Hanford City Council
March 18, 2025

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-59
Discussion
This section is based on the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) prepared for the Project (QK, 2023d), which is included as Appendix E of this document. The WSA analysis of the Project used a higher residential lot count than what is currently proposed. Therefore, it can be presumed that water use estimates resulting from the Project would be less than the estimates provided in the WSA.

Impact #3.4.10a – Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? During construction, potential impacts on water quality arising from erosion and sedimentation are expected to be temporary conditions during the construction of the new development. The new development must develop and comply with an SWPPP that specifies BMPs to prevent construction pollutants from contacting stormwater to keep all erosion products from moving offsite and into receiving waters. The intention is to eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharge to storm sewer systems and other waters of the United States.

To reduce potential impacts to water quality during construction activities, the Project proponent will be required to prepare and receive approval of an SWPPP. The Project SWPPP would include BMPs to minimize and control the construction and post-construction runoff and erosion to the maximum extent practicable.

The SWPPP is required to be approved by the RWQCB prior to construction. Furthermore, the proposed Project has been designed to control stormwater runoff and erosion, both during and after construction. Project-specific drainage improvements would reduce the proposed Project’s potential to violate water quality standards during construction to a lessthan-significant impact.

The City Building Division and Public Works Department will review and approve the new development's grading plans and site development requirements.

Senate Bill 610 (Chapter 643, Statutes of 2001) amended State law, effective January 1, 2002, to improve the link between information on water supply availability and land use decisions made by cities and counties. The statute requires detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to city and county decision-makers prior to approval of specified large development projects which are subject to CEQA approval. These include residential, commercial, and industrial uses. The statute also requires this detailed information to be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an entitlement action by the city or county on such projects. The statute-required water supply assessment (WSA) must examine the availability and sufficiency of an identified water supply under normal-year, single-dry-year, and multiple dry-year conditions over a 20-year projection, accounting for the projected water demand of the Project in addition to other existing and planned future uses of the identified water supply. It was concluded that sufficient Project water supply is available and is in accordance with SB 610’s normal year, dry year, and

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-60
multiple dry year requirements. Therefore, the proposed Project's potential to violate water quality standards during construction is reduced to a less-than-significant impact with implementation of BMPs associated with the required SWPPP and NPDES permit, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10b – Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The Project site is located within the San Joaquin Valley – Tulare Lake Subbasin, which is identified as being critically over-drafted and subject to Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requirements and the newly formed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies. SGMA consists of three legislative bills, and the legislation provides a framework for long-term sustainable groundwater management across California. The current efforts of the City and Kings County Water District coupled with the requirement of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act through the Groundwater Sustainability Plan process ensure that future development as an implementation of the General Plan would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. GSAs will then have the responsibility to achieve groundwater sustainability.

Construction
The City currently uses groundwater pumped from the Tulare Lake Basin to meet its water demand. Like any activity in Hanford, groundwater would be used for construction. Water would be used for dust control during grading and construction and for minor activities such as washing construction equipment and vehicles. Water demands generated by the Project during the construction phase would be temporary and not substantial. It is anticipated that groundwater supplies would be adequate to meet construction water demands generated by the Project without depleting the underlying aquifer or lowering the local groundwater table.

Therefore, Project construction would not deplete groundwater supplies, and impacts would be less than significant.

Project construction would not substantially prevent or inhibit incidental groundwater recharge onsite during precipitation events. As the Project is constructed, portions of the site would remain pervious and would allow infiltration that presently occurs during precipitation events to continue to occur. Therefore, Project construction would not substantially deplete area groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, and impacts would be less than significant.

Operation
The WSA analyzed a Project with 342 dwelling units, and assumed an average household size in Hanford as 3.5 (QK, 2023d); therefore, under the assumptions, approximately1,197 people would be housed. However, based on the 326 lots now being proposed, the number of people would be 1,141, which has been calculated for water demand purposes in this

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-61
section. According to the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the supply and demand comparison for normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry year are given in Tables 3.4.10-1, 3.4.10-2, and 3.4.10-3 below.

Table 3.4.10-1
Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison
2025 (AF) 2030 (AF) 2035 (AF) 2040 (AF) 2045 (AF)
Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 11,623 12,172 12,748 13,351 13,982
Difference 3,488 3,179 2,855 2,515 2,160
Source: Appendix E
Table 3.4.10-2
Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison
2025 (AF) 2030 (AF) 2035 (AF) 2040 (AF) 2045 (AF)
Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 12,971 13,584 14,227 14,899 15,604
Difference 2,140 1,767 1,376 967 538
Source: Appendix E
Table 3.4.10-3
Five Consecutive Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison
2025 (AF) 2030 (AF) 2035 (AF) 2040 (AF) 2045 (AF)
First Year Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 12,971 15,584 14,227 15,899 15,604
Difference 2,140 1,767 1,376 967 538
Second
Year
Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 12,971 13,584 14,227 14,899 15,604
Difference 2,140 1,767 1,376 967 538
Third Year Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 12,971 13,584 14,227 14,899 15,604
Difference 2,140 1,767 1,376 967 538
Fourth
Year
Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 12,971 13,584 14,227 14,899 15,604
Difference 2,140 1,767 1,376 967 538
Fifth Year Supply 15,110 15,351 15,602 15,866 16,142
Demand 12,971 13,584 14,227 14,899 15,604
Difference 2,140 1,767 1,376 967 538
Source: Appendix E
Per the UWMP, approximately 11,715 acre-feet of water was delivered to an estimated 17,965 water service connections, of which approximately 67.5% of the water use is for residential services (City of Hanford, 2020). Based on an average day water demand of 125 gallons per day per person, the proposed Project would result in an estimated water demand

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-62
of 52.06 million gallons per year (1,162 people x 125 gallons/day x 365 days = 52.06 million gallons/year) or 162.7 159.76 acre-feet per year.

The Project will follow requirements as applicable in the City of Hanford and Kings County Groundwater Sustainability Plan (Greater Kaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency, 2020). Given that the water needed for the Project’s construction is temporary and minimal, and operations will be within projections associated with the UWMP, the Project’s construction and operations would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or conflict with any future adopted groundwater management plan.

Since the Project is consistent with the General Plan designation, the Project’s water usage has been accounted for in the UWMP. This Project’s groundwater usage would not change the condition of groundwater water supplies in the Basin beyond the baseline conditions and projections already analyzed in the 2020 UWMP. Therefore, the Project’s construction and operations would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere significantly with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Impacts would be less than significant. Impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10c(i) – Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
The Project site is relatively flat grading would be minimal. The topography of the site would not appreciably change because of grading activities. The site does not contain any blue-line water features, including streams or rivers. The Project has a proposed storm basin that will collect stormwater runoff on the site (QK, 2023a). The Project would develop areas of impervious surfaces that would reduce the rate of percolation at the site or concentrate, but areas of open space would allow for the percolation of stormwater to recharge the aquifer, or the water would be directed into the City’s existing stormwater sewer system. The Project would comply with applicable City development standards and codes. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact on drainage patterns or cause substantial erosion or siltation on or off the site.

As discussed in Impact #3.4.10a above, potential impacts on water quality from erosion and sedimentation are expected to be localized and temporary during construction.

Construction-related erosion and sedimentation impacts due to soil disturbance would be less than significant after implementing an SWPPP and BMPs required by the NPDES. No drainages or other water bodies are present on the Project site, and therefore, the proposed Project would not change the course of any such drainages.

The existing drainage pattern of the site and area would be affected by Project development because of the increase in impervious surfaces at the site. The Project design includes natural features such as landscaping vegetation and a retention basin that would allow for the percolation of stormwater. However, there will be an addition in impervious surfaces that

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-63
could increase the potential for stormwater runoff and soil erosion. The Project would connect to existing City stormwater sewer infrastructure. The Project will comply with all applicable local building codes and regulations to minimize impacts during construction and post-construction. With compliance of the required NPDES permit and SWPPP, impacts related to erosion or siltation on- or off-site are less than significant. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10c(ii) – Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? No drainages or other water bodies are present on the Project site. Therefore, the development of the site would not change the course of any such drainages that may potentially result in on or offsite flooding. Water would be used during the temporary construction phase of the Proposed project (e.g., for dust suppression). However, any water used for dust control would be mechanically and precisely applied and would generally infiltrate or evaporate prior to running off.

The Project site is flat, and the proposed grading would not substantially alter the overall topography of the Project site. Although the amount of surface runoff on the Project site would not substantially increase with the construction of the Project, runoff patterns and concentrations could be altered by grading activities associated with the Project. Improper design of the access road or building pads could alter drainage patterns that would cause flooding on or offsite. The potential for the construction of the proposed Project to alter existing drainage patterns would be minimized through compliance with the preparation of an SWPPP. With the implementation of such measures, the Project would not substantially increase the amount of runoff to result in flooding on or offsite. Impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels.

Additionally, approval of grading plans and site development requirements by the City Building Division that incorporates BMPs and design standards, the new development operations would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or offsite. Impacts would be less than significant with compliance with the required NPDES permit, and approval of an SWPPP. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10c(iii) – Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Please see Impact #3.4.10c(i)-(ii) above.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-64
Water would be used during the temporary construction phase of the proposed Project (e.g., for dust suppression). However, any water used for dust control would be mechanically and precisely applied and would generally infiltrate or evaporate prior to running off.

The Project would comply with all applicable State and City codes and regulations. The Project will construct a stormwater retention basin onsite to capture stormwater.

Engineering calculations will support the storm drainage plan to ensure that the Project does not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

Therefore, the Project would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10c(iv) – Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows?
See also Impact #3.4.10(a through c[iii]).

The Project will construct a stormwater retention basin onsite to capture stormwater, and the storm drainage plan would be reviewed and approved by the City. The Project would comply with all applicable State and City codes and regulations. A grading plan will be submitted for review and approval before construction activities to ensure it meets City standards.

The Project site is within an area of minimal flood hazard. There are no development restrictions associated since these are areas determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain. Impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10d – Would the Project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to Project inundation?
The Project site is not located by the ocean or lake large enough to produce seiches.

Therefore, there is no risk that the new development would be inundated by tsunami or seiches. The Project area is flat and does not contain slopes steep enough to cause a mudflow, avalanche, or significant ground-related risks. As noted above, the Project site is not located within the 100-year floodplain, and there do not appear to be any significant levees that could potentially affect people or structures if they were to fail.

The Kings County EOP concludes that dam inundation is not a significant hazard due to the very low probability of dam failure and the distance of Hanford from existing dams (Kings County, 2015). The Project site is not located in the dam inundation area and would therefore not expose people or structures to risk due to dam or levee failure. There would be no impact.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-65
There is no potential for the inundation of the Project site by seiche. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.10e – Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? See response #3.4.10b above. The water demand from this Project would not result in a significant impact due to depleted groundwater resources or interference with groundwater recharge. Per the City’s 2020 UWMP and under conclusions made in the prepared WSA, the City’s existing system has a total supply capacity that can accommodate the Project (QK, 2023d).

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-66

Discussion
Impact #3.4.11a – Would the Project physically divide an established community? The Project site is on the edge of the City’s core development area, which is expanding with the need for additional housing. There is residential development to the east, with undeveloped agricultural land to the west and north. As a note, the proposed Billingsley Ranch residential subdivision project is located directly west of the Project site. The Project proposes connecting to existing roadways, providing future connectivity access, and not dividing an established or future community. Future development would not be built in a pre-existing community area and would not create any physical barrier between an established community. Therefore, the Project would not result in an impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.11b – Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

The Land Use and Planning section of the focused EIR will evaluate the consistency of the proposed project with City General Plan policies, zoning regulations, and LAFCo policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental impact, pursuant to Appendix G of CEQA Guidelines in the EIR.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less-thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.11 - LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the Project:
a. Physically divide an established
community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-67

Discussion
Impact #3.4.12a – Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? The California Department of Conservation and Geological Survey classifies lands into Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) based on guidelines adopted by the California State Mining and Geology Board, as mandated by the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1974. These MRZs identify whether known or inferred significant mineral resources are present in areas. Lead agencies are required to incorporate identified MRZs resource areas delineated by the State into their General Plans. Neither the Project site nor the surrounding area is designated as a Mineral Resources Zone in the City of Hanford General Plan or zoning ordinance, nor is it currently being utilized for mineral extraction (City of Hanford, 2014). The Project site is also not within a CalGEM-identified oilfield or gas field.

The Project design does not include mineral extraction. The Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.12b – Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
See Impact #3.4.12a above. No portion of the City or nearby vicinity is designated for mineral resources or zoned for mineral resources (City of Hanford, 2017). Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resources recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or any other land use, and there would be no impact. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less–thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.12 - MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:

a. Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan, or other land use plan?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-68

Discussion
Impact #3.4.13a – Would the Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Land uses deemed sensitive receptors include schools, hospitals, rest homes, and long-term care and mental care facilities, which are considered to be more sensitive to ambient noise levels than others. The nearest sensitive land uses include widely spaced residential homes to the south and west.

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

The General Plan Noise Element and City Municipal Code outline policies and regulations to mitigate the health effects of noise in the community and prevent exposure to excessive noise levels. In particular, policies in the General Plan regarding new development include:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less-thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.13 - NOISE
Would the Project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the Project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. For a Project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the Project expose people
residing or working in the Project area to
excessive noise levels?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-69
• Policy H41 Interior Noise Exposure. Adopt State Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) and Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) concerning interior noise exposure for new single, and multi-family housing, hotels, and motels.
• Policy H42 Noise Evaluation for New Development. Evaluate proposed development proposals against existing and future noise levels from ground transportation noise sources. Policy H43 Non-Transportation Noise. Mitigate noise created by non-transportation noise sources so as not to exceed the maximum allowable interior and exterior noise level standards. • Policy H48 Noise Mitigation for Construction Activities. Require all development projects to mitigate noise impacts associated with construction activities. Policy H50 Sound Walls. Utilize sound walls at the perimeter of new residential developments to protect from noise generated by transportation corridors.

During the Project's construction phase, noise-generating activities will be present; however, it will be temporary, and any machinery used as a part of the construction of the Project will be muffled. Construction activities would be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime working hours. Construction is anticipated to take approximately 12 months to complete. The City Noise Ordinance- 9.10.060.10 requires construction to occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. There are no specific construction noise thresholds established by the City other than the noise-generating construction activities that are only allowed to occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. However, the proposed Project's construction would be temporary and would occur between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., five days a week for approximately 12 months. No demolition or pile-driving will occur during the construction phase of the Project (City of Hanford, 2022). The Project will comply with this ordinance to the greatest extent feasible, which will reduce temporary noise impacts to less than significant levels. .

Once constructed, the Project would not significantly increase traffic on local roadways.

Residential activities could also increase ambient noise levels in the immediate Project vicinity. Activities that could be expected to generate noise include cars entering and exiting the development and mechanical systems related to heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems located in residential buildings. However, the development will be surrounded by a six-foot-high block wall, which will reduce the noise emanating from residences. Additionally, this noise would be similar to those generated by the nearby existing residential development and would not be of a level that exceeds thresholds.

Therefore, these increases in ambient noise are considered less than significant and consistent with applicable standards. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.13b – Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-70
The proposed Project is expected to create temporary ground-borne vibration as a result of the construction activities (during site preparation and grading). According to the U.S.

Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, vibration is sound radiated through the ground. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration is called groundborne noise. The ground motion caused by vibration is measured as particle velocity in inches per second and is referenced as vibration decibels (VdB). The background vibration velocity level in residential areas is usually around 50 VdB. A list of typical vibration-generating equipment is shown in Table 3.4.13-1. However, the Project does not propose to use this specific equipment. The table is meant to illustrate typical vibration levels for various pieces of equipment.

Table 3.4.13-1
Different Levels of Groundborne Vibration
Vibration Velocity Level Equipment Type
94 VdB Vibratory roller
87 VdB Large bulldozer
87 VdB Caisson drilling
86 VdB Loaded trucks
79 VdB Jackhammer
58 VdB Small bulldozer
Source: (Federal Transit Administration, 2006) Note: 25 feet from the corresponding equipment.

The vibration velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels for many people.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations (Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S.

Department of Transportation, 2017). In general, the FTA architectural damage criterion for continuous vibrations (i.e., 0.2 inch/second) appears to be conservative even for sustained pile driving. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience any cosmetic damage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This distance can vary substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer between vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to vibration generated by construction equipment. The typical vibration produced by construction equipment is illustrated in Table

3.4.13-2.

With regard to the proposed Project, groundborne vibration would be generated during site clearing and grading activities onsite facilitated by the implementation of the proposed Project. As indicated in Table 3.4.13-2, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment that would be used during Project construction range from 0.076 to 0.210 inch-per-second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet from the source of activity. As demonstrated in Table 3.4.13-2, vibration levels at 100 feet would range from

0.010 to 0.026 PPV. Therefore, the anticipated vibration levels would not exceed the 0.2 inchPage 626 of 1543 Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-71
per-second PPV significance threshold during construction operations at the nearest receptors, which are residences located easterly adjacent to the Project site.

Table 3.4.13-2
Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment
Reference peak particle
velocity at 25 feet
(inches/second)1
Approximate peak particle
velocity at 100 feet
(inches/second)2
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.011
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.010
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.000
Auger/drill Rigs 0.089 0.011
Jackhammer 0.035 0.004
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 0.009
Vibratory
Compactor/roller 0.210 0.026
Notes:
1 – Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines, May 2006. Table 12-2. 2 – Calculated using the following formula: PPV equip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5 where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level in/sec from Table 12-2 of the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
Typical outdoor sources of perceptible ground-borne vibration are construction equipment and traffic on rough roads. For example, if a roadway is smooth, the ground-borne vibration from traffic is barely perceptible.

Typically, ground-borne vibration generated by construction activity attenuates rapidly with distance from the source of the vibration. Therefore, vibration issues are generally confined to distances of less than 500 feet (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2005). Potential sources of temporary vibration during the construction of the proposed Project would be minimal and would include the transportation of equipment to the site.

Construction activity would include various site preparation, grading, fabrication, and site cleanup work. Construction would not involve the use of equipment that would cause high ground-borne vibration levels, such as pile-driving or blasting. Once constructed, the proposed Project would not have any components that would generate high vibration levels.

Thus, the construction and operation of the proposed Project would not result in any vibration, impacts would be less than significant and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.13c – Would the Project result in for a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-72
As noted previously, the Project site is approximately 2.8 miles west of the Hanford Municipal Airport, and outside hazards or noise contour zone boundary as identified in the Kings ALUCP (Kings County, 1994). The noise levels associated with the airport operations do not contribute significantly to the overall noise environment at the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels, and there would be no impact and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-73

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less- than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.14 - POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the Project:
a. Induce substantial population unplanned
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)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
Discussion
Impact #3.4.14a – Would the Project induce substantial population unplanned 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)? According to the 2020 U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the population in Hanford was 57,990 people (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). The City is expected to increase its population by 32,010 residents in the next 20 years. The City’s General Plan goals include encouraging residential developments to meet the future population growth needs. The Project proposed 326 new housing units, and the average number of persons per household in the City of Hanford is

3.5(QK, 2023d). Therefore, the Project will house approximately 1,141 people. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) from the California Department of Housing and Community Development specifies the number of units, by affordability level, that need to be accommodated.

Table 3.4.14-1
Regional Housing Needs 2014-2024 (Hanford)
Housing Type Federal Standards
Extremely Low 549
Very Low 548
Low 821
Low Moderate 865
Above Moderate 2,049
Total 4,832
Source: (City of Hanford, 2022)

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-74
The Project directly induces population growth in an area by proposing new residential development. However, the population of the City is expected to grow by more than 50 percent over the next 20 years, furthering the need for additional dwelling units. The 6th Cycle RHNA states that the City of Hanford will need to provide an additional 5,547 dwelling units by 2035. The proposed Project will provide an estimated additional 326 single-family units. The Project is also consistent with the density allowed in the General Plan planned for population growth. The Project will help the City of Hanford work toward attaining a sufficient housing supply for its residents. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.14b – Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Construction of the Project is anticipated to last 12 months and would likely be completed by construction workers residing in the City or the surrounding area; they would not require new housing. The Project site is undeveloped and will not displace existing people or housing, necessitating replacing housing elsewhere. Therefore, the Project would have no impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-75

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less-thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.15 - PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the Project:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or to other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i. Fire protection?
ii. Police protection?
iii. Schools?
iv. Parks?
v. Other public facilities?

Discussion
Impact #3.4.15a(i) – Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the public services - Fire Protection? The Project site is located approximately 0.28 miles west of Kings County Fire Department Station 3.

The proposed Project will comply with Title 24 of the California Building Code and local development standards. Prior to the recordation of any subdivision map, the applicant will be required to enter into an agreement with the City to contribute towards necessary fire protection equipment and/or facilities as determined through negotiations between the City and the applicant.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-76
An approved water supply system capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection purposes is to be installed by the Project. The establishment of gallons-perminute requirements for fire flow shall be based on the Guide for Determination of Required Fire Flow, published by the State Insurance Service Office and the City’s adopted Fire Code.

Development of the Project will increase the need for fire protection services and expand the service area and response times of the local City Fire Department. The Project would install the required infrastructure to meet water supply demands for fire protection services. Fire hydrants would also be located and installed per the City fire standards. These design standards, coupled with existing fire protection infrastructure, would provide the proper fire suppression services onsite. By incorporating the fire standards and the required design features in the Project design, additional fire protection services will be required to provide the Project’s coverage. Because the Project will increase both the need and the demand for fire protection services in the City, the Project will comply with impact fee requirements.

According to the General Plan, the Project plans and permits will be reviewed for input from the Police and Fire Departments. The Project’s proposed construction would be located adjacent to existing residential areas, which the City Fire Department already serves. The developer will be required to pay development impact fees to offset the growth in population in the area that would impact fire protection. Impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.15a(ii) – Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the public services – Police Protection? The City of Hanford Police Department is located approximately two miles northeast of the Project and provides law enforcement and public protection. The proposed Project would be located adjacent to residential subdivisions that the City police station serves.

The Project proposes additional residential development in a previously undeveloped location, which will increase the need for police services. The Project will pay appropriate development fees based on the adopted fee calculations and is responsible for constructing any infrastructure needed to serve the Project. The Project may result in significant environmental impacts related to acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives specific to police protection services, and expanded police coverage may be required. Impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.15a(iii) – Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the public services – Schools?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-77
The local school districts include Hanford Joint Union High and Armona Union Elementary school districts. Local districts typically serve both a portion of the City and areas of Kings County. Armona Union Elementary local school districts provide elementary, and one local school district provides secondary education to the City of Hanford. The increased population generated by the proposed Project would increase the number of students attending local schools and could significantly impact these facilities by requiring new facilities. The proposed Project would require the payment of Developer fees for each new residential construction to offset the District’s student classroom capacity. The developer will pay appropriate impact fees at the time of building permits. According to Government Code Section 65996, the development fees authorized by SB 50 are deemed “full and complete school facilities mitigation.” School districts would utilize the General Plan and codes to establish new school sites and make decisions on school amenities and facility size.

The development will be subject to School Impact Fees to mitigate any increased impacts on school facilities, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.15a(iv) – Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or to other performance objectives for any of the public services – Parks? The Project is within the boundaries of the Hanford Parks and Recreation District. The proposed Project includes uses that would increase the use of park and recreation facilities in the area. The City presently owns and maintains 24 parks. The closest City-maintained park is Centennial Park located approximately 0.59 miles east of the Project site.

According to the 2020 Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the City currently offers 299.70 acres of parkland which equates to a total Level of Service (LOS) of 5.06 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents based on the City’s 2018 population. The 2035 General Plan includes a LOS standard goal of 3.5 acres per 1,000 residents for future growth. Similar to other public services, the City had established the Park Facilities Impact Fee - Policy O65 pursuant to Chapter 15.44 of the City Municipal Code. The parks facilities development impact fee is established on the issuance of all residential building permits for development in the Hanford city area to pay for parks and recreational facilities improvements. Each developer will pay this development fee prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Project will pay its assessed fees as required by Policy O65. Additionally, a 3.58-acre neighborhood park is planned to be developed to provide recreational space in the immediate space of the proposed subdivision. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.15a(v) – Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-78
times, or to other performance objectives for any of the public services – Other Public Facilities?
The City provides a wide range of public services to the public besides those services previously mentioned above. The City also provides animal control services, refuse pick-up, library facilities, and drainage management. These services are generally funded through the general fund, usage fees, fines, penalties, or impact fee collection.

In the City of Hanford, all jurisdictions collect planning and building fees and impact fees for new development, as necessary. Since the demand for other public facilities is driven by population, the proposed Project would be required to pay fees to offset the demand for that service. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-79

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less–thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.16 - RECREATION
Would the Project:
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b. Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities that might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?

Discussion
Impact #3.4.16a – Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
See Impact #3.4.15a(ii) above.

The City’s inventory of parks and recreation facilities ranges from a rose garden to softball and baseball fields to community centers. Park facilities are classified into nine categories:
private recreational space, mini-park or pocket park, neighborhood parks, community parks, special use parks, dual-purpose stormwater basin park, indoor recreational facilities, school parks, and regional parks. Recreational facilities span from picnic shelters to sports fields.

Hanford maintains 229.17 acres of park and grounds, including inspection of Landscape Assessment Districts and right of way and median landscape acreage. Additionally, several elementary schools within Hanford provide public open space during non-school hours.

The Project would not require the construction of additional recreational facilities due to the existing ratio of at least 5.06 acres per 1,000 residents. Given the close proximity to Centennial and Heritage Parks, the Project is required to meet a reduced ratio of 3.5 acres per 1,000 residents and proposed the development of a 3.58-acre neighborhood park. The City of Hanford requires that the Project developer pay Park Impact Fees for parkland, community centers, recreational facilities, park amenities, vehicle equipment, and impact fee studies to offset any potential impacts from new development.

Although the proposed Project includes uses that would increase the use of park and recreation facilities in the area, payment of Park Impact Fees will address impacts associated with maintenance and upkeep of park and recreation facilities result from increased use

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-80
andwill not result in the substantial physical deterioration of existing parks or recreational facilities. There would be a less-than-significant impact with the payment of the impact fees.

No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.16b – Would the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The Project includes the development of a 3.58-acre neighborhood park. The development of this neighborhood park will provide outdoor recreational space for residents in the immediate area. The Project does not include the expansion of existing recreational facilities.

There will be no impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-81
Discussion
Impact #3.4.17a – Would the Project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
The subject Project site is located south of Hanford Armona Road between Greenbrier Driver to the east and 13th Avenue to the west. The Project could potentially significantly impact the local circulation system and level of service at nearby intersections. A Traffic Impact Analysis will be prepared and impacts to the circulation system will be analyzed in the EIR.

Impact #3.4.17b – Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision (b)?
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b) was adopted in December 2018 by the California Natural Resources Agency. These revisions to the CEQA Guidelines criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts shift the focus from driver delay to a reduction of vehicular greenhouse gas emissions through the creation of multimodal vehicle trips. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is a measure of the total number of miles driven for various purposes and is sometimes expressed as an average per trip or per person.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less-thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.17 - TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Would the Project:
a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, Subdivision
(b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-82
In the case of this Project, the anticipated VMT impacts could potentially exceed established significance thresholds. As such, an in-depth VMT analysis is required and will be further analyzed in the EIR.

Impact #3.4.17c – Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
The Project will be designed to meet current standards and safety regulations. All intersections will be constructed to comply with the City and Caltrans regulations and design and safety standards of Chapter 33 of the California Building Code (CBC) and the guidelines of Title 24 to create safe and accessible roadways.

Vehicles exiting the subdivision will be provided with a clear view of the roadway without obstructions. Landscaping associated with the entry driveways could impede such views if improperly installed. Specific circulation patterns and roadway designs will incorporate all applicable safety measures to ensure that hazardous design features or inadequate emergency access to the site or other areas surrounding the Project area would not occur.

Therefore, the Project will have a less-than-significant impact with the incorporated design features and all applicable rules and regulations. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.17d – Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? See the discussion in Impact #3.4.9f
State and City fire codes establish standards by which emergency access may be determined.

The proposed Project would have to provide adequate unobstructed space for fire trucks to turn around. The proposed Project site would have adequate internal circulation capacity, including entrance and exit routes to provide adequate unobstructed space for fire trucks and other emergency vehicles to gain access and to turn around. The proposed Project would not inhibit the ability of local roadways to continue to accommodate emergency response and evacuation activities. Therefore, the Project would result in a less-than-significant impact associated with emergency access. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-83

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less–thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.18 - TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:
a. Would the Project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code Section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or
ii. A resource determined by the Lead
Agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the Lead
Agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

Discussion
Impact #3.4.18a(i) – Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is 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)?
See also Section 3.4.5 - Cultural Resources.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-84
Native American Tribal Consultation was completed for the Project in compliance with Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), CEQA, and the Public Resources Code.

A Sacred Land Files search was requested from the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to identify previously recorded sacred sites or cultural resources of special importance to tribes and provide contact information for local Native American representatives who may have information about the Project area. A response was received on June 20, 2022, indicating negative results that did not indicate the presence of any cultural places within the Project site and within a half-mile buffer around the Project site. The City of Hanford, as Lead Agency, sent consultation request letters pursuant AB 52 to the tribal groups on the NAHC list.

The Lead Agency has not received information from a local tribal group indicating that the Project would impact tribal cultural resources.

Although there is no obvious evidence of historical or archaeological resources on the Project site, there is the potential during construction for the discovery of cultural resources.

Grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing actions can damage or destroy these previously unidentified and potentially significant cultural resources within the Project area, including historical resources.

The General Plan EIR determined that new development could affect known and previously unknown archaeological resources. The EIR also included policies that specifically address sensitive archaeological resources and their protection, which include:
• Policy O45—Consult with appropriate Native American associations about potential archaeological sites in the beginning stages of the development review process. • Policy O46—Require archaeological studies by a certified archeologist in areas of archeological potential significance prior to approval of development projects. • Policy O47—Consult with the California Archaeological Inventory Southern San Joaquin Valley at California State University, Bakersfield about potential cultural sites on projects that could have an impact on cultural resources. • Policy O48—Halt construction at a development site if cultural resources are encountered.

An inventory was conducted for the General Plan Update and this site was not listed as having a potential cultural resource. Compliance with General Plan Policies 045 throughO48, as set forth above, is required to be included as a note on all plans and specs resulting from the Project. The notes would outline the necessary steps to be taken. The required notes will require the Project developer to adhere to the policies set forth in the Hanford General Plan pertaining to the preservation of Cultural Resources, including Policies 045 through O48.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-85
These measures will be added to all engineered plans and specs that outline the necessary steps to be taken prior to the start of construction in the unlikely event construction of the Project inadvertently uncovers previously unknown tribal cultural resources. These measures require all work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery of cultural resources to halt until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the find and make recommendations. In addition, prior to any ground disturbance, if the City of Hanford receives a request from a Native American tribal group, a surface inspection of the site will be conducted by a tribal monitor, and the tribe will have the opportunity to provide a Native American Monitor during ground-disturbing activities, dependent upon the availability and interest of the tribe.

With the implementation of these measures, impacts are considered to be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.18a(ii) – Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the Lead Agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the Lead Agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? See discussion in Section 3.4.5 - Cultural Resources and Impact #3.14.18(i) above.

With the implementation of these measures, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is a resource determined by the Lead Agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. The Project would result in a less-than-significant impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-86

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less-thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the Project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which would
cause significant environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry, and
multiple dry years?
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve
the Project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the Project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity of
local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e. Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?

Discussion
Impact #3.4.19a – Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which would cause significant environmental effects?
The proposed Project will require the construction of new infrastructure to connect to the existing City utility infrastructure. This will include water, wastewater, and stormwater drainage connections. Additionally, the Project will include connections for electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. The installation of this infrastructure will not require any major upsizing or other offsite construction activities that would cause a

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-87
significant impact. The new infrastructure would be connected to the existing infrastructure that is adjacent to the Project site.

See Section #3.4.10- Hydrology and Water Quality for a discussion of water and stormwater disposal. The Project will not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. Water usage for dust control during construction-related activities will be minimal due to the small footprint and short duration of construction-related activities of the proposed Project.

The proposed Project would be subject to the payment of any applicable connection charges and/or fees and extension of services in a manner that is compliant with the City’s development standards, specifications, and policies. All applicable local, State, and federal requirements and best management practices will be incorporated into the construction and operation of the Project. Therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.19b – Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
The City’s water system is a groundwater system. The City is located within the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region. Within that region, the City is located within the Tulare Lake Groundwater Subbasin, which transmits, filters, and stores water from the main San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin.

The City of Hanford maintains 203 miles of main lines (City of Hanford, 2021a). The City has established an ongoing program to replace undersized and aging water mains with larger lines that have the capability to deliver more water and consistent pressure as demand increases. The City has constructed six new deep-water wells, rehabilitated two deep wells, and eliminated six old wells with poor water quality. To use the most cost-efficient wells in the system as primary producers, a sophisticated computer control system was installed in 1992. The system is currently being upgraded and is anticipated to be fully functional in the spring of 2014. The City’s water system consists of 13 supply wells, one standby well, three elevated storage tanks (all three of which are abandoned), one existing 0.5-million-gallon ground-level storage tank at the Industrial Park, 3.5-million-gallon ground-level storage tank, and a piping network for distributing the water throughout the City (two-million-gallon storage tank at Grangeville and Centennial Drive facility and one-million-gallon storage tank at the Fargo Avenue facility).

Table 3.4.19-1
Water Usage
Project Component Description Acre-Feet/Year
Low Density Residential 326 units/1,141 people 159.76
Total 159.76
Source: Appendix E

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-88
Under the 2020 City of Hanford Urban Water Management Plan indicated that the actual 2020 gallons per capita per day for water demand was calculated at 125 GPCD. Therefore, the water demand for the proposed Project would result in 142,625 gallons per day (1,141 people x 125 gallons/day/person = 142,625 gallons/day) or 159.76 acre-feet per year. In consideration of the UWMP projections for water availability, the long-term operational water demand is lower than the available water supply in the City of Hanford and would be able to be accommodated by City services.

It is important to note that the water usage for the General Plan-designated land uses for the Project site water usage was considered as an effect of General Plan implementation in the adopted General Plan EIR. Such water usage is approximately the same as that required for Project implementation.

Water usage for construction is anticipated to have minimal effect and development as indicated in the UWMP and prepared WSA within water demand projections of the City. Even on a short-term basis, such usage does not require the water volumes required for human occupancy of residences and other structures, waste disposal, and year-round landscaping.

Water usage for construction dust control, trench and roadway soils compaction, landscaping, and related activities and usage is sporadic rather than long-term. Its quantification for analysis is difficult, but it clearly does not approximate or affect long-term water supply and demand projections.

Implementation of the Project will result in an increased demand for municipal water and potentially require an extension of the existing city water system. The Project will obtain its water from the City of Hanford’s municipal water system. The site is within the City of Hanford Water Management Plan Service Area (City of Hanford, 2020). The City’s groundwater has historically been capable of reliably meeting the City’s water demands. It is projected that with the expected population growth when the Project is completed, the supply of water would meet the demand. Based on these estimates, the Project’s construction and operations would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.19c – Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? Under the General Plan Update, it was determined that planned improvements and expansion development through various goals and policies would assist in providing wastewater services to the study area as development continues (City of Hanford, 2017).

The current capacity of the WWTF is designed to accommodate 8.0 mgd, which is expected to provide adequate services to population growth for the foreseeable future, as noted in the General Plan.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-89
Hanford's existing wastewater system includes a treatment facility south of Houston Avenue and east of 11th Avenue and 21 sanitary sewer lift stations at various locations throughout the city. The City has plans for pump replacements or upgrades at each of its locations within the next several years. The City’s wastewater treatment facility provides for treatment, disposal, and reuse of effluent, which meets all of the State’s discharge requirements for Hanford. The City’s plant treats nearly 1.75 billion gallons of sewage each year. The facility is a major part of the City’s effort to keep the environment clean and to provide a water resource for agricultural irrigation and reuse.

The latest treatment plant expansion was completed in 2004, increasing the City’s treatment capacity from 5.5 to 8.0 mgd, equivalent to an additional service for 8,000 new single-family dwellings. The expansion included a new influent pump station, head works, grit removal, oxidation ditch, irrigation pump station, and several modifications to existing buildings and structures. An increase of 326 homes would not cause a significant impact to the existing wastewater treatment plant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.19d – Would the Project Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Kings Waste Recycling Authority (KWRA) will remove solid waste produced from construction and operation. The KWRA is a key element that helps the City of Hanford meet the State's recycling goals. Refuse from both municipal and commercial haulers is sorted at the KWRA facility to recover recyclable materials, including wood/green waste processed for compost, ferrous/metallic items, plastic and glass, newspaper, scrap paper, junk mail, magazines, paperboard, and cardboard. The KWRA does not operate an active landfill. Waste is hauled by transfer trucks from the Material Recover Facility (MRF) to the State permitted 320-acre Chemical Waste Management Landfill site in Kettleman Hills, approximately 45 miles west of the MRF. A combined MRF and Transfer Station (TS) was constructed near the old landfill southeast of Hanford. The MRF and TS facility includes a small but complete Household Hazardous Waste collection station. KWRA operates the MFR and TS as an enterprise function, with all revenue coming from solid waste disposal fees and the sale of recovered recyclable materials and compost. Responsibilities of the KWRA include the siting, permitting, financing, construction, and operation of landfills, and an MRF and TS. Additional responsibilities include all activities and waste diversion goals required by the State and the closure, post-closure monitoring, and liabilities of all identified former landfills in Kings County.

Construction
Non-hazardous construction refuse and solid waste would be collected and recycled or disposed of in a KWRA facility (City of Hanford, 2017). Any hazardous waste generated during construction would be disposed of at an approved location.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-90
The Kettleman Hills Landfill has a maximum permit capacity of 18.4 million cubic yards (mcy) and a remaining capacity of 17.4 mcy and is expected to remain operational until at least 2030 (Cal Recycle, 2022).

The solid waste generated by construction activities is not expected to exceed the capacity of the landfill. Additionally, the construction period for the project is expected to be up to 12 months, and the landfill that would serve the project would be in operation during the construction period.

Operation
The Project would produce waste that would be collected and disposed of at the local landfill by a licensed waste hauler. Workers would generate small amounts of typical household refuse during maintenance visits. Some refuse will be sent for recycling as a part of the City’s recycling efforts.

In compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, the Project would dispose of all waste generated onsite at an approved solid waste facility.

The Project does not conflict with federal, State, or local regulations related to solid waste.

The proposed Project would be served by a landfill with the sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the Project’s solid waste disposal needs in compliance with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, the Project would have a lessthan-significant impact.

Cities generally measure their progress on waste reduction and reuse with a measurement called the “diversion rate.” Hanford’s diversion rate is 51 percent, which is about the statewide average. This level also meets the 51 percent required rate under State law since 2007. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.19e – Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed Project would generate solid waste during construction and operation, thus requiring the consideration of waste reduction and recycling measures. The 1989 California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) requires the City of Hanford to attain specific waste diversion goals. As stated above, the Kettleman Hills Landfill can accommodate solid waste generated by the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not be expected to significantly impact the area. See also Impact #3.4.9f regarding emergency response landfills.

In addition, the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991, as amended, requires expanded or new development Projects to incorporate storage areas for recycling bins into the proposed Project design. The proposed Project would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to the handling and disposal

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-91
of solid waste. The Project would result in a less-than-significant impact, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-92

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less-thanSignificant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.20 - WILDFIRE
Would the Project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose Project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power
lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate
fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
Discussion
Impact #3.4.20a – Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
See Impact #3.4.9f regarding emergency response. The proposed Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan regarding wildfire. Therefore, the Proposed project would have no impact regarding threshold a) above, and no further analysis is required.

Impact #3.4.20b – Would the Project due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose Project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? The risk of wildfire is related to a variety of parameters, including fuel loading (vegetation), fire weather (winds, temperatures, humidity levels, and fuel moisture contents), and topography (degree of slope). Fuels such as grass are highly flammable because they have a high surface area to mass ratio and require less heat to reach the ignition point. Steep slopes

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-93
contribute to fire hazards by intensifying the effects of wind and making fire suppression difficult.

The Project site and surrounding area are relatively flat and without steep slopes. The site is located in a predominately urban area with some ongoing agricultural activities, which is not considered at significant risk of wildlife. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.20c – Would the Project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
The Project includes the development of infrastructure (water, sewer, electrical power lines, and storm drainage) required to support the proposed residential uses. The Project site is surrounded by existing and future urban development. The Project would require installing or maintaining additional electrical distribution lines and natural gas lines to connect the residences to the existing utility grid. However, the Project would be constructed in accordance with all local and State regulations regarding power lines and other related infrastructure, as well as fire suppression requirements. Therefore, the Project would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing environmental impacts and would be less than significant, and no further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.20d – Would the Project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
The Project site is not located in or near an SRA or an LRA Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Thus the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact, and no further analysis is required.

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-94

Discussion
Impact #3.4.21a – Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
As evaluated in this IS, the Project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory including paleontological resources. Avoidance and minimization

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

3.4.21 - MANDATORY FINDINGS OF

SIGNIFICANCE
a. Does the Project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, substantially
reduce the number or restrict the range of a
rare or endangered plant or animal, or
eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b. Does the Project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a
Project are significant when viewed in
connection with the effects of past Projects,
the effects of other current Projects, and the
effects of probable future Projects.)
c. Does the Project have environmental effects
that would cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?

Initial Study

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 3-95
measures have been recommended to be added to all engineered plans and specs. By implementing these measures related to cultural, paleontological, and biological resources.

The incremental effects of the proposed Project would not contribute to a cumulative adverse impact on these resources. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact. No further analysis in the EIR is warranted.

Impact #3.4.21b - Does the Project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a Project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past Projects, the effects of other current Projects, and the effects of probable future Projects.)? The Project has the potential to contribute a cumulatively significant impact on the City’s circulation system and impacts related to VMT, as identified in this Initial Study. In addition, the Land Use and Planning section will evaluate the consistency of the proposed Project with City General Plan policies, zoning regulations, and LAFCo policies adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental impact. Such impacts could occur as a result of full buildout of the Project. Therefore, the preparation of a focused EIR is warranted to evaluate the Project’s contribution to transportation impacts related to the City’s circulation system and VMT. The EIR will evaluate the proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts in this area.

Impact #3.4.21c - Does the Project have environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The ways in which people can be subject to substantial adverse effects from projects include potential exposure to significant levels of local air pollutants; potential exposure to seismic and flooding hazards; potential exposure to hazardous materials; potential exposure to contamination from hazardous materials; and potential exposure to excessive noise levels.

The risks from these potential hazards would be avoided or reduced to less-than-significant levels through compliance with existing laws, regulations, or avoidance and minimization measures placed on all engineered plans and specs. All direct and indirect impacts attributable to the Project were identified and determined to be less than significant, except for the Project’s contribution to transportation impacts related to the City’s circulation system and VMT, as well as consistency with General Plan policies, zoning regulations, and LAFCo policies.

The EIR will evaluate the proposed Project’s contribution to impacts in this area, and preparation of a focused EIR is warranted for this Project.

List of Preparers

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 4-1

LIST OF PREPARERS
Lead Agency
• Jason Waters – Assistant City Manager
• Gabrielle de Silva Myers, Senior Planner- Community Development Department QK
• Jaymie Brauer – Principal Planner
• Thomas Kobayashi – Senior Associate Planner
• Dave Dayton– Principal Biologist
• Robert Parr, MA, RPA – Senior Archaelogist
• Brian Schoener, PE– Senior Engineer
Trinity Consultants
• Matt Daniel– Senior Consultant

Bibliography

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 5-1

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cal Recycle. (2022, Jan). Visalia Disposal Site (54-AA-0009). Retrieved from SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/822?siteID=3839 CalGEM. (2022). State of California Department of Conservation, Geological Energy Management Division. Retrieved from Online Mapping System:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/#openModal/- 119.63622/36.31040/15
California Department of Conservation. (2023, January). Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Retrieved from Important Farmland Finder- 2018:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
California Department of Transportation. (2022, January). California State Scenic HIghway System Map. Retrieved from State Scenic Highway System ARC GIS On LIne.:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8 e8057116f1aacaa
City of Hanford. (2014). 2034 General Plan Background Report.

City of Hanford. (2017). 2035 General Plan Update.

City of Hanford. (2017). 2035 General Plan Update.

City of Hanford. (2020). 2020 Urban Water Mangement Plan.

City of Hanford. (2022, January). Hanford Municipal Code. Retrieved from Title 17 Zoning, Chapt 17.50 Development Standards: http://qcode.us/codes/hanford/ City of Hanford. (2022). Housing Element (2016 - 2024). https://cms6.revize.com/revize/hanfordca/document_center/Planning/General%2 0Plan/Adopted%20Housing%20Element%20(03-31-2016).pdf.

Department of Toxic Substances Control. (2022). EnviroStor. California, United States of America.

Federal Transit Administration. (2006). Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.

Greater Kaweah Groundwater Sustainability Agency. (2020). Groundwater Sustainability Plan.

Kings County. (1994). Kings County Airport Compatibility Plan.

Kings County. (2009). 2035 General Plan.

Bibliography

Notice of Preparation/Initial Study April 2024
City of Hanford Page 5-2
Kings County. (2010). 2035 Kings County General Plan. In Health and Saftey Element.

Kings County. (2015). Kings County Emergency Ooperations Plan.

QK. (2023a). Biological Resource Evaluation, Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Subdivision Project.

QK. (2023b). Cultural Resource Technical Memorandum, Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Subdivisin.

QK. (2023c). Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Subdivision Project - Energy Consumption Technical Memorandum.

QK. (2023d). Water Supply Assessment, Silicon Valley Ranch.

SJVAPCD. (2015). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts.

Trinity Consultants. (2023). Air Quality Impact Analysis, Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Development Project.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). Census. Retrieved from Hanford, CA:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/hanfordcitycalifornia U.S. Department of Transportation, F. R. (2005). High-Speed Ground Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.

NOTICE OF PREPARATION/INITIAL STUDY FOR A FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Notice is hereby given that the City of Hanford will be the Lead Agency and will prepare a focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Subdivision Project (Project). An Initial Study has been prepared along with this Notice of Preparation (NOP), which scopes out environmental topics for further review. The focused EIR will address the potential physical environmental effects of the proposed projects that have not been scoped out, as outlined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City is requesting comments on the scope and content of this focused EIR.

A scoping session will be held on Monday, July 8, 2024 at 5:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Training Room (319 N Douty Street, Hanford, CA 93230). The scoping session, which is part of the focused EIR process, is the time when the City solicits input from the public and agencies on specific topics they believe should be addressed in the environmental analysis. The scoping process is designed to enable the City to determine the scope and content of the focused EIR, identify the range of actions, and identify potentially significant environmental effects, alternatives, and mitigation measures to be analyzed in the focused EIR.

Project Location
The Project is located within the Sphere of Influence for the City of Hanford and is anticipated for annexation. The Project is adjacent to Hanford Armona Road to the north, between Greenbrier Drive to the east and 13th Avenue to the west, and encompasses approximately 88.9 acres (APN 011-040-008, 010, and 027). The Project site is located within the Hanford USGS Quad, Section 3, Township 19S, Range 21E, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDB&M).

Project Description
The Project proposes to construct a 326-lot residential subdivision within the City of Hanford Sphere of Influence.

The Project will be annexed into the City under separate application. An approximately 12.5-acre portion of the site at the northeast corner of the property is intended to be removed via a lot-line adjustment.

The Project will be developed with a 326-unit single-family subdivision, a 3.58-acre park, and a three-acre retention basin. Lots will range between 5,000 to 6,000 square feet and would be developed with single-family residential units. Associated utility and right-of-way infrastructure would also be developed in accordance with City of Hanford standards and regulations.

Approvals include:
• Approval of Tentative Tract Map #943
• Prezoning – Because the project site does not currently have a City of Hanford zoning designation, prezoning of the site is required. The project site would be prezoned to the R-L-5 zone. • Annexation into the city limits by Kings County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) Construction:

Development of the Project is anticipated to occur over a 12-month period. Construction equipment will vary over the course of development and would include the following:
• Excavators/earth-moving equipment
• Depending on foundation system, auger rig, or pile-driving rig • All-terrain forklifts

• A man/material hoist
• Truck cranes and potentially a tower crane (pending permit approval) • Concrete trucks
• Dump trucks
• Street sweepers/water trucks for dust control
• Construction delivery trucks (typically box trucks of flat beds) • Small tools (generators, light plants, compactors, air compressors) As mandated by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the public review period for this document was 30 days (CEQA Section 15073[b]). The public review period began on June 21, 2024 and ended on July 22, 2024. For further information, please contact Gabrielle de Silva Myers, 317 N. Douty Street, Hanford, CA 93230, (559) 585- 2578 or visit:
https://cityofhanfordca.com/1236/Current-Projects
Mailing Address and Phone Number of Contact Person
Gabrielle de Silva Myers, Senior Planner
City Hall
317 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
(559) 585-2500
Findings
As Lead Agency, the City of Hanford finds that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Checklist (CEQA Guidelines Appendix G) or Initial Study (IS) (see Section 3 - Environmental Checklist) has identified one or more potentially significant effects on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 115064 (a)(1), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed Project under review may have a significant effect on the environment and should be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less-than-significant levels. The City of Hanford has determined that preparation of a focused Environmental Impact Report for the Project is necessary.

Figure 3-1
Project Site Area

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

CITY OF HANFORD

SILICON VALLEY RANCH

RESIDENTIAL PROJECT
OCTOBER 2024

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

SILICON VALLEY RANCH

RESIDENTIAL PROJECT

Prepared for:

City of Hanford
317 N. Douty Street
Hanford, CA 93230
Contact Person: Gabrielle Myers, Senior Planner
Phone: 559-585-2578
Consultant:
5080 California Avenue, Suite 220
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Contact: Jaymie L. Brauer
Phone: (661) 616-2600
October 2024
Project #220056

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page i Table of Contents
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. v CHAPTER 1 - Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 - Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2 - Project Summary.....................................................................................................................................1-1

1.2.1 - Project Location.....................................................................................................................1-1

1.2.2 - Project Description...............................................................................................................1-1

1.3 - Lead Agency, Responsible Agency, and Trustee Agencies ......................................................1-2

1.4 - Summary of Project Objectives..........................................................................................................1-2

1.5 - Scope of the Environmental Impact Report..................................................................................1-3

1.6 - Notice of Preparation ............................................................................................................................1-4

1.7 - Public Review of the Draft EIR...........................................................................................................1-4

1.8 - Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................................................1-5

1.8.1 - Impacts Not Further Considered in This EIR .............................................................1-5

1.8.2 - Impacts of the Proposed Project.....................................................................................1-5

1.9 - Summary of Project Alternatives...................................................................................................1-16

1.9.1 - Alternatives Considered and Rejected.......................................................................1-16

1.9.2 - Alternatives Considered and Evaluated....................................................................1-16

1.10 - Environmentally Superior Alternative......................................................................................1-16

1.11 - Growth Inducement..........................................................................................................................1-17

1.12 - Irreversible Impacts.........................................................................................................................1-19

1.13 - Areas of Controversy........................................................................................................................1-19

1.14 - Issues to be Resolved.......................................................................................................................1-19

1.15 - Executive Summary Matrix............................................................................................................1-19 CHAPTER 2 - Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 - Overview ....................................................................................................................................................2-1

2.2 - Purpose of This Environmental Impact Report ..........................................................................2-1

2.2.1 - Issues to be Resolved...........................................................................................................2-2

2.3 - Terminology..............................................................................................................................................2-2

2.4 - Decision-Making Process .....................................................................................................................2-4

2.4.1 - Notice of Preparation (NOP) ............................................................................................2-5

2.4.2 - Scoping Meeting.....................................................................................................................2-5

2.5 - Availability of the Draft EIR ................................................................................................................2-8

2.6 - Format and Content...............................................................................................................................2-8

2.6.1 - Required EIR Content and Organization......................................................................2-8

2.7 - Responsible and Trustee Agencies................................................................................................2-10

2.7.1 - Local Agencies .....................................................................................................................2-10

2.7.2 - State Agencies.......................................................................................................................... 10

2.7.3 - Federal Agencies.................................................................................................................2-11

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page ii

2.8 - Incorporation by Reference .............................................................................................................2-11

2.9 - Sources .....................................................................................................................................................2-11 CHAPTER 3 - Project Description ......................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 - Project Overview.....................................................................................................................................3-1

3.2 - Project Location and Environmental Setting ...............................................................................3-1

3.2.1 - Regional Setting.....................................................................................................................3-1

3.2.2 - Local Setting............................................................................................................................3-1

3.2.3 - Project Location.....................................................................................................................3-5

3.3 - Project Objectives ...................................................................................................................................3-5

3.4 - Proposed Project.....................................................................................................................................3-5

3.5 - Entitlements Required..........................................................................................................................3-7

3.5.1 - Other Responsible Agencies..............................................................................................3-8

3.6 - Cumulative Projects ...............................................................................................................................3-8 CHAPTER 4 - Environmental Impact Analyses ................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 - Land Use and Planning..........................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.1 - Introduction ............................................................................................................................4-1

4.1.2 - Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................4-1

4.1.3 - Regulatory Setting ................................................................................................................4-2

4.1.4 - Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................................4-16

4.2 - Transportation......................................................................................................................................4-52

4.2.1 - Introduction .........................................................................................................................4-52

4.2.2 - Environmental Setting .....................................................................................................4-52

4.2.3 - Regulatory Setting .............................................................................................................4-57

4.2.4 - Impacts and Mitigation Measures................................................................................4-68

4.3 - Approach to Environmental Analysis ..........................................................................................4-75

4.4 - Environmental Topics ........................................................................................................................4-76

4.5 - Organization of Issue Areas .............................................................................................................4-76

4.6 - Level of Significance............................................................................................................................4-76

4.7 - Format Used for Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures ...............................................4-77 CHAPTER 5 - Consequences of Project Implementation ............................................................... 5-1

5.1 - Environmental Effects Found to be Less than Significant.......................................................5-1

5.1.1 - Potential for Less than Significant Impacts to Occur ..............................................5-1

5.1.2 - Potential for Less than Significant Impacts to Occur with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures ..........................................................................................................................5-8

5.2 - Significant Environmental Effects that Cannot be Avoided....................................................5-8

5.3 - Growth Inducing Impacts ....................................................................................................................5-9

5.4 - Significant Irreversible Changes .......................................................................................................5-9 CHAPTER 6 - Alternatives ....................................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1 - Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................6-1

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page iii

6.1.1 - Significant Impacts of the Project...................................................................................6-2

6.1.2 - Other Impacts of the Project..........................................................................................6-11

6.2 - Project Objectives ................................................................................................................................6-11

6.3 - Alternatives Considered but Rejected..........................................................................................6-12

6.4 - Alternatives Considered and Evaluated......................................................................................6-12

6.4.1 - Alternative A - No Project Alternative .......................................................................6-12

6.4.2 - Alternative B - Reduced Project Alternative............................................................6-13

6.4.3 - Alternative C – Multi-Family Alternative ..................................................................6-13

6.4.4 - Alternative D – Different Site Alternative.................................................................6-14

6.5 - Environmentally Superior Alternative ........................................................................................6-15 CHAPTER 7 - Response to Comments.................................................................................................. 7-1 CHAPTER 8 - Organizations and Persons Consulted....................................................................... 8-1 CHAPTER 9 - List of Preparers ............................................................................................................... 9-1 CHAPTER 10 - References ..................................................................................................................... 10-1 List of Figures
Figure 3-1 Regional Location .......................................................................................................................3-2 Figure 3-2 Project Site.....................................................................................................................................3-3 Figure 3-3 Sphere of Influence.....................................................................................................................3-4 Figure 3-4 Tentative Tract Map 943..........................................................................................................3-6 List of Tables
Table 1-1 Summary of Significant Impacts of the Project..............................................................1-14 Table 1-2 Comparison of Alternatives Impacts..................................................................................1-18 Table 1-3 Summary of Mitigation............................................................................................................1-20 Table 2-1 Summary of Written Comments on Notice of Preparation ..........................................2-6 Table 2-2 Summary of Oral Comments on Notice of Preparation..................................................2-8 Table 4.1-1 Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Classifications....................4-2 Table 4.1-2 Project Consistency with the Kings County General Plan and City of Hanford General Plan.....................................................................................................................................................4-20 Table 4.2-1 Existing Arterial Streets.......................................................................................................4-52 Table 4.2-2 Existing Collector Streets....................................................................................................4-53 Table 4.2-3 City of Hanford VMT Thresholds .....................................................................................4-68 Table 4.2-4 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria..................................................4-70 Table 4.2-5 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria .......................................................4-70 Table 4.2-6 Intersection Level of Service Weekday AM Peak Hour ...........................................4-70 Table 4.2-7 Intersection Level of Service Weekday PM Peak Hour............................................4-71 Table 5-1 Summary of Significant Impacts of the Proposed Project.............................................5-8

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page iv Table 6-1 Summary of Alternatives Impacts.......................................................................................6-16

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page v List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
ADT Average Daily Trips
BMP best management practices
BSA Biological Survey Area
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CTC California Transportation Commission
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EBR eastbound right turn lane
EBTR eastbound through and right turn lane
EIR Environmental Quality Act
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FAR Floor Area Ratio
FMMP Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program
GHG Greenhouse gas
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HERO Human and Ecological Risk Office
HHRA Human Health Risk Assessment
HJO Hanford Municipal Airport
HSR Highspeed Rail
IS Initial Study
IS/NOP Initial Study/Notice of Preparation
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
KART Kings Area Rural Transit
KCAG Kings County Association of Governments
KCAPTA Kings County Area Public Transit
LAFCo Local Agency Formation Commission
LOS Level of Service
MDB&M Mount Diablo Base and Meridian
NHD National Hydrography Dataset
NOA Notice of Availability
NOC Notice of Completion
NOP Notice of Preparation
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
NWS National Weather Service
OCPs Pesticides and Organochlorine Pesticides
OPR Office of Planning and Research
PEA Preliminary Endangerment Assessment
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page vi PRC Public Resources Code
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Plan
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SCE Southern California Edison Company
SCG Southern California Gas Company
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
sf square feet
SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District SOI Sphere of Influence
SOV single-occupant vehicle
SR State Route
STIP State Transportation Improvement Program
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution and Prevention Plan
TA Technical Advisory
TIA Traffic Impact Analysis
USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WSA Water Supply Assessment

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-1 CHAPTER 1 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 - Introduction
This draft focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the construction of 326 single-family residences, internal roads, a 2.86-acre drainage retention basin, and a 3.58-acre park on an approximately 88.9-acre site (Project). An approximate 13.87-acre portion of the Project site is intended to be sectioned off from the Project via a lot line adjustment. The Project is located in the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of Hanford, California, and an annexation of the land is proposed.

The purpose of this EIR is to inform public agency decision‐makers, representatives of affected and responsible agencies, the public, and other interested parties of the potential environmental effects that may result from the Project. In addition to identifying potential environmental effects, this EIR also identifies methods by which these impacts can be mitigated, reduced, minimized, or avoided.

The study area for the analysis of the project and cumulative impacts is the Hanford city limits, the portions of Kings County located adjacent to the City. The applicable cumulative projections include growth projections from the Hanford General Plan and the Kings County General Plan.

1.2 - Project Summary

1.2.1 - PROJECT LOCATION
The Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Development Project is located south of Hanford Armona Road, in the SOI of the City of Hanford. The Project encompasses approximately 88.9 acres (APN 011-040-008, 010, and 027) and is bordered by undeveloped and rural residential lands on the west and south; a church and undeveloped land to the north; and residential uses to the east. The Project is located within Section 3, Township 19 South, Range 21, East Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDB&M).

1.2.2 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project proposes to construct a 326-lot residential subdivision within the City of Hanford SOI. The Project will be annexed into the City under a separate application. An approximately 13.87-acre portion of the site at the northeast corner of the property is intended to be removed via a lot-line adjustment. The Project will be developed with a 326- unit single-family subdivision, a 3.58-acre park, and a 2.86-acre retention basin. Lots will range between 5,000 to 7,000 square feet and will be developed with single-family residential units. Associated utility and right-of-way infrastructure would also be developed in accordance with City of Hanford standards and regulations.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-2 Approvals include:
• Approval of Tentative Tract Map #943.
• Prezoning – Because the Project site does not currently have a City of Hanford zoning designation, prezoning of the site is required. The Project site would be prezoned to the R-L-5 zone (Low Density Residential, 5,000 square feet). • Annexation into the city limits by Kings County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).

Development of the Project is anticipated to occur over a 12-month period. Construction equipment will vary over the course of development and will include the following:
• Excavators/earth-moving equipment
• Depending on the foundation system, auger rig, or pile-driving rig • All-terrain forklifts
• A man/material hoist
• Truck cranes and potentially a tower crane (pending permit approval) • Concrete trucks
• Dump trucks
• Street sweepers/water trucks for dust control
• Construction delivery trucks (typically box trucks or flatbeds) • Small tools (generators, light plants, compactors, air compressors

1.3 - Lead Agency, Responsible Agency, and Trustee Agencies The Lead Agency for the proposed Project is the City of Hanford. The City is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or disapproving the Project.

The responsible agencies are State and local public agencies other than the Lead Agency that have the authority to carry out or approve a project or that are required to approve a portion of a project for which the Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or Negative Declaration. A complete list of agencies that may have authority as a responsible or trustee agency is listed in Chapter 2, Introduction.

1.4 - Summary of Project Objectives
The Project has the following objectives:
• Provide a variety of housing opportunities with a range of styles, sizes, and values that will be designed to satisfy existing and future demand for quality housing in the area.
• Provide a sense of community and walkability within the development through the use of street patterns, parks/open space areas, landscaping, and other Project amenities.
• Create a successful and financially feasible Project by meeting the housing needs of the area.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-3 • Provide a residential development that assists the City in meeting its General Plan and Housing Element requirements and objectives.

1.5 - Scope of the Environmental Impact Report
The scope of this EIR is based on the Project description outlined in Chapter 2, Project Description and the Notice of Preparation (NOP) (Appendix A), focusing review of environmental resources that could result in potentially significant impacts on environmental resources. Chapter 4, Environmental Impact Analysis, identifies two resources related to the Project that were determined to be subject to potentially significant impacts in the NOP scoping process, and these are addressed in the following sections:
• 4.1 – Land Use Planning- Potential conflicts with an adopted land use plan, policy, or regulation
• 4.2 – Transportation and Traffic- all impacts
Sections 4.1 and 4.2 provide detailed discussions of the environmental setting, regulatory setting, methodology for impact assessment for the resource, impacts associated with the Project, and mitigation measures designed to reduce significant impacts where required and when feasible. Cumulative impacts also are discussed.

This EIR examines the potential direct and cumulative impacts of the proposed Project.

These impacts were determined through a rigorous process mandated by CEQA in which existing conditions are compared and contrasted with conditions that would exist once the Project is implemented. The significance of each identified impact was determined using CEQA thresholds informed by local thresholds of significance. The following categories are used for classifying impacts.
• Significant and Unavoidable: Significant impacts that cannot be feasibly mitigated or avoided. No measures could be taken to avoid or reduce these adverse effects to achieve insignificant or negligible levels. Even after the application of feasible mitigation measures, the residual impact would be significant. If the Project is approved with significant and unavoidable impacts, decision-makers are required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Section 15093 explaining why the benefits of the Project outweigh the potential damage caused by these significant unavoidable impacts.
• Less than Significant with Mitigation: Such impacts can be reduced to a less-thansignificant level with feasible mitigation, which can include incorporating changes to the Project. If the proposed Project is approved with significant but mitigable impacts, decision-makers are required to make findings pursuant to CEQA Section 15091, stating that impacts have been mitigated to the maximum extent feasible and the residual impact would not be significant.
• Less than Significant: These adverse but less-than-significant impacts do not require mitigation, nor do they require findings to be made.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-4 • No Impact: Such impacts are considered to not exist with the implementation of the proposed Project or have been found to not apply to the proposed Project.

1.6 - Notice of Preparation
The contents of this EIR were established based on the findings in the NOP and attached materials, as well as public and agency input during the scoping period. The City issued a NOP on June 21, 2024, to request comments on the scope of the EIR. The NOP was published online at https://www.cityofhanfordca.com/1236/Current-Projects. The NOP was circulated to relevant agencies, community organizations, and interested individuals in the City. A public scoping workshop was held on July 8, 2024; a 30-day public comments period closed on July 22, 2024 (CEQA Guidelines §15082). A copy of the NOP and comments received during the NOP review period are included in Appendix A.

1.7 - Public Review of the Draft EIR
Upon completion and circulation of this Draft EIR, the City of Hanford prepared and filed a Notice of Completion (NOC with the California Office of Planning and Research/State Clearinghouse to begin the public review period (Public Resources Code, Section 21161). Concurrent with the NOC, the City of Hanford distributed a Notice of Availability (NOA) in accordance with Section 15087 of the CEQA Guidelines. The NOA was mailed to the organizations and individuals who previously requested such a notice to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21092(b)(3). This Draft EIR was distributed to the California Office of Planning and Research/State Clearinghouse, published in the Fresno Bee newspaper to comply with Section 15087 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and was distributed to affected agencies, surrounding cities and municipalities, and all interested parties. During the public review period, this Draft EIR, including the appendices, will be available for review at the following location:

City of Hanford Community Development Department

CIVIC CENTER BUILDING
317 N Douty St, Hanford, CA 93230
In addition, the Draft EIR, including the appendices, will be available for review at the following City of Hanford website:
https://www.cityofhanfordca.com/1236/Current-Projects
Agencies, organizations, individuals, and all other interested parties not previously contacted or who did not respond to the NOP or attended the scoping meeting currently have the opportunity to comment on this Draft EIR during the 45‐day public review period. Written comments on this Draft EIR should be addressed to:

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-5 Attn: Gabrielle Myers, Senior Planner
City of Hanford Community Development Department

CIVIC CENTER BUILDING
317 N Douty St, Hanford, CA 93230
Email: [email protected]

1.8 - Environmental Impacts
Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that various, possible, new significant effects of a project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR. The County has engaged the public to participate in the scoping of the environmental document.

The contents of this Draft EIR were established based on the NOP prepared in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, as well as public and agency input that was received during the scoping process. The comments to the NOP are found in Appendix A of this document. Based on the findings of the NOP and the results of scoping, a determination was made that this EIR must contain a comprehensive analysis of Land Use and Planning as well as Transportation and Traffic related issues identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

1.8.1 - IMPACTS NOT FURTHER CONSIDERED IN THIS EIR
As discussed in Appendix A, the Project was determined to have impacts with regard to each of the impact thresholds. Therefore, all environmental issues related to Land Use and Planning as well as Transportation and Traffic as they are presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines are analyzed further in this EIR.

1.8.2 - IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
No Potential for Impacts to Occur
The potential environmental effects of the Project and mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Chapter 4 of this EIR. After a full analysis, the following effects were determined to have no potential for impacts to occur:

Aesthetics
• Impact 4.1-1: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista • Impact 4.1-2: Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway Agriculture and Forest Resources
• Impact 4.2-2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-6 • Impact 4.2-3: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), or timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Productions (as defined in Government Code Section 51104(g))
• Impact 4.2-4: Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use
Biological Resources
• Impact 4.4-5: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance • Impact 4.4-6: Conflict with provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural communities’ conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan
Geology and Soils
• Impact 4.7-8: Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Impact 4.9-7: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires Hydrology and Water Quality
• Impact 4.10-6: In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to Project inundation
Land Use and Planning
• Impact 4.11-1: Physically divide an established community Mineral Resources
• Impact 4.12-1: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State • Impact 4.12-2: Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-7 Noise
• Impact 4.13-3: For a Project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels
Population and Housing
• Impact 4.14-2: Displace substantial number of existing people or housing necessitating the construction
Recreation
• Impact 4.16-2: Include recreational facilities or require construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment Potential for Less than Significant Impacts
Potential environmental effects of the Project and mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Chapter 4 of this EIR. After a full analysis, the following effects were determined to have less-than-significant impacts to occur:

Aesthetics
• Impact 4.1-3: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality
• Impact 4.1-4: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area
Agriculture and Forest Resources
• Impact 4.2-1: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use • Impact 4.2-5: Involve other changes in the existing environment which, because of their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-8 Air Quality
• Impact 4.3-1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan
• Impact 4.3-2: Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard
• Impact 4.3-3: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations • Impact 4.3-4: Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people
Biological Resources
• Impact 4.4-1: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Impact 4.4-2: Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Impact 4.4-3: Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally Protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means • Impact 4.4-4: Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites Cultural Resources
• Impact 4.5-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5
• Impact 4.5-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5
• Impact 4.5-3: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-9 Energy
• Impact 4.6-1: Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation
• Impact 4.6-2: Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency
Geology and Soils
• Impact 4.7-1(i): Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving the rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42 • Impact 4.7-1(ii): Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking • Impact 4.7-1(iii): Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction
• Impact 4.7-1(iv): Directly or indirectly cause potentially substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides • Impact 4.7-2: Result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil • Impact 4.7-3: Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse • Impact 4.7-4: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property • Impact 4.7-6: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Impact 4.8-1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment
• Impact 4.8-2: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-10 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Impact 4.9-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials • Impact 4.9-2: 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
• Impact 4.9-3: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school
• Impact 4.9-4: Create a hazard to the public or the environment as a result of being located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5
• Impact 4.9-5: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area
• Impact 4.9-6: Impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
Hydrology and Water Quality
• Impact 4.10-1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality • Impact 4.10-2: Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin
• Impact 4.10-3(i): Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site
• Impact 4.10-3(ii): Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site • Impact 4.10-3(iii): Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-11 water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantially additional sources of polluted runoff • Impact 4.10-3(iv): Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows
• Impact 4.10-5: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan
Land Use Planning
• Impact 4.11-1: Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
Noise
• Impact 4.13-1: Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies • Impact 4.13-2: Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels
Population and Housing
• Impact 4.14-1: Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly
Public Services
• Impact 4.15-1(i): Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection • Impact 4.15-1(ii): Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection services • Impact 4.15-1(iii): Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-12 physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service Ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for school services • Impact 4.15-1(iv): Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for park services • Impact 4.15-1(v): Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for other public facilities Recreation
• Impact 4.16-1: Result in increased use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration would occur or be accelerated
Transportation
• Impact 4.17-3: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses
• Impact 4.17-4: Result in inadequate emergency access
Tribal Cultural Resources
• Impact 4.18-1: 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)
• Impact 4.18-2: 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 a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in Subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-13 Utilities and Service Systems
• Impact 4.19-1: Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects
• Impact 4.19-2: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed • Impact 4.19-3: Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the Project that it has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments • Impact 4.19-4: Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals
• Impact 4.19-5: Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste
Wildfire
• Impact 4.20-1: Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan
• Impact 4.20-2: Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose Project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire
• Impact 4.20-3: Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment
• Impact 4.20-4: Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes
Potential for Less than Significant Impacts to Occur with Incorporation of Mitigation Measures
The potential environmental effects of the Project and mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Chapter 4 of this EIR.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-14 Land Use
• Impact 4.17-1: Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Transportation
• Impact 4.2-1 - Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? • Impact 4.17-2: Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the EIR describe any significant impacts, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to less-than-significant levels.

The potential environmental effects of the Project and proposed mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Chapter 4 of this EIR. The following environmental impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable impacts (refer to Table 1-1, Summary of Significant Impacts of the Project).

Table 1-1
Summary of Significant Impacts of the Project
Resources Project Impacts Cumulative Impacts
Land Use
Impact 4.1
As evaluated in detail in Table 4.1-
2, the Project is consistent with the
goals and policies of the City of
Hanford General Plan and Kings
County General Plan.

The Project is consistent with both
Kings County and City of Hanford
General Plan policy.

Therefore, impacts are considered
less than significant
Potential land use impacts require
evaluation on a case-by-case basis
because of the interactive effects of
a specific development and its
immediate environment. Other
projects being proposed in the area
would similarly be analyzed for
consistency with the pertinent City
General Plan and Kings County
General Plan goals and policies.

Therefore, as proposed the Project
would be consistent with the goals
and policies of the City’s General
Plan and would therefore not
contribute to a cumulatively
considerable impact regarding
land use. Cumulative impacts are
less than significant.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-15 Resources Project Impacts Cumulative Impacts
Transportation
and Traffic
Impact 4.1
The Project will impact the 12th
Avenue and Hanford Armona Road
intersection. It is recommended
that the existing eastbound right
turn lane will change to an
eastbound through and right turn
lane. Implementation of MM 4.2-1
would allow the studied
intersection to operate at an
acceptable LOS under City LOS
standards and reduce impacts to
less than significant.

Cumulative impacts are assessed
with the proposed Project and the
12 projects located within a onehalf mile of the Project site as identified by the City of Hanford.

Eleven of the 12 projects are
entitled and either under
construction or are anticipated to
be under construction in the
future. The projects that are
entitled are included in and are
consistent with the General Plan.

Therefore, they are included in the
KCAG travel demand model. The
growth rates used to determine
future traffic volumes would
therefore reflect traffic from these
projects. Cumulative impacts
related to LOS would be less than
significant with mitigation
measures incorporated.

Transportation
and Traffic
Impact 4.2
Due to the Project’s location, it was
determined that Vehicle Miles
Travelled (VMT) would exceed the
City of Hanford’s adopted VMT per
capita threshold. No applicable
and feasible mitigation measures
were identified to reduce VMT
below thresholds. Therefore,
impacts are considered significant
and unavoidable.

Because the proposed Project is
determined to have a significant
and unavoidable impact by
exceeding VMT thresholds on a
project level, the cumulative
impacts would also be considered
significant and unavoidable.

Significant Cumulative Impacts
According to Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines, the term cumulative impacts “refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” Individual effects that may contribute to a cumulative impact may be from a single project or a number of separate projects.

Individually, the impacts of a project may be relatively minor, but when considered along with impacts of other closely related or nearby projects, including newly proposed projects, the effects could be cumulatively considerable.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-16 This EIR has considered the potential cumulative effects of the proposed Project. Impacts for the following issue areas have been found to be cumulatively considerable:
• Transportation and Traffic
This significant cumulative impact is discussed in the applicable section of Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, of this EIR.

1.9 - Summary of Project Alternatives
Below is a summary of the alternatives to the proposed Project, that have been considered but rejected as well as those alternatives that have been considered and evaluated in Chapter 6, Alternatives to the Proposed Project.

1.9.1 - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED
There are no Project alternatives that were considered and rejected.

1.9.2 - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND EVALUATED
• Alternative A (No Project Alternative). Under the No Project Alternative, the Project area would remain unchanged, and there would be no residential units or parks constructed.
• Alternative B – Reduced Project Alternative. This alternative would decrease the number of single-family residential houses from 326 to 242. • Alternative C – Multi-Family Alternative. This alternative would replace the proposed single-family residential with multi-family apartments at a density of at least 14.5 dwelling units per gross acre (1,088 units). The Medium Density Residential was utilized to follow General Plan designations north of the Project site. • Alternative D– Different Sites Alternative. This alternative would relocate the Project to a different site in order to be located nearer to corridor mixed use where a mix of commercial and office uses would be available in addition to be located closer to major transit corridors. This alternative would place the Project on the east side of the City, bounded by Lacey Boulevard to the south, 9 1/4 Avenue to the west, State Route 43 to the east, and Grangeville Boulevard to the north.

1.10 - Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA requires that the City identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative. If the No Project Alternative is the Environmentally Superior Alternative, the City must identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives considered in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6). This alternatives analysis includes three additional Project alternatives –Alternative B - Reduced Project, Alternative C - Multi-Family, and Alternative D - Different Site.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-17 Based on the evaluation of the three alternatives, Alternative C – Multi-Family would reduce significant and unavoidable environmental impacts relating to VMT due to the increase in density. Alternative C increased density from 9.1 dwelling units/acre (du/ac) to 14.5 du/ac for a 13 percent VMT reduction, while fulfilling most of the objectives of the proposed Project and is therefore the Environmentally Superior Alternative.

1.11 - Growth Inducement
The City of Hanford General Plan recognizes that certain forms of growth are beneficial, both economically and socially. Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines provides the following guidance on growth-inducing impacts: a project is identified as growth-inducing if it “could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.” Growth inducement can be a result of a new development that requires an increase in dwelling units or an increase in employment, removes barriers to development, or provides resources that lead to secondary growth. The Project would add new residential uses. It is anticipated that the construction workforce would commute to the site each day from local communities, and the majority would likely come from the existing labor pool as construction workers travel from site to site as needed. Construction staff not drawn from the local labor pool would stay in any of the local hotels in local communities.

With respect to residential land uses, the Project does not include the addition of any residentially designated uses, nor does it include typical elements that would directly or indirectly affect population or housing (i.e., extension of roads or other infrastructure). The Project would accordingly not directly result in population growth of the City.

Therefore, this Project would not result in a large increase in employment. In addition, the Project is situated in urbanized areas within the City of Hanford, where public services exist.

The Project would accordingly accommodate planned growth and not induce unplanned growth.

With respect to removing barriers to development, such as by providing access to previously undeveloped areas, the Project is not anticipated to result in significant growth inducement.

The Project does not include the construction of infrastructure that could provide for future residential development; it does not remove barriers to off-site development.

Although the Project accommodates planned economic growth at suitable locations, the net increase in population on the Project site would be less than significant.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-18 Table 1-2
Comparison of Alternatives Impacts
Environmental Resource Project Alternative
A
Alternative
B
Alternative
C
Alternative
D
Land Use and Planning: Cause a significant
environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect
Less than
significant
Similar Similar Similar Similar
Land Use and Planning: Cumulative Impacts
associated with land use plan, policy, or
regulation
Less than
significant
Similar Similar Similar Similar
Transportation and Traffic: Conflict with a
program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing
the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities
Less than
significant with
mitigation
incorporated
Fewer Fewer Similar Similar
Transportation and Traffic: Cumulative
Impacts associated with LOS
Less than
significant with
mitigation
incorporated
Fewer Fewer Similar Similar
Transportation and Traffic: Conflict or be
Inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, Subdivision (b)
Significant /
Unavoidable Fewer Similar Fewer Similar
Transportation and Traffic: Cumulative
Impacts associated with VMT
Significant /
Unavoidable Fewer Similar Fewer Similar
Meet Project Objectives? Yes No Yes Yes Yes
Reduce Any Significant and Unavoidable
Impacts to No Impact or Less than Significant? No Yes No Yes No

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-19

1.12 - Irreversible Impacts
Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines defines an irreversible impact as an impact that uses nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of a project.

Irreversible impacts can also result from damage caused by environmental accidents associated with a project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to ensure that such consumption is justified. Buildout of a project would commit nonrenewable resources during project construction and ongoing utility services during project operations.

During project operations, oil, gas, and other nonrenewable resources would be consumed.

Therefore, an irreversible commitment of nonrenewable resources would occur as a result of long-term project operations. However, assuming that those commitments occur in accordance with the adopted goals, policies, and implementation measures of the City of Hanford General Plan, as a matter of public policy, those commitments have been determined to be acceptable. The City of Hanford General Plan ensures that any irreversible environmental changes associated with those commitments will be minimized.

1.13 - Areas of Controversy
No areas of controversy were identified through written agency, and public comments received during the scoping period. Public comments received during scoping are provided in Appendix A and summarized in Section 2.4 of Chapter 2, Introduction. In summary, the following issues were identified during scoping and are addressed in the appropriate sections of Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis:
• Land Use and Planning
o Consistency with the General Plan
• Transportation
o Level of Service
o Vehicle Miles Traveled

1.14 - Issues to be Resolved
Section 15123(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR contain issues to be resolved, which includes the choices among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant impacts. The major issues to be resolved regarding the Project include decisions by the Lead agency as to whether or not:
• The Draft EIR adequately describes the environmental impacts of the Project. • The recommended mitigation measures should be adopted or modified. • Additional mitigation measures need to be applied.

1.15 - Executive Summary Matrix
Table 1‐3 below summarizes the impacts, mitigation measures, and the resulting level of significance after mitigation for the relevant environmental issue areas evaluated for the proposed project. Table 1‐3 is intended to provide an overview; narrative discussions for the issue areas are included in the corresponding sections of this Draft EIR.

City of Hanford Executive Summary

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 1-20 Table 1-3
Summary of Mitigation
Impacts Mitigation Measures Level of
Significance
Section 4.1 Land Use and Planning

4.1-2: Cause a
significant
environmental impact
due to a conflict with
any land use plan,
policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or
mitigating an
environmental effect
No mitigation is required. Less than
significant
Section 4.2 Traffic

4.2-1: Conflict with a
program, plan,
ordinance or policy
addressing the
circulation system,
including transit,
roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities
MM 4.17-1: The Project proponent or
developer shall be required to pay their fair
share costs for the needed improvements. This
includes changing the 12th Avenue and Hanford
Armona Road intersection eastbound right turn
lane to an eastbound through lane and a right
turn lane.

The fair share cost for the improvement is
calculated at 18.94% and shall be collected by
the City of Hanford at the appropriate time.

Less than
significant

4.2-2: Conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision
(b)
No mitigation is required. Significant
and
Unavoidable

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-1 CHAPTER 2 - INTRODUCTION

2.1 - Overview
The City of Hanford (City) will be the Lead Agency pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and will be responsible for preparing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to CEQA (Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines. In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City published a Notice of Preparation (NOP). This EIR will be used by the City to evaluate the potential environmental impacts that could result from implementation of the Project and develop changes in the proposed Project and/or adopt mitigation measures that would address those impacts.

This EIR has been prepared pursuant to the following relevant State statutes and guidelines:
• CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.).
• CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.).

The overall purposes of the CEQA process are to:
• Identify the significant effects to the environment of a project, identify alternatives, and indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be avoided or mitigated.
• Provide for full disclosure of the project’s environmental effects to the public, the agency decision-makers who will approve or deny the project, and responsible and trustee agencies charged with managing resources (e.g., wildlife, air quality) that may be affected by the project.
• Provide a forum for public participation in the decision-making process with respect to environmental effects.

2.2 - Purpose of This Environmental Impact Report
An EIR is a public informational document used in the planning and decision-making process. This project-level EIR will analyze the environmental impacts of the Project. The City of Hanford Planning Commission and City Council will consider the information in the EIR, including the public comments and staff response to those comments, during the public hearing process. As a legislative action, the final decision is made by the Board of Supervisors, who may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Project. The purpose of an EIR is to identify:
• The significant potential impacts of the Project on the environment and indicate the manner in which those significant impacts can be avoided or mitigated. • Any unavoidable adverse impact that cannot be mitigated.

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-2 • Reasonable and feasible alternatives to the Project that would eliminate any significant adverse environmental impacts or reduce the impacts to a less-thansignificant level.

An EIR also discloses growth-inducing impacts; impacts found not to be significant; and significant cumulative impacts of the project when taken into consideration with past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects.

CEQA requires an EIR that reflects the independent judgment of the Lead Agency regarding the impacts, the level of significance of the impacts both before and after mitigation, and mitigation measures proposed to reduce the impacts. A Draft EIR is circulated to responsible agencies, trustee agencies with resources affected by the project, and interested agencies and individuals. The purposes of public and agency review of a Draft EIR include sharing expertise, disclosing agency analyses, checking for accuracy, detecting omissions, discovering public concerns, and soliciting mitigation measures and alternatives capable of avoiding or reducing the significant effects of the project, while still attaining most of the basic objectives of the Project.

Reviewers of a Draft EIR are requested to focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and ways in which the significant effects of the Project might be avoided or mitigated. Comments are most helpful when they suggest additional specific alternatives or mitigation measures that would provide better ways to avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects.

2.2.1 - ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
Section 15123(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR contain issues to be resolved, which includes the choices among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant impacts. The major issues to be resolved regarding the Project include decisions by the Lead agency as to whether or not:
• The Draft EIR adequately describes the environmental impacts of the Project. • The recommended mitigation measures should be adopted or modified. • Additional mitigation measures need to be applied.

2.3 - Terminology
To assist reviewers in understanding this EIR, the following terms are defined:
• Project means the whole of an action that has the potential for resulting in a direct physical change in the environment. or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
• Environment means the physical conditions that exist in the area, and which will be affected by a proposed project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. The area involved is

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-3 where significant direct or indirect impacts would occur as a result of the Project. The environment includes both natural and manmade (artificial) conditions. • Impacts analyzed under CEQA must be related to a physical change. Impacts are:
o Direct or primary impacts that would be caused by a proposed project and would occur at the same time and place.
o Indirect or secondary impacts that would be caused by a proposed project and would be later in time or farther removed in distance but would still be reasonably foreseeable. Indirect or secondary impacts may include growth-inducing impacts and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems.
o The California Supreme Court recently ruled that the environment’s impact on a project falls outside the scope of CEQA except to the extent that impacts from a project exacerbate such impacts. This EIR includes the environment’s impacts on a project for informational purposes and addresses the exacerbation component of the Court’s decision.
• Significant impact on the environment means a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions in the area affected by a proposed project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historical or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself is not considered a significant impact on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant.
• Mitigation consists of measures that avoid or substantially reduce a proposed project’s significant environmental impacts by:
o Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. o Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
o Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
o Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action.
o Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments.
• Cumulative impacts are two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. The following statements also apply when considering cumulative impacts:
o The individual impacts may be changes resulting from a single project or separate projects.

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-4 o The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.

Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over time.

This EIR uses a variety of terms to describe the level of significance of adverse impacts. These terms are defined as follows:
• Less than significant. An impact that is adverse but that does not exceed the defined thresholds of significance. Less-than-significant impacts do not require mitigation. • Significant. An impact that exceeds the defined thresholds of significance and would or could cause a substantial adverse change in the environment. Mitigation measures are recommended to eliminate the impact or reduce it to a less-than-significant level. • Significant and unavoidable. An impact that exceeds the defined thresholds of significance and cannot be eliminated or reduced to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures.

2.4 - Decision-Making Process
CEQA requires Lead Agencies to solicit and consider input from other interested agencies, citizen groups, and individual members of the public. CEQA also requires a project to be monitored after it has been permitted to ensure that mitigation measures are carried out.

CEQA requires the Lead Agency to provide the public with full disclosure of the expected environmental consequences of a proposed project and with an opportunity to provide comments. In accordance with CEQA, the following is the process for public participation in the decision-making process:
• Notice of Preparation. The City of Hanford prepared and circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to responsible, trustee, and local agencies for review and comment on June 21, 2024. The NOP and responses to the NOP are included in Appendix A of this EIR. In conjunction with this public notice, a scoping meeting was held on July 8, 2024, at Hanford City Hall, located in the Training Room, 319 N Douty St, Hanford, CA 93230.
• Draft EIR Preparation. A Draft EIR is prepared, incorporating public and agency responses to the NOP and scoping process. The Draft EIR is circulated for review and comment to appropriate agencies and additional individuals and interest groups who have requested to be notified of EIR projects. Per Section 15105 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Hanford will provide for a 45-day public review period on the Draft EIR. The City will subsequently respond to each comment on the Draft EIR received in writing through a Response to Comments chapter in the Final EIR. The Response to Comments will be provided to each agency or person who provided

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-5 written comments on the EIR a minimum of 10 business days before the scheduled City Council hearing on the Final EIR.
• Preparation and Certification of Final EIR. The City of Hanford will consider the Final EIR and the Project, acting in an advisory capacity to the City Council. Upon receipt of the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the City Council will also consider the Final EIR, and all public comments and take final action on the Project. At least one public hearing will be held by both the Planning Commission and City Council to consider the Final EIR, take public testimony, and then approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Project.

2.4.1 - NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP)
Pursuant to Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, the City of Hanford circulated a NOP to the State Clearinghouse, public agencies, special districts, and members of the public for a public review period beginning June 21, 2024, and ending July 22, 2024.

The purpose of the NOP is to formally convey that the City, as the Lead Agency, solicited input regarding the scope and proposed content of the EIR. The NOP and all comment letters are provided in Appendix A of this EIR.

2.4.2 - SCOPING MEETING
Pursuant to Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Lead Agency is required to conduct at least one scoping meeting for all projects of Statewide, regional, or area-wide significance.

The scoping meeting is for jurisdictional agencies and interested persons or groups to provide comments regarding, but not limited to, the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and environmental effects to be analyzed. The City of Hanford hosted a scoping meeting at 5:00 p.m. on July 8, 2024, at Hanford City Hall, located in Training Room, 319 N Douty St, Hanford, CA 93230.

NOP and Scoping Meeting Results
One comment letter was submitted during the scoping process. No oral comments were presented during the July 8, 2024, scoping meeting. Specific concerns raised in written and oral comments received during the NOP public review period are discussed below. The NOP and all comments received are included in Appendix A, along with the Summary of Proceedings from the scoping meeting.

NOP Written Comments
The City received one letter with substantive comments in response to the NOP. The comments are summarized in Table 2-1, Summary of Written Comments on Notice of Preparation/Initial Study.

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-6 Table 2-1
Summary of Written Comments on Notice of Preparation
Commenter Summary of Comment
Federal Agencies No federal agencies submitted comments in response to the IS/NOP.

California State
Clearinghouse and
Planning Unit
(letter dated July 5, 2019)
Notifies reviewing agencies of their ability to review and provide comments on the NOP within 30 days of its
receipt from the Lead Agency.

California Department of
Toxic Substances Control
(letter dated July 9, 2024)
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
provided comments regarding the suitability of the site for residential use due to the past agricultural activities and potential past use of pesticides in addition to other
potential contaminants. The comment letter is provided
along with the IS/NOP in Appendix A. Responses to DTSC
comments are provided below.

Local Agencies No local agencies or members of the public submitted Members of the Public comments in response to the NOP.

1. California Department of Toxic Substances Control
Comment 1: That all imported soil and fill materials should be tested to ensure any contaminants of concern are within DTSC’s and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Regional Screen Levels for the intended land use. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material meets the screening levels outlined in DTSC’s Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) Guidance Manual for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledge of the prior land use. Additional information can be found by visiting DTSC’s Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) webpage.

Response: The Hanford Municipal Code requires that a grading plan be submitted for review and approval. The contents of the grading plan include specifications covering construction and material requirements, and a soils engineering report, which shall include data regarding the nature, distribution, and strength of existing soils; conclusions and recommendations for grading procedures; criteria for corrective measures when necessary; and opinions and recommendations covering adequacy of sites to be developed by the proposed grading. Should imported fill be necessary for the Project, the grading plan to be approved by the City will address the use of clean soil and fill pursuant to State and local requirements including Municipal Code and California Building Code standards.

Comment 2: When agricultural crops and/or land uses are proposed or rezoned for residential use, a number of contaminants of concern can be present. The Lead Agency shall

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-7 identify the amounts of Pesticides and Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs) historically used on the property. If present, OCPs requiring further analysis are Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, toxaphene, and dieldrin. Additionally, any level of arsenic present would require further analysis and sampling and must meet Human Health Risk Assessment Note Number 3 approved thresholds outlined in the PEA Guidance Manual. If they do not, remedial action must take place to mitigate them below those thresholds.

Response: A Phase I and Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared to determine if actual or potential environmental conditions involving the subjects are present and has been included as Appendix A in this Draft EIR (GeoTeck, Inc., 2024). Phase I ESA included a reconnaissance survey of the site and surrounding properties, interviews with appropriate representatives and regulatory agency personnel, and review of environmental databases, public records, and historical documents. The Phase I and 2 ESA also provided limited soils sampling to determine if any soil contamination was present. With respect to OCPs, five soil samples contained detectable concentrations of OCPs, however, those concentrations are below the EPA Regional Screening Level for residential soils. The concentration of the metal arsenic in all of the soil samples was above screening levels for residential soils, as determined by DTSC. However, the USEPA and the DTSC have acknowledged that naturally occurring arsenic in southern California typically exceeds the maximum screening level, with levels recorded up to 12 mg/kg in many areas (Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) Note Number 11 - Southern California Ambient Arsenic Screening Level). The test results for all of the soil samples are below the typically detected levels of arsenic in the southern California area. Therefore, the Phase I and 2 ESA concluded that no recognized environmental condition or concern is present on the site.

Comment 3: Additional contaminants of concern may be found in mixing/loading/storage area, drainage ditches, farmhouses, or any other outbuildings and should be sampled and analyzed. If smudge pots had been routinely utilized, additional sampling for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and/or Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons may be required.

Response: The Phase I and 2 ESA site investigation concluded that no recognized environmental condition in connection with the subject site had been identified. The survey of the site and historic document research did not reveal any contamination of concern related to historic use of the site for agriculture.

IS/NOP Oral Comments
The City received no oral comments in response to the NOP at the scoping meeting. The comments are summarized in Table 2-2, Summary of Oral Comments on Notice of Preparation.

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-8 Table 2-2
Summary of Oral Comments on Notice of Preparation
Commenter Summary of Comment
Federal Agencies No federal agencies commented in response to the NOP during the scoping meeting.

State Agencies No local agencies commented in response to the NOP during the scoping meeting.

Local Agencies No local agencies commented in response to the NOP during the scoping meeting.

Interested Parties No interested parties commented in response to the NOP during the scoping meeting.

2.5 - Availability of the Draft EIR
This Draft EIR is being distributed directly to agencies, organizations, and interested groups and persons for comment during a 45-day formal review period in accordance with Section 15087 of the CEQA Guidelines. This Draft EIR and the full administrative record for the Project, including all studies, is available for review during normal business hours Monday through Friday at the City of Hanford Community Development Department, located at:

City of Hanford Community Development Department

CIVIC CENTER BUILDING
317 N Douty St, Hanford, CA 93230

2.6 - Format and Content
This Draft EIR addresses the potential environmental effects of the Project and was prepared following input from the public and the responsible and affected agencies, through the EIR scoping process, as discussed previously. The contents of this Draft EIR were established based on the findings in the NOP and public and agency input. Based on the findings of the NOP, a determination was made that an EIR was required to address potentially significant environmental effects on the following resources:
• Land Use and Planning • Transportation

2.6.1 - REQUIRED EIR CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION
The content and organization of this Draft EIR are designed to meet the requirements of CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and the Kern County CEQA Implementation Document, as well as to present issues, analysis, mitigation, and other information in a logical and understandable way. This Draft EIR is organized into the following sections:
• Chapter 1, “Executive Summary,” provides a Project description and a summary of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures.

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-9 • Chapter 2, “Introduction,” provides CEQA compliance information, an overview of the decision-making process, organization of the EIR, and a responsible and trustee agency list.
• Chapter 3, “Project Description,” provides a description of the location, characteristics, objectives, and the relationship of the Project to other plans and policies.
• Chapter 4, “Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures,” contains a detailed environmental analysis of the existing conditions, project impacts, mitigation measures, and unavoidable adverse impacts.
• Chapter 5, “Consequences of Project Implementation (Mandatory CEQA Sections),” presents an analysis of the Project’s cumulative and growth-inducing impacts and other CEQA requirements, including significant and unavoidable impacts and irreversible commitment of resources.
• Chapter 6, “Alternatives,” describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project that could reduce the significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided. • Chapter 7, “Responses to Comments,” is reserved for responses to comments on this Draft EIR.
• Chapter 8, “Organizations and Persons Consulted,” lists the organizations and persons contacted during the preparation of this Draft EIR. • Chapter 9, “Preparers,”identifies persons involved in the preparation of the Draft EIR. • Chapter 10, “Bibliography,” identifies reference sources for the Draft EIR. • “Appendices” provide information and technical studies that support the environmental analysis contained within the Draft EIR.

The analysis of each environmental category in Chapter 4 is organized as follows:
• “Introduction” provides a brief overview of the purpose of the section being analyzed with regard to the Project.
• “Environmental Setting” describes the physical conditions that exist at this time and that may influence or affect the topic being analyzed.
• “Regulatory Setting” provides State and federal laws, the City of Hanford General Plan (GP) goals, policies, and implementation measures that apply to the topic being analyzed.
• “Impacts and Mitigation Measures” discusses the impacts of the Project in each category, including direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts, presents the

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-10 determination of the level of significance, and provides a discussion of feasible mitigation measures to reduce any impacts.

2.7 - Responsible and Trustee Agencies
Projects or actions undertaken by the Lead Agency, in this case, the City of Hanford, may require subsequent oversight, approvals, or permits from other public agencies in order to be implemented. Other such agencies are referred to as “responsible agencies” and “trustee agencies.” Pursuant to Sections 15381 and 15386 of the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, responsible agencies and trustee agencies are defined as follows:
• A “responsible agency” is a public agency that proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which a Lead Agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or Negative Declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term “responsible agency” includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency that have discretionary approval power over the project (Section 15381).
• A “trustee agency” is a State agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project that is held in trust for the people of the State of California (Section 15386).

The various public, private, and political agencies and jurisdictions with a particular interest in the Project include, but are not limited to, the following:

2.7.1 - LOCAL AGENCIES
• Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E)
• San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District (SJVAPCD)
• County of Kings
• Southern California Edison
Company (SCE)
• Southern California Gas Company
(SCG)

2.7.2 - STATE AGENCIES
• California Air Resources Board
(CARB)
• California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)
• California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW)
• California Integrated Waste
Management Board
• Department of Water Resources
• Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research
• Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB), Central Valley
Region
• Department of Toxic Substances
Control (DTSC)
• California Environmental
Protection Agency

City of Hanford Introduction

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 2-11

2.7.3 - FEDERAL AGENCIES
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

2.8 - Incorporation by Reference
In accordance with Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines to reduce the size of the report, the following documents are hereby incorporated by reference into this Draft EIR and are available for public review at the City of Hanford Community Development Department. • City of Hanford 2035 General Plan Update
• City of Hanford 2035 General Plan Update Master EIR
• City of Hanford Subdivision Ordinance
• City of Hanford Zoning Ordinance
• City of Hanford Housing Element
• City of Hanford Vehicle Miles Travelled Threshold and Implementation Guidelines

2.9 - Sources
This Draft EIR is dependent upon information from many sources. Some sources are studies or reports that have been prepared specifically for this document. Other sources provide background information related to one or more issue areas that are discussed in this document. The sources and references used in the preparation of this Draft EIR are listed in Chapter 10, Bibliography, and are available for review during normal business hours at the:

City of Hanford Community Development Department

CIVIC CENTER BUILDING
317 N Douty St, Hanford, CA 93230

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-1 CHAPTER 3 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 - Project Overview
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared to identify and evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with the construction of 326 single-family residences, internal roads, a 2.86-acre drainage retention basin, and a 3.58-acre park on an approximately 88.9-acre site (Project). An approximately 13.87-acre portion of the site at the northeast corner of the property is intended to be removed via a lot-line adjustment. The Project is within the City of Hanford’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) but will be annexed into the City (Figure 3-1 - Regional Location; Figure 3-2 – Project Area).

3.2 - Project Location and Environmental Setting

3.2.1 - REGIONAL SETTING
The City of Hanford (City) is located 30 miles south of the City of Fresno and 20 miles west of the City of Visalia in the northern portion of Kings County, California. Kings County is one of eight counties that comprise the San Joaquin Valley, which is bound on the west by the Coast Range Mountains, on the east by the Sierra Nevada, on the south by the Tehachapi Mountains, and on the north by the Sacramento River Delta area. Kings County is bordered by Monterey County to the west, Tulare County to the east, Kern County to the south, and Fresno County to the north. Like much of the greater San Joaquin Valley, Kings County has remained predominantly an agricultural area. There are four incorporated cities in Kings County. Hanford is the largest of the four cities in physical size and population. Figure 3-1 provides the regional location of Hanford.

3.2.2 - LOCAL SETTING
The City has a total area of approximately 17 square miles and, as of January 1, 2020, had a population of 57,339 residents, which was about 38 percent of the total population of Kings County. The City’s elevation is approximately 249 feet above mean sea level, and the topography of Hanford is relatively flat, indicative of the floor of the San Joaquin Valley where the City resides. Armona, Home Garden, and Grangeville are unincorporated communities located near Hanford. The Naval Air Station Lemoore is located 16 miles west of Hanford.

Santa Rosa Rancheria, the reservation of the Santa Rosa Indian Community, is located eight miles southwest of Hanford.

Figure 3-3 shows the current city limits. This figure also shows the City’s current Primary Sphere of Influence (SOI) and Secondary SOI. A Primary SOI is defined as “the probable physical boundaries and service area of a local agency.” The City’s Primary SOI represents an assumption of the City’s probable future physical boundaries and service. A Secondary SOI serves as an identification of the “areas of interest” between local agencies.

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-2

Figure 3-1
Regional Location
/"-,, Project Location
0 Miles 100 0
Miles 7.5
N.-w.d•
Nnonal
&ec:=_•tv L--=.r----:::::;;iir
Ensenada
...
"" F

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-3

Figure 3-2
Project Site

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-4

Figure 3-3
Sphere of Influence
:,:

E-
:::

FLINT
F/\RGO
GRANGF.VILLF.

LACEY
·HANFORD:

ARMONA

HOUSTON
IDAHO

JACKSON
Adopted April 24, 2017
•
City of Hanford _E]
2035 General Plan ~
1 inch• 1{4'-li e ~ ....... ~- I
-"'
--
-
.. = ;;_, I ~ ' " '
:,: M
.,. !:;
~ ~ :s:
:,: "' :,:
.)
Boundaries
[=.] Hanford City Limits (2014)
LJ 2035 Growth Boundary
:,:

E- .: .:
"' ex, "

HANFORD
General Plan
Land Use Map
Land Use Designations
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
- High Density Residential
Neighborhood Commercial
- Regional Commercial
- Service Commercial
- Highway Commercial
Office Residential
- Office
- Neighborhood Mixed Use
- Corridor Mixed Use
- Downtown Mixed Use
Light Industrial
c:J Planned Area (proposed Primary Sphere of Influence} c:J General Plan Study Area Area of Interest

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-5

3.2.3 - PROJECT LOCATION
The Silicon Valley Ranch Residential Development Project is located south of Hanford Armona Road, in the sphere of influence of the City of Hanford. The Project encompasses approximately 88.9 acres (APN 011-040-008, 010, and 027) and is bordered by undeveloped and rural residential lands on the west and south; a church and undeveloped land to the north; and residential uses to the east. The Project is located within Section 3, Township 19 South, Range 21 East Mount Diablo Base and Meridian (MDB&M). Figure 3-3 shows the location of the Project in relation to the city limits.

3.3 - Project Objectives
State CEQA Guidelines require that the EIR project description include a statement of the objectives of the proposed Project. The primary objectives of the Project are to:
• Provide a variety of housing opportunities with a range of styles, sizes, and values that will be designed to satisfy existing and future demand for quality housing in the area.
• Provide a sense of community and walkability within the development through the use of street patterns, parks/open space areas, landscaping, and other Project amenities.
• Create a successful and financially feasible Project by meeting the housing needs of the area.
• Provide a residential development that assists the City in meeting its General Plan and Housing Element requirements and objectives.

3.4 - Proposed Project
The Project proposes to construct a 326-lot residential subdivision within the City of Hanford Sphere of Influence (Figure 3-4). The Project will be annexed into the City under a separate application. An approximately 13.87-acre portion of the site at the northeast corner of the property is intended to be removed via a lot-line adjustment. The Project will be developed with a 326-unit single-family subdivision, a 3.58-acre park, and a 2.86-acre retention basin. Lots will range between 5,000 to 7,000 square feet and will be developed with single-family residential units. Associated utility and right-of-way infrastructure would also be developed in accordance with City of Hanford standards and regulations.

In order for the Project to be constructed, approval of the following actions is required:
• Approval of Tentative Tract Map 943.
• Prezoning – Because the Project site does not currently have a City of Hanford zoning designation, prezoning of the site is required. The Project would be prezoned to the R-L-5 (Low Density Residential, 5,000 square feet).
• Annexation into the city limits by Kings County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo).

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-6

Figure 3-4
Tentative Tract Map 943
.-f!RICAflO'lr.o.Tf
YALVE(m'1c,II..)
,.
$£1)2/:i'S(.Of'f:»,/()(M~EASE\IEW
,4' ,/Pl'
// ,?'
. ::sec~~ 4-,:;;,~ j'
10· flCIE Ofl"T <"ELD
"""
"""' I

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-7 Development of the Project is anticipated to occur over a 12-month period. Construction equipment will vary over the course of development and will include the following:
• Excavators/earth-moving equipment
• Depending on the foundation system, auger rig, or pile-driving rig • All-terrain forklifts
• A man/material hoist
• Truck cranes and potentially a tower crane (pending permit approval) • Concrete trucks
• Dump trucks
• Street sweepers/water trucks for dust control
• Construction delivery trucks (typically box trucks or flatbeds) • Small tools (generators, light plants, compactors, air compressors

3.5 - Entitlements Required
The City is the Lead Agency for the proposed Project, consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(b). As such, this EIR will be used by the City to evaluate the potential environmental impacts that could result from implementation of the Project and develop changes in the proposed Project, and/or adopt mitigation measures that would address those impacts.

The Hanford City Council will consider the adoption of the Project after certification of the Final EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the decision-makers must “balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ‘acceptable’.”
If the City, as the Lead Agency, approves the proposed Project and significant, unavoidable environmental impacts have been documented, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be written, which shall state the specific reasons to support the approval based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record.

Implementation of the proposed Project would require the following regulatory and/or legislative actions by the Hanford City Council, following the recommendation from the Planning Commission:
• Certify the Final EIR.
• Consider and adopt Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as necessary.
• Approve Tentative Tract Map 943.
• Adopt an Ordinance approving the prezoning of the site as R-L-5 Low-Density Residential.

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-8 • Initiate Annexation by filing an application with Kings County LAFCo.

3.5.1 - OTHER RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES
Future activities related to development may require consideration and approval from a variety of agencies, who will be CEQA responsible or trustee agencies in this environmental process. The specific responsible agencies may vary depending upon the nature of the planned activity, location, and the resources impacted by the proposed subdivision. A preliminary list of potentially responsible and trustee agencies is provided below:
• Kings County LAFCo
• San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD)

3.6 - Cumulative Projects
CEQA requires that an EIR evaluate cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts are the Project’s impacts combined with the impacts of other related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. As set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, the discussion of cumulative impacts must reflect the severity of the impacts, as well as the likelihood of their occurrence; however, the discussion need not be as detailed as the discussion of environmental impacts attributable to the Project alone. As stated in CEQA, Public Resources Code, Section 21083(b) (2), “a project may have a significant effect on the environment if the possible effects of a project are individually limited but cumulatively considerable.” According to the CEQA Guidelines:

Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual effects, which, when considered together, are considerable and compound or increase other environmental impacts. • The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects.
• The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment, which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.

Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time (California Code of Regulations [CCR], Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, §15355).

In addition, as stated in the CEQA Guidelines, it should be noted that:

The mere existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone shall not constitute substantial evidence that the proposed Project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable (CCR, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15064[I][5]).

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-9 Cumulative impact discussions for each environmental topic area are provided at the end of each technical analysis contained within Chapter 4, under Impacts and Mitigation Measures.

The cumulative impacts discussions explain the geographic scope of the area affected by each cumulative effect (e.g., immediate project vicinity, city, county, watershed, or air basin). The geographic area considered for each cumulative impact depends upon the impact that is being analyzed. For example, in assessing aesthetic impacts, the pertinent geographic study area is the vicinity of the areas of new development under the proposed plan from which the new development can be publicly viewed and may contribute to a significant cumulative visual effect. In assessing macro-scale air quality impacts, on the other hand, all development within the air basin contributes to regional emissions of criteria pollutants, and basin-wide projections of emissions are the best tool for determining the cumulative effect.

Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines permits two different methodologies for the completion of the cumulative impact analysis:
• The ‘list’ approach permits the use of a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including projects both within and outside the city.
• The ‘projections’ approach allows the use of a summary of projections contained in an adopted plan or related planning document, such as a regional transportation plan, or in an EIR prepared for such a plan. The projections may be supplemented with additional information such as regional modeling.

This EIR uses the list approach and below is a list of similar projects within a 1.5-mile radius of the Project site. The project list provided by the Lead Agency includes the following projects.

1. Live Oak North (Tract 902, 99 single-family units, under construction)

2. Billingsly (Tentative Tract 927, 95 single-family units, not under construction)

3. Stonehaven (Tentative Tract 940, 82 single-family units, not under construction)

4. Live Oak West (Entitled under Live Oak Master Plan and Tentative Tract 909, 642 units, not under construction)

5. Live Oak East (Tract 865 and 881, 448 single-family units, under construction)

6. Live Oak East II (Tentative Tract 912, 94 single-family units, not under construction)

7. Fairfield Inn Hotel (80 units, under construction)

8. The Enclave (Tract 915, 66 single-family units, under construction)

9. The Village (100 multi-family units, under construction)

10. 216-unit apartment complex (not under construction)

11. Proposed medical mixed use complex (not entitled)

12. Monte Vista (40 high-density single-family units, under construction) The following provides a summary of the cumulative impact scope for each impact area:

City of Hanford Project Description

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 3-10 • Land Use and Planning: The analysis of the proposed Project addresses cumulative impacts related to consistency with the City of Hanford General Plan and other applicable planning documents.
• Transportation and Traffic: The analysis of the proposed Project addresses cumulative impacts to the transportation network in Hanford and the surrounding area.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-1 CHAPTER 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSES

4.1 - Land Use and Planning

4.1.1 - INTRODUCTION
This section describes the affected environment and regulatory setting of the proposed Project for impacts that may affect land use and planning. It also describes the environmental and regulatory setting and discusses the need for mitigation measures where applicable. The information is based, in part, on a review of the proposed Project’s consistency with the City of Hanford General Plan, City Zoning Ordinance, Kings County General Plan, and Kings County LAFCo regulations.

4.1.2 - ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
On-Site Land Uses
The Project site has historically been used as an agricultural field and does not contain any structures.

As discussed in the scoping Initial Study (IS) prepared with the NOP (Appendix A), the site contains both Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance as designed by the California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) (California Department of Conservation, 2022). The Project site is located within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City and is designated for Low Density Residential under their General Plan. The Project site is not subject to a Williamson Act Land Use contract.

The Project site is located in Flood Zone X, an area of minimal flood hazard, and outside of the 100-year flood zone. Furthermore, the Project site is not located within the Special Flood Hazard Area (Zone A, V, A99, AE, AO, AH, VE, or AR). Per the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), the Project site does not contain a delineated wetland, water feature, or potentially jurisdictional water body or wetland that may fall under the jurisdiction of federal and/or State regulatory agencies.

The Kings County General Plan states that there are limited excavation operations of soil, sand, and gravel for commercial use within Kings County. In 2009, the County had only one surface mining permit for a non-active gravel operation, and two agricultural reclamation sites that were fully reclaimed (Kings County, 2010). The City of Hanford General Plan further states that there have been no efforts to attempt extraction of mineral resources within or near the General Plan Planning Area. The Project site does not contain a mineral resource extraction area. Per the California Department of Conservation Well Finder online mapping application, the Project site does not contain an active or abandoned well site.

As shown in Table 4.1-1, Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Classifications, the Project site has a Kings County General Plan designation of Limited Agriculture, 10 acres, and a City of Hanford General Plan designation of Low Density Residential. The Project

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-2 proposes to annex into the City of Hanford’s city limits and will be prezoned to the R-L-5 (Low Density Residential, 5,000 square feet) to be consistent with the City General Plan designation.

Surrounding Land Uses
Land uses in the region and immediate area of the Project site consist of agricultural operations and residential development. Immediately north of the Project site is agricultural land improved with row crops and single-family residences, and the Koinonia Church. The area west and south of the Project site consists of rural residential and undeveloped land.

Land to the east is mainly developed with single-family residential. The nearest residences are located along the eastern boundary of the Project site.

As summarized in Table 4.1-1, surrounding land uses are designated Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Open Space under the City of Hanford General Plan Land Use Map. A small portion west of the Project site is located outside of the city limits and is designated as Limited Agriculture under the Kings County General Plan.

Table 4.1-1
Project Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Classifications Existing Land Use Existing General
Plan Designation
Existing Zoning
Project Site Undeveloped Land Low Density
Residential
Prezone: R-L-5
Surrounding Land Use
North Agriculture, Rural
Residential, Church
Medium Density
Residential
R-M (Medium
Density Residential)
East Single-Family Residential Low Density
Residential
R-L-5 (Low Density
Residential, 5,000
square feet)
South Undeveloped Open Space and Low
Density Residential
R-L-5 and CO
(Conservation)
West Rural Residential,
Undeveloped
Limited Agriculture,
5 Acres (Kings
County)
Low Density
Residential (City of
Hanford)
R-L-5 (City of
Hanford)
AL10 (Limited
Agriculture, 10
acres) (Kings
County)

4.1.3 - REGULATORY SETTING
This section summarizes the Land Use and Planning policies, laws, and regulations that apply to the proposed Project. This information provides context for the impact discussion related to the Project’s consistency with applicable regulatory conditions.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-3 Federal
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws are applicable for this issue area.

State
There are no State regulations for this issue area.

Regional

KINGS COUNTY LOCAL AREA FORMATION COMMISSION (LAFCO)
Kings County LAFCo is responsible for coordinating logical and timely changes in local governmental boundaries, conducting special studies that review ways to reorganize, simplify and streamline governmental structure and preparing a SOI for each city and special district within each county. The Commission’s efforts are directed to seeing that services are provided efficiently and economically while ensuring that agricultural and open-space lands are protected. A SOI is a planning boundary outside of an agency’s legal boundary that designates the agency’s probable future boundary and service area. The purpose of the SOI is to ensure the provision of efficient services while discouraging urban sprawl and premature conversion of agricultural and open space lands by preventing overlapping jurisdictions and duplication of services. A secondary SOI has been established by Kings County LAFCo which is beyond the primary SOI and includes additional territory that serves only as an area of planning interest to the city. When a city desires to alter its boundary and add additional contiguous land into its jurisdictional control through an annexation, the city must first obtain LAFCo approval.

The Kings County LAFCo adopted standards to review proposals of all changes or organization or reorganization of cities and special districts and are reflected in the Kings County LAFCo Policies and Procedure Manual. Both favorable and unfavorable factors are listed, and the existence of favorable or unfavorable factors should not decide approval or denial; however a substantial number of favorable, or unfavorable, factors may be the determining factor of approval or denial of the proposal.

Standards for Annexation to Cities and Special Districts Providing Urban Services

1. Favorable Factors:
a. Proposal would eliminate or reduce in size, islands, near islands or other gross distortions of existing city and district boundaries.
b. The proposed area is urban in character and should be provided with municipal or urban type services.
c. The proposed area is close to urban development and municipal type services and would enhance its potential of full development.
d. The proposal is required by a governmental agency for annexation of its publicly owned property.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-4 e. The proposed annexation conforms to the adopted general plan. f. The boundaries are definite and certain.
g. The proposed area is consistent with the sphere of influence. h. Request for annexation comes with the consent of all land owners as shown on the last assessment roll.

2. Unfavorable Factors:
a. The proposed annexation would create extensive corridors or peninsulas extending into an unincorporated area, and would cause further distortion of existing city boundaries.
b. The proposed annexation would result in a premature intrusion of urbanization into an agricultural area.
c. Extension of city services is financially infeasible for the foreseeable future. d. The area is presently rural or agricultural and no urban development appears to be imminent.
e. The proposed annexation is motivated by land speculation or other motives not in the public’s best interest.
f. Boundaries of the proposal do not include appropriate area or are otherwise improperly drawn.
g. The proposal is inconsistent with adopted sphere of influence and adopted general plan.

Local

KINGS COUNTY GENERAL PLAN
The 2035 Kings County General Plan provides a future vision for the county and guides the physical growth and development of the unincorporated portion of Kings County. The Kings County General Plan is also intended to conserve the County’s resources through the year 2035 in a manner consistent with the goals of the people of Kings County. The Kings County General Plan includes the following goal, objective and policies regarding annexation.

LU Goal E1: Urban Fringe areas continue to allow existing uses, while land remains intended for probable future urban growth and expansion of Cities where urban level municipal services are provided.

LU Objective E1.1: Require new development in city fringe areas (except a single-family house or secondary dwelling unit on an existing lot) to annex to the city, and encourage existing developed fringe areas to annex to the City where the City the closest and most logical municipal service provide.

LU Policy E1.1.1: Require urban growth to be contiguous to existing urban development and annex to a city in order to ensure coordinated urban growth according to that City’s General Plan policies. Commercial and industrial development may be considered for development

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-5 in the County when annexation is not feasible or practical but must develop public improvements to City standards.

CITY OF HANFORD GENERAL PLAN
The Hanford General Plan serves as the community’s guide for the continued development, enhancement, and revitalization of the City of Hanford. The General Plan includes the following policies related to land use and annexations that are relevant to this analysis:

Chapter 3 Land Use and Community Design
Goal L1: A well planned community that grows in an organized fashion.

Goal L3: Limitation of urban sprawl-style development patterns in new growth areas.

Goal L4: Adequate land available to meet housing needs for all citizens through the year 2035.

Goal L5: Stable, high quality neighborhoods with housing integrated with schools, parks, and availability of everyday commercial goods and services.

Goal L6: A wide range of housing choices that insure opportunities for a variety of age groups, lifestyles, and income levels.

Goal L7: Residential densities that encourage both compact and infill development.

Goal L30: Preservation and enhancement of Hanford’s unique character and achievement of an optimal balance of residential, commercial, industrial, public, and open space land uses.

Goal L32: Improvement in Hanford’s quality of life through use of practical design principles and standards.

Goal L38: Revitalized Arterial corridors that accommodate a mix of nonresidential and residential uses that generate activity and economic vitality and improve the visual character.

Policy L1 Planned Area Boundary
Designate a Planned Area Boundary to serve as the limits of the area to be planned for urban development.

Policy L2 2035 Growth Boundary
Designate a 2035 Growth Boundary to serve as the limits of the area to be developed with urban uses during the 2015 to 2035 planning period. Locate the 2035 Growth Boundary along major roadways and other natural or manmade physical features that can serve as a physical boundary between urban and agricultural uses.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-6 Policy L3 Developable Land Inventory
Include enough land within the 2035 Growth Boundary to meet the project land needs to accommodate growth through the year 2035, along with a 35% market flexibility factor that acknowledges existing constraints to development of some parcels.

Policy L4 New Development within Boundary
Approve new urban development only within the 2035 Growth Boundary.

Policy L6 Agriculture and the Urban Fringe
Recognize and protect the right of agricultural uses within the growth boundary to exist and continue to operate in proximity to new development on the fringes of the City.

Policy L7 Primary Sphere of Influence
Support and pursue an amendment of the City of Hanford’s Primary Sphere of Influence to be coterminous to the Planned Area Boundary.

Policy L15 Initiation of Annexations
Consider initiation of annexation of land into the City of Hanford only when the following criteria are met:

1. The land is within the Primary Sphere of Influence.

2. The capacity of the water, sewer, fie, school, and police services are adequate to service the area to be annexed, or will be adequate at the time that development occurs.

3. Land for development within the city limits is insufficient to meet the current land use needs.

4. The territory to be annexed is contiguous to existing developed areas.

Policy L18 Compatibility with Surrounding Neighborhoods Ensure that new development is compatible with existing and surrounding neighborhoods.

Policy L24 Availability of Infrastructure
Ensure that new residential developments have sufficient urban infrastructure and public facilities to accommodate the number and type of development being proposed.

Policy L27 Mix of Densities in Neighborhoods
Encourage mixing of residential densities and lot sizes within neighborhoods.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-7 Policy L29 Agriculture
Recognize the right of agriculture to exist and continue to operate in proximity to the new residential development on the fringes of the city. Deed restrictions may be required which inform future residents of the right of agriculture to continue within the limits of the law without interference or protect from nearby property owners.

Policy L33 Size of Lots in the Low Density Residential Land Use Designation While it is recognized that existing lot sizes of 10,000 to 40,000 square feet are included in this designation, new individual lot sizes shall range from 5,000 to 10,000 square feet in size.

Under Planned Unit Development provisions, smaller lot sizes at higher densities may be permitted when clustered around shared open space amenities or through density bonus policies.

Policy L114 Services and Facilities
Include easily accessible services and facilities within each neighborhood to meet the daily needs of neighborhood residents. Most residents should life within a ½ mile walking distance of schools, parks and retail services.

Policy L120 Encroachment of Incompatible Land Uses
Protect residential neighborhoods from the encroachment of land uses that may have a negative impact on the residential living environment.

Policy L147 Hanford-Armona Road Residential and Mixed Use Development Encourage residential and mixed use developed in the Hanford-Armona Road Corridor between 10th and 13th Avenues.

Chapter 4 Transportation and Circulation
Policy T1 Coordination of Circulation and Land Use
Develop a circulation network that reinforces the desired land use pattern for Hanford, as identified in the land use element.

Policy T29 Maximum Level of Service
Maintain a peak hour Level of Service E on streets and intersections within the area bounded by Highway 198, 10th Avenue, 11th Avenue, and Florinda Avenue, inclusive of these streets.

Maintain a peak hour Level of Service D on all other streets and intersections with the Planned Growth Boundary.

Policy T33 Street improvements and Priorities
Prioritize street improvements with emphasis on current and forecasted service levels.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-8 Policy T36 Traffic Impact Fees
Periodically review and update the traffic impact fee program to ensure new development contributes its fair share of funding for new street, intersection, and highway improvements.

Policy T40 Pedestrian and Bicycle Placemaking
Promote pedestrian and bicycle improvements that improve connectivity between neighborhoods, provide opportunities for distinctive neighborhood features, and foster a greater sense of community.

Policy T48 Traffic Calming
Consider the use of traffic calming designs such as roundabouts, bulb-outs, and other traffic calming designs, where they will improve the operation or LOS of a street.

Policy T49 Subdivision Connectivity
Design subdivision to maximize connectivity both internally and with other surrounding development.

Policy T51 Alternative Design Standards
Consider alternative roadway design standards for new residential and mixed use development for future streets that may include:
• Narrower street widths on local roadways.
• Smaller turning radii geometrics on street intersections to improve safety for pedestrians.
• Tree lined streets in parkways between the curb and sidewalk. • Roundabouts in lieu of traffic signals where appropriate conditions exist to maximize intersection efficiency, maintain continuous traffic flow, and reduce accident severity.

Policy T64 Bicycle Network Master Planning
Maintain a Bicycle Master Plan to coordinate existing and planned infrastructure to support, encourage and promote bicycle transportation, with effective connections to downtown, major shopping areas, mixed use neighborhoods, community facilities, schools, parks, and employment areas.

Policy T70 Pedestrian Connections
Increase connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, village centers and other destinations throughout the city.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-9 Chapter 5 Open Space, Conservation and Recreation
Goal O8: The equitable distribution of parks throughout the community that are well designed, accessible, and integrated with the surrounding neighborhood.

Goal O9 Parks provided at a combined ratio of 2.5 acres per 1,000 residents.

Policy O1 Boundary between Urban and Agricultural Uses
Utilize the Planned Area Boundary as the long term boundary line between urban uses and agricultural uses and prohibit non-agricultural development outside the Planned Area Boundary.

Policy O2 Agricultural Buffer
Coordinate land use policies and designations with Kings County to provide for a buffer between the urban area of Hanford and the surrounding unincorporated communities.

Policy O4 Interim Agricultural Use
Retain existing agricultural areas as an interim use inside the Planned Area Boundary and support agricultural operations until such time that the areas are needed for logical urban expansion.

Policy O12 Soil Erosion
Require new development to implement measures to minimize soil erosion related to construction.

Policy O15 Energy-efficient Design Features
Require that new development incorporate energy-efficient design features for HVAC, lighting systems, and insulation meet or exceed California Code of Regulations Title 24.

Policy O16 Vegetation to Conserve Energy
Encourage the use of native and drought tolerant shade trees and vines on southern and western exposure building walls as an energy conservation technique.

Policy O21 Water Conservation Ordinance
Actively enforce and periodically update the City Water Conservation Ordinance.

Policy O22 Water Conservation Efforts
Actively encourage water conservation by both agricultural and urban water users.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-10 Policy O24 Drought Tolerant Vegetation
Promote the use of drought-tolerant vegetation to minimize water consumption by providing information to developers, designers, and homebuyers.

Policy O25 Recharge Basins
Protect existing groundwater recharge basins and natural and manmade sloughs and seek the establishment of new basins within and around Hanford.

Policy O28 Water Availability in Emergencies
Ensure that public and private water facilities have adequate capacity to supply emergency needs.

Policy O29 Water Conservation Measures for New Development Encourage new development projects to include water conservation measures, including use of graywater, reclaimed, or recycled water for landscaping, water-conserving plumbing fixtures and appliances, and water-efficient landscapes.

Policy O30 Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Implement the NPDES Stormwater Permit and for those properties exempt from the Permit, require a storm water pollution prevention plan, including use of best management practices, to control erosion and sedimentation during construction.

Policy O31 Provision of Open Space Areas
Preserve and enhance natural open space areas.

Policy O35 Impacts from Development
Ensure that potential impacts to biological resources and sensitive habitat are carefully evaluated when considering development projects.

Policy O36 Nonnative Invasive Species
Manage or eliminate nonnative invasive species from City-owned property and open space.

Policy O37 Mature Trees
Promote the preservation of existing mature trees and encourage the planting of appropriate shade trees
Policy O38 Native Tree Species and Drought Tolerant Vegetation Encourage the planting of native tree species and drought-tolerant vegetation.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-11 Policy O39 Endangered Wildlife and Habitat
Establish programs in connection with environmental review processes that protect endangered wildlife and their habitats.

Policy O40 Sensitive Wildlife
Work with state, federal, and local agencies on the preservation of sensitive wildlife species in the City.

Policy O44 Flexible Land Use Standards
Adopt flexible land use and design standards to allow the adaptive reuse of historic buildings with a variety of economically viable uses, while minimizing impacts to the historic value and character of sites and structures.

Policy O46 Archaeological Site Consultation
Consult with appropriate Native American associations about potential archaeological sites in the beginning stages of the development review process.

Policy O47 Archaeological Site Study
Require archaeological studies by a certified archaeologist in areas of archaeological potential significance prior to approval of development projects.

Policy O48 Cultural Site Consultation
Consult with the California Archaeological Inventory Southern San Joaquin Valley at California State University, Bakersfield about potential cultural sites on projects that could have an impact on cultural resources.

Policy O49 Cultural Site Discovery
Halt construction at a development site if cultural resources are encountered unexpectedly during construction.

Policy O50 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan Prepare and periodically update a Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan to plan for new growth identified in the land use element.

Policy O57 Neighborhood Parks
Establish neighborhood parks generally between 2 and 5 acres in size at locations easily accessed by residents of the neighborhood.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-12 Policy O58 Neighborhood Parks Service Area
Neighborhood parks shall have a general service are of approximately ½ mile radius, and situated to avoid patrons having to cross arterial streets, railroad lines and major waterways.

Policy O64 Park Visibility
Parks shall be designed to promote a safe and clean environment for recreation. New neighborhoods shall be designed so that common side and rear residential property lines with parks are minimized and visibility of parks from public streets is maximized.

Policy O65 Development Impact Fee for Parks
Adopt and periodically update a park development impact fee to fund new neighborhood and community parks needed to serve new growth.

Chapter 6 Public Facilities and Services
Goal P1: Adequate water quality and quantity to meet existing and planned needs.

Goal P2: Adequate wastewater collection and treatment to meet both existing and planned needs.

Goal P3: Adequate and effective stormwater collection and disposal to meet both existing and planned needs.

Goal P5: Adequate solid waste disposal capacity to meet existing and future demands.

Goal P12: Adequate provision of school facilities to serve projected growth.

Policy P1 Adequate Water Services
Provide adequate water services to sup[port the level of development identified in the land use element.

Policy P3 Water Supply and Fire Flow Availability
Condition approval of new development projects and water service extensions on the availability of adequate water supply and the ability to meet domestic and fire flow needs of the area.

Policy P7 New Water Infrastructure
Require developers to fund and install new water distribution facilities to service their new developments.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-13 Policy P8 Impact Fees for Water Facilities
Adopt and periodically update a water impact fee to fund community-wide water supply, treatment, and distribution infrastructure needed to serve new growth.

Policy P9 Sufficient Collection and Treatment
Ensure provision of sufficient wastewater collection and treatment facilities to support the existing and new growth identified in the land use element.

Policy P13 New Wastewater Infrastructure
Require developers to fund and install new wastewater collection facilities to service their new development.

Policy P14 Impact Fees for Wastewater Facilities
Adopt and periodically update a wastewater impact fee to fund community-wide wastewater collection and treatment needed to serve new growth.

Policy P15 Adequate Storm Water Services
Provide adequate storm water drainage infrastructure to support the level of development identified in the land use element.

Policy P17 Adequate Storm Water Drainage Improvements Availability Condition approval of development projects on the provision of adequate storm water drainage improvements.

Policy P21 New Storm Water Drainage Infrastructure
Require developers to fund and install new storm water drainage facilities to service their new developments.

Policy P22 Impact Fees for Wastewater Facilities
Adopt and periodically update a wastewater drainage impact fee to fund area-wide storm water drainage needed to serve new growth.

Policy P24 New Development Run-Off Volumes
Require new development to discharge storm water runoff at volumes no greater than the capacity of any portion of the existing downstream system by utilizing detention or retention or other approved methods, unless the project is providing drainage infrastructure in accordance with an adopted drainage plan.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-14 Policy P37 Impact Fees for Police Facilities
Require new development to provide funding to meet the cost of providing vehicles, equipment, and structures, to meet the needs for new population growth.

Policy P46 Building Design for Safety
Encourage building designs that help to reduce crime and improve resident safety.

Policy P47 Lighting for Safety
Facilitate public safety through the placement and design of outdoor lighting, while respecting the privacy of surrounding properties.

Policy P52 Impact Fees for Fire Facilities
Require developers to contribute impact fees to fund the cost of providing fire facilities needed to support new population growth and development.

Policy P59 Fire and Building Codes
Continue to enforce the California Fire Code, California Building Code, and Hanford Municipal Code to mitigate threats to safety and property.

Policy P79 Impact Fees for General Government Facilities Require developers to contribute impact fees to fund the cost of providing expanded general government facilities needed to support new population growth and development.

Chapter 7 Health, Safety, and Noise
Goal H1: Reduced impacts to human life, property, the local economy, and the environment resulting from natural hazards, human-trade hazards, and noise.

Goal H5: Protection from the harmful effects of hazardous materials.

Goal H7: Protection from the harmful and annoying effects of excessive noise.

Goal H8: Protection of the City’s economical base by preventing incompatible land uses from encroaching upon existing or planned noise-producing uses.

Policy H15 Building Codes and Standards for Earthquakes Maintain and enforce current building codes and standards to reduce the potential for structural failure caused by ground shaking and other geologic hazards.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-15 Policy H17 Geologic and Soils Studies
Require geologic and soils studies to identify potential hazards as part of the approval process for all new development prior to grading activities where questionable conditions exist.

Policy H20 New Development Requirements for Flood Protection Require new development to provide onsite drainage or contribute towards their fair share cost of off-site drainage facilities to handle surface runoff.

Policy H27 Fire Code
Ensure that all new buildings are constructed to current Fire Code Standards.

Policy H34 Sensitive Receptors
Avoid siting uses with new sensitive receptors near existing industrial facilities that use or produce hazardous materials or may emit toxic air contaminants.

Policy H39 Aircraft Noise
Evaluate proposed development proposals against the land use policies of the Kings County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

Policy H41 Interior Noise Exposure
Adopt State Noise Insulation Standards (California Code of Regulations, Title 24) and Chapter 35 of the Uniform Building Code concerning interior noise exposure for new single, multi-family housing. Hotels, and motels.

Policy H42 Noise Evaluation for New Development
Evaluate proposed development proposals against existing and future noise levels from ground transportation noise sources.

Policy H50 Sound Walls
Utilize sound walls at the perimeter of new residential developments to protect from noise generated by transportation corridors.

Policy H53 Land Use Zones that Encourage Health Food Sales Designate land use zones that allow for convenience stores, supermarkets, and neighborhood markets that stock nutritional food choices in every existing and planned neighborhood.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-16 Policy H60 Health and Land Use Decisions
Consider environmental justice issues as they are related to potential health impacts associated with land use decisions, including enforcement actions, to reduce the adverse health effects of hazardous materials, industrial activities, and other undesirable land uses on residents regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, race, socioeconomic status, or geographic location.

Policy H61 Public Amenities
Consider environmental justice issues as they are related to the equitable provisions of desirable public amenities such as parks, recreational facilities, and other beneficial uses that improve the quality of life.

Policy H65 Comfortable Walking and Biking Environments
Provide comfortable environments and destinations for walking and bicycling to integrate physical activity into daily routines.

Policy H66 Non-Vehicular Access
Improve, bicycle, pedestrian, and public transportation access to residential areas, education and childcare facilities, employment centers, commercial centers, recreational areas, and other destination points.

Policy H68 New Growth Areas
Encourage land use pattern, density, and mix of uses in new growth areas that minimize the number of vehicle miles traveled and support viable choices for public transit, bicycling, and walking.

Policy H69 Separation between Incompatible Land Uses and Residential Neighborhoods Maintain a separation between uses that are incompatible with residential neighborhoods.

4.1.4 - IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Methodology
The potential impacts associated with the Project are evaluated on a qualitative basis through a comparison of the existing land use and the proposed land uses, considering the applicable planning goals and policies identified above. Compliance with the aforementioned goals and policies is illustrated in consistency tables provided in the Project Impacts section below. The change in the land use on the project site is significant if the effect described under the thresholds of significance below occurs as a result of the project. The evaluation of the project impacts is based on professional judgment, analysis of the County’s land use policies and the significance criteria suggested in in California Environmental Quality Act

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-17 (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G, which the County has determined appropriate for this Draft EIR.

Thresholds of Significance
As identified in CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, to determine whether a project could potentially have a significant adverse effect on land use. A project could have a have a significant adverse effect on land use if the project would:
a. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Project Impacts
Impact 4.1-2 - Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The City of Hanford General Plan establishes land use policies and regulations that are applicable to the Project. In addition to the City of Hanford General Plan, applicable policies and regulations of the Kings County General Plan and Kings County LAFCo were identified as they pertain to annexations of land. The following discussion evaluates the Project’s consistency with these plans, policies, and regulations in the lands for which the City and responsible agencies has jurisdiction. Implementation of the proposed Project would require approval of an annexation request from Kings County LAFCo, and approval of a prezoning of the land to a compatible City of Hanford zone district, and tentative tract map with the City of Hanford Planning Commission and City Council.

The Project site has a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential and would be prezoned R-L-5. Per the City General Plan zoning matrix, the R-L-5 zone district is compatible with the General Plan designation. Approval of the tentative map subject to the provisions of the City of Hanford municipal code would allow subdivision of the Project area into lot sizes consistent with the R-L-5 zone district. Pursuant to Table 17.08.020, the proposed development of single-family dwellings throughout the subdivided Project area are permitted uses under the R-L-5 zone district.

Table 4.1-2 presents an evaluation of the Project’s consistency with the City of Hanford General Plan and Kings County General Plan. The table lists the goals and policies identified above in the regulatory setting and provides analysis on the Project’s general consistency with overarching policies. Additionally, the table provides goals and policies of issue areas that are presented in more detail in other sections of the EIR. As evaluated in detail in Table

4.1-2 below, the Project is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Hanford General Plan and Kings County General Plan.

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-18 As described in Section 4.1-3, Regulatory Setting, Regional, the Project requires approval of an annexation request from Kings County LAFCo. The Kings County LAFCo Policy and Procedures Manual establishes standards for review of annexations that provide favorable and unfavorable factors to be considered with an application for annexation. Consistent with both Kings County and City of Hanford General Plan policy, application for annexation of land within the SOI of the City would occur with Kings County LAFCo and a decision would be made by the Kings County LAFCo Commissioners.

MITIGATION MEASURES
None

LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Impacts would be less than significant.

Cumulative Setting Impacts and Mitigation Measures

CUMULATIVE SETTING
The study area for the analysis of cumulative impacts is the City of Hanford and the unincorporated portions of Kings County located adjacent to the city limits. The applicable cumulative projections include growth projections from the City of Hanford General Plan and the Kings County General Plan.

The City of Hanford General Plan was last adopted in the year 2017. Anticipated development within the General Plan includes 15,695 residential units needed between 2013 and 2035. The County of Kings General Plan was last adopted in the year 2010. The County General Plan was prepared to accommodate population growth through the year 2035. The General Plan estimates an additional 1,464 residential units to be constructed in the “Non-District County” area.

The Kings County 2016-2024 Housing Element, which includes Hanford, quantifies the number housing needs based on demographic trends noting an approximate 4,832 housing units under the new construction category. The total number of housing units is further defined with income categories stating 549 new construction units for extremely low income, 548 new units for very low income, 821 new units for low income, 865 units for moderate income, and 2,049 units for above-moderate income.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed in the Cumulative Project List section of the draft EIR, 12 similar projects are proposed within a one and a half-mile radius of the proposed Project, the geographic scope being the City of Hanford General Plan planning area. The Project and future development is required to be consistent with the City of Hanford General Plan and other applicable planning documents. Cumulative projects requiring additional consideration including rezones,

City of Hanford Land Use and Planning

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-19 General Plan Amendments, and annexation would require approval by the County.

Consistency with the City’s applicable General Plan policies and Zoning Ordinance (and any other applicable planning documents) would ensure compliance and orderly development of the proposed Project and other related cumulative projects. Additionally, all cumulative projects are subject to environmental review and compliance with all federal, State, and local policies and plans. As such, cumulative impacts related to land use would be less than significant.

Moreover, the proposed Project’s incremental contribution to the less than significant cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. The anticipated impacts of the proposed Project in conjunction with cumulative development in the area of the Project site would increase the urbanization and result in the loss of agricultural space within the San Joaquin Valley region. However, potential land use impacts require evaluation on a case-bycase basis because of the interactive effects of a specific development and its immediate environment. Further, as described in Table 4.1-2 below, the proposed project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the Hanford General Plan and would not lead to the premature conversion of agricultural land.

MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation measures are required.

CUMULATIVE LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-20 Table 4.1-2
Project Consistency with the Kings County General Plan and City of Hanford General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Kings County General Plan
LU Goal E1: Urban Fringe areas
continue to allow existing uses, while
land remains intended for probable
future urban growth and expansion of
Cities where urban-level municipal
services are provided.

Consistent The Project site is located within the SOI of the City of Hanford and is designated for low
density residential under the City General Plan.

The City of Hanford Water System Master Plan
and Sewer System Master Plan indicate that
municipal services are available or anticipated
for development and would be able to service
the Project.

LU Objective E1.1: Require new
development in city fringe areas
(except a single-family house or
secondary dwelling unit on an existing
lot) to annex to the city, and encourage
existing developed fringe areas to
annex to the City where the City the
closest and most logical municipal
service provide.

Consistent The Project site is located adjacent to the
current city limits and proposes annexation
into the City. Per the City’s Water System and
Sewer System Master Plans, municipal services
are either available or proposed for
development and would be able to service the
Project.

LU Policy E1.1.1: Require urban growth
to be contiguous to existing urban
development and annex to a city in
order to ensure coordinated urban
growth according to that City’s General
Plan policies. Commercial and
industrial development may be
considered for development in the
County when annexation is not feasible
Consistent The Project site is located adjacent to current city limits and is within the SOI of Hanford.

The site is proposed to be prezoned for low
density residential and is consistent with its
General Plan designation. The Project
proposes to annex into the City of Hanford and
follows the urban growth principles of the
City's General Plan.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-21 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency or practical but must develop public
improvements to City standards.

City of Hanford General Plan
Chapter 3: Land Use and Community Design
Goal L1: A well-planned community
that grows in an organized fashion.

Consistent The Project follows the General Plan
designation of the site for low density
residential and proposes a prezoning of R-L-5
(Low Density Residential, 5,000 square feet).

Development of the subdivided lots would be
subject to review, approval, and inspection by
the City. This includes compliance with Zoning
Ordinance development standards.

Goal L3: Limitation of urban sprawlstyle development patterns in new growth areas.

Consistent The Project follows the General Plan buildout forecast by providing single-family residential
lots for an area designated for low density
residential uses. The Project is located within
the SOI of the City and is adjacent to existing
single-family residences. The Project continues
orderly City expansion as planned in the
General Plan.

Goal L4: Adequate land available to
meet housing needs for all citizens
through the year 2035.

Consistent The Project site encompasses approximately

88.9 acres. A 13.87-acre portion is anticipated
to be removed via a lot-line adjustment,
Goal L5: Stable, high-quality
neighborhoods with housing integrated
with schools, parks, and availability of
Consistent Pursuant to the City of Hanford General Plan and Zoning Map, there is a variety of
commercial areas, recreational spaces, and
school sites within a one-mile radius of the
Project site. A mix of commercially zoned and

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-22 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency everyday commercial goods and
services.
existing commercial areas are located east,
west, and north of the site. The proposed
residential subdivision would meet the
adopted standards of the City Municipal Code
and Zoning Ordinance.

Goal L6: A wide range of housing
choices that insure opportunities for a
variety of age groups, lifestyles, and
income levels.

Consistent The Project site is proposed to be prezoned RL-5 and consistent with the General Plan designation of Low Density Residential. The
Project proposes a 326-lot residential
subdivision with lots ranging between 5,000 to
7,000 square feet meeting the minimum lot
size requirements of the City Zoning
Ordinance. The lot size range allows for a
variety of single-family residences to be
developed.

Goal L7: Residential densities that
encourage both compact and infill
development.

Consistent The Project site will be prezoned R-L-5,
consistent with the General Plan designation of
Low Density Residential. The lots proposed
range between 5,000 to 7,000 square feet and
meet the minimum lot size and density
requirement of the R-L-5 zone district.

Goal L30: Preservation and
enhancement of Hanford’s unique
character and achievement of an
optimal balance of residential,
commercial, industrial, public, and
open space land uses.

Consistent The Project is consistent with the General Plan buildout as the site is designated for Low
Density Residential and is proposed to be
prezoned R-L-5.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-23 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Goal L32: Improvement in Hanford’s
quality of life through use of practical
design principles and standards.

Consistent Prior to Project construction, the proposed
single-family residences, utility/infrastructure
installation, and right-of-way development
would be subject to review under the adopted
development standards of the City including
Municipal Code, Zoning Ordinance, and City
utility design standards. Review and approval
of ministerial building and grading permits
ensure consistency for building and design
standards throughout the City.

Goal L38: Revitalized Arterial corridors
that accommodate a mix of
nonresidential and residential uses that
generate activity and economic vitality
and improve the visual character.

Consistent The Project site is located directly south of Hanford Armona Road, a designated Arterial
road. The Project is consistent with General
Plan buildout assumptions for Low Density
Residential and adds 326 residential lots, a
ponding basin, and a neighborhood park.

Policy L1 Planned Area Boundary:

Designate a Planned Area Boundary to
serve as the limits of the area to be
planned for urban development.

Consistent The Project site is located within the Planned Area Boundary and SOI of the City of Hanford.

The site is designated for Low Density
Residential under the General Plan.

Policy L2 2035 Growth Boundary:

Designate a 2035 Growth Boundary to
serve as the limits of the area to be
developed with urban uses during the
2015 to 2035 planning period. Locate
the 2035 Growth Boundary along
major roadways and other natural or
manmade physical features that can
Consistent See Project Consistency Finding Policy L1.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-24 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency serve as a physical boundary between
urban and agricultural uses.

Policy L3 Developable Land Inventory:

Include enough land within the 2035
Growth Boundary to meet the project
land needs to accommodate growth
through the year 2035, along with a
35% market flexibility factor that
acknowledges existing constraints to
development of some parcels.

Consistent The Project proposes residential development consistent with the General Plan designation
for Low Density Residential and will
accommodate anticipated population growth
by providing 326 residential lots.

Policy L4 New Development within
Boundary: Approve new urban
development only within the 2035
Growth Boundary.

Consistent See Project Consistency Finding Policy L1.

Policy L6 Agriculture and the Urban
Fringe: Recognize and protect the right
of agricultural uses within the growth
boundary to exist and continue to
operate in proximity to new
development on the fringes of the City.

Consistent Currently, the Project site is zoned AL20 under Kings County jurisdiction. The proposed
Project will annex the site into the City of
Hanford and follow City General Plan buildout
for Low Density Residential. Parcels located
adjacent to city limits under Kings County
jurisdiction will continue to be zoned
appropriately for limited agriculture until the
annexation of land within the SOI to the City
occurs. The development and future residents
are subject to City municipal code
requirements including the “Right-to-Farm”
standards due to its proximity to existing
agriculture uses.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-25 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Policy L7 Primary Sphere of Influence:

Support and pursue an amendment of
the City of Hanford’s Primary Sphere of
Influence to be coterminous to the
Planned Area Boundary.

Consistent See Project Consistency Finding Policy L1.

Policy L15 Initiation of Annexations:

Consider initiation of annexation of
land into the City of Hanford only when
the following criteria are met:

1. The land is within the Primary
Sphere of Influence.

2. The capacity of the water,
sewer, fire, school, and police
services are adequate to service
the area to be annexed or will be
adequate at the time that
development occurs.

3. Land for development within
the city limits is insufficient to
meet the current land use needs.

4. The territory to be annexed is
contiguous to existing
developed areas.

Consistent The Project proposes annexation of the subject parcels into the City of Hanford. The Project
meets the criteria:

1. The Project site is located within the
Primary SOI.

2. Per the City of Hanford Water System
Master Plan and Sewer System Master
Plan, city services are available or
anticipated for development to service
urban development along Hanford
Armona Road.

3. The City of Hanford has designated this
area for Low Density Residential and is
located within the Primary SOI. The
Project area has been made available
for development and has municipal
services in close proximity. Alternative
infill sites within the city limits may not
be available for development due to a
number of variables including
availability, municipal services
connections, or other constraints.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-26 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency

4. The Project site located adjacent to city
limits in all directions. The annexation
of the Project site will not create a
County island.

Policy L18 Compatibility with
Surrounding Neighborhoods: Ensure
that new development is compatible
with existing and surrounding
neighborhoods.

Consistent Per the City of Hanford General Plan, is
similarly designated and compatible with the
existing and surrounding neighborhood. Land
to the north is designated for Medium Density
Residential, and land south, east, and west are
designated for Low Density Residential. There
is an existing single-family subdivision located
directly east of the Project. Therefore, the
proposed development would be compatible
with the existing Low Density Residential to
the east, and compatible with future Medium
Density and Low Density Residential
anticipated for sites north, south, and west of
the Project site.

Policy L24 Availability of
Infrastructure: Ensure that new
residential developments have
sufficient urban infrastructure and
public facilities to accommodate the
number and type of development being
proposed.

Consistent Per the City of Hanford Water System Master
Plan and Sewer System Master Plan, water and
sewer infrastructure exists or is anticipated to
be developed to service residential
development north and south of HanfordArmona Road. The prepared initial study attached with the NOP determined that the
City of Hanford has enough utility capacity to
service the residential lots associated with the
Project.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-27 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Policy L27 Mix of Densities in
Neighborhoods: Encourage mixing of
residential densities and lot sizes
within neighborhoods.

Consistent The Project proposes a prezone of R-L-5 which is consistent with the General Plan designation
of Low Density Residential. The subdivision
proposes lots between 5,000 and 7,000 square
feet, which is consistent with the City Zoning
Ordinance and provides a mix of lot sizes for
this new residential subdivision.

Policy L29 Agriculture: Recognize the
right of agriculture to exist and
continue to operate in proximity to the
new residential development on the
fringes of the city. Deed restrictions
may be required which inform future
residents of the right of agriculture to
continue within the limits of the law
without interference or protection
from nearby property owners.

Consistent The City of Hanford has adopted “Right-toFarm” provisions that accept the inherent potential inconveniences and discomforts
associated with agricultural activities and
operations. The Project is located adjacent to
existing agriculture uses and is subject to the
“Right-to-Farm” provisions as adopted in the
city Municipal Code.

Policy L33 Size of Lots in the Low
Density Residential Land Use
Designation: While it is recognized that
existing lot sizes of 10,000 to 40,000
square feet are included in this
designation, new individual lot sizes
shall range from 5,000 to 10,000
square feet in size. Under Planned Unit
Development provisions, smaller lot
sizes at higher densities may be
permitted when clustered around
Consistent The Project proposes lots sizes between 5,000 square feet and 7,000 square feet. The Project
meets the minimum lot size requirements of
the Low Density Residential land use
designation and proposed prezone of R-L-5.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-28 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency shared open space amenities or
through density bonus policies.

Policy L114 Services and Facilities:

Include easily accessible services and
facilities within each neighborhood to
meet the daily needs of neighborhood
residents. Most residents should live
within a ½ mile walking distance of
schools, parks and retail services.

Consistent The Project site is located in proximity to a variety of services, including commercial
services approximately 0.3 miles east of the
Project site and a larger community
commercial area approximately 0.5 miles
north. The Project proposes the development
of a neighborhood park to be utilized by
residents of the development and provide
recreational opportunities to existing and
future residents. Additionally, Centennial Park
is located approximately 0.6 miles east of the
Project site. The nearest existing school site is
approximately one mile east of the Project site.

Therefore, there is a variety of accessible
services and facilities within reach of the
proposed Project site.

Policy L120 Encroachment of
Incompatible Land Uses: Protect
residential neighborhoods from the
encroachment of land uses that may
have a negative impact on the
residential living environment.

Consistent Per the City of Hanford General Plan, a mixture of residential and commercial uses are
proposed in proximity to the Project site.

There are no incompatible land uses adjacent
to or in proximity of the site that would
negatively impact the residential living
environment.

Policy L147 Hanford-Armona Road
Residential and Mixed Use
Development: Encourage residential
and mixed use developed in the
Consistent The Project is consistent with the General Plan land designation of Low Density Residential.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-29 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Hanford-Armona Road Corridor
between 10th and 13th Avenues.

The Project proposes 326 residential zoned
lots.

Chapter 4: Transportation and Circulation
Policy T1 Coordination of Circulation
and Land Use: Develop a circulation
network that reinforces the desired
land use pattern for Hanford, as
identified in the land use element.

Consistent The Project proposes to access the subdivision from Hanford Armona Road and adjacent local
roads. Access from Hanford Armona Road and
internal roadways are subject to the design
standards adopted by the City of Hanford.

Policy T29 Maximum Level of Service:

Maintain a peak hour Level of Service E
on streets and intersections within the
area bounded by Highway 198, 10th
Avenue, 11th Avenue, and Florinda
Avenue, inclusive of these streets.

Maintain a peak hour Level of Service D
on all other streets and intersections
with the Planned Growth Boundary.

Consistent The prepared Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
found Level of Service for the 13th Avenue and
Hanford Armona Road intersection would
operate at LOS E by the year 2043. To mitigate
Project impacts on the intersection,
signalization of the intersection was found to
raise the LOS from LOS F to LOS A. Therefore,
with implementation of the mitigation
measure MM 4.2-1, the Project would be
consistent with Policy T29.

Policy T33 Street improvements and
Priorities: Prioritize street
improvements with emphasis on
current and forecasted service levels.

Consistent The Project is expected to pay Traffic Impact Fees and pay its fair share towards
improvements to the intersection that is
anticipated to perform below LOS standards as
identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis.

Policy T36 Traffic Impact Fees:

Periodically review and update the
traffic impact fee program to ensure
new development contributes its fair
share of funding for new street,
Consistent The Project proponent will pay Traffic Impact Fees as required by the City.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-30 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency intersection, and highway
improvements.

Policy T40 Pedestrian and Bicycle
Placemaking: Promote pedestrian and
bicycle improvements that improve
connectivity between neighborhoods,
provide opportunities for distinctive
neighborhood features, and foster a
greater sense of community.

Consistent The Project proposes to connect to the existing residential neighborhood to the east, Hume
Avenue to the south, and Hanford Armona
Road to the north. Right-of-way improvements
including pedestrian and bicycle-related
enhancements would be developed pursuant
to standards adopted in the City development
code.

Policy T48 Traffic Calming: Consider
the use of traffic calming designs such
as roundabouts, bulb-outs, and other
traffic calming designs, where they will
improve the operation or LOS of a
street.

Consistent Right-of-way development and improvements
will be constructed to City development code
standards.

Policy T49 Subdivision Connectivity:

Design subdivision to maximize
connectivity both internally and with
other surrounding development.

Consistent The Project has right-of-way connections to
the existing subdivision to the east and
proposes access to proposed subdivisions to
the south and west.

Policy T51 Alternative Design
Standards: Consider alternative
roadway design standards for new
residential and mixed use development
for future streets that may include:

Consistent Right-of-way development and improvements
will be constructed to City development code
standards. Listed design alternatives would be
considered and implemented as a result of
consultation between the Project proponent
and City.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-31 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency • Narrower street widths on local
roadways.
• Smaller turning radii geometrics
on street intersections to
improve safety for pedestrians.
• Tree lined streets in parkways
between the curb and sidewalk.
• Roundabouts in lieu of traffic
signals where appropriate
conditions exist to maximize
intersection efficiency, maintain
continuous traffic flow, and
reduce accident severity.

Policy T64 Bicycle Network Master
Planning: Maintain a Bicycle Master
Plan to coordinate existing and planned
infrastructure to support, encourage,
and promote bicycle transportation,
with effective connections to
downtown, major shopping areas,
mixed use neighborhoods, community
facilities, schools, parks, and
employment areas.

Consistent The 2035 Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan slates
Hanford Armona Road and Hume Avenue for
Class II Bike Lanes. The Project would not
conflict with the adopted Pedestrian and
Bicycle Plan.

Policy T70 Pedestrian Connections:

Increase connectivity through direct
and safe pedestrian connections to
public amenities, neighborhoods,
Consistent The proposed subdivision connects to existing and proposed neighborhoods to the east, west,
and south. The Project would be developed to
City of Hanford development code standards

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-32 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency village centers, and other destinations
throughout the city.
and provide access to Hanford Armona Road to
the north, and Hume Avenue to the south
where connection to commercial development
exists east and north of the Project site.

Chapter 5: Open Space, Conservation and Recreation
Goal O8: The equitable distribution of
parks throughout the community that
are well-designed, accessible, and
integrated with the surrounding
neighborhood.

Consistent In addition to the proposed park located
within the Project site, residents are within
approximately half a mile of Centennial Park.

The proposed park is located towards the
northern portion of the Project site with
internal roadways providing access to the
neighborhood park to all residents of the
subdivision. Proposed access points from
surrounding proposed and existing
neighborhoods will also have access to the
proposed park.

Goal O9: Parks provided at a combined
ratio of 3.5 acres per 1,000 residents.

Consistent The Project proposes a 326-lot single-family residential subdivision on an 88.9-acre Project
site. Assuming an average person per unit of

3.11 (U.S. Census), the Project would have
approximately 1,014 residents. Per the
performance standard of 3.5 acres per 1,000
residents, the Project would need
approximately 3.55 acres of park space.

Therefore, with the anticipated population, the
proposed 3.58-acre park would be sufficient to
meet Goal O9.

Policy O1 Boundary between Urban
and Agricultural Uses: Utilize the
Consistent The Project site is located within the
SOI/Planned Area Boundary. The Project

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-33 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Planned Area Boundary as the long
term boundary line between urban
uses and agricultural uses and prohibit
non-agricultural development outside
the Planned Area Boundary.
proposes a single-family residential
subdivision and does not conflict with the
General Plan designation for low density
residential.

Policy O2 Agricultural Buffer:

Coordinate land use policies and
designations with Kings County to
provide for a buffer between the urban
area of Hanford and the surrounding
unincorporated communities.

Consistent Per the Kings County General Plan, land within the SOI of a city is designated for limited
agriculture to serve as the buffer between
agriculture and the urban boundary of the City.

The area outside of the SOI would continue to
hold its limited agriculture or general
agriculture designation.

Policy O4 Interim Agricultural Use:

Retain existing agricultural areas as an
interim use inside the Planned Area
Boundary and support agricultural
operations until such time that the
areas are needed for logical urban
expansion.

Consistent The Project is following the correct procedures to change its County designation of limited
agriculture to the City’s low density residential
designation by providing a consistent prezone
and annexation request. The site is located
within the primary SOI and is adjacent to the
current city limits.

Policy O12 Soil Erosion: Require new
development to implement measures
to minimize soil erosion related to
construction.

Consistent The California Regional Water Quality Control Board requires that construction projects
disturbing more than one acre of land will
need to prepare and seek approval of a NPDES
permit and SWPPP. The NPDES permit and
SWPPP address best management practices
(BMP) to minimize soil erosion and prevent
pollution on surface and groundwater. The
Project is also required to be constructed in
compliance with City adopted development

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-34 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency standards which include the California
Building Code.

Policy O15 Energy-efficient Design
Features: Require that new
development incorporate energyefficient design features for HVAC, lighting systems, and insulation to meet
or exceed California Code of
Regulations Title 24.

Consistent As noted, the Project is required to be
constructed in compliance with the California
Building Code and City development
standards. These standards include
compliance with the California Code of
Regulations, Title 24, Part 11.

Policy O16 Vegetation to Conserve
Energy: Encourage the use of native
and drought-tolerant shade trees and
vines on southern and western
exposure building walls as an energy
conservation technique.

Consistent The Project will comply with the adopted City development code standards and the
California Building Code. The California
Building Code also provides recommendations
for energy-saving standards in the Green Code,
Title 24, Part 11.

Policy O21 Water Conservation
Ordinance: Actively enforce and
periodically update the City Water
Conservation Ordinance.

Consistent The Project proposes a connection to City
services for water. Future residents would be
subject to and comply with the provisions of
the City Water Conservation Ordinance.

Policy O22 Water Conservation Efforts:

Actively encourage water conservation
by both agricultural and urban water
users.

Consistent See Consistency Finding Policy O21
Policy O24 Drought Tolerant
Vegetation: Promote the use of
drought-tolerant vegetation to
minimize water consumption by
Consistent Development of the Project including
landscaping is subject to the City Municipal
Code. Landscaping is to be reviewed and

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-35 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency providing information to developers,
designers, and homebuyers.
approved by the City which can include the use
of drought-tolerant vegetation.

Policy O25 Recharge Basins: Protect
existing groundwater recharge basins
and natural and manmade sloughs and
seek the establishment of new basins
within and around Hanford.

Consistent The Project proposes the development of a

2.86-acre basin for stormwater management
in addition to groundwater recharge. The
basin would be developed in accordance with
Municipal Code requirements.

Policy O28 Water Availability in
Emergencies: Ensure that public and
private water facilities have adequate
capacity to supply emergency needs.

Consistent The Water Supply Assessment prepared for
the IS/NOP (Appendix A) determined that the
City of Hanford has sufficient water supplies to
service the daily and potential emergency
needs of the Project.

Policy O29 Water Conservation
Measures for New Development:

Encourage new development projects
to include water conservation
measures, including the use of
graywater, reclaimed, or recycled
water for landscaping, waterconserving plumbing fixtures and appliances, and water-efficient
landscapes.

Consistent Project construction is subject to compliance with the adopted development code and
California Building Code including the
CalGreen Code (Title 24, Part 11). The
standards include the use of water-efficient
appliances and plumbing fixtures. The Project
proposes connection to City services and will
comply with water conservation measures
implemented by the City.

Policy O30 Storm Water Pollution
Prevention: Implement the NPDES
Stormwater Permit and for those
properties exempt from the Permit,
require a stormwater pollution
prevention plan, including the use of
Consistent Per NPDES Permit and SWPPP requirements,
the Project will disturb more than one acre of
land. Therefore, preparation and approval of
the NPDES and SWPPP from the Regional

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-36 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency best management practices, to control
erosion and sedimentation during
construction.

Water Quality Control Board will be necessary
as a regulatory requirement.

Policy O31 Provision of Open Space
Areas: Preserve and enhance natural
open space areas.

Consistent The Project site proposes the development of a

3.58-acre park space. The site has historically
been utilized for agriculture and does not
contain a natural open space area.

Policy O35 Impacts from Development:

Ensure that potential impacts to
biological resources and sensitive
habitat are carefully evaluated when
considering development projects.

Consistent A reconnaissance survey of the Project site and a 50-foot buffer (Biological Survey Area, or
BSA) was conducted for the IS/NOP (Appendix
A) to determine the presence of a sensitive
species of habitat. The IS/NOP determined that
the site does not contain a special status
species or sensitive habitat. A preconstruction
survey would be conducted to ensure no
species are present at the time of construction
and avoidance measures would be
implemented as necessary.

Policy O36 Nonnative Invasive Species:

Manage or eliminate nonnative
invasive species from City-owned
property and open space.

Consistent The proposed park design is subject to review and approval by the City. The use of non-native
invasive species would not be approved.

Policy O37 Mature Trees: Promote the
preservation of existing mature trees
and encourage the planting of
appropriate shade trees
Consistent Under Municipal Code standards, landscaping
including the planting of street trees would be
complied with. The survey of the Project site
indicated that mature trees are not present on
the site.

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-37 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Policy O38 Native Tree Species and
Drought-Tolerant Vegetation:

Encourage the planting of native tree
species and drought-tolerant
vegetation.

Consistent Development of the Project including
landscaping is subject to the City Municipal
Code. Landscaping is to be reviewed and
approved by the City which can include the use
of native tree species and drought-tolerant
vegetation.

Policy O39 Endangered Wildlife and
Habitat: Establish programs in
connection with environmental review
processes that protect endangered
wildlife and their habitats.

Consistent The reconnaissance survey as part of the
IS/NOP did not identify a special status species
or sensitive habitat where protection of an
endangered species or sensitive habitat is
necessary. A preconstruction survey would be
conducted to determine the presence of a
special-status species and avoidance measures
would be implemented as necessary.

Policy O40 Sensitive Wildlife: Work
with state, federal, and local agencies
on the preservation of sensitive wildlife
species in the City.

Consistent The reconnaissance survey as part of the
IS/NOP did not identify a special status species
or sensitive habitat where consultation with a
State or federal agency is necessary.

Policy O44 Flexible Land Use
Standards: Adopt flexible land use and
design standards to allow the adaptive
reuse of historic buildings with a
variety of economically viable uses,
while minimizing impacts to the
historic value and character of sites and
structures.

Consistent The Project is proposed on land that has
historically been utilized for agricultural
purposes and is improved with a single-family
residence. The single-family residence has not
been found to be historically significant. The
IS/NOP determined that no impacts to
historical structures would occur as a result of
the Project.

Policy O46 Archaeological Site
Consultation: Consult with appropriate
Consistent A cultural resource records search and
requests for tribal consultations pursuant to

City of Hanford Environmental Impact Analyses

Draft Environmental Impact Report October 2024
Silicon Valley Ranch Residential (Tract No. 943) Project Page 4-38 Goals and Policies Consistency Determination Project Consistency Native American associations about
potential archaeological sites in the
beginning stages of the development
review process.

Assembly Bill 52 were conducted. The records
search indicated negative results and tribal
consultation was conducted and completed
with no identification of an archaeological site.

Policy O47 Archaeological Site Study:

Require archaeological studies by a
certified archaeologist in areas of
archaeological potential significance
prior to approval of development
projects.

Consistent A review of the Project site within the IS/NOP for archaeological significance provided
negative results.

Policy O48 Cultural Site Consultation:

Consult with the California
Archaeological Inventory Southern San
Joaquin Valley at California State
University, Bakersfield about potential
cultural sites on projects that could
have an impact on cultural resources.

Consistent A Sacred Lands Files search was conducted
with the Native American Heritage
Commission and a records search with the
Southern San Joaquin Valley Information
Center. Both searches found that the Project
site does not contain a cultural resource.

Policy O49 Cultural Site Discovery: Halt
construction at a development site if
cultural resources are encountered
unexpectedly during construction.

Consistent There is no indication that a cultural resource is likely to be found at the Project site,
however, the Project proponent will comply
with Policy O49 and halt construction if a
cultural resource is unexpectedly encountered
during construction.

Policy O50 Parks, Recreation, and Open
Space Master Plan: Prepare and
periodically update a Parks, Recreation,
and Open Space Master Plan to plan for
Consistent The Project does not conflict with the goals and policies established in the Parks,
Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan. The
Project proposes the establishment of a
neighborhood park approximately 3.58 acres