Hollister City Council
April 20, 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
City Limits Inventory Sector Details
Each sector experienced notable changes in activity and emissions level between 2005 and 2024. This section provides a summary of the changes by sector and presents possible explanations for these changes.

Transportation
Hollister's community members drove approximately 198,652,450 vehicle miles in 2005, increasing to 412,220,070 vehicle miles in 2024. The vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in 2005 resulted in the release of approximately 110,140 MTCO2e, which increased to 209,840 MTCO2e in 2024. Although vehicle miles increased by 108 percent between 2005 and 2024, emissions only increased by 91 percent due to increasingly fuel -efficient vehicles, along with a wider adoption of electric vehicles (EVs). The method used to calculate VMT for the transportation sector of the CAP, and the results of this process, are consistent with those of the 2040 General Plan. Table A- 2 provides a breakdown of the activity data and GHG emissions for on -road transportation by each individual year included in the updated community -wide inventory.

Table A-2 Transportation Activity Data and GHG Emissions within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (VMT)
Light -duty vehicles
Heavy-duty vehicles
Total Annual VMT
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Light -duty vehicles
Heavy-duty vehicles
Total Emissions (MTCO2e)
2005
2024
173,226,780 347,144,350
25,425,670 65,075,720
198,652,450 412,220,070
72,400 121,550
37,740 88,290
110,140 209,840
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows.

Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
100%
156%
108%
68010
134%
91%
January 2026 Page A-3

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Residential Electricity
Hollister's GHG emissions from residential electricity totaled approximately 9,600 MTCO2e in 2024, compared to 13,560 MTCO2e in 2005, a decline of 29 percent. Improvements in energy efficiency have reduced the amount of electricity and natural gas used in Hollister despite a growing population, which has also contributed to reduced energy -related GHG emissions. While residential electricity use declined approximately 3 percent over this period due to increases in energy efficiency, much of the decline in emissions is due to electricity coming from renewable and carbon -free sources. This trend accelerated after the wide -scale adoption of 3CE, which in 2024 supplied 56 percent of its electricity from renewable and other carbon -free sources to 3Cchoice customers. Power supplied to 3Cprime customers was 100 percent renewable. Table A-3 provides a breakdown of the activity data and GHG emissions for residential electricity by each individual year included in the updated community inventory.

Table A-3 Residential Electricity Activity GHG Emissions by Subsector within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (kWh)
Residential electricity PG&E
Residential electricity 3CE
Total activity (kWh)
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Residential electricity PG&E
Residential electricity 3CE
Total emissions (MTCO2e)
2005
2024
60,662,240 8,097,940
50,443,140
60,662,240 58,541,080
13,560 60
9,540
13,560 9,600
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows.

Residential Natural Gas
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
-87%
-3%
-100%
-29%
GHG emissions from residential natural gas use totaled approximately 23,700 MTCO2e in 2024, compared to approximately 22,650 MTCO2e in 2005, an increase of 5 percent. This increase in natural gas GHG emissions is proportional to the increase in natural gas use between the two inventory years. Table A-4 provides a breakdown of the activity data and GHG emissions for residential natural gas by year in the updated community -wide GHG inventory.

Table A-4 Residential Natural Gas Activity and GHG Emissions within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (therms)
Residential natural gas
GHG emissions (MTCO2e)
Residential natural gas
2005
4,257,670
2024
4,465,190
22,650 23,700
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows.

Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
5%
5%
Page A-4
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Nonresidential Electricity
Hollister's GHG emissions from nonresidential electricity, including GHG emissions from direct access electricity, totaled 10,160 MTCO2e in 2024, compared to approximately 20,280 MTCO2e in 2005, a decline of 50 percent. This decline in nonresidential electricity emissions occurred in tandem with a decrease in electricity use of 38 percent and is attributable to a reduction in electricity use and electricity coming from cleaner sources. As mentioned previously, this trend accelerated when 3CE started to supply electricity in Hollister, which provides electricity from renewable and carbon -free sources. Table A-5 provides a breakdown of the activity data and GHG emissions for nonresidential electricity by each year included in the updated community -wide inventory.

Table A--5 Nonresidential Electricity Activity and GHG Emissions by Subsector within City Limit, 2005 and 2024
Sector
Activity Data (kWh)
Nonresidential electricity PG&E
Nonresidential electricity 3CE
Direct access electricity*
Total activity (kWh)
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Nonresidential electricity PG&E
Nonresidential electricity 3CE
Direct access electricity
Total emissions (MTCO2e)
2005
83,591,440
4,874,830
88,466,270 55,158,500
18,690
2024
1,514,000
53,644,500
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
-98%
-100%
-38%
10 -100%
10,150
1,590 -
20,280
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows. *No direct access electricity was reported in 2024.
10,160 -50%
January 2026 Page A-5

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Nonresidential Natural Gas
Nonresidential natural gas GHG emissions totaled approximately 9,970 MTCO2e in 2024, compared to approximately 34,840 MTCO2e in 2005, a decrease of 71 percent. This decrease in natural gas GHG emissions may be due to changes in weather conditions (affecting the need for natural gas heating), and general improvements in energy efficiency. Conversions from natural gas to electric appliances may also contribute to reduced natural gas emissions. Table A-6 provides a breakdown of the activity data and GHG emissions for nonresidential natural gas by each individual year included in the updated community inventory.

Table A-6 Nonresidential Natural Gas Activity and GHG Emissions within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (therms)
Nonresidential natural gas
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Nonresidential natural gas 34,840
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows. 2005
2024
Solid Waste
6,550,060
1,878,280
9,970
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
-71%
-71%
Hollister's GHG emissions associated with municipal solid waste (MSW) thrown away by community members within the city limits increased by 42 percent between 2005 and 2024, from 11,330 MTCO2e in 2005 to 16,140 MTCO2e by 2024. This increase in emissions, which is smaller than the rate of increase in the volume of solid waste, is potentially the result of an increase in population during the time period. Table A-7 presents specific solid waste data for each year.

Table A-7 Solid Waste Activity and GHG Emissions within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (tons)
MSW
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
MSW
2005
38,640
11,330
2024
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows. 56,420
16,140
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
46%
42%
Page A-6
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Off -Road Equipment
GHG emissions from the off -road equipment sector in Hollister increased approximately 69 percent between 2005 and 2024, from 32,400 MTCO2e in 2005 to 54,710 MTCO2e in 2024, based on data available from the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Table A-8 shows the change in GHG emissions for each year. As shown, emissions from transport refrigeration units (TRUs) have increased the most significantly, followed by construction and mining equipment and light commercial equipment. Increases in TRU and light commercial equipment emissions may be attributed to an increase in commercial and agricultural activity, while growth in construction and mining equipment emissions may be attributed to an increase in construction activities and employment. Portable equipment emissions rose by 96 percent. These increases are largely attributed to the increases in population that Hollister experienced during this time.

Emissions from lawn and garden equipment, pleasure craft equipment, and recreational equipment also increased, but by a smaller amount than other types of equipment (less than 50 percent between 2005 and 2024).

Table A-8 Off -Road Equipment GHG Emissions by Subsector within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Off -Road Equipment
Agricultural
Construction and mining
Industrial
Lawn and garden
Light commercial
Pleasure craft
Portable equipment
Recreational
Transport Refrigeration Units
Total Off -Road Equipment (MTCO2e)
2005
660
750
5,530
4,140
13,130
470
7,700
20 32,400
2024
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows. 20 8,800
1,300
7,480
9,820
15,990
920
8,500
1,880
54,710
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
1233%
73%
35%
137%
22%
96%
10%
9300%
69%
January 2026 Page A-7

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Water and Wastewater
GHG emissions from Hollister's water and wastewater consumption increased by 9 percent from 2,340 MTCO2e in 2005 to 2,550 MTCO2e in 2024. Emissions associated with indirect water and indirect wastewater (Le., the electricity needed to move and process water and wastewater) decreased by 13 percent and increased by 34 percent, respectively. GHG emissions released from direct wastewater grew by 30 percent due to increased indoor water consumption. Although the activity data in Table A-9 shows a decrease in water consumption of only 8 percent and a significant increase (57 percent) in the amount of energy used to process wastewater, the GHG emissions for these subsectors were less affected due to the use of renewable and carbon -free electricity sourced from 3CE.

Table A-9 Water and Wastewater Activity and GHG Emissions by Subsector within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data
Indirect water (millions of gallons)
Indirect water (kWh)
Indirect wastewater (kWh)
Water and Wastewater Total (kWh)
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Indirect water
Indirect wastewater
Direct wastewater
Water and Wastewater Total (MTCO2e)
2005
2024
1,750 1,610
5,331,260 5,473,680
1,305,600 2,047,530
6,636,860 7,521,210
1,190
290
860
2,340
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows. 1,040
390
1,120
2,550
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
-8010
3%
57%
13%
-13%
34%
30%
90/0
Page A-8
January 2026

City of Hollister
Agriculture
The project team assessed GHG emissions from agriculture by calculating the nitrous oxide emissions associated with fertilizer use for all types of agricultural production in Hollister, including field, vegetable crops, fruit, and nut crops. As shown in Table A-10, GHG emissions in this sector were eliminated as agricultural lands were developed within the city limits..

Table A-10 Fertilizer Use and GHG Emissions within City Limit, 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (acres)
Acres of Fertilized Crops
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Fertilizer GHG Emissions
2005
1,120
2024
400,
All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows.

Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
-100%
-100%
Land Use and Sequestration
GHG emissions from land use and sequestration can be either positive or negative. Natural lands and street trees can absorb carbon by storing it in biomass such as wood, plants, and soil. As a result, when natural land is preserved or when more street trees are planted, emissions from this sector go down because GHGs are being removed from the atmosphere. However, developing natural lands or converting them to a different form (for example, replacing forests with crop land) or removing street trees causes carbon to be released, creating GHG emissions.

The land use and sequestration sector includes emission sources and sinks from two types of activities: (1) emissions caused by permanently removing vegetation from natural lands or farmlands as a part of development (emissions source), and (2) sequestration of GHG emissions in street trees in urbanized areas (emissions sink). As shown in Table A-11, the development of agricultural land resulted in the release of 1,600 MTCO2e and 1,400 MTCO2e in 2005 and 2024, respectively. These emissions are calculated based on development of agricultural land that occurred during a 20 -year period. Urban street trees absorbed approximately 2,300 MTCO2e and 2,110 in 2005 and 2024, respectively, offsetting the emissions caused by urban development and other activities. As a result, the net impact of land use change, when accounting for urban street trees, is a decrease in emissions. Emissions from this sector total - 700 MTCO2e in 2005 and -710 MTCO2e in 2024.

January 2026 Page A-9

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Table A--11 Land Use Change and Street Tree Biomass within City Limit 2005 and 2024 Sector
Activity Data (acres)
Land use change*
Street tree biomass
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)
Land use change*
Street tree biomass
Total MTCO2e
2005
1,700
730
1,600
-2,300
-700
2024
1,390
670
1,400
-2,110
-710
Percentage Change
2005 to 2024
-18010
-8010
-13%
-8%
10/0
*The conversion of agricultural to urban land method assumes that all developed agricultural land was converted into urban land uses, and no street trees were removed on those urban lands.

All numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual rows. 2024 GHG Inventory Totals for CAP Study Area
As noted in the Introduction section, the General Plan anticipates that Hollister will grow within its existing boundary and through the annexation of land outside of the current city boundary but within the General Plan's CAP Study Area (see Table A-12). This land consists primarily of agricultural or low -density residential land south and east of the city boundary. The Hollister 501, totaling approximately 6,554 acres, including the area in the city boundary, is the area designated to indicate land that is likely to be annexed into the city in the near future.

Table A-12 Combined 2024 GHG Emissions — Existing City Limit, Sphere of Influence, and Combined Total (CAP Study Area)
Total Emissions (MTCO2e)
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
CAP Study Area (Total)
2024
335,960
13,910
349,870
Page A-10
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Demographic Projections
The community -wide GHG emissions forecasts are based on the 2024 community -wide GHG emissions inventory, taking into account Hollister's 2024 demographics and predicted demographic trends used in the Hollister 2040 General Plan. Table A-13 shows projected changes in population, households, jobs, service population, and VMT between 2024 and 2045. The 2024 demographic statistics are from the US Census, the Department of Finance, and AMBAG. Projected demographic information is from 240 General Plan buildout projections. VMT are derived from Kimley-Horn (2024). VMT is modeled for 2015 and 2040. The City interpolated and extrapolated these results to obtain VMT estimates for 2024, 2030, and 2045.

The City of Hollister's service population in the city boundary is projected to increase by 59 percent between 2024 and 2045.

Table A-13 City of Hollister Demographic Projection within City Limit, 2024-2045 Population
Households
Jobs
Service population
Vehicle miles traveled
2024
2030
2040
2045
43,000 53,250 63,300 68,320
12,420 15,350 18,620 20,250 63%
Percentage
Change,
2024 to 2045
Relevant
Sectors
59010 Off -road equipment
Residential energy,
off -road equipment
15,730 19,930 23,510 25,290 61% Nonresidential energy,
off -road equipment
Solid, water and
58,730 73,180 86,800 93,610 59% wastewater, off -road
equipment
412,220,070 449,024,680 510,365,710 541,036,210
Table A-14 shows the demographic projections used to prepare the GHG emissions forecast for the SO1. 31% Transportation
January 2026
Page A-11

2024
2030
2040
2045
Percentage
Change,
2024 to 2045
Relevant Sectors
3,680 6,480 10,680 Off -road equipment
Residential energy, off -
road equipment
560 1,680 2,930 3,560 1112% Nonresidential energy,
off -road equipment
Solid waste, water and
Service population* 4,240 8,160 13,620 657% wastewater, off -road equipment
Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 2,013,740 2,312,340 2,810,000 3,058,830 Transportation 1,190
2,080
3,440
Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Table Al4
Hollister Demographic Projection in Sphere of Influence, 2024-2045 Metric
Population
Households
Jobs
12,780
4,110
16,340
586010
599010
52010
Sources: 2024 demographic numbers are from US Census, the Department of Finance, and AMBAG. * Service population is the sum of populations and jobs.

Future demographics are from buildout projections. VMT are derived from Kimley-Horn (2024) using modeled VMT analysis for the years 2015 and 2040 to interpolate and extrapolate as needed to obtain VMT estimates for 2024, 2030, and 2045.

The service population of the city's SOI, not including the city boundary, is projected to increase by 657 percent between 2024 and 2045.

STATE GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONS
California has adopted and committed to implementing policies to decrease GHG emission levels statewide, many of which apply to the major GHG emitters in Hollister. Many of these policies are identified in the State's Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan), which was originally adopted in 2008 in response to the California Global Warming Solutions Act. The Scoping Plan outlines several regulatory and market -based solutions to achieving California's GHG emission reduction goals. Successive updates to the Scoping Plan in 2014, 2017, and 2022 revised these State level actions and identified additional opportunities for GHG emission reductions, as applicable.

While the Scoping Plan and related documents lay out policies to reduce GHG emissions statewide, the CAP focuses on the policies that most directly impact Hollister. The CAP accounts for the impacts of the State's GHG emissions reduction efforts on the level of emissions released by activities that take place in Hollister. These efforts are:

The Reriewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires increases in renewable and carbon -free electricity supplies. RPS was first established in 2002 and has been amended multiple times, most recently by Senate Bill (SB) 1020 in 2022. It requires all electricity providers in the state to obtain at least 60 percent of their electricity from eligible renewable resources by the end of 2030 and all theft electricity from carbon -free (although not necessarily eligible renewable) resources by the end of 2045. This policy reduces GHG emissions from electricity use, including the electricity used to transport and process water and wastewater, and the electricity used for electric vehicles.

Page A-12
January 2Q26

The Clean Car Standards, which require increased fuel efficiency of on -road vehicles and decreased carbon intensity of vehicle fuels. In 2002, California adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, the New Passenger Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards, or Pavley standard. It required a reduction in tailpipe GHG emissions from new vehicles produced from 2009 to 2015.

In 2012, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted an extension of this policy, the Advanced Clean Car Standards, which requires more stringent reductions in tailpipe GHG emissions from vehicles produced from 2016 to 2025. In August 2022, CARB adopted another expansion of these standards, known as the Advanced Clean Cars II standards. This regulation requires that all new light -duty vehicles (e.g., passenger cars, small trucks, and SUVs) sold in the state be zero -emission by 2035, with interim targets for new light -duty vehicle sales beginning in 2026. There are some limited exceptions for plug-in hybrid vehicles. CARB adopted similar rules for heavy-duty vehicles and State and local government fleets in 2020 (Advanced Clean Trucks) and 2023 (Advanced Clean Fleets).

The updated Title 24 building energy -efficiency standards require new buildings to achieve increased energy -efficiency targets.

California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6 are California's energy -efficiency standards for new and renovated buildings, which are applied at the local level through the project review and building permit process. The standards are strengthened every three years, with the ultimate goal of making new buildings net -zero energy, meaning that they would generate as much energy as they use. The most recent set of Title 24 standards, known as the 2025 standards, went into effect on January 1, 2026. The 2025 Title 24 standards encourage efficient electric heat pumps, expands electric -ready requirements for new homes and businesses, expand solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, supports greater flexibility of energy use timing for resilience and cost savings, and strengthen ventilation standards. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) mandates reduced carbon intensity of fuels used in off -road equipment.

The short-lived climate pollutants law (SB 1363) requires that communities divert 75 percent of organic waste (e.g., food scraps, grass, and plant trimmings) away from landfills and toward alternatives such as composting or energy generation. As a part of this requirement, all jurisdictions must offer curbside composting to single-family and small multifamily properties (less than five units). Larger multifamily properties and businesses must either participate in curbside composting or self -haul organic waste to a composting program or collection site. SB 1383 also includes requirements related to diverting surplus food to people in need, increasing the use of products made from recycled organics, and providing more detailed reporting statistics.

Title 24: Building Standards Code
Title 24 is the section of the California Code of Regulations that establishes standards to promote energy efficiency, public health, and GHG reduction standards for the construction of new commercial, residential, and public -school buildings. Title 24 includes Part 6, Building Energy Efficiency Standards (also known as the Energy Code), which focuses on reducing energy consumption of new buildings, and Part 11, CALGreen Code, which focuses on reducing environmental impacts and improving public health through mandatory measures in the building sector.

Title 24 is applied at the local level through the building permit and development review process, implemented through the municipal building code. Section 15.04.050 of the Hollister Municipal Code adopts the California Building Standards Code, including the CALGreen Code, by reference. The Municipal Code thus requires compliance with statewide Title 24 standards that improve energy efficiency, public health, and environmental sustainability in new homes and nonresidential buildings, such as high -efficiency electric air and water heating systems, improved ventilation systems, and rooftop solar and battery storage systems. This CAP was prepared with the 2022 standards in effect.

January 2026
Page A-13

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions in City Limit In the city limit, if no changes in activities or emissions occur (business as usual scenario), GHG emissions are projected to increase by approximately 40 percent between 2024 and 2045. By comparison, with State actions, Hollister's community -wide GHG emissions are projected to decrease by 56 percent relative to 2024 levels by 2045. Table A-15 shows the GHG emission forecast for the city limit with and without reductions from State actions.

Table A-15 GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions in City Limit, 2024-2045 GHG Emissions
Forecasted emissions without State actions
Reductions from RPS
Renewable natural gas
Reductions from Clean Car standards
Reductions from Title 24
Reductions from LCFS
(off -road only)
Reductions from SB 1383
Reductions from all State actions
Emissions with State actions
2024
MTCO2e
335,960
0 0
0 2030
MTCO2e
375,890
1,030
2,660
40,830
1,260
2040
MTCO2e
439,640
9,410
8,650
152,710
5,800
2045
MTCO2e
470,610
33,360
11,170
200,370
7,620
48,760 59,640 65,000
0 3,160 3,840
0 97,700 240,050
335,960 278,190 199,590
GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions in Sphere of Influence 4,180
321,700
148,910
Percentage Change
2024 to 2045
400/0
-56%
In the SOI, if no changes in activities or emissions occur, GHG emissions are projected to increase by 164 percent between 2024 and 2045. By comparison, with State actions, 2045 GHG emissions in the SOI are projected to decrease by 9 percent. Table A-16 shows the GHG emission forecast with and without reductions from State actions in the SOI.

Page A-14
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
Table Al6
GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions in the Sphere of Influence, 2024 — 2045 GHG Emissions
Forecasted emissions without State actions
Reductions from RPS
Renewable natural gas
Reductions from Clean Car standards
Reductions from Title 24
Reductions from LCFS
(off -road only)
Reductions from SB 1383
Reductions from all State actions
Emissions with State actions
2024
MTCO2e
2030
MTCO2e
10,060
o
0'
18,870
120
320
0 200
0 510
2040
MTCO2e
31,130
1,500
1,310
780
2,080
2045
MTCO2e
36,740
5,870
1,770
1,000
2,810
0 5,950 9,950 11,940
0 0
10,060
GHG Emission Reductions in CAP Study Area
370 620 750
7,470 16,240 24,140
11,390 14,900 12,620
Percentage
Change
2024- 2045
265%
-9010
With State actions, the CAP Study Area's GHG emissions are projected to decrease by 35 percent relative to 2024 levels by 2045.

Table A-17 shows the GHG emission reductions from State actions in the CAP Study Area.

Table A-17 GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions in the CAP Study Area, 2024 — 2045 GHG Emissions
Forecasted emissions without State actions
Reductions from RPS
Renewable natural gas
Reductions from Clean Car standards
Reductions from Title 24
Reductions from LCFS (off -road only)
Reductions from SB 1383
Reductions from all State actions
Emissions with State actions
2024
MTCO2e
346,010
0 0'
0'
0'
0 0
0'
346,010
2030
MTCO2e
394,760
1,150
2,980
41,030
1,770
54,710
3,530
105,170
289,580
2040
MTCO2e
470,770
10,910
9,960
153,490
7,880
69,590
4,460
256,290
214,490
2045
MTCO2e
507,350
39,230
12,940
201,370
10,430
76,940
4,930
345,840
161,530
Percentage
Change
2024- 2045
47%
-53%
January 2026
Page A-15

Appendix A
Technical Appendix

TECHNICAL DATA FOR EXISTING AND PLANNED ACTIVITIES
Existing Activities
EXISTING ACTION 1 CITYWIDE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS
Existing Action 1 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
2030
Less than 10
2040
Less than 10
2045
Less than 10
EXISTING ACTION 2 3CE RENEWABLE ENERGY PORTFOLIO
Existing Action 2 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
2030
2040
21,830
18,450
2045
0 EXISTING ACTION 3 INSTALLATION OF EV CHARGERS
Existing Action 3 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
2030
Less than 10
2040
2045
Less than 10
Less than 10
Page A-16
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Planned Activities
Strategy 1 MUNICIPAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION Strategy 1 GHG Reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
2040
2045
20 Less than 10
20 60
Less than 10
60 Assumptions
Description
Percentage of municipal
electricity reduced
Percentage of municipal natural
gas use reduced
2030
2040
70 Less than 10
70 Performance Standards
2045
Description 2030
150/0 25% 30%
20% 60% 75%
N/A
2040
2045

N/A N/A N/A

N/A N/A

N/A N/A
Strategy 2 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY -WIDE BUILDING STANDARDS Strategy 2 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
2040
2045
2,540
350
2,890
3,460
3,460
600 150
4,060 3,610
January 2026
Page A-17

Appendix A
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of residential
electricity reduced
Percentage of residential
natural gas use reduced
2030
Technical Appendix
2045
Performance Standards
2040
2045
Description
2030
30% 55% 60%
20% 25% 300/0 -
Number of retrofitted
residential units
2040
5,160 8,010 8,570
Sources:

California Energy Commission. (2025). Building energy efficiency standards (Title 24, Part 6, California Code of Regulations). https://w vw.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards Strategy 3

RESIDENTIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
Strategy 3 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
S01
CAP Study Area
2030
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of residential
electricity reduced
Percentage of residential
natural gas use reduced
2030
10%
320
40 2040
540
90 360 630
2045
760
130
900
Performance Standards
Description
20% 30% Number of retrofitted low-
income residential units
15% 50% 75% -
2030
2040 2045
610 1,220 1,830
Sources:

California Energy Commission. (2025). Building energy efficiency standards (Title 24, Part 6, California Code of Regulations). https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards California Department of Housing and Community Development. (2024). State Income Limits for 2024. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/flocs/grants-and-funding/income-I imits-2024.pdf Page A-18
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 4 NONRESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION AND EFFICIENCY Stra
e
4 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
2040
City Limit
S01
CAP Study Area
2,440
200
2,640
Assumptions
Description
Percentage nonresidential
electricity use reduced
Percentage nonresidential
natural gas use reduced
2030
30%
2040
2045
4,180
440
4,620
2045
4,250
470
4,720
Performance Standards
Description
Number of
60% 65% nonresidential spaces
retrofit
20% 35% 35% -
2045
280 520 550
Sources:

Liu, G., Liu, B., Zhang, J., Wang, W., Athalye, R., Moser, D., Crowe, E., Bengtson, N., Effinger, M., & Webster, L. (2011). *Advanced energy retrofit guide: Retail buildings*. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and PECI. https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-20814.pdf Liu, G., Liu, B., Wang, W., Zhang, J., Athalye, R., Moser, D., Crowe, E., Bengtson, N., Effinger, M., & Webster, L. (2011). *Advanced energy retrofit guide: Office buildings*. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and PECI. https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-20761 .pdf January 2026
Pa e A-19

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Strategy 5 ONSITE SOLAR ENERGY FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
Strategy 5 GHG reduction (MTC02e)
Geography
City Limit
S01
CAP Study Area
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of new
nonresidential buildings with
solar installations
2030
2040
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
2045
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Performance Standards
Description
65010 80% 90% Solar installations on new
nonresidential buildings
2030
2040
2045
90 270 390
Source:

U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). National Renewable Energy Laboratory. PV Watts Calculator. https//pvwatts.nrel.gov/ Strategy 6 MUNICIPAL RENEWABLE AND CARBON -FREE ENERGY
Strategy 6 GHG Reduction (MTC02e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
SO1
CAP Study Area
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
2040
Assumptions
Description
Number of new solar
installations on municipal
property
2030
5 2040
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
2045
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Performance Standards
2045
Description
2030
10 15
Number of new solar
installations on municipal
property
040
2045
5 10 15
Source:

U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). National Renewable Energy Laboratory. PV Watts Calculator. https//pvwatts.nrel.gov/ Page A-20
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 7

COMMUNITY -WIDE RENEWABLE, CARBON -FREE, AND RESILIENT ENERGY SYSTEMS Strategy 7 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
Sal
CAP Study Area
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
2040
2045
Assumptions
Description
Percentage existing
nonresidential buildings
obtaining new solar systems (city
limits)
Percentage existing
nonresidential buildings
obtaining new solar systems
(SOI)
2030
3%
3%
2040
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Performance Standards
2045
Description
New solar installations
10% 12%
(City Limit)
10% 12%
New solar installations
(SOI)
2030 I 2040 ( 2045
390 1,300 1,560
40 120 150
Source:

U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). National Renewable Energy Laboratory. PV Watts Calculator. https//pvwatts.nrel.gov/ Strategy 8 BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION
Strategy 8 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
SO'
CAP Study Area
7,900
680
8,580
2040
2045
14,350
1,100
15,450
16,380
1,090
17,470
January 2026
Pa2.e A-21

Appendix A
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of existing homes
converting to all -electric
Percentage of existing
nonresidential spaces converting
to all -electric
2030 2040 2045
Technical Appendix
2045
Performance Standards
Description
2030
2040
Residential units
30% 70% 90°%a undergoing all -electric 3,770 8,810 11,320 retrofits
Nonresidential spaces
25% 70% 900/0 undergoing all -electric 140 400 520
retrofits
Source:

Greenblatt, J. (2015) "Modeling California policy impacts of greenhouse gas emissions." Energy Policy. https://www.scienced i rect.com/science/article/a bs/pi i/50301421514006892?via%3D ihub Strategy 9 BUILDING CODE UPDATES AND INCENTIVES FOR ELECTRIFICATION OF NEW BUILDINGS Strategy 9 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
So'
CAP Study Area
240
90 330
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of new homes built
to be all -electric
Percentage of new
nonresidential spaces built to
be all -electric
2030
2040
2045
0% 70% 90%
25% 65°!o 90%
2040
2,860
1,110
3,970
2045
5,040
1,970
7,010
Performance Standards
Description
2030
Residential units built to
be all -electric
Nonresidential spaces
built to be all -electric
2040
2045
5,450 9,180
40 220 390
Source:

Greenblatt, J. (2015) "Modeling California policy impacts of greenhouse gas emissions." Energy Policy. https://www.scienced i rect.com/science/article/a bs/pi i/50301421514006892?via%3D i hub Page A-22
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 10 REDUCING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
Strategy 10 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
2040
2045
10,400
70 10,470
Assumptions
Description
Target participation rate in
Commute Trip Reduction Program
Percent of new residents in transit -
oriented development
Percent new jobs in transit -
oriented development
Percent new multifamily units
designated affordable
Target light -duty VMT/service
population reduction for new
development
Percent transit routes that receive
treatments
Percent of households targeted
with CBTP
5% 20%
50/o
2045
4,500
70 4,570
2,720
50 2,770
Performance Standards
Description
2030
2040
2045
Employees participating in
35% commute trip reduction 1,080 5,290 9,880
program
15% 25%
10% • 20% 30%
20% 20% 25%
15% 20% 25%
10% 20% 25%
30% 50% 750/0
Residents in transit -oriented
developments
Jobs in transit -oriented
developments
650 4,090 8,160
530 2,030 3,580
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA httI s/"wvvw . irqudlityoral esiderltsic limate c hanEe/gfit;_!1dndbook_ caleemod
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (22 November 2019). Travel Chapter 3: Mode Choice. FHWA. https://www.fhwa . dot.gov/pol icy/23cpr/chap3.cfm#vmt-and-person-m iles-traveled.

January 2026
Page A-23

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Strategy 11

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
Strate
GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
2,440
Less than 10
2,440
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of installation o
planned bicycle facilities
Percentage of installation of
planned pedestrian facilities
Percent reduction in VMT from
displaced vehicles due to bicycle
facility
Percent change of residences who
have access to scooter sharing
2030
50%
10%
2040
75%
25%
2040
1,790
Less than 10
1,790
2045
1,250
Less than 10
1,250
Performance Standards
2045
Description
100%
35%
40% 75% 90%
500/0 75% 90%
Total mileage of bicycle
facilities
Total mileage of pedestrian
facility improvements
2030
2040 2045

19.1 28.6 38.2

2.5 3.8 5.1
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. Lt s://vtiww.airquality.ors/residentslclimate-change/ -handbook- caleemodl
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2025). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory .

City of Hollister. (February 8, 2018). Engineering and Traffic Survey. City of Hollister. https://hollister.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/2018/03/EngineeringTrafficSurvey.pdf
City of Hollister. (2020). Hollister Complete Streets Plan. City of Hollister.

I.rttp //hollIsterc .,vv/uvpcontcrit.uploads, 202c.K08„'Hgllister Re c t 9)dt U.S. Census Bureau. (2020). Total population, 2020. American Community Survey, 5 -year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/
Page A-24 January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 12 SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLS
Safe Routes to Schools is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Strategy 13 TRANSIT ACCESS
Strategy 13 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
S01
CAP Study Area
9,280 10,820
50 70
9,330 10,890
2045
Assumptions
Description
Average round trip commute
distance in Hollister (miles)
Average round trip commute
distance in Hollister SOI
(miles)
Percent increase in transit
network coverage
2030
2040 2045
Description
9,400
60 9,460
Performance Standards
2030
2040
2045
Number of new Hollister
56 56 56 transit trips per year with 76,110 207,050 240,120 service expansion
56 56 56
15% 40% 60%
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/residents/climate-change/ghg-handbook- caleemodCalifornia Air Resources Board (CARB). (2024). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB.

I?ttp5://dlb.Cd;gov/erTlldi(ieIT1Iss on Inventory,
U.S. Census. (2022). Distance/Direction Report: Home census block to work census block. Longitudinal Employer -Household Dynamics (LEND) OnTheMap. https://lehd.ces.census.gov/ .

San Benito County Express. (2022). Intercounty schedule 2022. San Benito County Express. http://www.sanbenitocountyeuress.orghdf/2022/06/Intercounty%20Schedule May%202022.pdf U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). Means of transportation to work, 2024 American Community Survey 5 -year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https:///data.censL.rs.govLedsci/ .

January 2026
Pa2e A-25

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Strategy 14 ELECTRIC VEHICLES (EVs)
Stra
e
14 Per reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
S01
CAP Study Area
2030
9,420
40 9,460
Assumptions
Description
2030
2040
2040
2045
13,200
50 13,250
24,980
90 25,070
Performance Standards
2045 i Description
2030
Target for eVMT share of
community wide VMT 30010 75% 90%
(light -duty)
Target for eVMT share of
community wide VMT 30010 75% 95%
(heavy-duty)
City Limit target number
of new charging stations
SO1 target number of
new charging stations
20 35 45
0 2040
2045
Light duty eVMT in
Lity mits 96,729,600 264,155,460 331,247,870
Light duty eVMT in
SO1
Heavy-duty eVMT
in city limits
Heavy-duty eVMT
in SOI
554,520 1,401,030 1,737,820
21,171,080 59,795,920 80,091,360
51,840 146,590 196,440
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. hdtp54,/ www.airquailty.orgiresident5/chmate ohs!rage/ghg;handbook .,
caleemod
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2025). Light -duty vehicle population in California. CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energv- almanac/zero-emission-vehicle-and-infrastructure-statistics/light-duty-vehicle.

California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2025). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. htbs://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2018). California public road data. Caltrans. htt)s://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot- mediahrograms/research-innovation-system-information/documents/california-public-road-data/prd-2018-a 11 y.pdf.

Page A-26
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 15 EXPAND MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC VEHICLE FLEET AND PROMOTE LOW CARBON TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS.

Expand Municipal Electric Vehicle Fleet and Promote Low Carbon Transportation Options is not a quantifiable strategy in Hollister because municipal electric fleet and public bus data are not available. Instead of being quantified as a stand-alone strategy, GHG emissions reductions for this strategy were quantified at the community -wide scale. As a result, there are no specific GHG reductions, assumptions, or performance targets specific to municipal operations.

Strategy 16
CONSIDER DEVELOPING AN EV CAR SHARE PROGRAM.

Strategy 16 GHG reduction (MTC02e)
Geography
City Limit
SoI
CAP Study Area
2030
630
Less than 10
630
2040
2045
Assumptions
Description
Number of EVs in Car Share
Program
2030
2040
2045
470
Less than 10
470
320
Less than 10
320
Performance Standards
Description
2030 2040 1 2045
20 40 50 Number of EVs in Car
Share Program
20 40
50 Strategy 17 ANTI -IDLING ORDINANCE
Strategy 17 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
S0I
CAP Study Area
2030
870
Less than 10
870
2040
2045
870
Less than 10
870
600
Less than 10
600
January 2026
Pa e A-27

Appendix A
Assumptions
Description
2030
Compliance rate with idling
ordinance
Reduction in idling time with
ordinance
2040
2045
Technical Appendix
2045
Performance Standards
Description
50% 75% 900/0 Idling Time (mins)
40% 40010 40%
3 Sources:

San Bernardino County Transportation Authority. (2021). Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. https,iJww!w gosbc.ta cunt/plan, regior al greenhouse-4�as reduc[ioi Lir /
Strategy 18 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
Strategy 18 GHG reduction (MTC02e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
5,190
40 5,230
2040
Assumptions
Description
2030
Increase in residential density
(du/ac), city limits
Increase in residential density
(du/ac), SOI
2040
300/0 64010
2045
4,450
30 4,480 2,200
2045
2,190
10 Performance Standards
Description 2030 2040
2045
64010 N/A
47010 93% 93% N/A
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. Irt_tps//mv�._aiidu_I!ityoig/rFsiciFritsiairridtecliaii eigl_ig-hdocibook._ caleemod
City of Hollister. (2025). Hollister 2040 General Plan (draft).

Page A-28
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 19 ELECTRIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT Strategy 19 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
Sol
CAP Study Area
4,830
2040
14,280
460 1,880
5,290 16,160
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of construction
equipment converted to electric
Percentage of landscaping
equipment converted to electric
Percentage of all other off -road
equipment converted to electric
2030
2040
2045
2045
19,670
2,890
22,560
Performance Standards
Description
300/0 75% 95% N/A
40% 75% 95010 N/A
300/0 75% 95% N/A
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. Lt s://vtiww.airquality,ors/residentslclimate-change/ -handhook- caleemed
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2025). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory .

January 2026
Pa e A-29

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Strategy 20 REDUCE COMMUNITY -WIDE WASTE GENERATION
Strategy 20 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
2,370
280
2,650
Assumptions
Description
Reduction in
generation
solid waste
2030
15%
2040
2040
12,470
2,030
14,500
2045
16,700
2,990
19,690
Performance Standards
2045
Description
2030
65% • 80% N/A
2040 j 2045
Strategy 21 RECYCLING AND COMPOSTING EDUCATION
Strategy 20 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
501
CAP Study Area
2030
420
50 470
Assumptions
Description
Organic recycling target
2030
2040
2045
85% 85% 95%
2040
510
80 590
2045
1,110
200
1,310
Performance Standards
Description
Tons of solid waste
reduced
2045
1,060 1,330 2,940
Strategy 22 METHANE CAPTURE AT LANDFILLS
Strategy 22 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SO!
CAP Study Area
2030
2,600
310
2,910
2040
2,480
400
2,880
2045
2,450
440
2,890
Page A-30
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Assumptions
Description
Current methane capture rate
2030
75%
2040
75%
Performance Standards
2045
Description
2030
75% N/A
Target for methane capture rate 80% 85% 95% N/A
Percentage of captured methane
that will be combusted for 4% 6% 8% N/A
cogeneration
Source:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. helps::pAivvyvairrqudiity orrg/re id ntsi imcite c hange/g!sg hdndlbook c<iieemcd Strategy 23 REDUCE COMMUNITY -WIDE WATER USE
Strategy 23 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of water
use reduced
N/A
N/A
2030
2040
20% 35%
2045
260
30 290
2040
2045
560
90 650
960
170
1,130
Performance Standards
Description
Water use reduction
55% (MG)
Wastewater generation
reduction (MG)
Energy use reduction
(kWh)
2030
770
300 500
120 200 310
1,477,730 3,141,450 5,372,580
Source:

PlaceWorks. (2021). City of Hollister 2024 GHG Inventory, Water and Wastewater Sector. PlaceWorks.

January 2026
Page A-31

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Strategy 24 REDUCE MUNICIPAL WATER USE
Strategy 24 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
SoI
CAP Study Area
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Assumptions
Description
2030
Efficiency improvement
in water treatment and 10%
distribution system
2040
2045
15% 20%
2040
2045
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Less than 10
Performance Standards
Description
Electricity use of water
treatment and
distribution system
2045
3,550,350 2,607,060 1,704,280
Strategy 25 METHANE CAPTURE FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES Strategy 25 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
2030
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
100
10 110
2040
2045
Assumptions
Description
RDWWTP's existing wastewater
methane capture rate (2019)
RDWWTP's target wastewater
methane capture rate
2030
2040
2045
210
30 240
500
90 590
Performance Standards
Description
0% 0% 0% N/A
70% 80% 90% N/A
Source:

PlaceWorks. (2021). City of Hollister 2024 GHG Inventory, Water and Wastewater Sector. PlaceWorks. 2030
2040 I 2045
Page A-32
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 26 NATURAL RESOURCES AND OPEN SPACE
Reducing Community -wide Waste Generation is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy.

There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Strategy 27 TREE PLANTING AND PRESERVATION
Strategy 27 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
So'
CAP Study Area
2030
2040
2045
260
50 310
Assumptions
Description
Trees planted
Mortality rate
Cumulative total number of
trees planted
Sources:
2030
100
2040
300
2045
310
60 370
150
30 180
Performance Standards
Description
2030
2040
2045
500 N/A

5.5% 5.5% 5.5% N/A
700 1,700 2,200 N/A
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2010). Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. CAPCOA. http://www.agmd.gov/flocs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/capcoa-quantifying-greenhouse-gas-mitigation-measures.pdf Hilbert, D. R., Roman, L. A., Koeser, A. K., Vogt, J., & van Doorn, N. S. (2019). Urban tree mortality: a literature review. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry:
45 (5): 167-200., 45(5), 167-200.

Strategy 28 GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Green Infrastructure is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Strategy 29 LOCAL FOOD SYSTEMS
Local Food Systems is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

January 2026
Page A-33

Appendix A
Technical Appendix
Strategy 30 SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE AND CARBON SEQUESTRATION Strate
0 GHG reduction (MTCO2e)
Geography
City Limit
SOI
CAP Study Area
2030
180
660
840
Assumptions
Description
Percentage of prime farmland
involved in Healthy Soils
Program
Percentage of grazing land
involved in Healthy Soils
Program
Sources:

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2024). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/residents/climate-change/ghg-handbook- caleemodCalifornia Air Resources Board (CARB).
2030
2040
0 0
0 2045
0 0
0 Performance Standards
Description
1 2030
2040 2045
City limit acres of prime
10% O% 0% farmland involved in
Healthy Soils Program
SOI acres of farmland
10% 010 0% involved in Healthy Soils 178
Program
49 0
0 USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). (2022). COMET -Planner CDFA Healthy Soils Program (HSP). USDA NRCS. h1tp://c r et 7m/# text=-COMEl /;2DPlanne"rb20Cdl'Torn i '?020llealthyo/o20Soils&text=COMEI0/o2DPlannei%20foi /o201 eo/o20CINA,Practice s/„20indude,i0/b20v0/o20the;/o2ot
Strategy 31 REGIONAL COOPERATION
Regional Cooperation is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Strategy 32 COMMUNITY RESILIENCE RESOURCES
Community Resilience Resources is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Page A-34
January 2026

City of Hollister
Climate Action Plan
Strategy 33 SAFETY FOR OUTDOOR WORKERS
Safety for Outdoor Workers is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Strategy 34 GREEN JOBS
Green Jobs is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.

Strategy 35 CLIMATE CHANGE AWARENESS AND EDUCATION.

Climate Change Awareness and Education is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG reductions for this strategy.

There are no assumptions or performance targets.

January 2026
Pa e A-35

Appendix A
This page intentionally left blank.

Page A-36
January 2026

City of Hollister

APPENDIX B
State of California Regulations and Guidance
California has adopted several laws to reduce GHG emissions and prepare for the impacts of climate change. These laws and associated regulations are briefly summarized here.

Executive Order S-03-05
In 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-03-05, which established the first statewide GHG reduction goals for California: reduce emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and reduce emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2045.

Assembly Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 Assembly Bill (AB) 32 was adopted in 2006. It establishes a legislative target for the State of California to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. It also makes the California Air Resources Board (CARB) responsible for reducing statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 includes the major GHGs and groups of GHGs that are being emitted into the atmosphere. These gases include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrogen dioxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3). Through the adoption of AB 32, the California Legislature declared:
(a) Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the State from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health -related problems. (b) Global warming will have detrimental effects on some of California's largest industries, including agriculture, wine, tourism, skiing, recreational and commercial fishing, and forestry. It will also increase the strain on electricity supplies necessary to meet the demand for summer air conditioning in the hottest parts of the State.

Climate Change Scoping Plan
The Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) was first adopted by CARB in 2008. It lays out the State's plan to reduce GHG emissions in accordance with adopted targets, including direct regulations, alternate compliance mechanisms, incentives, voluntary actions, and market -based approaches like a cap -and -trade program. CARB updated the Scoping Plan in 2014 and 2017 to reflect new State targets and additional opportunities for GHG emission reduction.

In December 2022, CARB adopted a third update to the Scoping Plan. Core strategies in the 2022 Scoping Plan include:
• Making the transition to zero -emission vehicles (ZEVs) and near-ZEV technologies. • Continued investment in renewables, such as solar, wind, and other types of renewable energy. • Greater use of low carbon fuels.

January 2026
Page -1

Appendix B
• Integrated land conservation and development strategies. • Coordinated efforts to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants (methane, black carbon, and fluorinated gases).

Integrated land use planning to support livable, transit -connected communities and conserve agricultural and other lands. • Requirements for GHG reductions at stationary sources complement local air pollution control efforts by the local air districts to tighten criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions limits on a broad spectrum of industrial sources.

Senate BiII 375: Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 In 2008, SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, was adopted to connect the GHG emissions reductions targets established in the 2008 Scoping Plan to local land use decisions that affect travel behavior. Its intent is to reduce GHG emissions from light -duty trucks and automobiles (excludes emissions associated with goods movement) by aligning regional long-range transportation plans, investments, and housing allocations to local land use planning to reduce VMT and vehicle trips. Specifically, SB 375 required CARB to establish GHG emissions reduction targets for each of the 18 metropolitan planning organizations.

Executive Order B-30-15
Executive Order (EO) B-30-15 was signed in 2015 by Governor Jerry Brown and set a goal of reducing GHG emissions in the State to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. EO B-30-15 directed CARB to update the Scoping Plan to quantify the 2030 GHG reduction goal for the State and requires State agencies to implement strategies to meet the interim 2030 goal.

Senate BiII 32 and Assembly Bill 197
In 2016, Governor Brown signed SB 32 and AB 197, making the EO goal for 2030 into a statewide, mandated legislative target. AB 197 established a joint legislative committee on climate change policies and requires CARB to prioritize direct emissions reductions rather than the market -based cap -and -trade program for large stationary, mobile, and other sources.

Executive Order B-55-18
EO B-55-18, signed in 2018, sets a goal "to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter". EO B-55-18 directs CARB to work with relevant State agencies to ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal. The goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 is in addition to other statewide goals, meaning that not only should emissions be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, but that, by no later than 2045, the remaining emissions should be offset by equivalent net removals of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) from the atmosphere, including through sequestration in forests, soils, and other natural landscapes.

Executive Order N-79-20
In 2020, Governor Newsom issued EO N-79-20, which sets a time frame for the transition to ZEVs, including passenger vehicles, trucks, and off -road equipment. It directs CARB to develop and propose passenger vehicle and truck regulations requiring increasing volumes of new ZEVs sold in California toward the target of 100 percent of in -state sales by 2035, and similar regulations for medium - and heavy-duty vehicles to achieve a target of 100 percent fleet electrification by 2045. In addition, EO N-79-20 provides strategies — in cooperation with other State agencies, the EPA, and local air districts —to achieve 100 percent zero emissions from all off -road vehicles and equipment operations in California by 2035.

Page B-2
January 2026

City of Hollister
Assembly BiII 1279
AB 1279, also referred to as the California Climate Crisis Act, was approved by the California legislature on August 31, 2022, and signed by Governor Newsom on September 16, 2022. The California Climate Crisis Act requires the State to:
• Achieve net -zero GHG emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative GHG emissions thereafter.
• Ensure that by 2045, statewide anthropogenic GHG emissions are reduced to at least 85 percent below statewide 1990 levels.

The legislation requires CARB to work with relevant State agencies to ensure that updates to the Climate Change Scoping Plan identify and recommend measures to achieve these policy goals and to identify and implement a variety of policies and strategies that enable carbon dioxide removal solutions and carbon capture, utilization, and storage technologies in California, as specified. "Net zero greenhouse gas emissions" means emissions of GHGs released to the atmosphere are balanced by removals of GHG emissions over a period of time, as determined by the State board. The goals established by AB 1279 are in addition to, and do not replace or supersede, the statewide GHG emissions reduction targets established by AB 32 for SB 32.

Monterey Bay Air Resources District
The Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) is the regional air district responsible for air quality management in Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito Counties, also geographically known as the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB). The MBARD is responsible for monitoring air quality, achieving and maintaining air quality standards, and supporting the mission to protect environmental and public health in the Monterey Bay region. MBARD plays an important role in controlling emissions of GHGs, such as carbon dioxide, released from privately owned facilities in the region that are not under the jurisdiction of city planning. These facilities are called stationary sources of emissions, and they include industrial facilities and natural gas fired -power plants. In addition, MBARD is the regional agency responsible for compliance with State air quality standards, such as the California Clean Air Act (CCAA), which established regulatory standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen dioxide. Pinnacles National Park is classified as a nonattainment area for ozone under the State's Ambient Air Quality Standards, which means that it exceeds the threshold for ozone levels deemed acceptable for human health in California.19 According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), GHG emissions and ozone levels are correlated because ozone formation in the atmosphere accelerates as temperature increases. Ozone exposure can exacerbate human health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, asthma, and other respiratory diseases.20 Fortunately, studies show that nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from the San Francisco Bay Area and San Joaquin Air Basins areas are forecast to decline through the year 2030.
19 Monterey Bay Air Resources District. 2017, March 15. Air Quality Management Plan: 2012-2017. https://www.mbard.org/files/6632732f5/2012- 2015-AQMP_FINAL.pdf
2° Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022, February 15. "How Climate Change May Impact Ozone Pollution and Public Health Through the 21st Century." litips:/! www.gpa p scieliceinattersjhow climate-draw-imay-impact-ozone--pollution-and ublic-health-throu2, 21st-centur January 2026
Page B-3

Appendix B
This page intentionally left blank.

Page B-4
January 2Q26

City of Hollister
HOLLISrftR2040 GENERAL PLAN,

CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND AGRICULTURAL

LA ND PRESERVA TON PROGRAM PROJECT
March 2026 I EIR Addendum

March 2026 I EIR Addendum
HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN,

CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM PROJECT
for City of Hollister
Prepared for:

City of Hollister
Contact: Eva Kelly, Planning Manager
339 Fifth Street
Hollister, California 95023
831.636.4360
Prepared by:

Place orks
2040 Bancroft Way #400
Berkeley, California 94704
510.848.3815
www.placeworks.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction 1-1

1.1 Background, Purpose, and Scope 1-1

1.2 Environmental Procedures 1-1

1.3 Prior Environmental Documentation 1-3

2. Project Description 2-1

2.1 Location and Setting 2-1

2.2 Addendum Study Area 2-1

2.3 Modified Project 2-1

3. Environmental Analysis 3-1

3.1 Aesthetics 3-1

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources 3-2

3.3 Air Quality 3-5

3.4 Biological Resources 3-7

3.5 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources 3-11

3.6 Energy 3-13

3.7 Geology and Soils 3-15

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3-18

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3-19

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality 3-21

3.11 Land Use and Planning 3-24

3.12 Mineral Resources 3-25

3.13 Noise 3-26

3.14 Population and Housing 3-28

3.15 Public Services and Recreation 3-29

3.16 Transportation 3-30

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems 3-33

3.18 Wildfire 3-34

4. Findings 4-1

5. List of Preparers 5-1

SOURCES
All documents cited in this report and used in its preparation are hereby incorporated by reference into this Addendum. Copies of documents referenced herein are available for review online at www.hollister2040.orq .

MARCH 2026 i

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures
Figure 1 Addendum Study Area 2-2
Figure 2 Proposed Sphere of Influence Reduction 2-4
List of Tables
Table 1 Proposed 2040 Buildout Projections in the Addendum Study Area 2-3 Table 2 Vehicle Miles Traveled 3-32
ii Place orks

1.1 BACKGROUND, PURPOSE, AND SCOPE
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Sections 15000 et. seq.) recognize that between the date an environmental document is completed and the date the project is fully implemented, one or more of the following changes may occur: 1) the project may change; 2) the environmental setting in which the project is located may change; 3) laws, regulations, or policies may change in ways that impact the environment; and/or 4) previously unknown information can arise.

Before proceeding with a project, CEQA requires the lead agency to evaluate these changes to determine whether or not they affect the conclusions in the environmental document.

The City of Hollister (City) certified the Hollister 2040 General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Agricultural Lands Preservation Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2021040277 and approved the Hollister 2040 General Plan, Climate Action Plan (CAP), and Agricultural Lands Preservation Program (ALPP) Project in December 2024. For the purposes of this Addendum, the EIR is considered the "Certified EIR," and the Project is considered the "2024 Project." This document is the first Addendum to the Certified EIR.

The subjects of this Addendum are the modifications to the 2024 Project that was analyzed in the Certified EIR, herein referred to as the proposed "Modified Project" The Modified Project does not increase the development potential or extend the boundaries beyond what was analyzed in the Certified EIR. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Hollister is the lead agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether or not to approve the proposed action.

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, this Addendum focuses on whether implementation of the Modified Project would require major revisions to the Certified EIR due to the potential for new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, when an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines that one or more of the following conditions are met:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; MARCH 2026
1-1

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

1. INTRODUCTION
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
(3)
New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

A supplement to an EIR (supplemental EIR), which is narrower in scope than a subsequent EIR, may be prepared if any of the above criteria apply, but "only minor changes or additions would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15163(a)). In the absence of the need to prepare either a subsequent or supplemental EIR, an addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared. Section 15164 states:
(a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
(d) The decision -making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
(e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164)
1-2 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

1. INTRODUCTION
This Addendum to the Certified EIR has been prepared because evaluation of the Modified Project determined that none of the circumstances requiring a subsequent or supplemental EIR are applicable.

As demonstrated in Chapter 3, Environmental Analysis, of this Addendum, the Modified Project would not result in impacts that differ from the 2024 Project, and it would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a). The Modified Project would not change the assumptions made under the Certified EIR.

The Modified Project is consistent with the buildout projections analyzed in the Certified EIR. This Addendum demonstrates that no substantial changes are proposed to the 2024 Project or have occurred in the development area covered by the Certified EIR that would require major revisions to the Certified EIR or substantially increase the severity of previously identified significant effects (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][1]). Therefore, the impacts of the Modified Project are within the levels and types of environmental impacts disclosed in the Certified EIR.

As substantiated in Chapter 3, Environmental Analysis, of this Addendum, the Modified Project would not result in new significant impacts or substantially increase the severity of the impacts of the 2024 Project due to substantial changes in circumstances since the certification of the EIR (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][2]).

In addition, no information that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Certified EIR was certified has been revealed that shows new or substantially more severe significant impacts would result (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]). There are no new or considerably different mitigation measures that would substantially reduce one or more significant impacts of the 2024 Project but that are not adopted.

Because this Addendum does not identify new or substantially more severe significant impacts, circulation for public review and comment is not necessary (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164[c]).

However, the City of Hollister has considered this Addendum together with the previously certified EIR prior to adoption of the Modified Project, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(d).

1.3 PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
The CEQA environmental review process for the 2024 Project started on April 9, 2021, with issuance of a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR. A 30 -day public comment period for the NOP ended on May 10, 2021. A virtual public scoping meeting was held on April 22, 2021, to accept public input on environmental topics to be analyzed in the EIR and approaches to the impact analyses. Written comments received on the NOP are included in Appendix A of the Revised Draft EIR. A copy of the NOP is also included in Appendix A of the Revised Draft EIR.

The 2023 Draft EIR for the 2023 draft of the Hollister 2040 General Plan, CAP, and ALPP (2023 Proposed Project) was published on May 17, 2023, and was made available for a 45 -day public review and comment period that ended on June 30, 2023. A Draft EIR Public Hearing was held virtually on June 22, 2023, to receive input from agencies and the public. Copies of the 2023 Draft EIR were posted online on the City's 2040 General Plan website ( https://hollister2040.org/) .

MARCH 2026
1-3

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

1. INTRODUCTION
After preparation of the 2023 Draft EIR, but prior to its certification, the City made modifications to the 2023 Proposed Project and evaluated those modifications and any subsequent residual impacts in response to written and verbal comment made during the 45 -day public review period for the 2023 Draft EIR. The 2023 Draft EIR was revised to include the new analysis for the 2024 Project.

The Revised Draft EIR for the 2024 Project was recirculated on July 3, 2024, and was made available for a 45 -day public review and comment period that ended on August 16, 2024. A Revised Draft EIR Public Hearing was held virtually on July 22, 2023, to receive input from agencies and the public. Copies of the Revised Draft EIR were posted online on the City's 2040 General Plan website ( https://hollister2040.org/) .

Comment letters received on the 2023 Draft EIR and the Revised Draft EIR and comments read at the public hearing are provided in their entirety in Appendix G of the Final EIR. The City received a total of 16 comment letters, of which ten were from governmental agencies, four were from private organizations, and two were from members of the public.

The Final EIR was completed and published on October 23, 2024. The EIR consists of two documents: the Revised Draft EIR issued in July 2024 and the Final EIR issued in October 2024. Chapter 4 of the Final EIR consists of comments received during the public review period for the 2023 Draft EIR and the Revised Draft EIR and provides responses to those comments. Chapter 5 of the Final EIR contains revisions to the Revised Draft EIR to clarify, amplify, or correct information in the Revised Draft EIR, and associated appendices.

The Hollister City Council certified the EIR and approved the project on December 3, 2024. A Notice of Determination was filed with the San Benito County Clerk and State Clearinghouse on December 4, 2024.

The Certified EIR concluded that the 2024 Project would result in less -than -significant impacts for the topics of aesthetics, energy, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services and recreation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire. Impacts to biological resources, cultural and tribal resources, and geology and soils would be less than significant with implementation of the mitigating 2040 General Plan policies and actions. The 2024 Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to agricultural resources, air quality, noise, and transportation at the program level.

With respect to agricultural resources, the CEQA standard of significance is the loss of any qualified Farmlands (Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance) and any conversion of qualified Farmlands to nonagricultural uses would constitute a significant impact under CEQA. Therefore, this significant and unavoidable would remain with future projects that result in the conversion of qualified agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses. With respect to air quality, noise, and transportation, the finding of significant and unavoidable at the program level would not preclude the finding of less than significant at the project level for future development in Hollister. 1-4 Place orks

2.1 LOCATION AND SETTING
Hollister lies in north central California at the northern end of the San Benito Valley, approximately 40 miles east of Monterey, 100 miles southeast of San Francisco, and 300 miles north of Los Angeles. State Routes (SR) 25 and 156, which diagonally transect the city in the northwest to southeast and southwest to northeast directions, define the principal transportation corridors connecting the city to the subregion. United States (US) Highway 101 to the west serves as a major transportation corridor for the state, providing connections to the San Francisco Bay Area to the north, and the Salinas Valley and Central Coast regions to the south. SR 156 connects to the Monterey Peninsula area to the west and the Central Valley region to the east, while SR 25 connects south to Pinnacles National Park.

2.2 ADDENDUM STUDY AREA
As shown on Figure 1, Addendum Study Area, the Addendum Study Area for the Modified Project encompasses the Hollister City Limits and newly proposed Sphere of Influence (SOI). The Hollister City Limits boundary surrounds the incorporated territory where the City currently has jurisdictional authority. Parts of the City Limits follow along the San Benito River and Santa Ana Creek, while the remaining City Limits are more arbitrary. The total land area of the City Limits is approximately 5,220 acres (about 8.2 square miles). The current Hollister SOI is approximately 1,817 acres (about 2.8 square miles). Under the Modified Project, the proposed SOI would add approximately 289 acres (about 0.5 square miles) to increase to approximately 2,106 acres (about 3.2 square miles). The proposed SOI would extend further south of the existing SOI, but would remain contiguous with the existing SOI border to the east and west. The proposed SOI would expand to Union Road between San Benito Street and Southside Road and to Enterprise Road between Southside Road and SR 25. As described in the Union Road Special Planning Area, development in this expansion area would be subject to specific guidelines for development, including the creation of a Specific Plan for projects within the Union Road Special Planning Area.

2.3 MODIFIED PROJECT
The proposed Modified Project consists of modifications to the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, 2040 General Plan and associated land use map, CAP, and ALPP. In summary, the Modified Project would reduce the extent of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI and accordingly revise the 2040 General Plan land use map. The modifications to the 2040 General Plan and CAP would ensure consistency with State regulations and guidance. The modified ALPP would require dedication of eligible agricultural conservation easements at a rate of at least two acres of agricultural land for each one acre of agricultural land to be converted (2:1 ratio) for projects that would convert agricultural land to non- agricultural uses.

MARCH 2026
2-1

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 1 Addendum Study Area
City Limit
Existing Sphere of Influence
Modified Project Proposed
Sphere of Influence
Parks and Open Space
Creeks and Waterways
Addendum Study Area
Certified EIR Study Area
Source: United States Geological Survey, 2019; Esrl, 2020; San Benito County, 2020. 2-2
PlaceWorks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.3.1 Modified Sphere of Influence
The Modified Project would reduce the SOI boundaries analyzed in the Certified EIR. Figure 2, Proposed Sphere of Influence Reduction, shows the comparison between the SOI boundaries of the 2024 Project and the proposed SOI boundaries of the Modified Project. The Modified Project would result in the reduction of the proposed SOI by approximately 2,134 acres (about 3.3 square miles).

2.3.2 Modified General Plan 2040
As a result of the proposed SOI reduction, the 2040 General Plan land use map would be revised. The revisions to the land use map would not change the buildout projections analyzed in the Certified EIR and presented again in Table 1, Proposed 2040 Buildout Projections in the Addendum Study Area.

Table 1
Category
Existing Conditions
2019
Projected Growth
2019-2040 (Proposed
Project)
Buildout Estimates
2040
Population
40,370
31,575
71,945
Housing Units
11,675
10,530
22,205
Households
11,250
10,160
21,410
Jobs
14,460
11,170
25,630
Proposed 2040
uildout Projections in the Addendu
Study Area
Notes: Numbers are rounded from original sources and therefore represent approximate estimates.

Sources: City of Hollister, 2022; Kimley Horn and Associates, 2024; PlaceWorks, 2024.

In addition to the revisions to the land use map, the Safety Element of the 2040 General Plan would reflect the new Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The Natural Resources Element would reflect Senate Bill (SB) 1425 and Assembly Bill (AB) 1889, which require jurisdictions to plan equitable access to open space, speak to the co -benefits of open space in relation to climate change, rewilding opportunities, and wildlife connectivity.

The Modified Project reflects the results of the evacuation assessment conducted in compliance with AB 747 (California Government Code Section 65302.15) to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability and evacuation locations under a range of emergency scenarios.

2.3.3 Modified Climate Action Plan
The Modified Project includes an update to the CAP to reflect the changes to the 2040 General Plan and ensure consistency with State regulations and guidance. The updated CAP would include a community - wide GHG inventory for 2024 in addition to the 2005 and 2019 inventories. The GHG Emissions forecast and GHG reduction strategies of the updated CAP would reflect the changes to the modified General Plan land use map.

MARCH 2026
2-3

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figure 2 Proposed Sphere of Influence Reduction
City Limit
Approved Project Proposed
Sphere of Influence
Modified Project Proposed
° Sphere of Influence
Parks and Open Space
Creeks and Waterways
Source: United States Geological Survey, 2019; Esri, 2020; San Benito County, 2020. 2-4
PlaceWorks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.3.4 Modified Agricultural Land Preservation Program
The Modified Project includes an update to the ALPP which requires the dedication of eligible agricultural conservation easements at a rate of at least one acre of agricultural land for each one acre of agricultural land to be converted (1:1 ratio) for projects that would convert agricultural land to non- agricultural uses. Under the Modified Project, the ALPP would increase the rate to at least two acres of agricultural land for each one acre of agricultural land to be converted (2:1 ratio).

MARCH 2026
2-5

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This page is intentionally left blank.
2-6 Place orks

The Modified Project does not make any changes to the mitigating policies and actions identified in the 2024 Project and the Certified EIR as means to mitigate environmental impacts under CEQA. These policies and actions are fully enforceable at the discretion of the decision -maker through permit conditions, agreements, or other legally binding instruments. These mitigating policies and actions use the imperative "shall," include performance criteria, and are marked with an asterisk (*). This following analysis summarizes the conclusions of the Certified EIR, including the mitigating policies and actions, and then discusses how the Modified Project would meet the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 for preparation of an Addendum.

3.1 AESTHETICS

3.1.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? LTS
Yes
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
NI
Yes
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point).

LTS
Yes
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
LTS
Yes
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant
a), c), and d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vistas, degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings, or create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. All MARCH 2026
3-1

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
potential future development subject to discretionary approval would be required to undergo site and architectural review and design review prior to project approval pursuant to Hollister Municipal Code (HMC) Section 17.24.190 and Section 17.24.240(E), as necessary. Potential future development would also be subject to the general best management practices (BMPs) that require lighting that is context sensitive in style and intensity required under the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), as well as the lighting regulations outlined in Title 17 of the HMC. Future developments making major parking lot improvements or proposing new lighting would still be required to prepare a lighting plan for review by the city as required by the Zoning Ordinance to minimize light trespass and greater overall light levels in the city. Additionally, all potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce aesthetic impacts.

Furthermore, for development in the downtown area, the Downtown Design Guidelines would address site planning, building form, roofs, building facades, projecting facade elements, landscaping, fences and walls, lighting, service areas and mechanical equipment, and business signage. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to scenic vistas, visual character and public views, and light and glare.
b) The Certified EIR screened out this standard from evaluation because the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has not designated any highway within Hollister or the Certified EIR Study Area as a State Scenic Highway. This condition has not changed. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to state scenic highways.

3.1.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

3.2.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. 3-2 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
SU
Yes
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
SU
Yes
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
NI
Yes
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use?
NI
Yes
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use? SU
Yes
Key: NI = no impact; SU = significant and unavoidable
a) and b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would convert qualified Farmlands (Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance) to nonagricultural use and conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or with a Williamson Act contract. Even with implementation of the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.2.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level.

Most of the land within City Limits is classified as Urban and Built -Up Land and no farmland under active Williamson Act contracts are within City Limits. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. With a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, less qualified Farmlands and farmlands under active Williamson Act contracts would be converted to nonagricultural uses. All potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to agricultural resources, including the mitigating General Plan policy and action listed under Section 3.2.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions.

Furthermore, under the Modified Project, the ALPP would be amended to require dedication of eligible agricultural conservation easements at an increased rate of at least two acres of agricultural land for each one acre of agricultural land to be converted (2:1 ratio) for projects that would convert agricultural land to non-agricultural uses. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the MARCH 2026
3-3

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the conversion qualifying Farmlands or conflict with Williamson Act contracts. c) and d) The Certified EIR screened out this standard from evaluation because the HMC does not contain a zoning district for forest land or timberland production, and there are no state or national forest lands in the Certified EIR Study Area. This condition has not changed. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to forest land and timberland. e) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Like the 2024 Project, while the Modified Project would allow development that could result in potentially incompatible urban uses next to farms or ranches, creating circumstances that impair the productivity and profitability of agricultural operation, and could eventually lead farmers to take their land out of production, all potential future development would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts of adjacent land uses on farmland. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the conversion of farmland.

3.2.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Revisions to the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified in the Certified EIR, made as part of the Modified Project, are shown in stri <ctiroug i for deleted text and double underline for new, inserted text.

Open Space and Agriculture (OS) Element
*Policy OS -2.1: Offsets for Loss of Agricultural Land. Require that all new developments that convert agricultural land to urban uses provide for preservation of the same amount of agricultural land in perpetuity.
*Action OS -2.1: Offsets for Agricultural Land Conversion. Require tic creation anc acoption o Create and adopt an agricultural preservation program to address the conversion of land classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance in the City Limits and Sphere of Influence to nonagricultural uses.
3-4 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

3.3 AIR QUALITY

3.3.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
SU
Yes
b) 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? SU
Yes
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? SU
Yes
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant; SU = significant and unavoidable a) and b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would result in the generation of substantial operational (long-term) criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed Monterey Bay Air Resources District's (MBARD's) regional significance threshold for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO). Construction activities under the 2024 Project would generate substantial short-term criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed MBARD's regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB). The 2024 Project would also result in the exposure of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and diesel particulate matter (DPM) to sensitive receptors from industrial land uses and construction activities. Accordingly, the 2024 Project would conflict with MBARD's AQMP; result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard; and expose air quality sensitive receptors to substantial TAC and DPM concentrations from operation and construction activities. Even with implementation of the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.3.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level.

The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. As further detailed in Section 3.16, Transportation, of this Addendum, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per Capita (Residential) and VMT per Employee slightly decreased under the Modified Project compared to the 2024 Project. Therefore, the MARCH 2026
3-5

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
transportation emissions forecast would not increase under the Modified Project. All potential future development would be required to comply with existing MBARD rules and regulations. Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to air quality, including the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.3.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. However, like the 2024 Project, because project -specific details are unknown, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to conflict with the AQMP, cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants, or exposure of substantial TAC and DPM concentrations to sensitive receptors. d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not result in emissions (such as those leading to odors) from non -industrial land uses or construction activities that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. The 2024 Project would not create objectionable odors from operation of new industrial land uses with implementation of mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section

3.3.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development would be required to comply with MBARD Rule 402, which requires abatement of any nuisance generating a verified odor complaint.

Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to air quality, including the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.3.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of odor impacts.

3.3.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Natural Resource and Conservation (NRC) Element
*Policy NRC-3.6: Technical Assessments. Require project applicants to prepare technical assessments evaluating potential project construction and operation phase -related air quality impacts to the City of Hollister for review and approval prior to project approval. Such evaluations shall be prepared in conformance with Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) criteria and methodology in assessing air quality impacts. If air pollutants are found to have the potential to exceed the MBARD-adopted thresholds of significance, ensure mitigation measures, such as those listed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, are incorporated to reduce air pollutant emissions during construction or operational activities. *Policy NRC-3.14: Construction Health Risk Assessment. Require project applicants of discretionary projects on sites greater than one acre, within 1,000 feet of sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, day care facilities, and nursing homes, etc.), as measured from the property line of the project, that utilize off -road equipment of 50 horsepower or more, and that occur for more than 12 months of active construction (i.e., exclusive of interior renovations) to prepare a construction health risk assessment (HRA) in accordance with policies and procedures of the State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD). If the 3-6 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
construction HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds 10 in a million, the appropriate noncancer hazard index exceeds 1.0; or the thresholds as determined by the MBARD, require the project applicant to identify and demonstrate measures, such as those listed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, that can reduce potential cancer and noncancer risks to an acceptable level.
• *Policy NRC-3.15: Operational Health Risk Assessment. Require project applicants of discretionary projects to prepare an operational health risk assessment (HRA) for industrial or warehousing land uses and commercial land uses that would generate substantial diesel truck travel (i.e., 100 diesel trucks or 40 or more trucks with diesel -powered transport refrigeration units per day based on the California Air Resources Board recommendations for siting new sensitive land uses) prior to project approval. The operational HRA shall be prepared in accordance with policies and procedures of the State Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment and the Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD). If the operational HRA shows that the incremental cancer risk exceeds 10 in a million, the appropriate noncancer hazard index exceeds 1.0; or the thresholds as determined by the MBARD, the City shall require the project applicant to identify and demonstrate measures, such as those listed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, that can reduce potential cancer and noncancer risks to an acceptable level.

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

3.4.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
LTS/M
Yes
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
LTS/M
Yes
c) 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?
LTS/M
Yes
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
LTS
Yes
MARCH 2026
3-7

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? LTS
Yes
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
NI
Yes
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation a) through c) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, or state or federally protected wetlands with implementation of mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.4.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential to disturb special -status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and wetlands. All potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the federal and State Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to biological resources, including the mitigating General Plan policies listed under Section 3.4.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to special -status species. d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not 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. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas with few wildlife corridors or locations where wildlife is already acclimated to human activity, thereby reducing the potential to impact wildlife movement. All potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the federal and State Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to biological resources. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, 3-8 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to wildlife movement.
e) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Under the Modified Project, all potential future development would still be required to comply with applicable HMC requirements as well as the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to biological resources. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources.
f) The Certified EIR screened out this standard from evaluation because the Certified EIR Study Area is outside of the area covered by the Merced County Natural Community Conservation Plan. While the San Benito County Conservation Plan was initiated in July 2021, it has yet to become and adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. This condition has not changed. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

3.4.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Revisions to the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified in the Certified EIR, made as part of the Modified Project, are shown in stri <ctirougl for deleted text and double underline for new, inserted text.

Natural Resource and Conservation (NRC) Element
*Policy NRC-1.4: Specialized Surveys for Special -Status Species and Sensitive Natural Communities.

Require that sites with suitable natural habitat, including creek corridors through urbanized areas, be surveyed for special -status species and sensitive natural communities prior to development approval as part of the environmental review process. Such surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and occur prior to development -related vegetation removal. All surveys shall take place during appropriate seasons to determine presence or absence, including nesting or breeding occurrences, with a determination on whether the project site contains suitable habitat for such species and sensitive natural community types. These results would inform the site assessment and environmental review process for proposed developments and other activities that could adversely affect special -status species.
*Policy NRC-1.5: Biological Site Assessment. Require a biological resource assessment for proposed development on sites with natural habitat conditions that may support special -status species, sensitive natural communities, or regulated wetlands and waters. The assessment shall be prepared prior to project approval and conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the presence or absence of any sensitive resources that could be affected by proposed development, shall provide an MARCH 2026
3-9

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
assessment of the potential impacts, and shall define measures for protecting the resource and surrounding buffer habitat, in compliance with City policy and state and federal laws. An assessment shall not be necessary for locations where past and existing development have eliminated natural habitat and the potential for presence of sensitive biological resources and regulated waters. ■ *Policy NRC-1.6: Mitigation of Potential Impacts on Special -Status Species and Sensitive Habitat Areas. Require that potential significant impacts on special -status species, occurrences of sensitive natural communities, or regulated wetlands and waters be minimized through adjustments and controls on the design, construction, and operations of a proposed project prior to project approval.

Where impacts to these sensitive biological habitat areas are unavoidable, appropriate compensatory mitigation shall be required by the City. Such compensatory mitigation shall be developed and implemented in accordance with City policy and any relevant state and federal regulations. These may include on -site set asides, off -site acquisitions (conservation easements, deed restrictions, etc.), and specific restoration efforts that benefit the special -status species and sensitive habitat areas.
• *Policy NRC-1.7: Preconstruction Surveys for the San Joaquin Kit Fox. Require preconstruction surveys for the San Joaquin kit fox prior to project approval, in accordance with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Guidelines for Preconstruction Surveys for the endangered San Joaquin Kkit gox, for new developments in the County -designated kit fox habitat area. Development in the habitat area boundaries shall be assessed an impact fee by the County for every home or acre developed. • *Policy NRC-1.8: California Red -Legged Frog and California Tiger Salamander Site Assessments.

Require site assessments by a qualified biologist to evaluate the potential for proposed projects in identified Critical Habitat areas for the California red -legged frog and/or California tiger salamander to have a negative effect on these species. Such assessments shall be prepared prior to project approval and identify any high -quality habitat for these species and shall be peer reviewed by a second qualified biologist. Protocol surveys may be warranted to confirm presence or absence of these species based on the results of the habitat assessment. Development in areas with identified high -quality occupied habitat shall be avoided. High -quality habit includes sites known to be occupied by the species, breeding habitat, large areas of suitable habitat, and the absence of nearby development.
*Policy NRC-1.9: Surveys and Mitigation for Burrowing Owls. Require project applicants with proposed projects on grazing or fallow agricultural land to conduct a survey for burrowing owls in accordance with the latest guidelines of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife prior to project approval. Project applicants in the Fairview Road/Santa Ana Road area shall be required to develop and implement a mitigation plan to avoid or otherwise compensate for any disturbance to the burrowing owl colony in that area. This plan shall be developed in coordination with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
*Policy NRC-1.10: Preconstruction Surveys for Nesting Birds. Require preconstruction surveys for nesting native birds, to be conducted prior to site disturbance by a qualified biologist, for those projects that would affect on -site oaks or orchards, or which would involve vegetation removal and construction during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31). Tic City Hollister shall allow no construction activities that would result in the disturbance of an active native bird nest (including tree removal) to proceed until after it has been determined by a qualified biologist that the nest has been abandoned.
3-10 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
• *Policy NRC-1.13: Wetland Preservation. Require appropriate public and private wetlands preservation, restoration, and/or rehabilitation through compensatory mitigation in the development process for unavoidable impacts. Continue the City's practice of requiring mitigation for projects that would affect wetlands in conjunction with requirements of state and federal agencies.
• *Policy NRC-1.14: Wetlands Delineation. Require a delineation of jurisdictional waters by a qualified wetland specialist at the outset of the project planning stage of any proposed development that may contain wetlands or other regulated waters. This delineation shall be verified and approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Regional Water Quality Control Board where federally regulated waters are absent prior to project approval.

3.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

3.5.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
LTS/M
Yes
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
LTS/M
Yes
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
LTS
Yes
d) 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
LTS
Yes
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.

LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation MARCH 2026
3-11

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
a), b) and d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, archaeological resource, or tribal cultural resource with implementation of mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.5.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development.

Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential to disturb historical resources, archaeological resources, and tribal cultural resources. All potential future development would be required to comply with HMC Section 15.04.050 for repairs, alterations, and additions necessary for the preservation, rehabilitation, relocation, related construction, change of use, or continued use of a qualified historical building or structure; HMC Section 15.16.090 for Historic Resources Commission staff to review and approve permits for work for or on a designated historic resource; and HMC Section 17.16.030 for the procedure in the event of discovery of a historic resource during construction. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to cultural resources, including the mitigating General Plan policies listed under Section 3.5.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to historical resources.
c) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not disturb any known human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries but recognized that unknown remains could be unearthed. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential to disturb unknown human remains. All potential future development would be required to comply with the procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains mandated by Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e). Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to human remains.

3.5.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Revisions to the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified in the Certified EIR, made as part of the Modified Project, are shown in strikethrough for deleted text and double underline for new, inserted text.
3-12 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Land Use (LU) Element
• *Policy LU-420.1: Historic Structure Preservation, Renovation, and Rehabilitation. Require the preservation, renovation,_ and rehabilitation of historic structures that conform to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Structures and the California Historical Building Code and require project applicants to demonstrate compliance with these standards when proposing new or redevelopment that could affect historic structures in Hollister.
■ *Policy LU-X920.5: Historic Structure Alteration. Prior to approving alteration (including demolition) of historically significant buildings, require the evaluation of alternatives, including structural preservation, relocation, or other mitigation, and demonstrate that financing has been secured for replacement use. Demolition of historically significant buildings shall only be considered after all other options have been thoroughly reviewed and exhausted.

Natural Resource and Conservation (NRC) Element
• *Policy NRC-2.3: Protection and Preservation of Archaeological Resources. Require project applicants to comply with state and federal standards to evaluate and mitigate impacts to tribal resources prior to project approval. Continue to require that project areas found to contain significant archaeological resources be examined by a qualified consulting archaeologist with recommendations for protection and preservation.
*Policy NRC-2.4: Tribal Coordination During Project Construction. Require the developer of a proposed project that could impact a tribal cultural resource to contact an appropriate tribal representative to train construction workers on appropriate avoidance and minimization measures, requirements for confidentiality and culturally appropriate treatment, other applicable regulations; and consequences of violating State laws and regulations prior to construction. *Policy NRC-2.5: Preconstruction Investigations. Require project applicants to prepare preconstruction investigations of potential tribal cultural resources and on -site mitigation for all developments prior to the issuance of building permits.

3.6 ENERGY

3.6.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
LTS
Yes
MARCH 2026
3-13

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) and b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or conflict with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As further detailed in Section 3.16, Transportation, VMT per Capita (Residential) and VMT per Employee slightly decreased under the Modified Project compared to the 2024 Project. Therefore, the transportation energy forecast would not increase under the Modified Project. All potential future development would be required to comply with the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, Renewables Portfolio Standard, and CAFE standards. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce energy impacts. Compliance with these regulations would increase building energy efficiency and vehicle fuel efficiency and reduce building energy demand and transportation -related fuel usage and support the statewide goal of transitioning the electricity grid to renewable sources. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of energy impacts.

3.6.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.
3-14 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

3.7 Geology and Soils

3.7.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.)
LTS/M
Yes
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
LTS/M
Yes
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? LTS/M
Yes
iv) Landslides?
LTS/M
Yes
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? LTS
Yes
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
LTS
Yes
d) 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?
LTS
Yes
e) 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?
LTS
Yes
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation a) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, or seismic -related ground failure with implementation of mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.7.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. The Certified EIR Study Area is mostly flat and the Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not have a significant impact from slope stability resulting in landslides. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development on active fault would be required to comply with HMC Chapter 17.14.030, which requires surface fault investigations. Potential future MARCH 2026
3-15

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
development would also be subject to the seismic design standards of the latest California Building Code (CBC) to reduce impacts of seismic hazards, such as ground shaking and ground failure. Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce geological impacts, including the mitigating General Plan policies listed under Section 3.7.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the risk of loss, injury or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic -related ground failure, or landslides.
b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development would be required to comply with HMC Chapter 15.24, which requires erosion and sediments to be controlled. Potential future development would also be subject to the regulations of the CBC related to construction grading, drainage, and erosion and sediment control, as well as the Construction General Permit (CGP) Water Quality Order 2009-0009-DWQ, which includes the preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to soil erosion. c) and d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not be on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in lateral spreading, liquefaction, or collapse, or be on expansive soil that would create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. The Certified EIR Study Area is mostly flat and does not show a pattern of widespread irreversible permanent lowering of the ground surface. The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not have a significant impact from landslides or subsidence. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development would still be subject to the seismic design standards of the latest CBC to reduce impacts of liquefactions and lateral spreading as well as CBC standards for seismic safety, excavation, foundations, retaining walls, site demolition, and grading activities, including drainage and erosion control. Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce geological impacts. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to unstable or expansive soils. e) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where soils would be incapable of adequately supporting in cases where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to 3-16 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
existing development, where it can be connected to the existing public sanitary sewer system.

Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less of a need to use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. All potential future development requiring septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would still be required to comply with HMC Section 13.04.040 which requires the project applicant to obtain a County permit. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. f) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not destroy a unique paleontological resource or site. The geology and soils in the Certified EIR Study Area are common throughout the city and region and are not considered to be unique. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential to disturb paleontological resources. All potential future development would be required to comply the federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act that limits the collection of vertebrate fossils and other rare and scientifically significant fossils to qualified researchers who have obtained a permit from the appropriate state or federal agency and the Public Resources Code Section 5097 that prohibits the removal of any paleontological site or feature from public lands without the permission of the jurisdictional agency. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to paleontological resources.

3.7.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Revisions to the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified in the Certified EIR, made as part of the Modified Project, are shown in stri <ctirougl for deleted text and double underline for new, inserted text.

Health and Safety (HS) Element
*Policy HS -1.1: Location of Future Development. Permit development only in areas where potential danger to the health, safety, and welfare of the community can be adequately mitigated. This includes prohibiting development that would be subject to severe flood damage or geological hazard because of its location and/or design and that cannot be mitigated to safe levels.

Development shall also be prohibited where emergency services, including fire protection, cannot be provided.
*Policy HS -1.2: Safety Considerations in Development Review. Require project applicants to prepare appropriate studies to assess identified hazards and ensure that impacts are adequately mitigated prior to project approval.

MARCH 2026
3-17

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
• *Policy HS -2.2: Geotechnical and Geologic Review. Require all geologic hazards to be adequately addressed and mitigated prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy through project development. Development proposed within areas of potential geological hazards shall not be endangered by, nor contribute to, the hazardous conditions on the site or on adjoining properties. • *Policy HS -2.3: Engineering Tests for Geologic Conditions. Require engineering tests prior to issuance of building permits for those development projects that may be exposed to impacts associated with expansive soils, so that building foundation footings, utility lines, roadways, and sidewalks can be designed to accept the estimated degree of soil contraction, expansion, and settlement, according to the standards of the Uniform Building Code.

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

3.8.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
LTS
Yes
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) and b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As further detailed in Section 3.16, Transportation, VMT per Capita (Residential) and VMT per Employee slightly decreased under the Modified Project compared to the 2024 Project. Therefore, the transportation emissions forecast would not increase under the Modified Project. Furthermore, under the Modified Project, the CAP will be updated include a community -wide GHG inventory for a more recent year in addition to the 2005 and 2019 inventories.

GHG Emissions forecast and GHG reduction strategies will be revised to reflect the changes to the General Plan land use map. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of GHG emissions impacts.

3.8.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.
3-18 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

3.9.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions for
an Addendum
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
LTS
Yes
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? LTS
Yes
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
LTS
Yes
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
LTS
Yes
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? LTS
Yes
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
LTS
Yes
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? See Section 3.18, Wildfire, for
the discussion of wildfire
related impacts.

Key: LTS = less than significant
a) through c) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, disposal, or accident release of hazardous materials or emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 miles of an existing or proposed school. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Under the Modified Project, potential future development would still be subject to the regulatory programs overseen by Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and San Benito County Health Department. All hazardous materials to be transported must be done so in compliance with United States Department of Transportation regulations. Additionally, development of new schools would still be required to coordinate with DTSC's School Property Evaluation and Cleanup Division to assess, investigate, and clean MARCH 2026
3-19

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
up proposed school sites to ensure that properties are 'free' of contamination or that they have been `cleaned' to a level that protects the students and staff. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce hazards and hazardous materials impacts. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the transport, handling, use, disposal, or accidental release of hazardous materials.
d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project could be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 but would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential to develop on an active hazardous materials site. All potential future development would be required to comply with the regulatory programs overseen by the RWQCB, DTSC, and San Benito County Health Department. Site -specific investigative reports (i.e., Preliminary Endangerment Assessment, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, or Remedial Action Workplan, etc.) for locations with known contamination would still be required to identify, test, and manage soil and groundwater suspected of or known to contain hazardous materials. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce hazards and hazardous materials impacts. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to development on hazardous materials sites. e) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not, for a project located within an airport land use plan, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area.

The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential development projects within the Hollister Municipal Airport Influence Area still must be reviewed by the San Benito County Airport Land Use Commission to ensure consistency with the Airport Compatibility Land Use Plan. Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce airport hazards impacts.

Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to airport safety hazards.
f) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SO. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in 3-20 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. With a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there would be less strain on the Hollister Fire Department (HFD), Hollister Police Department (HPD), San Benito County Fire Department, and San Benito County Sheriff's Department to respond to emergencies. All potential future development would be required to comply with the regulations of the San Benito County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to emergency response. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude impacts related to interference with emergency response. g) The Certified Project EIR evaluated the impacts of wildland fires fully in its Wildfire evaluation.

Therefore, this standard was not discussed in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials Evaluation. See Section 3.18, Wildfire, for evaluation of the wildland fires under the Modified Project.

3.9.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

3.10.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions for
an Addendum
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
LTS
Yes
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? LTS
Yes
MARCH 2026
3-21

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions for
an Addendum
c) 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:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; LTS
Yes
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site; LTS
Yes
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or LTS
Yes
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
LTS
Yes
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
LTS
Yes
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) and c) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise degrade surface or groundwater quality, or alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in erosion or siltation, flooding, exceedance of the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, additional sources of polluted runoff, or altered flood flows. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development that disturbs one or more acres of land would be subject to GCP requirements, which includes the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP to incorporate BMPs to control sediment, erosion, and hazardous materials contamination of runoff during construction and prevent contaminants from reaching receiving water bodies. Additionally, potential future development projects would still need to abide by the requirements of HMC Chapter

15.24, which describes the City's rules and regulations to control land disturbance, erosion and sediment control. In accordance with the requirements of the Phase II Small municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4) permit (Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ), new development and significant redevelopment projects under the Modified Project must still incorporate low -impact development (LID) site design and BMPs to address post -construction stormwater runoff. Regulated projects would be required to submit a Stormwater Control Plan in compliance with HMC Section 17.16.140, the Phase II Small MS4 permit, and the City's MS4 Guidance Document. New development projects would still be required to pay public utility fees, pursuant to HMC Chapter 13, which finances improvements to the municipal storm drain system to accommodate increased flows. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to hydrology and water quality. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of water quality or drainage impacts.
3-22 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
b) and e) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin, or conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Accordingly, the 2040 water supply projected in the City's 2020 Urban Water Management Plan would still be able to meet future water demand and not impact groundwater supply under the Modified Project. All potential future development would be required to adhere to the CGP, the HMC, the Phase II Small MS4 Permit, and the City's MS4 Guidance Document to ensure that surface and groundwater quality are not adversely impacted during construction and operation. Potential future development would still be required to implement the water -efficient requirements specified in the CALGreen, California Plumbing Code, and Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), as well as BMPs and LID measures to improve groundwater recharge. Future projects that meet the criteria under California Water Code Section 10912 would be required to prepare a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) that demonstrates that project water demands would not exceed water supplies. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to hydrology and water quality. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of groundwater impacts.
d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not risk release of pollutants due to project inundation if in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones. The Certified EIR Study Area is approximately 20 miles from the ocean and therefore is not at risk of flooding from a tsunami. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential for development in a flood hazard or dam inundation zone. All potential future development in 100 -year flood zones would be subject to floodplain requirements listed in HMC Chapter

15.20. Dam owners would continue to be required to maintain emergency action plans that include procedures for damage assessment and emergency warnings. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to hydrology and water quality. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the release of pollutants due to project inundation.

3.10.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

MARCH 2026
3-23

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

3.11.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Physically divide an established community?
LTS
Yes
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?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not physically divide an established community.

The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less need to construct physical features or means of access that could cut off development in the SOI from those within City Limits. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to land use and planning. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the physical division of an established community. b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not 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 Modified Project would not result in changes to the development projections of the Certified EIR; therefore, the Modified Project would still comply with the California Housing Element law and fulfill the Regional Housing Needs Allocation requirements. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. However, the proposed SOI under the Modified Project would still require review and approval from the San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to land use and planning, ensuring compliance with the California Housing Element law, San Benito County LAFCO, Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, San Benito County 2035 General Plan, and Hollister Municipal Airport ALUCP. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified 3-24 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

3.11.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

3.12.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? LTS
Yes
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?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) and b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 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 or a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development, where there are no known resources of value. Additionally, with a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there is less potential to impact aggregate resources. While the Modified Project would result in changes to land use designations, it would not change the land use designation of the mining sites (Plant 25, Sandman, San Benito Sand Plant). Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to mineral resources.

Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the loss of important mineral resources.

MARCH 2026
3-25

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

3.12.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.13 NOISE

3.13.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Result in the 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?
SU
Yes
b) Result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
LTS/M
Yes
c) Be 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 and if so expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable a) The Certified EIR found that construction activities associated with development under the 2024 Project could expose sensitive receptors in close proximity to a construction site to excessive noise from construction equipment. Additionally, operational vehicle traffic noise increases would exceed the City's significance thresholds with implementation of the 2024 Project. Even with implementation of the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.13.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level.

The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development would be required to implement construction best management practices throughout the entire active construction period to ensure that construction noise is minimized to the extent feasible. Stationary noise sources would be subject to the regulations of HMC Chapter 8.28.

Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce noise impacts, including the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.13.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions.

However, like the 2024 Project, because project -specific details are unknown, impacts would remain 3-26
Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
significant and unavoidable at the program level. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to increased ambient noise levels in excess of established standards. b) The Certified EIR found that construction and operational activities associated with development under the 2024 Project would not generate excessive short- and long-term vibration levels during project construction and operation with implementation of mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.13.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Where the use of vibration -causing construction equipment would affect nearby sensitive receptors, potential future development would be required to use alternate methods/equipment to ensure that construction vibration is minimized to the extent feasible.

Additionally, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce noise impacts, including the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.13.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions.

Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration and groundborne noise levels. c) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not expose people residing or working within two miles of a private airstrip or airport to excessive noise levels. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. The Hollister Municipal Airport noise contours do not extend much beyond the runway and would not affect nearby noise -sensitive receptors. Potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce airport noise impacts. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to exposure of excessive airport noise levels to people working or residing near the airport.

3.13.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Revisions to the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified in the Certified EIR, made as part of the Modified Project, are shown in stri <etirougl for deleted text and double underline for new, inserted text.

Health and Safety (HS) Element
*Policy HS -9.1: Protect Noise Sensitive Areas from Unacceptable Traffic Noise Levels. Protect the noise environment in existing residential areas by requiring mitigation measures be identified prior to project approval for the operational phase of projects under the following circumstances: (a) the project would cause the day -night average sound level (Ldn) to increase 5 dB(A) where ambient noise is below 60 dB(A); (b) the project would cause the Ldn to increase 3 dB(A) where ambient noise is between 60 dB(A) and 70 dB(A); or (c) the project would cause the Ldn to increase 1.5 dB(A) where ambient noise is 70 dB(A) or greater.

MARCH 2026
3-27

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
• *Action HS -9.1: Review New Development for Potential Noise Impacts. Require review of all development proposals prior to project approval to verify that the proposed development would not increase noise beyond the City's established thresholds and that it would not generate noise that would be incompatible with existing uses in the vicinity of the proposed development. • *Action HS -9.6: Periodic Updates to Noise Ordinance. Require the Noise Ordinance to incorporate the noise -related policies presented in the Hollister General Plan and to develop a procedure for handling noise complaints.
■ *Action HS -9.8: Noise and Vibration Thresholds. Require the adoption of the noise and vibration thresholds applied in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report into the Noise Ordinance. For noise thresholds, this shall include the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) criteria for acceptable levels of construction noise as well as Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and noise receptor.

For vibration thresholds, this shall include FTA criteria for acceptable levels of groundborne vibration during operation of commercial or industrial uses and groundborne vibration for various types of construction equipment. If vibration levels exceed the FTA limits for construction, alternative methods/equipment shall be used.
• *Action HS -9.9: Construction Best Management Practices. Require the adoption of the construction best management practices outlined in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report to be incorporated into the Noise Ordinance to minimize construction noise to the extent feasible.

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

3.14.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
LTS
Yes
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) and b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not include substantial unplanned population growth in an area or displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development under the Modified 3-28
Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to population and housing. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of population and housing impacts.

3.14.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION

3.15.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
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 other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire protection?
LTS
Yes
Police protection?
LTS
Yes
Schools?
LTS
Yes
Parks?
LTS
Yes
Other public facilities?
LTS
Yes
b) 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? LTS
Yes
c) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) through c) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not result in physical impacts associated with the need for or provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance objectives for public services, accelerate physical deterioration of MARCH 2026
3-29

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
recreational facilities, or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. With a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there would be less strain on HFD and HPD to provide fire protection and police services. All potential future development would be required to comply with the CBC and CFC for fire safety standards, as well as HMC requirements for police and fire protection impact fees, public safety tax, site reservations, school site dedications, park development fees, and park and recreation dedication and fees. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to public services and recreation. Future construction of new facilities would continue to be subject to separate project -level approval and CEQA review, if required, in order to identify potential environmental impacts and mitigation measures as needed. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts to public services and recreation.

3.15.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.16 TRANSPORTATION

3.16.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
LTS
Yes
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
SU
Yes
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
LTS
Yes
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant; SU = significant and unavoidable 3-30
Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
a), c), and d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities; substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or result in inadequate emergency access. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. Potential hazards associated with future development projects would continue to be analyzed and evaluated in detail through the project - specific environmental review process or during project application review. Prior to the construction of streets, highways, alleys, traffic signals, and related public improvements, the City of Hollister Public Works Department is to review and approve plans according to construction standards and specifications. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce transportation impacts.

Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts relating to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system; hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses; or inadequate emergency access. b) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would result in a significant VMT impact for VMT per Capita (Residential) and Retail VMT over 50,000 square feet, due to forecasted land use growth through 2040, based on a comparison of the VMT rate increment for VMT to the corresponding average baseline rates for the San Benito County region. Even with implementation of the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified under Section 3.16.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level.

The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. However, to confirm that the land use changes would not result in an increased VMT impact, a qualitative VMT analysis is required. The City of Hollister's VMT impact thresholds and analysis guidelines were used as the basis of the analysis prepared for the Modified Project by Kimley Horn and Associates. VMT is measured by VMT per Capita (Residential) and VMT per Employee for two scenarios: 2045 MTP (No Project), and 2045 Plus Project.

Because Retail land uses typically redistribute shopping trips rather than generate new trips, VMT from Retail was analyzed qualitatively. The threshold for significance for Retail VMT for projects greater than 50,000 square feet is any net increase over existing conditions. Therefore, if a proposed retail development is over 50,000 square feet and results in any additional VMT over the existing condition, the proposed retail project would result in a significant impact. A complete description of the methodology is provided in Kimley Horn and Associates report prepared for the Modified Project.

As shown in Table 2, Vehicle Miles Traveled, the VMT per Capita (Residential) and VMT per Employee only slightly decreased under the Modified Project compared to the 2024 Project. Like the 2024 Project, MARCH 2026
3-31

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
the Modified Project would also exceed the threshold for VMT per Capita (Residential). Similarly, the Modified Project could also exceed the threshold for retail VMT, like the 2024 Project.

Table 2
Scenario
2024 Project
Modified Project
VMT/Capita
(Residential)
VMT/Employee
VMT/Capita
(Residential)
VMT/Employee
City Threshold

18.8 20.6

18.8 20.6
2040 MTP (No Project)

21.5 18.9

21.2 18.8
2040 Plus Project

19.7 15.2

19.6 14.7
Over Threshold?
2040 MTP (No Project)
Yes
No
Yes
No
2040 Plus Project
Yes
No
Yes
No
Vehicle
es Traveled
Sources: Kimley Horn and Associates, 2025.

Potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce transportation impacts, including the mitigating General Plan policies identified under Section 3.16.2, Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions. VMT- reduction approaches should still be accounted for in subsequent VMT evaluations of specific projects as they are proposed within the City of Hollister. However, like the 2024 Project, because project -specific details are unknown, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the program level. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to VMT.

3.16.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Revisions to the mitigating General Plan policies and actions identified in the Certified EIR, made as part of the Modified Project, are shown in stri <etirougl for deleted text and double underline for new, inserted text.

Circulation (C) Element
*Policy C-1.5: Transportation Demand Management. Require new development to reduce single - occupant vehicle usage using Transportation Demand Management strategies prior to project approval.
*Action C-1.1: Performance and Monitoring. Require the monitoring of the City's mode split progress on reducing vehicle miles traveled VMTI and reducing GHG emissions from VMT, as data is available.
3-32 Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
• *Action C-1.2: VMT Mitigation Banking Fee Program. Require the establishment of a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Mitigation Banking Fee Program. This program shall fund the construction of facilities throughout Hollister that support active transportation (cycling and walking) and transit ridership to mitigate VMT impacts from new development.
• *Policy C-4.6: Transportation Demand Management Requirements. Require new or existing developments that meet specific size, capacity, and/or context conditions to implement Transportation Demand Management strategies and other single -occupancy vehicle reduction methodologies. Require new developments to comply with tiered trip reduction and VMT reduction targets and monitoring that are consistent with the targets of the City's VMT CEQA thresholds prior to project approval.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems

3.17.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
Would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
LTS
Yes
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
LTS
Yes
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
LTS
Yes
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?
LTS
Yes
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) through e) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded utilities facilities, would have sufficient water supplies, would not result in the determination by the wastewater treatment provider that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the 2024 Project, would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards or MARCH 2026
3-33

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
the capacity of local infrastructure, and would comply with federal, state, and local solid waste regulations. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development would be required to implement the water -efficient requirements specified in the CALGreen, California Plumbing Code, and MWELO and those that meet the criteria under California Water Code Section 10912 would be required to prepare a WSA that demonstrates that project water demands would not exceed water supplies. Potential future development would still be subject to CGP requirements as applicable, which includes the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP to incorporate BMPs to control sediment and non-stormwater discharges. In accordance with the requirements of the Phase II Small MS4 permit, new development and significant redevelopment projects under the Modified Project must still incorporate BMPs to address post -construction stormwater runoff as appropriate. Future development would also need to comply with the recycling requirements of CALGreen and AB 341, as well as energy demand reduction requirements of the California Energy Code, CALGreen and Appliance Efficiency Regulations. All potential future development would be required to pay fees for water services, wastewater collection, sewer connection, storm drainage impact pursuant to HMC Chapter 13. Furthermore, potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to utilities and service systems. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities.

3.17.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.

3.18 Wildfire

3.18.1 Impacts Associated with the Modified Project
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (FHSZ), would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
LTS
Yes
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?
LTS
Yes
3-34
Place orks

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (FHSZ), would the project:

Level of
Impact in
Certified EIR
Meets the
Conditions
for an
Addendum
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?
LTS
Yes
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? LTS
Yes
Key: LTS = less than significant
a) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. Under the Modified Project, potential future development within the City Limits is still largely expected to occur in existing urban areas, primarily in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized or in close proximity to existing development. With a smaller SOI under the Modified Project, there would be less strain on the HFD, HPD, San Benito County Fire Department, and San Benito County Sheriff's Department to respond to emergencies. All potential future development in the Wildland Urban Interface or Very High FHSZs would be required to comply with the State Responsibility Area (SRA) and Very High FHSZ Fire Safe Regulations, Public Resources Code Section 4291, CBC, CFC, and HMC, which have requirements for the length of single -access roads, widths of roadways, and vegetation fuel management around roadways.

Potential future development would be required to comply with the regulations of the San Benito County EOP. Furthermore, all potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce impacts to emergency response. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude impacts related to interference with emergency response.
b) through d) The Certified EIR found that the 2024 Project would not expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire, exacerbate fire risk from installation or maintenance of infrastructure, or expose people or structures to significant risks as a result of runoff, postfire slope instability, or drainage changes. The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. All potential future development would be required to comply with the 2019 Strategic Fire Plan for California, 2021 California Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan, Unit Strategic Fire Plan for San Benito -Monterey, San Benito County CWPP, and San Benito County MJHMP to reduce wildfire hazards and coordinate response to these hazards on a statewide and regional scale. Potential future development would be required to comply with SRA and Very High FHSZ MARCH 2026
3-35

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

3. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Fire Safe Regulations, Public Resources Code Section 4291, CBC, CFC, California Public Utilities Commission, and HMC regulations to reduce fire hazard risks from slope, prevailing winds, vegetation, infrastructure installation, runoff, and drainage. Furthermore, all potential future development under the Modified Project would still be required to comply with the General Plan goals, policies, and actions to reduce wildfire impacts. Therefore, compared to the 2024 Project analyzed in the Certified EIR, the Modified Project would not result in a new impact or a substantial increase in the magnitude of impacts related to relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities.

3.18.2 Mitigating General Plan Policies and Actions
Impacts were found to be less than significant and no mitigating General Plan policies or actions were required.
3-36 Place orks

As summarized below, and for the reasons described in Section 3, Environmental Analysis, of this Addendum, the City of Hollister has concluded that the Modified Project meets the conditions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 and that therefore an Addendum to the Certified EIR is the appropriate CEQA document to address the Modified Project.

As previously discussed, under CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum to an EIR or MND may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or MND have occurred.

The following restates the standards set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 as they relate to the Modified Project.

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

The Modified Project would result in a reduction of the 2024 Project's proposed SOI, as well as associated land use changes to accommodate the 2024 Project's development projections. As such, the Addendum Study Area would be smaller than the extent of the Certified EIR Study Area. While the Modified Project also involves changes to land use designations analyzed in the Certified EIR, such changes would not result in changes to the development projections of the Certified EIR.

Consequently, there are no substantial changes proposed that will require major revisions of the Certified EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

2. No substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

The Modified Project would not result in substantial changes in physical circumstances that would cause a new significant impact or substantially increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact, and there have been no other changes in the circumstances that meet this criterion. There have been no changes in the environmental conditions in the Certified EIR Study Area that were not contemplated and analyzed in the Certified EIR and that would result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts in association with implementation of the Modified Project.

MARCH 2026
4-1

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

4. FINDINGS

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

A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

There is no new information of substantial importance (which was not known or could not have been known at the time of the adoption of the Hollister 2040 General Plan, CAP, and ALPP in December 2024) that identifies a new significant impact; a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact; mitigation measures or alternatives previously found infeasible that would now be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the General Plan; or mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified EIR and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment.
4-2 Place orks

LEAD AGENCY
Eva Kelly, Hollister Planning Manager

PLACEWORKS
Terri McCracken, Principal, Principal -in -Charge
Vivian Kha, Associate II, Project Manager

KIMLEY HORN
Frederik Venter, Principal
Mehul Champaneri, Project Manager
MARCH 2026
5-1

HOLLISTER 2040 GENERAL PLAN, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND

AGRICULTURAL LAND PRESERVATION PROGRAM EIR ADDENDUM

CITY OF HOLLISTER

5. LIST OF PREPARERS
This page is intentionally left blank.
5-2 Place orks

E
DATE April 17, 2026
TO City of Hollister City Council
FROM David Early and Carey Stone, PlaceWorks
SUBJECT Overview of Draft General Plan, Draft Climate Action Plan, and Draft Environmental Impact Report Addendum
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an overview of the Draft General Plan, Draft Climate Action Plan (CAP), and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Addendum for consideration at the April 20, 2026 City council meeting. The draft documents are available for review at:
https://hollister2040.org/
This memorandum includes the following components:

Overview of the process to create the draft plans.

Summary of the Revised General Plan.

Summary of the Revised CAP.

Overview of community engagement process.

Summary of community Input on the Revised Draft Plans.

Overview of the Draft Environmental Impact Report Addendum.

Overview of Planning Commission Recommendation on the Draft Plans Next Steps.

UPDATE ON DRAFT GENERAL PLAN PROCESS
As a brief reminder, the process to update the General Plan included the phases discussed below:

Existing Conditions: Researching and documenting baseline environmental conditions in Hollister and preparing a series of reports available on https://hollister2040.org/documents-past-meeting- materials/.

Vision and Guiding Principles: Establishing a communitywide vision and supporting guiding principles. The General Plan Vision describes the future of Hollister as the community would like it to be in 2040. The Vision and Guiding Principles guided the development of the goals, policies, and actions and land use changes.

Policy Development: Developing policy options for key issues identified through input given at the General Plan visioning workshops held in Summer 2020 and the three GPAC meetings held in Fall 2020. On June 22, 2021, the City Council provided final policy direction for the following topics:

Parks » Sensitive Habitats
New School Funding
Farmland Mitigation
Heritage Trees
Economic Development
2040 Bancroft Way Suite 4O.)
ley, California 94/U)4
510,84.8,381 i
PlaceWorks.cOrn

Retail Leakage
Job Creation
Industrial Uses
Tourism
Airport
Complete Streets and Safe Routes to
School
Level of Service
Roundabouts
Growth Management
Special Planning Areas
Residential Land Use Designations
Inclusionary Housing
Historic and Cultural Resources
Coordination with Local Tribes
Environmental Justice
Arts and Culture
Climate Change, Sustainability, and Natural
Hazards
2023 Draft General Plan. On April 4, 2023, the City published the Draft General Plan, Draft CAP, and Draft Agricultural Preservation Program for public review and comment. The Draft General Plan carries forward the majority of the existing General Plan goals, policies and actions along with the policy direction developed through the prior phases and City staff recommended updates all informed by feedback collected during community participation processes.

September 11, 2023 City Council Direction. On September 11,2023, the City Council directed staff to revise the Draft General Plan to:
o Expand the Sphere of Influence.
o Include a total of five Specific Plan areas.
o Update the North Gateway Commercial designation to allow residential uses. o Add an action in the Arts Element to prepare a study for a potential public art fee. o Make targeted land use changes to sites on Buena Vista Road, Chappell Road/Santa Ana Road, Glenmore Drive, and in the Meridian Road Special Planning Area. o Update the agricultural land preservation requirement from preserving two acres of ag land for every acre disturbed to a 1:1 ratio.
2024 Revised General Plan. The City published the Revised General Plan on July 3, 2024 that incorporated Council direction from the September 11, 2023 meeting.

October 24, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting. At the October 24, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Draft 2024 Revised General Plan and Draft Climate Action Plan and certification of the Revised Draft EIR.

December 3, 2024 City Council Meeting. At the December 3, 2024 City Council meeting, the City Council adopted the 2024 draft of General Plan 2040, Climate Action Plan and Agricultural Preservation Program and certified the Final Environmental Impact Report.

March 3, 2025 City Council Meeting. At the March 3, 2025 City Council meeting, the City Council repealed the resolution that adopted the 2024 General Plan (Resolution Number 2024-01) in response to a referendum petition that would have put the repeal of the General Plan resolution on the ballot for an upcoming election.

April 2026 l Page 2

April 21, 2025 City Council Meeting. Following the repeal of the 2040 General Plan on March 3, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing study session to provide further direction on moving forward with an update to the 2005 General Plan. At this meeting, the City Council provided direction to revise the previously adopted 2040 General Plan to align with direction from the 2023 Public Review Draft General Plan.
2026 Draft General Plan. The City published the Draft General Plan on January 16, 2026 that incorporated Council direction from the April 21, 2025 meeting.

Public Review and Adoption: Public review and Council consideration of final documents are the remaining tasks of the General Plan update. This phase includes approximately four months of public review of the Revised Draft General Plan and Revised Draft CAP. In addition, City Council and Planning Commission hearings will be held to consider adoption of the Revised Draft Plans. See "Next Steps" below for more detail.

SUMMARY OF THE REVISED GENERAL PLAN
The Revised General Plan includes an introductory chapter and vision chapter, as well as an individual chapter for each of the 10 General Plan elements that establish goals, policies, and actions for implementing the General Plan. The 10 elements include the eight -mandated topics required by California Government Code Section 65302 as well as two additional topics of particular interest to Hollister. The 2026 Draft General Plan includes the following elements:

Land Use and Community Design Element. This element establishes the type, location, density and intensity of development activity in Hollister. It describes the goals and policies that will guide Hollister's future growth patterns and development standards.

Circulation Element. This element describes the services, facilities, and capital improvements needed to facilitate vehicle, pedestrian, transit, bicycle, and emergency circulation.

Community Services and Facilities Element. This element describes the community facilities that are necessary in the provision of Hollister's essential public services.

Economic Development Element. This is a new element as part of this update to the General Plan and establishes policy guidance to support and maintain an economically viable community.

Natural Resources and Conservation Element. This element outlines City policy for the preservation of natural resources and provision of outdoor recreation opportunities.

Health and Safety Element. This element covers two of the 8 State -mandated elements: safety and noise. The safety section of this element identifies and assesses hazards in the community and establishes the goals, policies, and actions necessary to ensure community safety and protection from noise.

Open Space and Agriculture Element. This element outlines City policy for the preservation of open space and agricultural areas.

April 2026 I Page 3

Housing Element. This element identifies the housing needs of the city for all income levels and strategies and policies for providing housing to meet those needs. Since the Housing Element is updated more frequently than the other elements, as required by State law, it exists as its own document outside of the proposed 2040 General Plan and is therefore not part of the proposed project. The current Housing Element addresses housing needs in Hollister for the 2015 to 2023 housing cycle and is currently being updated by the City through a separate process.

Arts and Culture Element. This is a new element as part of this update to the General Plan and outlines City policy for creating a lively arts scene that encourages self-expression and ensures the representation of Hollister's arts and cultural communities.

Environmental Justice Element. This is a new element as part of this update to the General Plan and identifies impacted communities and sets policy direction to minimize effects of environmental hazards on these communities, with an emphasis on pollution exposure, food access, and safe and sanitary homes.

Proposed Sphere of Influence Change
The Hollister Sphere of Influence (SOI) is defined and determined by San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), although the City can propose the area that it would like its SOI to include. Per the direction of the City Council, the City is proposing changes to the currently approved SOI as shown on Figure 1.

The current SOI is roughly 1,817 acres or about 2.8 square miles. The proposed SOI expansion would add about 289 acres (about 0.5 square miles) to increase the SOI to approximately 2,106 acres and 3.2 square miles. The proposed SOI would extend further south of the existing SOI, but would remain contiguous with the existing SOI border to the east and west. The proposed SOI would expand to Union Road between San Benito Street and Southside Road and to Enterprise Road between Southside Road and SR 25. As described in the Union Road Special Planning Area, development in this expansion area would be subject to specific guidelines for development, including the creation of a Specific Plan for proposed projects within the Union Road Special Planning Area.

Proposed Land Use Changes
The Revised General Plan land use map, as shown in Figure 2, carries forward the majority of existing designations. However, the land use map does propose targeted changes. A summary of the major land use changes as directed by the City Council include:
n Designate sufficient land as High Density Residential to utilize the Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c)(3)(B) default density standard provision which allows jurisdictions to identify Housing Element sites for lower income households without additional analysis such as market demand, financial feasibility, or information based on development project experience within a zone or zones that provide housing for lower -income households. The California Department of Housing and Community Development, also referred to as HCD classifies April 2026 I Page 4

Hollister as Metropolitan jurisdiction which requires a default density standard of a minimum of 30 dwelling units/acre.'
n Apply Medium Density Residential and High Density Residential in the Meridian Street Extension Special Planning Area. Also apply the General Commercial designation in this area to improve access to commercial services on the east side of the city. uuuuuu For areas outside the SOI, the City Council directed staff to apply the Agricultural designation.

For already urbanized areas outside the SOI, the City Council directed staff to apply the land use designation that matched the existing use.

As part of the 2026 update to the General Plan, City staff also recommends that the parcels immediately surrounding the Hollister Municipal Airport be designated as Airport Support. The Airport Support land use designation and associated Zoning District is generally an industrial zoning district that allows for airport -related business which might otherwise not be feasible in the Industrial designation. The Airport Support designation would facilitate the Hollister Municipal Airport's unique through -the -fence opportunities (airplane manufacture/repair, flight schools, etc.). Airport Support also allows standard M1 and IBP land uses as well for properties that want to retain industrial land uses.

At the March 26, 2026 Planning Commission meeting, a public comment was made requesting that additional street labels be added to the Draft General Plan Land Use map and for the boundaries on the map to be more clearly distinguished. Staff recommends that the Council consider including a 24x36 General Plan Land Use map as an appendix to the General Plan that includes all street labels. See Attachment 9 for an example map.

In addition, the Draft General Plan proposes residential density changes compared to the 2005 General Plan as summarized in Table 1. A summary of these changes includes:
n As discussed, the 2026 Draft General Plan increases the High Density Residential designation minimum density as directed by the City Council to meet the HCD default density standard. City staff also suggests this same minimum density be applied to the Mixed -Use, Downtown Mixed Use, and West Gateway Commercial and Mixed Use designations for the same reason. uuuuuu As directed by the City Council, the 2026 Draft General Plan increases the upper range of the Downtown Mixed Use density to 125 du/ac because the small parcels in the Downtown limit what can actually be built. Raising the maximum residential density to 125 du/ac per acre could potentially encourage developers to add residential components to their mixed -use projects. n To better align with the High Density Residential density range, the 2026 Draft General Plan changes the Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential designation density ranges as shown in Table 1.
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-element- memos/docs/defaultdensity2020censusupdate.pdf
April 2026 l Page 5

uuuuuu The 2026 Draft General Plan also modifies the Medium Density Residential designation to preclude single family residential uses as an allowed use to increase the diversity of housing options in Hollister.
uuuuuu As directed by the City Council, the 2026 Draft General Plan allows residential uses in the North Gateway Commercial designation with a density range of 30 to 65 du/ac. uuuuuu As directed by the City Council, the 2026 Draft General Plan measures all densities based on gross acres instead of net acres.

TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION UPDATES Land Use Designation
Residential Estate
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Mixed -Use Commercial and Residential
Downtown Commercial and Mixed -Use
West Gateway Commercial and Mixed -
Use
North Gateway Commercial
Home Office
Existing GPLU Density
1 du/5 ac
1 to 8 du/ac
8 to 12 du/ac
12 to 35 du/ac
25 to 40 du/ac
25 to 45 du/ac
20 to 35 du/ac
n/a
8 to 12 du/ac
Draft GPLU Density

0.2 to 1 du /ac
6 to 10 du/ac
11 to 29 du/ac
30 to 65 du/ac
30 to 65 du/ac
30 to 125 du/ac
30 to 65 du/ac
30 to 65 du/ac
11 to 29 du/ac

SUMMARY OF THE REVISED CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
The Revised Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a strategic plan that assesses and reduces Hollister's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, consistent with State targets and directions. It identifies Hollister's current and projected future sources of GHG emissions, including electricity and natural gas use, vehicle travel, solid waste generation, and other activities. The CAP also includes a discussion of how climate change may affect Hollister by increasing the frequency and severity of flooding, drought, extreme heat, regional wildfires, and other natural hazards.

Like the previous draft CAP, the Revised CAP contains a comprehensive set of strategies that reduces these emissions 82 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2045. Key strategies in the CAP include:

Encouraging community members to replace natural gas appliances with electric models.

Reducing vehicle travel through improved access to local and regional transit systems.

Increasing Hollister's electric vehicle adoption rate.

Transitioning away from diesel -powered construction and landscaping equipment.

Decreasing the amount of waste sent to landfills.

When the 2026 General Plan was revised, the CAP was revised to reflect the new allowed land use pattern.

April 2026 I Page 6

FIGURE 1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Planning Area
Urban Service Area
Existing Sphere of Influence
Proposed Sphere of Influence Expansion
City Limit
Parks
Source: ESRI, 2020; PlaceWorks, 2025; San Benito County, 2020; USGS, 2019 April 2026 l Page 7

FIGURE 2 DRAFT GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP
San Justo
Reservoir
© Planning Area
Q Urban Service Area
Existing Sphere of Influence
Proposed Sphere of Influence Expansion
© City Limit
GPLU 2040 Designations
Residential Estate
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
'%'I Mixed Use
Ikai Downtown Commercial & Mixed Use
Home Office
West Gateway
North Gateway Commercial
General Commercial
Industrial
Airport
Airport Support
Public
Open Space
Agriculture
Hollister Research Campus Study Area
0 0.3 1 1.5
Miles
Source: ESRI, 2020; PlaceWorks, 2025; San Benito County, 2020; USGS, 2019 April 20261 Page 8

OVERVIEW OF COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
The Draft General Plan and Draft CAP were developed through a public process, consisting of issue exploration, visioning, and policy development as described above. A General Plan Advisory Committee provided overall direction, with the assistance of citizen representatives who worked closely with the consultant team and City staff to guide the public process for updating the plan.

Table 2 summarizes the outreach events and Table 3 summarizes the meetings undertaken through March 2025. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which began in early 2020, the City collected community input primarily through virtual workshops and online activities. Although most of the workshops were virtual, they still allowed for dialogue and small group participation so community members could share ideas and hear feedback from their neighbors.

The public input received from the workshops, online activities, survey, and General Plan Advisory Committee meetings helped inform the development of the Draft Plans. The Revised Plans will be reviewed in public discussion and finalized based on Council direction which will be provided on April 20, 2026.

TABLE 2
Workshops
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
Online Activities
1 SUMMARY OF OUTREACH EVENTS
Meeting Date
Saturday, June 27, 2020
Tuesday, June 30, 2020
Wednesday, July 8, 2020
Thursday, July 9, 2020
Tuesday, March 9, 2021
Wednesday, March 10, 2021
Thursday, May 6, 2021
2 Source: PlaceWorks, 2024.

Wednesday, May 17, 2023
Thursday, May 18, 2023
Tuesday, July 16, 2024
Summer 2020
Spring 2021
Topic
Visioning Workshop
Visioning Workshop
Visioning Workshop
Visioning Workshop
Policy Options Workshop
Policy Options Workshop
Spanish Language Workshop
Draft General Plan, Draft CAP , and Draft
Agricultural Preservation Program- Farmers
Market Pop-up
Draft General Plan and CAP - Virtual Workshop
Revised Draft EIR Public Meeting
Visioning Online Engagement
Policy Options Online Engagement
# of Participants
12 18
15 20
16 20
45 71
15 5
47 8
April 20261 Page 9

TABLE 3
GPAC Meetings
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8

SUMMARY OF MEETINGS
Meeting Date
Thursday, June 4, 2020
Tuesday, October 6, 2020
Tuesday, November 17, 2020
Tuesday, March 23, 2021
Tuesday, March 30, 2021
Tuesday, April 6, 2021
Tuesday, April 13, 2021
Tuesday, April 27, 2021
Planning Commission Meetings
1 Thursday, April 22, 2021
2 Monday, May 24, 2021
3 4
City Council Meetings
1 2
3 4
5 Thursday, August 10, 2023
Thursday, October 23, 2024
Monday, April 6, 2020
Monday, March 1, 2021
Tuesday, June 22, 2021
Tuesday, January 18, 2022
Monday, September 11, 2023
6 Monday, December 3, 2024
7 8
Monday, March 3, 2025
Monday, April 21, 2025
Topic
General Plan Kick-off
Visioning
Existing Conditions
Policy Options
Policy Options
Policy Options
Policy Options
Policy Options
EIR Scoping Meeting
Draft Vision Statement and Policy Options
Draft General Plan, Draft CAP, Draft Agricultural
Preservation Program, and Draft EIR
Revised General Plan, CAP, Agricultural
Preservation Program and FEIR
GPAC Formation
Project Update
Draft Vision Statement and Policy Options
Project Update
Draft General Plan, Draft CAP, Draft Agricultural
Preservation Program, and Draft EIR
Revised General Plan, CAP, Agricultural
Preservation Program and FEIR
Repeal of Revised General Plan
Direction on General Plan Update
Source: PlaceWorks, 2026.

COMMUNITY INPUT ON THE REVISED PLANS
This section includes a summary of the community feedback collected on the 2026 Draft General Plan from January 2026 through April 8, 2026 via emails sent to City staff and public comment received at the March 26, 2026 Planning Commission meeting:

Revised Draft General Plan 2040
April 2026 I Page 10

o Change designation at the northwest corner of San Benito Street and Union Road from Medium Density Residential to either Commercial or Mixed -Use. Reduce diversity, equity, and inclusion themes in the Draft General Plan Vision. o Revise Policy NRC-3.8 to replace the requirement for "zero -emissions operations" with measures that can be controlled by the property owner.
o Revise Policy LU-5.5 which requires regional distribution centers to be located at least 1,000 feet away from sensitive receptors (housing, schools, day care centers, and health facilities) and replace it with enforceable performance standards. o Change the designation of APNs 56-250-005 & 028 (151 & 191 Hillcrest — the existing concrete plant) from Mixed Use to Industrial.
o Revise Policy LU-14.1 to allow development in Union Road without requiring the development of a Specific Plan first.

Do not require residential uses as part of the West Gateway and Downtown Mixed Use General Plan land use designation.
o Within the West Gateway area, designate APN 052-090-045 as General Commercial and do not require housing at this parcel.
o Within the West Gateway area, allow for greater development flexibility:
■ Do not require ground floor commercial uses at the at the intersections of Graf Road/Fourth Street, Rajkovich Way/Fourth Street, and Westside Boulevard/Fourth Street per Policy LU-8.1.
• Do not require three-story buildings at locations fronting Fourth Street as specified in Policy LU-8.2.
■ Do not require parking to be at the rear of buildings per Policy LU-8.7. o Reduce High Density Residential and the mixed -use minimum residential densities of 30 dwelling units per acre to 20 dwelling units per acre; the market will not support densities of 30 dwelling units per acre.
o Allow sewer service to properties outside the Sphere of Influence; either amend or remove Policy LU 1.5 and Policy CSF-2.10.
■ Policy LU-1.5 Development Projects Outside of the City. The City shall not accept an application for any projects (subdivision, grading, development, etc.) for any land that has not been annexed into the City Limits. ■ Policy CSF-2.10 Water and Sewer Connections in City Limits. Require all development that will use City water and wastewater services to be in the City Limits, with the exception of a public health or safety threat, in accordance with State law.
o Improve the legibility of the boundaries on the General Plan land use map. o Change the designation of the High Density Residential parcels located along San Benito Street and River Parkway to Medium Density Residential. o Ensure the proper and safe operation of water and wastewater service in the City.

April 2026 I Page 11

o Policy LU-1.5 states that the City shall not accept an application for any projects (subdivision, grading, development, etc.) for any land that has not been annexed into the City Limits. This policy conflicts Government Code Section 66454 which permits the filing of a tentative map for parcels not yet annexed, provided those parcels are adjacent to the city.

In addition, the San Benito High School District commented that it plans to build a second high school within the Buena Vista Special Planning Area and that it seeks to work with the City in the future to change land use policies on around its proposed site. However, the District did not ask for changes to the Draft General Plan at this time.

No comments have been received regarding the Revised Draft Climate Action Plan.

Attachment 7 includes public comments received as of April 8, 2026.

OVERVIEW OF THE ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN 2040 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT
On December 3, 2024, the City Council certified the Hollister 2040 General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and Agricultural Lands Preservation Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2021040277 and approved the Hollister 2040 General Plan, Climate Action Plan (CAP), and Agricultural Lands Preservation Program (ALPP) Project. However, subsequent to the EIR certification, the City Council repealed the 2024 General Plan and directed staff to revert to the 2023 Draft General Plan.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Sections 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Sections 15000 et. seq.) recognize that between the date an environmental document is completed and the date the project is fully implemented, one or more of the following changes may occur: 1) the project may change; 2) the environmental setting in which the project is located may change; 3) laws, regulations, or policies may change in ways that impact the environment; and/or 4) previously unknown information can arise. If such changes occur, CEQA requires the lead agency to evaluate these changes to determine whether or not they affect the conclusions in the environmental document. Depending on the circumstances, this evaluation can lead to a determination that a subsequent EIR, a supplemental EIR or an EIR Addendum is required.

The City prepared an Addendum to the Certified EIR (Attachment 5) because evaluation of the 2026 Draft General Plan determined that none of the circumstances requiring a subsequent or supplemental EIR are applicable. Specifically, the 2026 Draft General Plan would not result in impacts that differ from the 2024 Draft General Plan, it would not trigger the need for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162(a) and 15163(a), and it would not change the assumptions made under the Certified EIR.

April 2026 I Page 12

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON THE DRAFT PLANS
At the March 26, 2026 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the General Plan and Climate Action Plan with these modifications:

Grandfather in the requests of existing development applications.

Allow variances to applications who cannot meet the 30 dwelling unit per acre minimum density requirements for High Density Residential and mixed use designations.

NEXT STEPS
If the Council adopts the General Plan and Climate Action Plan at its April 20, 2026 meeting, PlaceWorks will then create a final version of the adopted documents, and the project will be completed. City staff will then commence steps to implement the Plan.

April 2026 I Page 13

RE: Hollister General Plan 2040 Update — Request to Redesignate Property at San Benito Street & Union Road from Medium -Density Residential to Commercial or Mixed -Use City of Hollister
Planning Division / General Plan Update Team
Hollister, CA
Dear Planning Commission and City Staff,
My name is Michael Brigantino. I am submitting comments regarding the Draft Hollister 2040 General Plan land use designation for our property located at the corner of San Benito Street and Union Road (currently in the County and zoned C-2 Neighborhood Commercial). Please see maps below for reference.

Under the Draft General Plan, the property is within the City's Sphere of Influence and designated Medium -Density Residential (MDR). We respectfully request that the City redesignate this site to either Commercial or Mixed -Use.

Why this change is appropriate

1. Consistency with existing zoning and intended use
This property is currently zoned C-2 Commercial, and we purchased it as a commercial property. Redesignating it to MDR creates unnecessary inconsistency between County and City planning and removes reasonable commercial potential that exists today.

2. Better land use fit for a major intersection and arterial corridor This site is directly adjacent to the newly constructed Union Road bridge and roadway improvements and functions as a highly visible gateway corner. This location is better suited for commercial or mixed -use uses that serve the surrounding area and reduce land use conflicts at a high -traffic intersection.

3. Supports the City's goals for the Union Road area
The Draft General Plan states the Union Road area should include a mix of uses, including job -generating uses. A commercial or mixed -use designation at this corner supports that objective.

4. Residential compatibility concerns
Medium -density residential is not ideal at this location due to traffic impacts, noise, access/driveway conflicts, and overall compatibility with an arterial roadway environment.

5. Fault zone considerations
Because the site is within a known fault zone, commercial or mixed -use provides more flexibility for site design and building placement than MDR.

Request
For these reasons, we respectfully request that the City revise the Draft General Plan designation for the corner of San Benito Street & Union Road from Medium -Density Residential to either:
• Commercial, or
• Mixed -Use (Commercial + Residential)
Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Michael Brigantino

SUBJECT: Public Comment on Policy NRC-3.8 — Feasibility and Enforceability of Zero -Emissions Requirement for Commercial/Industrial Projects Over 10,000 SF To the City of Hollister 2040 General Plan Update Team and Planning Commission, My name is Michael Brigantino. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Public Review Draft of the Hollister 2040 General Plan (January 2026).

I support the City's goals of improving air quality and reducing emissions while also encouraging job growth and economic development. However, Policy NRC-3.8, as currently written, risks making commercial, industrial, and logistics development economically infeasible and difficult to enforce by requiring outcomes that exceed what a property owner or developer can reasonably control.

Policy NRC-3.8 requires new or expanded commercial and industrial projects exceeding 10,000 square feet to be "zero -emissions operations," including the facilities themselves and the associated fleets. In practice, this is not realistic or enforceable for most projects because vehicle fleets are typically owned and operated by third -party tenants, logistics providers, vendors, contractors, and delivery companies —not the property owner or the initial project applicant. As a result, the policy creates an operational mandate that depends on future tenant behavior and business decisions that the applicant cannot guarantee at the time of entitlement.

A General Plan policy should be written to require objective, measurable, and enforceable conditions within the applicant's control, such as site design, infrastructure, circulation planning, and on -site operational standards that reduce emissions. In contrast, requiring "zero - emissions operations" and compliance by "associated fleets" creates an outcome -based mandate that is difficult to verify, difficult to enforce over time, and likely to introduce uncertainty for both applicants and City staff during project review.

Additionally, California already has statewide programs and evolving regulatory frameworks intended to reduce emissions from warehouse, industrial, and logistics operations. These statewide efforts recognize that electrification and fleet transitions depend on real -world constraints, including utility capacity and infrastructure timing —factors that are often outside the applicant's control. It is premature for Hollister to impose a local "zero -emissions operations" mandate that goes beyond what can reasonably be ensured at the entitlement stage, especially where compliance depends on third -party fleet ownership and future operational decisions.

Just as importantly, Hollister must consider competitiveness and feasibility. If Hollister adopts local requirements that exceed practical statewide implementation timelines or go beyond what applicants can control, industrial and commercial investment will predictably shift to other jurisdictions with clearer, achievable, and enforceable standards. That would mean fewer job -

generating projects, reduced economic opportunity, and lost tax base —despite the General Plan's stated goals to support employment growth.

Clear Recommendation (Requested Revision to Policy NRC-3.8):

I respectfully recommend revising Policy NRC-3.8 to replace the requirement for "zero - emissions operations" with an enforceable, applicant -controlled approach focused on electrification readiness and objective on -site emission -reduction measures, such as:

1. Electrification Readiness (Infrastructure -Based Compliance) Require projects to be designed as "electrification -ready," including electrical capacity planning, conduit installation, panel capacity, transformer space, and design provisions to support future zero -emission charging and equipment as technology and grid capacity continue to scale.

2. Site Design Measures That Reduce Emissions Immediately Require objective project design and circulation standards that reduce emissions and protect sensitive receptors, including adequate on -site truck queuing capacity, circulation design that prevents off -site stacking, operational anti -idling measures, and plug-in capable loading docks where feasible.

3. Phased Compliance Tied to State Timelines and Utility Capacity Tie any future operational requirements to statewide implementation schedules and verified utility capacity, rather than imposing immediate local operational mandates that depend on factors outside the applicant's control.

As currently written, Policy NRC-3.8 would function as a de facto barrier to industrial and and commercial development in Hollister, not because projects cannot reduce emissions, but because the policy requires guaranteed operational outcomes that are not within the applicant's control. Revising NRC-3.8 to focus on electrification readiness and enforceable project design standards would achieve meaningful air quality benefits while maintaining feasibility, enforceability, and economic competitiveness.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Michael Brigantino

COMMENT — Policy LU-5.5 (Regional Distribution Center Buffer Requirement —1,000 Feet) To the City of Hollister General Plan Update Team and Planning Commission, My name is Michael Brigantino. I am submitting comments regarding Policy LU-5.5, which requires regional distribution centers to be located at least 1,000 feet away from sensitive receptors (housing, schools, day care centers, and health facilities).

I support the goal of improving compatibility between industrial uses and nearby residents.

However, a blanket 1,000 -foot separation requirement is overly rigid and would function as a de facto prohibition on distribution and logistics development, even in areas designated for employment and industrial growth.

As shown on the attached map, homes and other sensitive receptors are scattered throughout and adjacent to existing and planned industrial areas, rather than being concentrated in clearly separated residential neighborhoods. Because sensitive receptors are so widely distributed, a 1,000 -foot buffer would make it virtually impossible to site a distribution center across large portions of Hollister's industrial area, eliminating many otherwise viable sites. In practice, this policy would prevent job -generating development the City has planned for and relies on to support the local economy.

A fixed distance requirement of this magnitude is not a performance standard —it is a geographic constraint that does not account for site design, operational controls, or real -world mitigation measures that can successfully protect sensitive receptors. Compatibility outcomes are better achieved through objective and enforceable project -level requirements.

Clear Recommendation:

I respectfully recommend revising Policy LU-5.5 to remove the mandatory 1,000 -foot separation requirement and replace it with objective, enforceable performance standards and project -level compatibility measures, such as:
• designated truck routes and circulation plans that avoid residential streets • limits on idling, queuing, and loading/unloading hours • building orientation and loading bay placement away from sensitive receptors • noise studies and mitigation (sound walls, berms, building insulation standards) • air quality controls, dust control, and operational standards • on -site design requirements such as landscaping, walls, setbacks, and screening

This approach would protect sensitive receptors through measurable outcomes while still allowing Hollister to attract and retain industrial/logistics uses in the appropriate areas, consistent with the City's economic development and employment goals. jghborh 5d of Ho
4 h i hborhood of He

From: Karl Broussard
To: [email protected] ; [email protected]

Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 at 02:27:53 PM PST
Subject: Regarding Hollister Plan 2040
Under section two: Vision and Values...

The word concept of 'Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI)' has been used in recent years as common pop culture, progressive monikers intended as a sort of modern group benefit, unfortunately have resulted in anything but. The application of this concept has resulted in divisive governance in public and private sectors - separating people into racial, gender and socio-economic classes, promoting racial determination (group or class maneuvering against one over another in an attempt to remediate real and/or perceived historical injustice's regardless of timeframe and personal responsibility), all to the detriment of contemporary unity and culture. In no way should these terms be used as representative terms or monikers for our Hollister people. This word concept promised one thing, but has actively resulted in the opposite - twisted logic. A few examples below.

Over the past decade or two, there has been a coercive push by corporate, local, state and federal governance bodies to apply DEI standards that has led to men being permitted to compete against woman in sports. Lowering college admissions criteria to meet opaque DEI (race, gender, etc.) standards resulting in more qualified student applications being rejected over lesser qualified; some refer to this as reverse racism (US Supreme Court ruled against such practices, June 2023 in Fair Admissions v. Harvard). Lowering standards for commercial airlines pilots to somehow bridge the gap between qualified and unqualified pilots then arbitrarily hiring some DEI anointed groups of people, resulting in an increase in plane accidents, some argue; similar actions and results leading to a weakening of our military forces. DEI has led to the acceptance of an expansion of genders from two (male and female) to upwards of 50 to 60 different genders - gender fluidity. The list goes on.... everyone is entitled to argue the benefits or detractions of such thinking, but in no way should Hollister base its identity upon on such radical thinking, actions and results.

It is not representative of at least half or maybe more of the good, hard working, law abiding people that live in Hollister and our county. The DEI fad has thankfully lost some steam in the most recent year and hopefully it will do the same here; being replaced with more suitable, appropriate and representative timeless values.

This is not the point of this commentary, but please allow me to suggest another option of 'Vision and Values' for Hollister.

Some more appropriate defining values for our county would include Agriculture and God.

AG. (Though this may not yet be comprehensive..)
God bless.
karl broussard
2 Chronicles 7:14 (KJV)
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

Psalm 89:15 (KJV)
15 Blessed is the people that know the joyful sound: they shall walk, O Lord, in the light of thy countenance.

From: Allen Andrade
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2026 11:04 AM
To: Eva Kelly
Cc: Mike Walsh; Victor Gomez
Subject: RE: 2024 Draft General Plan - APNs 056-250-005 & 028 (151 & 191 Hillcrest) Hi Eva,
Owner of APNs 056-250-005 & 028 (151 & 191 Hillcrest) would like to request those parcels be designated industrial for consistency with the parcels to the east (Industrial drive) and more importantly so that this existing concrete batch plant and landscape supply business that has been a valuable asset to the community since 1981 is appropriately designated according to this historic and ongoing use.

Please let me know what I can have the owner do to make it clear to the General Plan committee, planning commission and city council the importance of this.

Thank you for your assistance.

Allen T. Andrade, PE, PLS
MH engineering Co.

Gerald R. Blatt
Gerald R. Batt
President
City of Hollister
City Counsel
Planning Commission
General Plan Committee
[email protected]
Eva Kelly, Planning Manager
Community Development Dept.
339 Fifth Street, Hollister, CA 95023
[email protected]
February 3, 2026
Re: General Plan Comment
151 Hillcrest Road, APN: 056-250-005
191 Hillcrest Road, APN: 056-250-028
Members of the City Council
Members of the Planning Commission
Mernbers of the General. Plan Committee
Ms. Eva Kelly
1404 S T' Street
San Jose, CA 95112
(408) 947-0669 Office
(408) 947-0434 Fax
I am the owner of property located at 151 and 191 Hillcrest Road, Hollister, and am writing to ask you to change the zoning of the above referenced parcels and designate them as Industrial Use in your new general plan. This property's historic, current and future use has been and will continue to be a concrete batch plant and landscape material supply which is best conducted in an Industrial Use zone.

These parcels were previously designated Industrial Use. For reasons unknown, the City changed this property's use from industrial to Mixed Use. This makes no sense as its use has always been industrial and it is located in a neighborhood with other industrial businesses. As such, please review the historical and current use of this property and return it to Industrial Use in your new General Plan.

Public Comment — Union Road Special Planning Area
To the Hollister 2040 General Plan Update Team,
I am a property owner within the Union Road Special Planning Area. While I support thoughtful planning, I am concerned that the draft General Plan effectively prohibits development in this area for an indefinite period of time.

Policy LU-14.1 states that a Specific Plan must be created "prior to approval of any new development projects in the area." As written, this language conditions all development approvals on completion of a future planning document.

The General Plan update process began in early 2020. Property owners have already waited more than six years for adoption of this plan. Requiring an additional, undefined waiting period before any application may even be considered is unreasonable and inequitable.

Critically, the draft provides:
• no timeline
• no initiation trigger
• no responsible agency
• no funding source
• and no completion schedule
Without these elements, the requirement functions as a de facto moratorium on development.

Indefinite deferral of development rights:
• freezes investment and financing
• reduces property values
• discourages job -generating uses
• undermines orderly, market -driven growth
• and places a disproportionate burden on a small group of landowners A General Plan is intended to provide certainty and implementable land use direction. It should not postpone all activity pending future studies with no defined schedule or accountability.

If additional guidance is desired, the City can address design and infrastructure standards through zoning regulations, development agreements, or project -level review. Requiring

completion of a separate Specific Plan before any application is processed is unnecessary and counterproductive.

I respectfully request that the City revise Policy LU-14.1 to allow development consistent with adopted General Plan designations to proceed immediately.

Suggested language:
"Development within the Union Road Special Planning Area may proceed consistent with adopted General Plan land use designations and zoning. Preparation of a specific plan shall not preclude or delay consideration or approval of individual development applications." This approach preserves City oversight while restoring predictability, fairness, and the ability for property owners to responsibly invest in their land.

Thank you for your consideration.

Michael Brigantino

Docusign Envelope ID: 228F1F79-4884-4344-AAEB-262189CC6913 2/9/2026
Mayor Stephens & City Council
Hollister Planning Commission
Development Services Dept. Staff
375 5th St.

Hollister, Ca 95023
Re: General Plan Update
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments on the 2040 General Plan Update. My name is Tim Johnson and I am the property owner of the parcel at the corner of Enterprise and Southside Roads with APN 020-290-054. I have several concerns regarding how the general plan update treats my parcel, especially when taking into consideration the facts on the ground. This particular parcel is fronted by both sewer and water yet would be excluded from city development as the plan is written. Even more egregious is that part of this parcel was used to accommodate the city sewer system that serves development further out from the city limit. Please see the specific comments below and respond in due course. Thank you for your consideration.

Proposed Sphere of Influence- As written the general plan update would exclude my parcel from the new sphere of influence. The sphere would actually stop directly in front of the northern property line. There is currently dense housing to the south and west of my parcel and there is a subdivision being built to the east. If the sphere moves to Enterprise Road it is safe to say that development will eventually reach the northern property line as well. I would like the opportunity to utilize my property at its highest and best use just as my neighbors have. It is my position that my parcel should be included in the sphere of influence and zoned accordingly. Any future development of my property can be planned for and studied during the specific plan process for the Union Road corridor.

Policy LU 1.5/CSF2.10- If the city is unwilling to bring my parcel into the new sphere of influence it is of utmost importance that Land Use Policy 1.5 and Community Service and Facilities policy 2.10 be amended or completely removed from the general plan update. As stated by others in the past, the current out of jurisdiction sewer service situation is a problem. The city has both the capacity and the infrastructure in place to serve my parcel. If policies LU 1.5 and CSF 2.10 were to be put in place I would not even be able to apply for services to the city. If you leave my parcel out of the sphere, I will be forced to apply to the county. If I apply to the county and you implement LU 1.5 and CSF 2.10, I won't be able to receive city sewer services.

Thank you again for considering these comments. My main goal is for my parcel to be treated the same as the neighboring parcels. As written, the general plan update excludes my parcel from development and injures my prospects and the value of my property. Please take a moment to consider how you would feel if you were in my position. The city, county and nearby property owners have utilized my property in the past when needed and the city is now trying to exclude me from utilizing it to its highest and best use. Please make the appropriate changes to the draft plan to include my parcel in the

Docusign Envelope ID: 228F1F79-4854-4344-AAEB-262189CC6913 proposed sphere of influence to rectify this future harm. Thank you and please feel to reach out to me as needed.

Tim Johnson
Cc:

Karson Klauer
K2 Solutions ILLC
u5FFFgned. by;
Sou
B443...

Forwarded message
From: Lee Shahinian
Date: Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 7:32 PM
Subject: GP2040 Unworkable Housing Density
To:

Good afternoon Commissioner Rodriguez,
My family owns the vacant land in downtown Hollister shown in #1. The proposed GP2040 zoning for this land is MU. As demonstrated in the following documents, the required MU density does not work for Hollister.
#2: Republic Urban Properties (RUP) put significant time and effort into this mixed use proposal, including live-in commercial that would keep residents in Hollister. They were forced to abandon the project when zoning was changed from 20 du/a to 30 du/a, and walked away from $350,000 in deposits! #3: Peter Lin, RUP Director of Development, pleaded with the City to no avail. #4: Dennis Martin of the Bay Area Building Industry Association states that densities above 20 du/a will not work in Hollister. We did not solicit his opinion.
#5: Density calculations based on GP2040 numbers seem to question the need for densities > 20 du/a. #6: These county population figures demonstrate how inappropriate a Metropolitan designation is for Hollister, at odds with the rural hometown character that the City is trying to preserve.

Jon Schultz, VP of CBRE, represents our property. He has presented it to dozens of developers, and none have been willing to work with 30 du/a.

Victor Gomez, former Hollister mayor, also feels that 30 du/a will not work in Hollister.

At your Planning Commission meeting tomorrow evening, to be on public record, I will comment on the need for a GP2040 with workable housing densities.

I welcome your questions, comments, and suggestions.

Thanks for your attention to this matter,
Lee Shahinian
Managing owner

•

30.00 30.00
NORTH
s. oe e91 e. 137.0
SrAr£ or CALIF
•7.a N. or_st'e.
60 SALLY

3.50 AC.
132,37
50 36 STREET 3O 20 I0
to
21 ,74 AC.

SAN FELIPE ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY )
S. 8n W. OTLea
R3
13632
23 ,37 AC.

N., 1370, i05
so
Th
is
8O
map
slid for
a'
d f
ct
8/
e
u,H'
IJ ::
a'
•
51-02
SALLY„ $T,.,, , , , ,
a NOT AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT and
ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY.

EAST ST.
4 Y

SAN BENITO ST,
RANCHO SAN JUST°
PTN. HOMESTEAD LOT 22
/mount's Ono, County ofS.ut Bonito, Cahf.
1

Republic Urban Properties Proposal
San Felipe Rd &
Maple St
General Plan Amendment Initiation
December 19, 2022
Republic
a tfJ�, k i► ^N

2

3 Site Summary:

Sr:n Are;:
t o,t5
-4 f21+ :rre l.
tit.' ' Linn::'n::rtt
Unit Sumn ry:

Car Rr n: 7vvr• )::r'es
Tota!
Required Parking:

TQtal
Provided Parking:

Cii e
Project Features:
fcV sr }
Sr}
93 Oils
44 Space::
t'1.Sflt�'.e5
• is",'rreiy° Erze ker;'
• Yr rate: Pt_xa,, Zr<„re::r.r::r nV :rcit"y' ilESQ::, St.xi, SP c:et:
• P*r.•atef 2 Ca• Ci;PrIige fear trury Brit
▪ Prrr,are e'.^rcr. ar ej Icor CktcJ'
• a t::�a w a'A SFr anc Qther Open Space ?Or stets
.n f'xr rs Sicrle! IrrrVe'tr Ir4ar!rN,'enneret
Sins:atn:dun ✓aoi Ealctr,e Deaar:lupr•ent, P Gn Prcrarimi • Stp.yr F;:rc:!r; n:later:::n F : (ki ktirg.

Z;}Qr7,.Oc.iteC SOW i e`t3y` E..ectrr.ty't.)r A fie*aientS • Sr -art Horne TeChr°ology rtetthtrt Each t_ryr
Aw rn V:,nr+r9 and ;.Ar°i!'a,ape ;SrrSrialrr5

4 BUILD FOR RENT AMENITIES
+,
I d, m x, M: .
,t
04,
,t4Yi k.
4,
m

WHY BUILD FOR RENT IN HOLLISTER

COMMERCIAL LIVE WORK UNITS

tMi _

Repubhc
City of Hollister
Planning Department
Attn: Eva Kelly
339 Fifth Street, Hollister CA 95023
Comments on the draft General Pan Update - Proposed Density Range for High Density Residential and mixed Use Zoning Districts
Dear Eva,
Republic Urban propertie (RUP) has been in contract with the Shahinian Family since January 2021 to purchase their property located on San Felipe Road between Santa Ana and Maple Street. RUP has spent the past 2 years designing a project for the &.6S -acre property.

RUP has proposed a "Built for Rent" community that gees residents the look and feel of a single lam iy home, but with the arsenities of an apartments complex, and the flexibility of renting a new h'me. Built for Rent is currently one of the most sought after housing products because many people do not qualify to buy a new home, either due to the large downpayment or because of the credit requirements. This project would offer a newly built rental option that can accomm ate growing families. Hollister is a perfect ation for this product type,, as it offers a reasonable commute distance to the core Bay Area, while also providing a non - urban lifestyle and great access to open space,shopping and dining.

As part of the General Plan Update process, the City of Hollister identified several sites in and around the San Felipe Road corridor that could accommodate High Density Residential. This was contemplated to have a minimum density of 2€l Dwelling Units per Acre (DOA), as shown in the attached exhibit from PlaceWorks.

Unfortunately, now that the long-awaited draft General Plan Update has been circulated, those same properties including the Shahinian Property, have been designated for a minimum density of 30 DUA.

RUP has desned and proposed a wonderful project that meets the strong need for rental housing for the missing middle". This project was designed to conform to the proposed minimum density of 20 DUA, so the new 30 DUA density designation wou render this project out of conformance, and make the project nfeasible..

Republic Urban Properties STRONGLY requests that staff reconsiders this 30 DUA minimum density designation, and su sts going back to the 20 DUA Minimum density that has been contemplated and designed around for the past 2 years.

Regards,
Peter l.in, Development Director

June 15, 2023
City of Hollister
975 Fifth St.

Hollister, CA 95023

TRANSMITTED VIA EMAIL
Re: Comments to Draft 2040 General Plan Update
Dear Sir/Madam,
The Building Industry Association of the Bay Area (BIA) respectfully submits the following comments to the City of Hollister's Draft 2040 General Plan Update. BIA offers these comments in the spirit of collaboration and support for the City adopting a comprehensive and productive General Plan that paves the way for achieving its challenging housing goals. These comments to the Draft 2040 General Plan may also pertain to the Draft EIR as many BIA comments and recommendations would touch on the Environmental Impact Report.

BIA is concerned that political opposition to housing production in the City and San Benito County has been ingrained in the Draft 2040 General Plan. The City has worked hard to bring forward a Draft General Plan that preserves and enhances many wonderful features of the region:
a productive farming industry, scenic parks and open spaces, and picturesque towns.

Integrating responsible future growth into the Draft General Plan is the key. The Draft 2040 General Plan is an excellent opportunity to balance and blend the rural, agricultural character of Hollister with future well planned residential communities that support families, business and a thriving economy.

Still, BIA remains concerned that the Draft 2040 General Plan Update has incorporated several concerning new policy proposals, actions and fees that may create major obstacles to housing production by choking off land supply, prescribing intractable new rules and burdening each home with tens of thousands of dollars in new fees.

Housing Element Law requires that the City identify adequate sites to accommodate its regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) at all income levels. BIA encourages the City Council and Staff to take steps to revise policies and actions that may potentially constrain the production of housing during the lifespans of the 2040 General Plan and 6t11 Cycle Housing Element.

Policies that may require the City to analyze these rules as severe constraints to housing and mitigate accordingly include:

• Constrained Land Supply — Plan for sufficient land to accommodate housing production necessitated by the City's 6th Cycle RHNA and additional land requirements; • Inflexible Transportation Policies — Compliance with Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) policies in the Plan will present an obstacle to housing under current and future transportation systems and development patterns unless mitigated with policies to offset this significant hindrance;
• Onerous Ag Land Mitigation Policies - Agriculture mitigation at a 2:1 ratio plus Agricultural Buffer Zone requirements would stymie many projects and land deals; • Impracticable lnclusionary Zoning Policy — A requirement of 20% inclusionary affordable housing on market rate for sale and rental housing would render projects infeasible or require implementation of a massive density bonus program.

Land Use and Community Design Element
The Draft 2040 General Plan Update severely constrains production of housing through limited Development Capacity, and tight Sphere of Influence (SOI). Figure LU-2, the Draft 2040 General Plan Update Land Use Map, when compared to the current General Plan shows that the SOI and Urban Service Area are nearly unchanged.

In order to accommodate more housing growth, BIA urges the City to expand the limited proposed Sphere of Influence in the Draft Plan to coincide with the Urban Service Line especially in the East and South quadrants of the City, incorporating more land for potential development where Prime Farmland is less prevalent.

LU-1.3. Development Capacity. Housing element site inventory requirements state that the purpose of the housing element's site inventory is to identify and analyze specific land (sites) that is available and suitable for residential development in order to deteiluine the jurisdiction's capacity to accommodate residential development and reconcile that capacity with the jurisdiction's Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA).

In the 6th Cycle Housing Element that spans the 8 year time period from 2024 to 2032, the City of Hollister must plan the capacity for an unprecedented Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) of 4,163 housing units. In addition, to comply with the "No Net Loss Requirements Law" (Government Code § 65863), the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) recommend that to reduce the likelihood of having to rezone should an identified housing site develop with less units than assigned, it is a best practice to have 30% more units listed in the inventory than are required to meet a jurisdiction's RHNA.

Accommodating a 30%+ buffer capacity of Housing Element Site Inventories would add about 1248 units for a total housing need of 5,411 units. The Draft General Plan states capacity for 6,455 units, leaving only 1,292 units in excess capacity through 2040.

Finally, the goal of the Draft 2040 General Plan Update is to create a vision for the City's next 20 years of growth. BIA strongly encourages the City to assume now that the 7th Cycle Housing Element, spanning the years 2032 to 2040, may require at least another 4,000 units plus a capacity buffer of 1.500 units. In other words, the Plan is grossly under capacity by more than - 2

4,000 residential units just for the City of Hollister's future RHNA and other units that the City may need to absorb from the County.

LUD - Land Use Designations. Table LU-2 General Plan Land Use Designations shows several hundred acres identified for Medium Density and High Density Residential. Yet no market study or analysis is provided to substantiate that development of these residential densities can be feasible in. Hollister.

LUD 3.3.3. Medium & High Density Residential. This paragraph is confusing as it lumps High.

Density Residential (30-65 DU/AC) in with Medium Density Residential (12-29 DU/AC).

Medium Density may support a viable product in the Hollister market in the future, but any densities above approximately 20 DU/AC (townhouses) will be very difficult to develop. High construction costs and low market demand make the Hollister market a tough sell to nonsubsidized multifamily builders.

Additionally, there is no need for High Density Residential land use and zoning in the Plan. In the Housing Element, HCD allows jurisdictions to use zoned density as a proxy for lower income, as long as certain statutory requirements are met. These include counting sites zoned at 20 units per acre as affordable because Hollister is a "suburban jurisdiction" as opposed to an "urban jurisdiction". This is called the default density. BIA strongly recommends that reliance on Medium and especially High Density Land Use Designation to achieve housing production numbers be reduced.

Policy LU-2.1. Land Supply. This policy claims to ensure that there is adequate land designated to meet the projected future housing needs of the City. However, as noted earlier in this letter, the Draft 2040 General Plan Update fails to plan for enough housing to support this policy. The Draft Plan land supply available for residential capacity must be revised to increase the residential capacity through 2040.

Policy LU-2.6. Medium and High Density Residential. Medium Density and especially High Density housing development in Hollister is generally financially challenged. For sale medium density product above 20 units an acre, such as townhouses, would likely be viable, however 30- 60 DU/AC high density will present a very difficult challenge to develop.

While market rate high density housing is unlikely to develop in Hollister, subsidized 100% affordable housing may be feasible. 100% affordable projects require funding from a wide variety of sources including local sources. The City should keep the option open for market rate projects to pay inclusionary fees so as to amass local funding for affordable housing projects.

Action LU-2.1 Inclusionary Housing. No residential density or housing type is financially viable with a 20% inclusionary affordable housing requirement, according to the City's Consultant. To justify the inclusionary percentage, the City would be forced to authorize a massive increase in density in every residential zoning district, along with concessions and waivers of development standards, impact fees and other development requirements.

Open Space and Agricultural Element
-3

Policy OS -2.1. Offsets for Loss of Agricultural Land. Requiring 2:1 offset of any agricultural land used for development is may represent a loss of developable land that could result in a severe constraint to housing, especially if that land is located within the City's Urban Service Area. Monterey County is now forming their new Agricultural Land Offset policy with a 1:1 mitigation requirement.

Ranking offsets on a sliding scale could be keyed to the soil quality of the mitigation land. For instance, the conversion of Prime Faiinland might provide a 1.5:1 offset, but other classifications including Land of Local Importance, Grazing land, etc. to provide a 1:1 offset.

Policy OS -2.2. Agricultural Buffers. 200 foot buffer zones close to the City's identified growth areas would rule out many developable parcels from proceeding because so much project land would be needed for the buffer zone. This policy could be revised to apply only to annexations outside the Sphere of Influence and allow the developer to provide a buffer zone proposal for projects larger than 40 acres adjacent to productive farmland. Coordinated Ag policies with the County of San Benito is key, especially as the City and County are updating their general plans at the same time.

The policy should incorporate exemptions and variances to allow building in the buffer area.

Consider establishing an "Agricultural Policy Advisory Commission" to hear proposals to build within a buffer area.

While the County of Santa Cruz applies a 2:1 agricultural buffer, it has established policies that ease the burden on projects by addressing buffer zone encroachment with some flexible approaches:

In most cases, agricultural buffer reductions can be approved if features are proposed or present that mitigate potential negative impacts to adjacent or surrounding commercial agricultural land. Existing mitigations can include changes in topography, permanent substantial vegetation, or other physical barriers between the agriculture and non-agricultural uses. Proposed mitigations include the establishment of a physical barrier, typically a 6 foot tall solid wood fence with a vegetative buffer and the recordation of a Statement of Acknowledgement on the property title which acknowledges the potential for conflicts between the agricultural and non-agricultural uses.

Circulation Element

4.1.5 Vehicle Miles Traveled. Mitigating VMT on a project by project basis would help pave the way to failure for housing production under the Draft 2040 General Plan Update. BIA encourages the City to complete an overarching EIR evaluating VMT for the entire City and devise cohesive City-wide policies and solutions supported by residential development mitigation fees. Impact fees, restrictive land use regulations, infrastructure costs, and rising labor costs create serious impediments to addressing the housing affordability crisis the region is facing.
-4

It is critical that the City of Hollister continue to produce housing for all incomes. The City high housing costs is a testament to the under production of housing to meet the demands of our robust economy. Unless significantly revised, the Draft 2040 General Plan. Update represents a grave threat to the City's obligation under RHNA and will almost certainly result in a constrained housing supply. The Draft 2040 General Plan Update in effect creates a housing moratorium by making it too expensive to build.

Again, BIA offers these comments in the spirit of collaboration and support for the City achieving its housing goals. BIA is committed to working with the City of Hollister to find creative and community based solutions that benefit current and future residents and support a healthy economy and lifestyle.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments.

Very truly yours,
Dennis Martin
BIA Government Affairs
cc: Mayor Mia Casey
Kevin Henderson, Chair, Planning Commission
David Mirrione, City Manager
Christy Hopper, Community Development Director
Eva Kelly, Interim Planning Manager
Jennifer Woodworth, City Clerk
-5

New Dwelling Units in the General Plan Update
From Page 35 (LU-19) of the General Plan Update:
n
specs{
(1.11). assumes the
tons by t year 2(
However, on Page 25 of the General Plan Update, the Land Use Designations are listed with their acres within City Limits and intensity (density) ranges. Using the minimum permitted density of dwelling units/acre (du/ac):

Land Use
Minimum du/ac
Designation Acres Permitted Density Total Potential DUs LDR 1,365 6
MDR 445 11
HDR 250 30
MU 105 30
DMU 55 30
HO 15 11
WG 75 30
8,190
4,895

7.500
3,150
1,650
165
2,250
TOTAL: 27,800
Changing minimum densities of 30 du/ac to 20 du/ac:

LDR 1,365 6 8,190
MDR 445 11 4,895
HDR 250 20 5,000
MU 105 20 2,100
DMU 55 20 1,100
HO 15 11 165
WG 75 20 1,500
TOTAL: 22,950
Therefore, minimum densities of 30 du/ac can be reduced to 20 du/ac or lower and still exceed the goal of 10,530 dwelling units.

Suburban Counties 20+/acre*
2020 -2022 Population
*Default density, not compulsory
Butte 212,000
Fresno 1,010,000
Imperial 180,000 (least populated county in Southern California) Kern 909,000
Kings 152,000
Madera 160,000
Monterey 439,000
Napa 134,000
San Joaquin 793,000
San Luis Obispo 282,000
Santa Barbara 448,000
Metropolitan Counties 30+/acre*
Alameda 1,682,000
Contra Costa 1,166,000
El Dorado 191,000
Los Angeles 9,861,000
Orange 3,151,000
Placer 405,000
Riverside 2,418,000
Sacramento 1,585,000
San Benito 64,000
San Bernardino 2,194,000
San Diego 3,299,000
San Francisco 809,000
San Mateo 729,000
Santa Clara 1,936,000

2026
March 26, 2026
Re: Hollister General Plan Review 2040, Public Review Draft, March 2026
Dear Planning Commissioners,
Tonight you will be reviewing and voting on whether to accept the above Draft. We are unable to attend in person, and will not have online access. We are submitting this written statement for your consideration. Please review with your body's legal counsel.

Government Code Section 65102, and Muni. Code Section 16.04.020, require that city policies and ordinances comply, and not be in conflict, with state and federal laws.

Government Code Section 66454 permits the filing of a tentative map for parcels not yet annexed, provided those parcels are adjacent to the city. (New) Policy LU-1.5 prohibits the acceptance of subdivision applications for any lands that have not yet been annexed. Policy LU-1.5 provides no exemption for lands that lie adjacent to the city.

Policy LU-1.5, being in conflict with state law, cannot be included in the General Plan 2040 for the Plan to be lawful. Policy LU-1.5 must be deleted, or amended.

Happy to discuss anytime.

Thank you for your consideration,
Ingrid and Alex Sywak

PINNACLE
.. STRATEGY
Victor Gomez
President, Pinnacle Strategy LLC
[email protected]
March 26, 2026
Chair and Members of the Planning Commission
City of Hollister
375 Fifth Street
Hollister, CA 95023
RE: ITEM 6.1 General Plan 2040 — Request to Amend Land Use Designation (APNs associated with Dassel Properties)
Chair and Commissioners,
I am writing on behalf of my client, James Dassel, the owner of three parcels located in the southeastern portion of the City, as identified in the below map. These parcels are currently proposed to be designated High Density Residential (HDR) under the draft Hollister General Plan 2040. We respectfully request that the Planning Commission recommend revising the land use designation for these parcels to Medium Density Residential (MDR).

Basis for Request

1. Compatibility with Surrounding Development Pattern
The subject parcels are situated at the edge of established lower -density neighborhoods and adjacent to areas that do not exhibit characteristics supportive of high -density development. A Medium Density Residential designation would provide a more appropriate transition between existing uses and planned growth areas, reducing potential land use conflicts.

2. Infrastructure and Service Constraints
High -density designations assume a level of infrastructure capacity —including roadway circulation, utilities, and public services —that may not be fully aligned with existing conditions in this area. MDR zoning would better reflect realistic infrastructure capacity while still allowing meaningful residential growth.

3. Consistency with Sound Planning Principles
Good planning practice emphasizes:
• Gradual transitions in density
• Context -sensitive land use decisions
• Avoidance of abrupt intensity shifts at neighborhood edges

10 PINNACLE

MIE STRATEGY
The current HDR designation introduces a level of intensity that is inconsistent with these principles for this specific location. MDR achieves the City's housing objectives while maintaining compatibility and long-term neighborhood stability.

4. Housing Goals Can Still Be Achieved
Importantly, redesignating these parcels to MDR does not preclude residential development or undermine the City's broader housing strategy. Medium density zoning still allows for a substantial number of units while ensuring that development is feasible, market -aligned, and compatible with surrounding uses.

This request is not an effort to avoid development, but rather to ensure that future development is appropriately scaled, context -sensitive, and consistent with the City's long-term planning framework.

We respectfully ask the Planning Commission to recommend that these parcels be designated Medium Density Residential in the General Plan 2040.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I am available to discuss this request further or provide additional supporting analysis as needed.

Sincerely,
Victor Gomez
President, Pinnacle Strategy LLC
Tool

an Benito

HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
Continuity t. ce11eHCe

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
March 26, 2026
City of Hollister
Planning Commission
375 Fifth. Street.

Hollister, CA 95023
Email: [email protected]
RE: Comments on Hollister General Plan 2040, Public Review Draft Dear Comrnissicners,
1220 Monterey Street
Hollister, CA 95023
Phone (831) 837-5831x113.3
www.sbh8.abhsd.orrx
Shawn Tennenbaum, Ed.D.

Superintendent
This letter is submitted to the City of Hollister ("City") Planning Commission ("Commission") on behalf of the San Benito High School District ("District") and its Board of Trustees with regard to our review and assessment of the City of Hollister's General Plan 2040, Public Review Draft ("General Plan"'). As a California public school district serving children who reside and attend school within the City, and as an owner of property within the City and just beyond the proposed sphere of influence ("SDI") in Figure LU-1 of the General Plan, the proposed General Plan directly affects the District's operations. Accordingly, we now submit these comments to the Commission..

The District recognizes and appreciates the time and effort that the City has put into consulting its constituents and performing the necessary studies to produce this draft General Plan.. We congratulate the City on its award of the federal Safe Streets and Road for All to promote pedestrian and multi -modal, circulation and we look forward to participating and collaborating with the City to utilize its grant funds to promote pedestrian and road safety in our community., Specifically, the District recognizes and supports the partnership and cooperation between the City and school districts proposed by goals and policies of the General Plan, including in Chapter 4..3.1 (Multimodal Transportation and Safety), Chapter 5.2.1 (Services and Infrastructure Planning), and Chapter 5.2.8 (Public Schools). The District supports the draft General Plan as proposed and looks forward to working collaboratively with the City in the future to bring these goals to fruition, particularly with respect to the, development of necessary educational facilities to serve the City's growing population..

As the City Grows, the District Grows.

As the City is aware, the District operates Hollister High School, the only public high school in the City and serving the Hollister community. Located in the southwest quadrant of the City,. the school straddles City and County jurisdictions all the way from B Street to the north, across Nash Road, down to the River Parkway to the south. Hollister High School is

one of the largest high schools in Northern. California_ As of the 2025-2026 school year, the District is serving 3,405 students at a school designed for 3,405 students, representing approximately 100% of design capacity. A11 high school students generated and matriculating in the City and County of San Benito ("County") will be eligible for enrollment at Hollister High School, which is already overcapacity. As the City grows through the implementation of the General Plan, the accumulated impacts of residential and commercial development on the District's ability to provide adequate educational facilities will be substantial and will necessitate the construction of a second high school to meet the District's obligations under California law. (See Cal. Const. art. IX, § 1; Gov. Code § 65970.) To accommodate this growth, the District has acquired property along the Buena. Vista Corridor Special Planning Area,. as depicted in Figure LU-4 ("BVC"). Over the years, the District has worked with the community, State representatives, and local leaders to fundraise and plan for the development of a second high school in the BVC, including extensive outreach to the City. On. October 21, 2025, the District's Board of Trustees reaffirmed the District's intention to develop a new school in the BVC to accommodate growth from the City.

In December 2025, the City published its Revised Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element, which reinforces the District's determination that the Buena Vista neighborhood is the optimal location for a second high school by locating a majority of its pipeline projects around the BVC and allotting a majority of parcels for rezoning to high density in and around the BVC. A new high school in this area would not only help resolve the issue of overcrowding at Hollister Iligh School by balancing the student enrollment at this second high school, but it would also serve the local community and advance the General Plan's goals by obviating the need for a cross-town commute, reducing traffic congestion, and reducing the risk of automobile accidents throughout the city, consistent with the City's multimodal transportation and safety objectives.

The City and the District Must Collaborate to Expand the SOI for the Development of a Second High School While the District notes that the General Plan does not include the District's properties within the City's proposed SOI expansion at this time, the District nonetheless recognizes and appreciates the City's commitment in Policy CSF-8.5:.

Construction of a Second High School. Support the San Benito High School District's efforts to construct a new high school.

In furtherance of such support, the General Plan commits the City to continuing to require all new development to mitigate their fair share of impacts on school facilities through enforcement of school impact fees (Policy CSF-8.3); encouraging joint planning to determine the location of educational facilities (Policy CSF-8.2); and only approving development applications that can mitigate impacts or contribute a proportional fair share so that future growth does not create demands that exceed the capabilities and capacity of local public services such as public school districts (Policy CSF I . l ). The District will rely on these policy commitments as the City implements the General Plan and approves new development that generates additional students requiring educational facilities.

Following adoption of the General. Plan, the District intends to submit an application for a General Plan amendment to perform the necessary environmental studies and investigations to include the District's property within the City's SO, including preparation of a specific plan, if necessary, and an application for annexation pursuant to Policy CSF-1.3. The District respectfully requests the City's full cooperation and support in this process, consistent with Policies CSF-8.5 and CSF-1.1, including but not limited to: (I) expedited processing of the District's General Plan arnendrnent and annexation applications; (2) waiver or reduction of application and processing fees to the maximum extent permitted by law; (3) City