative 4

would
incorporate
land use and
zoning changes to increase residential capacity within the City to meet

and exceed

Regional Housing Needs
Allocation
goals
.

2. Alternative 4

would
contribut
e

to the implementation of the goals and policies in the City’s General Plan, specifically
related to the

Focus Areas within the City
.

3. Alternative 4

would
diversify neighborhoods

and
redevelop underutilized existing
non
-
residential land uses
with new residential densities and housing types
, consistent with regional and statewide goals for
sustainable infill development
.

4. Alternative 4

would

promote economic viability with the facilitation of on
-
site commercial uses
.

5. Alternative 4

would
result in

new
residential and
mixed
-
use development near
opportunity areas with
access to community amenities and promote affirmatively furthering fair housing policies .

6. Alternative 4

would
limit the redevelopment of
viable commercial developments within the City
.

FULLERTON HIOZ PROGRAM

/
CEQA

FINDINGS OF FACT

AND STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING

CONSIDERATIONS

12885

47 DECEMBER
2024

Conclusion

In light of the foregoing, and the information contained within the Final PEIR

and other portions of the record, the
City concludes that implementation of
Alternative 4

will result in a beneficial
program
as outlined above. The City
also finds that the benefits identified above outweigh and make acceptable the significant, unavoidable environmental impact associated with
Alternative 4

and, accordingly,
the City
adopts this Statement of Overriding
Considerations.

Attachment A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

NOVEMBER 2024 A-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(1) requires a Lead Agency that approves or carries out a project, where an environmental impact report has identified significant environmental effects, to adopt a “reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.”
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared to provide for the monitoring of mitigation measures required of the Fullerton Housing Incentive Overlay Zone Program (HIOZ or Program), as set forth in the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR). The City of Fullerton (City) is the Lead Agency that must adopt the MMRP for future development under the Project. The MMRP will be kept on file with the City of Fullerton Community and Economic Development Department, 303 We st Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California 92832.

Table 1 presented below, which constitutes the monitoring and reporting program, lists all mitigation measures (and conditions of approval) that are contained in the Final PEIR. For each listed mitigation measure (and condition of approval), the table identifies the following:
▪ PEIR section title (Environmental Factor) where the mitigation measure is contained. ▪ Mitigation measure number and content
▪ Actions required to comply with the mitigation measure ▪ Timing of implementation/monitoring for the mitigation measure ▪ Responsible agency or party responsible for implementing/reporting ▪ Monitoring agency or party responsible for verifying compliance

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-2

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-3
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks MM-AQ-1. Construction Emissions. If during subsequent project-level environmental review, construction-related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed SCAQMD’s construction mass daily thresholds, the City shall require applicants for new projects that exceed those
thresholds to incorporate appropriate measures to reduce or minimize air pollutant emissions during construction activities.

New projects are required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including but not limited to Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings), and Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions from
Demolition/Renovation Activities). Additional measures for projects that exceed SCAQMD’s construction mass daily
thresholds may include, but are not limited to, the following:
▪ Off-Road construction equipment with engines that are 50 horsepower or greater shall be rated by the USEPA as
having Tier 4 emission limits or better (whichever is the cleanest technology available at time of project
development). If it can be demonstrated to the City that such equipment is not commercially available or feasible, alternate emissions control devices and/or techniques
used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 4 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine, as defined by the California Air Resources Board’s regulations.
▪ Use electric or alternative-fueled (i.e., non-diesel) construction equipment, if available and feasible, including but not limited to, concrete/industrial saws, pumps, aerial lifts, material hoist, air compressors, forklifts, excavator, wheel loader, and soil compactors.
▪ Maintain records of all trucks associated with project construction activities to document that each truck used meets the required emission standards. The Applicant
shall provide records for inspection within five business days of request by CARB, SCAQMD, or the City.
▪ Provide electric vehicle (EV) charging stations or
appropriately sized electrical infrastructure and electrical panels. Electrical hookups should be provided for trucks to plug in any onboard auxiliary equipment.
▪ Provide temporary traffic controls such as a flag person, during all phases of significant construction activity to maintain smooth traffic flow, where necessary.
▪ Provide dedicated turn lanes for the movement of
construction trucks and equipment on- and off-site, where applicable.
▪ Ensure vehicle traffic inside the project site is as far away as feasible from sensitive receptors.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor(s)
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit; During
Construction
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Prior to the issuance of a
grading permit; During
Construction

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-4
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks ▪ Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph) or less.
▪ Suspend all excavating and grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 mph.
▪ Suspend use of all construction activities that generate air pollutant emissions during first stage smog alerts.
▪ Configure construction parking to minimize traffic
interference.
▪ Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials.
▪ Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site for each trip.
▪ Apply non-toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).
▪ Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
▪ Pave roads and road shoulders, where applicable.
▪ Sweep streets at the end of the day with SCAQMD Rule
1186 and 1186.1 compliant sweepers if visible soil is
carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommend
water sweepers that utilize reclaimed water).
▪ Utilize only super-compliant volatile organic compound (VOC) paints for architectural coatings (0 grams per liter to less than 10 grams per liter VOC) during construction
activities. If paints and coatings with VOC content of 0 grams/liter to less than 10 grams/liter cannot be utilized, the application of architectural coatings shall be prohibited during the peak smog season: July, August, and
September.

MM-AQ-2 Operational Emissions. If, during subsequent project-level environmental review, operation-related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed SCAQMD’s operation mass daily thresholds, the City shall require applicants for new projects that exceed those thresholds to incorporate appropriate measures to reduce or minimize air pollutant emissions during operational activities. New projects facilitated by the Fullerton Housing Incentive Overlay Zone are required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, including but not limited to Rule 445 (Wood Burning Devices), Rule 1401 (New Source of Toxic Air
Contaminants), and Rule 1110.2 (Emissions from Gaseous- ▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy;
Review of Project plans and
specifications

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-5
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks and Liquid-Fueled Engines). Additional measures for projects that exceed SCAQMD’s operation mass daily thresholds may include, but are not limited to, the following:
▪ All the Program’s buildings shall be powered fully by electricity, with no natural gas infrastructure or appliances, including no fireplaces. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Program Applicant or its designee shall
provide evidence to the City that the building design plans include no natural gas infrastructure.
▪ Install Energy Star rated heating, cooling, lighting, and appliances.
▪ Require the use of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment with a Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) of 12 or higher.
▪ Install of water heaters with an energy factor of 0.92 or higher.
▪ Install solar water heaters or tank-less water heaters. ▪ Use passive solar cooling/heating.
▪ Designate 10% of parking spaces to be for electric and alternative fuel vehicles.
▪ Install Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations in 6% of all parking spaces.
▪ Super-Compliant volatile organic compound (VOC)-content architectural coatings (0 grams per liter to less than 10 grams per liter VOC) shall be used during operational
application of paints and other architectural coatings to reduce ozone precursors for future development projects.

If paints and coatings with VOC content of 0 grams/liter to less than 10 grams/liter cannot be utilized, the developer shall avoid application of architectural coatings during the peak smog season: July, August, and September.
▪ The City shall develop and implement a Low-VOC/Green
Cleaning Product and Paint education program, including materials educating how to identify low-VOC cleaners and products, that can be provided to applicants, developers, tenants, and residents of development projects associated with the Program.
▪ At the time of discretionary approval of new sources of TAC emissions in close proximity to existing sensitive land uses, the City shall require development projects to implement applicable best management practices, as necessary and
feasible, that will reduce exposure to TACs. Specific
reduction measures will be evaluated and determined
depending on proposed land use TAC sources and
feasibility.

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-6
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide the City with appropriate documentation verifying compliance with the required measures.

MM-AQ-3 Revised Forecast. Prior to SCAG’s next update to the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, the City shall prepare a revised population, employment and housing forecast for SCAG that reflects anticipated growth generated from the proposed Program. The updated forecast provided to SCAG shall be used to inform the SCAQMD’s update to the Regional Air Quality Strategy and State Implementation Plan. The City shall prepare and submit a letter notifying the SCAQMD of this revised forecast for use in the future update to the RAQS and SIP as required.
▪ City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Prior to SCAG’s next update to the Regional
Housing Needs Assessment
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Prior to SCAG’s next update
to the Regional Housing
Needs Assessment

MM-HAZ-1 Hazardous Materials Survey. Demolition plans and contract specifications submitted to the City for approval shall incorporate survey and abatement procedures for the
identification and removal of materials containing asbestos, lead, polychlorinated biphenyls, hazardous material, hazardous wastes, and universal waste items, including decommissioning and removal of aboveground and underground storage tanks and drums. All survey and abatement work shall be done in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations, including those of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (which regulates disposal), Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, California Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (which regulates employee exposure), and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Surveys will be conducted by an environmental professional certified by California Department of Public Health [lead-based paint] and/or Contractors State License Board [asbestos], and
abatement shall be completed by a California-Certified or Licensed Contractor prior to demolition or renovation activities.

Transportation of hazardous wastes must also be completed by a licensed transportation company in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations, and disposal will be completed at a permitted facility.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor(s)
Prior to submittal of demolition plans and
contract specifications
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review of demolition plans
and specifications

MM-HAZ-2 Survey for Oil and Gas Features. Prior to approval of residential redevelopment for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g. issuance of permits), a survey will be completed to confirm the presence or absence of oil and gas wells, pipelines, or oil/gas field administrative boundaries on the proposed development site. The survey will also evaluate the proposed development site’s proximity to methane zones as outlined in the OCFA Combustible Soil Gas Hazard Mitigation Guideline C-03. The survey will include review of publicly available documents and databases, aboveground visual inspections, and subsurface ▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor(s)
Prior to approval of residential redevelopment
for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g.
issuance of permits)
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Prior to the issuance of
permits

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-7
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks surveys (such as ground-penetrating radar or other means of subsurface locates). The survey(s) will be completed by a professional company with experience in these types of
surveys. Proof of survey completion will be submitted to City of Fullerton as part of the application package.

MM-HAZ-3 Investigation of RECs, CRECs, and VECs. Following completion of a Phase I ESA and prior to approval of residential
redevelopment for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g. issuance of permits), any RECs, CRECs, or VECs identified in the Phase I ESA will be investigated by completion of a Phase II ESA under the requirements of ASTM E1903-19 (or the current applicable standard). The Phase II ESA will evaluate the presence of contaminants of concern related to RECs, CRECs, and/or VECs found in the Phase I ESA and will include a screening level risk evaluation to determine human health risks are present (i.e. if concentrations exceed current regulatory screening levels applicable at the time of the project (DTSC Screening Levels or RWQCB ESLs)). The investigation shall include consideration of aerially deposited lead (ADL) adjoining state highways and overpasses. The findings of the Phase II ESA and recommendations will be provided to the City for review prior to approval of residential development. ▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor(s)
Following completion of a Phase I ESA and prior
to approval of residential redevelopment for a
site within the Program Planning Area (e.g.
issuance of permits)
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review of Phase II ESA; prior
to issuance of permits

MM-HAZ-4 Actions for Contaminated Sites. If human health risks are identified (e.g. concentrations of contaminants of concern are above applicable regulatory screening levels) during a Phase I ESA or Phase II ESA that would indicate a risk to residential occupancy or would expose construction workers to
contaminants of concern above appliable screening levels, the impacts must be remediated or protections must be in place such that future risk to construction workers, adjacent sensitive receptors, future occupants, or future land uses on site are below current risk-based criteria (e.g. applicable regulatory screening levels). Written proof of remediation and/or protective measures would be submitted to the City prior to approval for residential redevelopment (e.g. issuance of permits).
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor(s)
If human health risks are identified (e.g.
concentrations of contaminants of concern are
above applicable regulatory screening levels)
during a Phase I ESA or Phase II ESA that would
indicate a risk to residential occupancy or would
expose construction workers to contaminants of
concern above appliable screening levels
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review of remediation and/or
protective measures; Prior to
issuance of permits

MM-HAZ-5 Conditions of Closure. Prior to approval of residential redevelopment for a site within the Program Planning Area (e.g. issuance of permits), if the proposed development site is located on a site that has received regulatory environmental cleanup, review, or assessment and has received regulatory closure by the overseeing environmental agency (federal, state, or local), the closure documents shall be reviewed and conditions or limitations, if any, shall be met. If conditions indicate a risk or limitations to future residential development, requirements from the regulatory agency will be implemented and proof of
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor(s)
If the proposed development site is located on a
site that has received regulatory environmental
cleanup, review, or assessment and has received
regulatory closure by the overseeing
environmental agency (federal, state, or local)
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review of closure documents;
Prior to approval of residential
redevelopment for a site
within the Program Planning
Area (e.g. issuance of permits)

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-8
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks implementation will be provided to the City prior to approval for redevelopment (e.g. issuance of permits).

MM-TCR-1 Tribal Cultural Resources. During subsequent project-level environmental review, the City shall obtain a State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Land
Files Search, as appropriate, and comply with all applicable requirements of AB 52. Pursuant to AB 52, the City shall provide formal notification of the project to designated contact of each traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American Tribe that has requested notice. The City shall begin the consultation process within 30 days after receiving a Tribe’s request for consultation. The City shall consider all relevant information available for the property to identify potential tribal cultural resources in the project area, evaluate the project’s potential impacts to tribal cultural resources, and mitigate those potential impacts.

If project impacts to tribal cultural resources are determined to be potentially significant, the City shall require the project to incorporate appropriate measures to avoid or minimize
impacts to tribal cultural resources, including but not limited to, the measures recommended in Public Resources Code Section 21084.3, tribal monitoring, or other alternative measures identified in consultation with the California Native American Tribe.

If any cultural resources (archaeological, historical,
paleontological) are identified in the preparation of a Phase I Cultural Resources Study (see COA-CR-1) or are inadvertently unearthed during excavation and grading activities (see COA- CR-3), the City shall consult and coordinate with a Native American Tribal monitor who is traditionally or culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the development project that will help analyze the Native American artifacts for identification and to evaluate and mitigate impacts in
accordance with the requirements set forth in COA-CR-1
through COA-CR-4.
▪ City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
During subsequent project-level environmental
review, the City shall obtain a State of California
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
Sacred Land Files Search
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Comply with all applicable
requirements of AB 52

Conditions of Approval
COA-AES-1

For future development located in or immediately adjacent to residentially zoned properties, construction documents shall include language that requires all construction contractors to strictly control the staging of construction equipment and the cleanliness of construction equipment stored or driven beyond the limits of the construction work area. Construction
equipment shall be parked and staged within the project site, as distant from the residential use, as reasonably possible.

Staging areas shall be screened from view from residential properties.
▪ Project Applicant(s) During pre-construction and construction City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review and approval of
construction documents;
periodic site inspections
during construction

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-9
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks COA-AES-2 Construction documents shall include language requiring that construction vehicles be kept clean and free of mud and dust prior to leaving the development site. Streets surrounding the development site shall be swept daily and maintained free of dirt and debris.
▪ Project Applicant(s) During pre-construction and construction City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review and approval of
construction documents;
periodic site inspections
during construction

COA-AES-3 Construction worker parking may be located off-site with prior approval by the City. On-street parking of construction worker vehicles on residential streets shall be prohibited.
▪ Project Applicant(s) During pre-construction and construction City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Review and approval of
construction documents;
periodic site inspections
during construction

COA-AQ-1 Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, the Community Development Director and the Building Official shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans, and specifications stipulate that, in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403,
excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be controlled by regular watering or other dust prevention measures, as specified in the SCAQMD’s Rules and Regulations. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site.

Implementation of the following measures would reduce short- term fugitive dust impacts on nearby sensitive receptors:

1. All active portions of the construction site shall be watered twice daily to prevent excessive amounts of dust;

2. Non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 20 days or more, assuming no rain), according to
manufacturers’ specifications;

3. All excavating and grading operations shall be suspended when wind gusts (as instantaneous gust) exceed 25 miles per hour;

4. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 miles per hour;

5. All on-site roads shall be paved as soon as feasible, watered twice daily, or chemically stabilized;

6. Visible dust beyond the property line which emanates from the project shall be prevented to the maximum extent
feasible;

7. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust prior to departing the job site;

8. Track-out devices shall be used at all construction site access points;

9. All delivery truck tires shall be watered down and/or scraped down prior to departing the job site;
▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit / ongoing inspections during construction
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Verification of grading plan,
building plans, and
specifications are in
compliance with SCAQMD
Rule 403 / Verification during
construction

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-10
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks

10. A construction relations officer shall be appointed to act as a community liaison concerning on-site construction activity including resolution of issues related to fugitive dust generation;

11. Streets shall be swept at the end of the day if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved public roads and use of SCAQMD Rule 1186 and 1186.1 certified street
sweepers or roadway; and

12. Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

COA-AQ-3 The following measures shall be implemented to reduce VOC emissions resulting from application of architectural coatings:
▪ Contractors shall use high-pressure-low-volume (HPLV) paint applicators with a minimum transfer efficiency of at least 50 percent;
▪ Use required coatings and solvents with a VOC content lower than required under Rule 1113;
▪ Construct/build with materials that do not require
painting; and
▪ Use pre-painted construction materials.
▪ Project Applicant(s) Ongoing inspections during construction City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Ongoing during construction
COA-AQ-6 Each individual implementing development project shall submit a traffic control plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The traffic control plan shall describe in detail safe detours and provide temporary traffic control during
construction activities for that project. To reduce traffic congestion, the plan shall include, as necessary, appropriate, and practicable, the following: temporary traffic controls such as a flag person during all phases of construction to maintain smooth traffic flow, dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off-site, scheduling of construction activities that affect traffic flow on the arterial system to off-peak hour, consolidating truck deliveries, rerouting of construction trucks away from congested streets or sensitive receptors, and/or signal synchronization to improve traffic flow.
▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit City of Fullerton Engineering Department
Submittal and approval of a
Traffic Control Plan

COA-AQ-9 Proposed developments within the City of Fullerton shall include, to the extent feasible, as a part of construction and building management contracts, the following measures:
▪ All residential and commercial structures shall be
required to incorporate high efficiency/low polluting
heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water
heaters.
▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to issuance of building permits City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Verification by City that
measures are included in
construction and building
contracts/ issuance of
building permits

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-11
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks ▪ All residential and commercial structures shall be
required to incorporate thermal pane windows and
weather-stripping.
▪ All residential, commercial, and industrial structures shall be required to incorporate light colored roofing
materials.

COA-AQ-14 New sensitive land uses such as residential, a hospital, medical offices, day care facilities, and fire stations shall not be located closer than 1,000 feet from any existing or
proposed distribution center/warehouse facility which
generates a minimum of 100 truck trips per day, or 40 truck trips with transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or TRU operations exceeding 300 hours per week, pursuant to the recommendations set forth in the CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. If new sensitive land uses cannot meet this setback, they shall be designed and conditioned to include mechanical ventilation systems with fresh air filtration. For operable windows or other sources of ambient air filtration, installation of a central heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system that includes high efficiency filters for particulates (Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value [MERV] 13 or higher) or other similarly effective systems shall be required.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Prior to issuance of a building permit City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Issuance of building permits
COA-BIO-1 A land use permit application for a project on a site located within or adjacent to an environmentally sensitive habitat area, as determined by the City of Fullerton Community Development Department, shall provide a Biological Resource Assessment prepared by a qualified biologist for review and approval by the Community Development Department. The Biological Resource Assessment shall evaluate the impact the proposed development may have on the habitat, and whether the development would be consistent with the biological continuance of the habitat. For those environmentally sensitive habitat areas which are only seasonally occupied, or where the presence of the species can best be determined during a certain season (e.g., annual wildflower species), the field investigation(s) must be conducted during the appropriate time to maximize detection of the subject species. The report shall identify possible impacts, their significance, measures to avoid possible impacts, mitigation measures required to reduce impacts to less than significant levels when impacts cannot be avoided, measures for the restoration of damaged habitats and long-term protection of the habitats, and a program for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of such measures.
▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to approval of a land use permit City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Submittal and approval of a
biological resource
assessment/ implementation
of identified mitigation
measures, as applicable

COA-CR-1 Future development projects for properties considered to be sensitive for cultural resources by the City of Fullerton shall conduct a Phase I Cultural Resources Study of the subject ▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to issuance of grading permit City of Fullerton Community and
Submittal and approval of a
Phase I Cultural Resources

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-12
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks property in accordance with the City of Fullerton’s protocol by a qualified professional, which shall be submitted to the City of Fullerton for review and approval. The Phase I Cultural Resources Study shall determine where the subject
development project would potentially cause a substantial adverse change to any significant archaeological,
paleontological, or historic resources. The Phase I Cultural Resources Study shall be prepared to meet the standards established by the City and shall, at a minimum, including the results of the following:

1. Records searches at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), the National or State Registry of Historic Places, and any appropriate public, private, and tribal archives.

2. Sacred Lands File records search with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), followed by project scoping with the tribes recommended by the NAHC.

3. Field survey of the subject development site.

Feasible measures shall be identified in order to mitigate the known and potential significant effects of the subject
development project, if any.

Economic Development
Department
Study/ Contact with Native
American Tribes
COA-CR-2 If the Phase I Cultural Resources Study required under COA-CR- 1 determines that monitoring during construction by a
professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist is needed for the subject development project, the project proponent shall retain a professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist, subject to approval by the City of Fullerton, prior to the issuance of grading permits. The task of the professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist shall be to verify
implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the City-approved Phase I Cultural Resources Study and to monitor the initial ground-altering activities, including but not limited to, debris removal, vegetation removal, tree removal, grading, trenching, or other site preparation activities. The professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert construction equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. All artifacts and/or fossils discovered at the subject development site shall be inventoried and analyzed by the professional archaeologist and/or paleontologist. If any artifacts of Native American origin are discovered, a Native American Tribal monitor shall be ▪ Project Applicant(s); a
professional
archaeologist and/or
paleontologist
Prior to issuance of a grading permit/ during
ground-altering activities
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Retention of a professional
archaeologist and/or
paleontologist/ ongoing
during initial ground-altering
activities/ submittal of report
of findings

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-13
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks asked to help analyze the Native American artifacts for identification as everyday life and/or religious or sacred items, cultural affiliation, temporal placement, and function, as deemed possible. A report of the findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered artifacts and/or fossils, shall be prepared and shall include a discussion of the significance and disposition of the recovered artifacts and/or fossils. The report and inventory shall be submitted to the City of Fullerton, signifying completion of the program to mitigate impacts to archaeological and/or paleontological resources.

COA-CR-3 In the event that cultural resources (archaeological, historical, paleontological) resources are inadvertently unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, the contractor shall immediately cease all earth- disturbing activities within a 100-foot radius of the area of discovery. If not already retained due to conditions present pursuant to CR-2, the project proponent shall retain a qualified professional (i.e., archaeologist, historian, architect, paleontologist, Native American Tribal monitor), subject to approval by the City of Fullerton, to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action (refer to Mitigation Measures CR-1, CR-2 and CR-4). If avoidance of the
resource(s) is not feasible, salvage operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately avoided or mitigated, work in the area may resume.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
During ground-altering activities City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Retention of a professional
archaeologist, paleontologist,
and/or Native American
monitor/ completion of
salvage operations, as
appropriate

COA-CR-4 In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are
determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendant of the deceased Native American, who shall serve as consultant on how to proceed with the remains. ▪ Project Applicant(s) During ground-altering activities City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
On-site monitor report to
Orange County Coroner’s
Office, if human remains are
discovered

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-14
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks and all site investigations (as outlined below), the SMP shall outline the proper screening, characterization, transportation, and disposal procedures for contaminated soils to be removed from the site for future development. For properties
considered by the City to involve the potential for site contamination, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall be prepared in accordance with ASTM Standards and
Standards and Practices for AAI, in order to investigate the potential existence of site contamination. Any site specific uses shall be analyzed according to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (i.e., auto service stations, agricultural lands, etc.).

The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment shall identify Specific Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) (i.e., asbestos containing materials, lead-based paints,
polychlorinated biphenyls, etc.), which may require remedial activities prior to construction. The Phase I ESA and SMP shall be provided to the City of Fullerton Community and Economic Department for review prior to any site grading.

The Project’s contractor shall ensure implementation of the SMP through the contract specifications for all proposed soil import and management of contaminated soils onsite, as
applicable. The SMP shall include health and safety and training procedures, air monitoring procedures, and permitting requirements. The SMP shall also include instructions for the identification of potentially-impacted soils, procedures for temporary cessation of construction activity and evaluation of the level of environmental concern if potentially-impacted soils or other subsurface anomalies are encountered, procedures for characterizing and managing potentially-impacted soils, and follow-up procedures such as confirmation sampling, disposal, and reporting, as necessary. Contaminated soil shall be managed and disposed of in accordance with applicable
federal, state, and local regulations. Imported soils shall meet all requirements for residential land use. Upon completion of construction activities, proof of compliance with the SMP shall be provided to the City of Fullerton Community and Economic Department.

Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the ▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to Remedial Excavation, if necessary and/or Issuance of Grading Permits
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Fire Department
Completion of Further
Sampling/ Remediation
Activities, if necessary/
Issuance of Grading Permits

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-15
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled.

In the event concentrations of materials are detected above regulatory cleanup levels during demolition or construction activities, the project Applicant shall comply with the following measures in accordance with Federal, State, and local
requirements:
▪ Excavation and disposal at a permitted, off-site facility; ▪ On-site remediation, if necessary; or
▪ Other measures as deemed appropriate by the City of
Fullerton Fire Department.

COA-HAZ-3 Prior to structural demolition/renovation activities, should these activities occur, a Certified Environmental Professional shall confirm the presence or absence of ACM’s and LBPs.

Should ACMs or LBPs be present, demolition materials
containing ACMs and/or LBPs shall be removed and disposed of at an appropriate permitted facility.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Certified
Environmental
Professional(s)
Prior to Issuance of Demolition or Construction
Permits/ Evaluation of ACM’s and LBPs/
Removal of ACMs and LBPs, if necessary
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Verification of Evaluation and
Removal of ACM’s and LBPs/
Issuance of Building Permits

COA-HAZ-4 Areas of exposed soils within Caltrans right-of-way that would be disturbed during excavation/grading activities shall be sampled and tested for lead prior to ground disturbance activities on a project-by-project basis, so that any special handling, treatment, or disposal provisions associated with aerially deposited lead may be included in construction documents (if aerially deposited lead is present).
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to excavation and grading activities/
during construction activities/ soil sampling, if
necessary/ remediation efforts, if necessary
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Completion of Sampling/
Remediation activities, if
necessary/ Issuance of
Grading Permits

COA-HAZ-5 Prior to construction, future developers shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan for implementation during the construction phase, as deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer. The Plan may include the following provisions, among others:
▪ At least one unobstructed lane shall be maintained in both directions on surrounding roadways.
▪ At any time only a single lane is available, the
developer shall provide a temporary traffic signal,
signal carriers (i.e., flagpersons), or other appropriate traffic controls to allow travel in both directions.
▪ If construction activities require the complete closure of a roadway segment, the developer shall provide
appropriate signage indicating detours/alternative
routes.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to issuance of demolition or construction
permits
City of Fullerton
Engineering Department
Submittal and approval of a
Traffic Control Plan

COA-HAZ-6 The City Community Development Department shall consult with the Fullerton Police Department to disclose temporary closures and alternative travel routes, in order to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles when construction of future projects would result in temporary lane or roadway closures.
▪ City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Prior to issuance of demolition or construction
permits
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Coordination with Fullerton
Police Department

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-16
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks COA-HYD-1 Prior to issuance of any Grading or Building Permit, and as part of the future development’s compliance with the NPDES
requirements, a Notice of Intent shall be prepared and
submitted to the Santa Ana RWQCB providing notification and intent to comply with the State of California General
Construction Permit. Also, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Engineering for water quality construction activities on-site. A copy of the SWPPP shall be available and implemented at the construction site at all times. The SWPPP shall outline the source control and/or treatment control BMPs to avoid or mitigate runoff pollutants at the construction site to the “maximum extent practicable.” All recommendations in the Plan shall be implemented during area preparation, grading, and construction. The project applicant shall comply with each of the and/or treatment control BMPs to avoid or mitigate runoff pollutants at the construction site to the “maximum extent practicable.” All recommendations in the Plan shall be implemented during area preparation, grading, and
construction. The project applicant shall comply with each of the recommendations detailed in the Study, and other such measure(s) as the City deems necessary to mitigate potential stormwater runoff impacts.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Issuance of Grading or Building Permits City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Proof of NOI Submittal/
Submittal and Approval of
SWPPP/ Issuance of Grading
or Building Permit

COA-HYD-2 Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit, future development projects shall prepare, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering, a Water Quality Management Plan or Stormwater Mitigation Plan, which includes Best Management Practices (BMPs), in accordance with the Orange County DAMP. All
recommendations in the Plan shall be implemented during post construction/operation phase. The project applicant shall comply with each of the recommendations detailed in the Study, and other such measure(s) as the City deems necessary to mitigate potential water quality impacts.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Submittal and Approval of a
Water Quality Management
Plan or Stormwater Mitigation
Plan/ Issuance of Grading
Permit

COA-HYD-3 Prior to site plan approval, the project owner/developer(s) shall be required to coordinate with the City of Fullerton Engineering Department to determine requirements necessary to mitigate impacts to drainage improvements in order to accommodate storage volumes and flood protection for existing and future runoff. Proposed projects shall implement mitigation
measures, if required, to the satisfaction of the City of Fullerton Public Works Director. For any new storm drainage
projects/studies that have the potential to impact adjacent jurisdictions’ storm drainage systems, the developer shall submit said studies to the applicable jurisdiction for review and approval.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Site Plan Approval City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Submittal and Review of
Storm Drainage Studies/ Site
Plan Approval

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-17
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks COA-N-1 Project applicants shall ensure through contract specifications that the following construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels:
▪ Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards and be in good working
condition.
▪ Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses,
where feasible.
▪ Schedule high noise-producing activities between the
hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM on any day except Sunday
or a City-recognized holiday to minimize disruption on
sensitive uses.
▪ Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent
feasible, which may include, but are not limited to,
temporary noise barriers or noise blankets around
stationary construction noise sources.
▪ Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, where feasible.
▪ Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty
equipment, motor vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for more than 30 minutes. ▪ Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow for surrounding owners and residents to contact the job superintendent. If the City or the job superintendent receives a complaint, the
superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate
corrective action, and report the action taken to the
reporting party.
▪ Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading or building permit (whichever is
issued first).
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit/ Periodic
Site Inspections Prior to- and During
Construction
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Issuance of Grading
Permit/Periodic Site
Inspections

COA-N-2 Project applicants shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks used during construction would be routed away from residential streets to the extent feasible. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit.

▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit/ Site
Inspections During Construction
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Review and Approval of
Contract Specifications/
Issuance of Grading Permits/
Site Inspections

Should construction activities take place within 25 feet of an ▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Issuance of a Prior to Issuance of a
Grading Permit/ Site Inspections During
Construction
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Review and Approval of
Contract Specifications/
Issuance of Grading Permits/
Site Inspections

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-18
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks occupied structure, a project specific vibration impact analysis shall be conducted. Contract specifications shall be included in construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Fullerton Engineering
Department
COA-N-4 The City shall require future developments to implement the following measures to reduce the potential for human
annoyance and architectural/structural damage resulting from elevated groundborne noise and vibration levels:
▪ Pile driving within a 50-foot radius of historic structures shall utilize alternative installation methods where possible (e.g., pile cushioning, jetting, predrilling, cast-in-place systems, resonance-free vibratory pile drivers).
▪ The preexisting condition of all designated historic
buildings within a 50-foot radius of proposed construction activities shall be evaluated during a preconstruction
survey. The preconstruction survey shall determine
conditions that exist before construction begins for use in evaluating damage caused by construction activities.

Fixtures and finishes within a 50-foot radius of
construction activities susceptible to damage shall be
documented (photographically and in writing) prior to
construction. All damage shall be repaired back to its
preexisting condition.

Vibration monitoring shall be conducted prior to and during pile driving operations occurring within 100 feet of the historic structures. Every attempt shall be made to limit construction- generated vibration levels in accordance with Caltrans
recommendations during pile driving and impact activities in the vicinity of the historic structures.
▪ Project Applicant(s);
Construction
Contractor
Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit/
Inspections During Pile Driving Operations
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Submittal and Approval of
Pre-Construction Surveys/
Ongoing During Construction

COA-N-5 Residential projects located within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour for the Fullerton Municipal Airport shall be subject to review by the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission and shall be required to ensure interior noise levels from aircraft operations are at or below 45 dB CNEL.
▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to Issuance of Building Permits City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Submittal and Approval of
Acoustical Noise Analysis /
Finding of Consistency/
Compatibility from the Orange
County Airport Land Use
Commission

COA-N-6 The City shall require mechanical equipment from future development to be placed as far practicable from sensitive receptors. Additionally, the following shall be considered prior to HVAC installation: proper selection and sizing of equipment, installation of equipment with proper acoustical shielding, and incorporating the use of parapets into the building design. ▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to Issuance of Building Permits City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Issuance of Building Permits
COA-PUB-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, individual development project applicants shall submit evidence to the City of Fullerton that legally required school impact mitigation ▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to Issuance of Building Permits City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department
Proof of Payment of School
Impact Mitigation Fees

ATTACHMENT A / MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NOVEMBER 2024 A-19
Table 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation
Number Mitigation Measure
Implementation Monitoring
Verification of
Compliance
Responsibility Timing Responsibility Timing Initials Date Remarks fees have been paid per the mitigation established by the applicable school district.

COA-TR-1 Prior to approval of any General Plan Amendment and/or Zone Change associated with the focused planning efforts for The Fullerton Plan Focus Areas, the City and/or project proponent shall prepare a detailed multi-modal analysis in order to determine specific impacts associated with the proposed General Plan Amendment and/or Zone Change, and where
applicable, identify mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less than significant levels based on City adopted multi-modal thresholds. The multi-modal analysis shall specify the timing, funding, construction, and fair share responsibilities for all traffic improvements necessary to maintain satisfactory levels of service within the City of Fullerton and surrounding jurisdictions, in accordance with the significant impact criteria established by the jurisdiction that controls the affected area. ▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to any GPA and/or Zone Change within The Fullerton Plan Focus Areas
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department
Preparation and Approval of a
Multi-Modal Analysis

COA-WW-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for any future development project, the Project Applicant shall prepare an engineering study to support the adequacy of the sewer
systems and submit the engineering study to the City of Fullerton for review and approval. Any improvements
recommended in the engineering study shall be installed prior to the certificate of occupancy for the development project. For any sewer projects/studies that have the potential to impact adjacent jurisdictions’ sewer systems, the developer shall submit said studies to the applicable jurisdiction for review and approval.

▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to Issuance of Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy
City of Fullerton
Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Submittal and Approval of an
Engineering Study/
Installation of Improvements
/ Issuance of Building Permit

COA-WW-2 Prior to issuance of a building permit for any future development project, the Project Applicant shall submit a sewer capacity analysis of existing wastewater utility in the project site’s vicinity for OCSD review and obtain sewer capacity verification from OCSD prior to issuance of a building permit.
▪ Project Applicant(s) Prior to Issuance of Building Permits City of Fullerton Community and
Economic Development
Department; City of
Fullerton Engineering
Department
Proof of Sufficient
Transmission and Treatment
Capacity from OCSD /
Issuance of Building Permit

City Council - Successor Agency - Housing AuthorityDecember 10, 2024

City Council - Successor Agency - Housing Authority
December 10, 2024