Kingsburg City Council
June 15, 2022

AGENDA

FOR THE JOINT MEETING OF THE KINGSBURG

CITY COUNCIL, BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF

THE CITY OF KINGSBURG PUBLIC FINANCING

AUTHORITY AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF

THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE

KINGSBURG REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
THE COUNCIL CHAMBER IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AT 100% CAPACITY.

Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 6pm
Invocation to be given by Pastor Pete Querin, New Life Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Laura North
6 P.M. REGULAR SESSION MEETING:

1. Call to Order and Roll Call for each entity. This meeting is a joint meeting of the Kingsburg City Council, the Board of Directors of the City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency. During the joint meeting, the members of the Kingsburg City Council will be concurrently sitting as the members of the Board of Directors of the City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency.

2. Public Comments: This is the time for any citizen to come forward and address the City Council and the respective Boards of Directors on any issue within its jurisdiction that is not listed on the Agenda. A maximum of five (5) minutes is allowed for each speaker.

3. Approve Joint Meeting Agenda: Action by the Council and respective Boards of Directors to approve the Joint Meeting Agenda or to make modifications. Items that can be added to the Joint Meeting Agenda is constrained by State law.

4. Presentations: None.

City of Kingsburg
1401 Draper Street, Kingsburg, CA 93631-1908
Phone (559)897-5821 Fax (559)897-5568
Mayor Laura North
Mayor Pro Tem Vince Palomar
Council Member Michelle Roman
Council Member Jewel Hurtado
Council Member Brandon Pursell, Jr.

City Manager Alexander J. Henderson
Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 15, 2022

5. Joint Meeting Consent Calendar: Items considered routine in nature are to be placed on the Consent Calendar. They will be considered as one item and voted upon in one vote unless individual consideration is requested. Each vote in favor of the Consent Calendar is considered and recorded as a separate affirmative vote in favor of each action listed. Approval of the Consent Calendar items include recitals reading ordinance(s) by titles(s) only and adoption of recommended action(s) contained in Staff Reports.
(To be approved only by City Council)

5.1 Approval of City Council Minutes: Approve the minutes from the May 31, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting as prepared by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office

5.2 Check Register: Ratify/approve payment of bills listed on the check register for the period May 9, 2022 through June 6, 2022 as prepared by Accounts Payable Clerk Marsha Alves.

Sponsor: Finance Department

5.3 Approve the City of Kingsburg COVID-19 Prevention Plan.- Staff Report prepared by Administrative Services Director Christina Windover.

Sponsor: Administrative Services Department

5.4 Adopt Resolution 2022-040 adopting the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines for VMT evaluations within the City of Kingsburg with a 13% threshold over existing VMT as the significance criteria for determining transportation impacts.- Staff Report prepared by City Engineer Dave Peters Sponsor: Engineering

5.5 Accept the infrastructure improvements to Tract 6306 and authorize the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion.- Staff Report prepared by City Engineer Dave Peters
Sponsor: Engineering

5.6 SB 1 Resolution FY 2022/23- Review the proposed project list and approve Resolution 2022-039 as presented. - Staff Report prepared by City Engineer Dave Peters Sponsor: Engineering

5.7 Authorize City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 of Agreement CDBG CV19392 and transmit the document to the County of Fresno for consideration by the Board of Supervisors.- Staff Report prepared by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office
(To be approved only by Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency)

5.8 Approval of Kingsburg Redevelopment Successor Agency Minutes - Approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on June 16, 2021 as prepared by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office
(To be approved only by Board of Directors of the Kingsburg Public Financing Authority) Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 15, 2022

5.9 Approval of Kingsburg Financing Authority Minutes - Approve the minutes from the regular meeting held on June 16, 2021 as prepared by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office

6. Regular Calendar

6.1 PUBLIC HEARING-Competitive Housing Allocations for Residential Development for 2022- Staff Report Prepared by Community Development Director Holly Owen
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Community Development Department
Possible Action(s):
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Presentation by Community Development Director Holly Owen c. Council Discussion
d. OpenPublicComment
e. Close PublicComment
f. Continued Council Discussion
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-034 awarding of 114 housing units as the 2022 housing unit allocation.

6.2 PUBLIC HEARING - Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Budget Review-Consider 2022/2023 Fiscal Year Recommended ExecutiveBudget
Sponsor: City Manager’s Office
Possible Action(s):
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Presentation by City Manager Alexander Henderson
c. Council Discussion
d. OpenPublicComment
e. ClosePublicComment
f. Continued Council Discussion
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-035 approving theCity of Kingsburg 2022/2023 Fiscal Year Budget; including the Kingsburg Public Finance Authority and Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency budgets.

6.3 PUBLIC HEARING-Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 93- 01- Consider Approval of Engineer's Report and Levy and Collection of Assessments within such District for Fiscal Year 2022/2023- Staff Report Prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Finance Department
Possible Action(s):
a. Open Public Hearing
b. Presentation by Finance Director Alma Colado
c. Council Discussion
d. OpenPublicComment
e. Close PublicComment
Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 15, 2022
f. Continued Council Discussion
g. Close Public Hearing
h. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-036 Approving the Engineer's Report for Assessment District No. 93-01 and the Levy and Collection of Assessments within such District for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 and Confirming Diagrams and Assessments Pursuant to the Provisions of Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code and as Provided by Article XIII D of the CaliforniaConstitution.

6.4 Community Facilities District 2017-01 FY 2022-2023 Levy- Staff Report prepared by City Manager Alexander Henderson
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: City Manager’s Office
Possible Action(s):
a. Presentation by Valerie Merklin, Senior Associate, DTA b. Council Discussion
c. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-037– Resolution of the City Council of the City of Kingsburg, Acting in its Capacity as the Legislative Body of Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services District) Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax for Fiscal Year 2022-2023.

6.5 Gann Limit Adoption for 2022-2023 Fiscal Year Budget Figures-Staff Report Prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Finance Department
Possible Action(s):
a. Presentation by Finance Director Alma Colado
b. Council Discussion
c. Adopt Resolution No. 2022-038 for the adoption of the 2022-2023 Gann Limit

6.6 Ordinance No. 2022-02, An Urgency Ordinance Of The City Council Of The City Of Kingsburg Temporarily Placing A Moratorium On The Issuance Of Land Use Entitlements And Permits Which Allow Professional Or Commercial Offices To Locate Within The Central Commercial District, Along Draper Street From Lincoln Street To California Street- Staff Report by Community Development Director Holly Owen
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Community Development Department
Possible Action(s):
a. Presentation by Community Development Director Holly Owen b. Council Discussion
c. Action as Deemed Necessary

6.7 Crime Statistics Report for the Month of May 2022 and General Police Department Update- Crime Statistics Report prepared by Kingsburg Police Department Records Supervisor Corina Padilla.

Sponsor: Police Department
Possible Action(s):
a. Presentation by Police Chief Neil Dadian
b. Council Discussion
Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 15, 2022
c. Informational- No Action Necessary

7. Council Reports and Staff Communications

7.1 Community Services Commission

7.2 Public Safety Committee

7.3 Chamber of Commerce

7.4 Economic Development

7.5 Finance Committee

7.6 Planning Commission

7.7 South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Joint Powers Authority (SKGSA)

7.8 Downtown Business Improvement District

7.9 Council of Governments

7.10 Council Member Reports

7.11 City Manager’s Report
- Reminder of the Cancelation of the 7/6/2022 City Council Meeting

8. Future Agenda Items
These items will be added to a future agenda with a motion from Council and majority voice vote.

9. Adjourn Joint Meeting of the Kingsburg City Council, the Board of Directors of The City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and the Board of Directors of The Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at City Hall, in the City Clerk’s office, during normal business hours. In addition, such writings and documents may be posted on the City’s website at www.cityofkingsburg-ca.gov.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the office of the City Clerk (559) 897-6520. Notification 48 hours prior to a meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to that meeting [28 CFR 35 .102.35.104 ADA Title II].

I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted at the front entrance of City Hall not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting. Dated this 10th day of June 2022.
____________________________________
Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk

KINGSBURG CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
May 31, 2022
Invocation was given by Mayor Pro Tem Vince Palomar, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Pro Tem Vince Palomar.
6 P.M. REGULAR SESSION MEETING:

Call to Order and Roll Call – Mayor Pro Tem Vince Palomar called the regular meeting of the Kingsburg City Council to order at 6:01 pm.

Council Members Present: Jewel Hurtado, Brandon Pursell, Jr., Michelle Roman and Mayor Pro Tem Vince Palomar.

Council Members Absent: Mayor Laura North.

Staff Present: City Manager Alexander Henderson, City Attorney Michael Noland, Finance Director Alma Colado, City Engineer Dave Peters and City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Approve Agenda: A motion was made by Council Member Pursell, Jr., seconded by Council Member Hurtado, to approve the agenda, as published. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote of those Council Members present.

Presentations:

Mayor Pro Tem Palomar presented Kira Wilson with a proclamation honoring her 2022 California Interscholastic Federation Scholar-Athlete of the Year award. Council congratulated her.

Sponsor: Council Member Palomar
Public Comments:

Janet Kelly, resident, Council should listen to constituents, should not govern on a person’s lifestyle.

Carol Williams, resident, rebutted points of previous public comment.

Cindy Rieger, non-resident, continued to rebut the points of previous public comment.

Lance Jackson, resident, duty of elected government to focus on the duties of an elected official.

David Jackson, non-resident, asked council to represent their constituents.

Mathew Cook, resident, commented on extreme watering throughout town in the time of the drought.

Consent Calendar: A motion was made by Council Member Roman, seconded by Council Member Pursell, Jr., to approve the items appearing on the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote of those Council Members present.

5.1 Approval of City Council Minutes: Approve the minutes from the May 18, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting as prepared by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office
Kingsburg City Council Minutes
May 31, 2022

5.2 Approve the Accountant Job Description- Staff Report by Director of Administrative Services Christina Windover.

Sponsor: Administrative Services

5.3 Adopt Resolution 2022-026 updating the City’s Code of Ethics filer list for the FPPC- Staff Report by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office

5.4 Adopt Resolution No. 2022-029- A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Kingsburg, County Of Fresno, State Of California Initiating Proceedings For The Annual Levy And Collection Of Assessments For The City Assessment District No. 93-01 For Fiscal Year 2022/23 Pursuant To The Landscaping And Lighting Act Of 1972, Part 2 Of Division 15 Of The Streets And Highways Code And As Provided By Article Xiii D Of The California Constitution; And Ordering The Preparation Of An Engineer’s Report In Connection Therewith- Staff Report prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado
Sponsor: Finance Department

5.5 Adopt Resolution No. 2022-030- A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Kingsburg, County Of Fresno, State Of California Preliminarily Approving The Report Of The Engineer In Connection With The Annual Levy Of And Collection Of Assessments For The City Assessment District No. 93-01 For Fiscal Year 2022/23, Pursuant To The Landscaping And Lighting Act Of 1972, Part 2 Of Division 15 Of The Streets And Highways Code And As Provided By Article Xiii D Of The California Constitution- Staff Report prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado Sponsor: Finance Department

5.6 Adopt Resolution No. 2022-031- A Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Kingsburg, County Of Fresno, State Of California Declaring Its Intention To Order The Annual Levy And Collection Of Assessment For The City Landscape Maintenance Assessment District No. 93-01 For Fiscal Year 2022/23 Pursuant To The Landscaping And Lighting Act Of 1972, Part 2 Of Division 15 Of The Streets And Highways Code And As provided By Article Xiii D Of The California Constitution, And Appointing A Time And Place For Hearing Protests- Staff Report prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado
Sponsor: Finance Department

5.7 Adopt Resolution 2022-032 - Approving the Request to Apply for the E-Mobility Commerce Grant Program through the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.- Staff Report by Community Services Director Adam Castaneda.

Sponsor: Administrative Services

5.8 Adopt Resolution 2022-033 and Accept the Funding Claim for Local Transportation Funds (TDA) and State Transit Assistance Funds (STAF) apportionment and authorize the Finance Director to sign and submit the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Transportation Funding Claim.- Staff Report by Finance Director Alma Colado.

Sponsor: Finance Department
Kingsburg City Council Minutes
May 31, 2022

5.9 Approve Requested Closures of Smith Street for Bella Boots Events on 7/1/2022, 7/29/2022, 8/26/2022, 9/30/2022 and 10/28/2022 - Staff Report by Community Services Director Adam Castaneda.

Sponsor: Community Services
Regular Calendar
Roundabout Bid Acceptance and Project Update
Sponsor: Engineering Department
City Engineer Dave Peters presented the plan for the Sierra Bethel Roundabout, big trucks will not have any issues. Grant will fund $976,625. The base bid is $971,946 with an add alternate is $75,000 for landscaping and a breakaway coffee pot. Council Member Roman asked about painting the coffee pot to match the water tower. City Engineer Peters said yes, we still have the stencils. Council Member Roman wanted to make sure that it is noted that this has been discussed with packing houses and trucking companies.

City Engineer Dave Peters said traffic will continue to go through during construction. The timeline is June 2022 to August 2022. The construction company is trying to have it completed by the start of school. Mayor Pro Tem Palomar asked about the size of the coffee pot. City Engineer Peters said it will be 20 feet tall. Council Member Pursell, Jr. said the city is growing and we need roadway infrastructure improvements. The City will have to update it in the future, this way we can use grant money. City Engineer Dave Peters said the reason for the grant was that there were a lot of accidents when it had a two way stop. Now it is a 4 way stop and traffic is getting backed up, this will make the intersection efficient and safe.

Council Member Pursell, Jr. motioned, seconded by Council Member Hurtado, to award the Bethel & Sierra Roundabout project to Don Berry Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,046,946.00, which includes the base bid plus the additive alternat. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote of those Council Members present.
2022-2023 City Manager’s Recommended Budget Introduction - Staff Report by City Manager Alexander Henderson.

Sponsor: City Manager’s Office
City Manager Alexander Henderson reviewed this current year budget. He said we had passed a skinny budget due to covid and the financial unknowns. The revenues are outpacing the expenditures by $800,000. The surplus will be moved to the waterfall fund as directed in the City’s policy. Council Member Pursell, Jr. asked if we have a timeline for ARPA funds. City Manager Henderson said not yet.

City Manager Henderson reviewed the General Fund revenue forecast- sales tax will outpace property tax for the first time since he has been at the City. The General Fund expenditures include the new accountant positions. The solid waste fund is in the negative, staff is working on the Prop 218 election to raise rates to cover the cost. Council and staff discussed the water fund and that the turf replacement program will continue. He reviewed the CIP projects and CalPERS. The waterfall fund will have over $3,000,000 projected by the end of Fiscal Year 2022-2023. All funds budget is at $33 million. The presented budget is fiscally responsible and structurally balanced. Mayor Pro Tem Palomar asked about the Civic Rec software, as of right now you have to come in to rent the park or pay for recreation? City Manager Henderson said yes. This software will assist with reservation and payments. We are applying for a grant Kingsburg City Council Minutes
May 31, 2022
to help pay for the startup costs since it will cut back on emissions from people having to drive to City Hall. City Council said good job.

Council Reports and Staff Communications
Community Services Commission- City Manager Henderson reported they met last week, brief updates with Prop 68 grant.

Public Safety Committee- Mayor Pro Tem Palomar said they have not met.

Chamber of Commerce – Council Member Pursell, Jr. said they have not met.

Economic Development- Council Member Roman said they met last week.

Finance Committee- City Manager Henderson said they have not met.

Planning Commission- City Manager Henderson said they met regarding housing units.

South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Joint Powers Authority (SKGSA)- Council Member Hurtado said nothing to report.

Downtown Business Improvement District- Council Member Hurtado said the BID discussed website and photos, success of the Swedish festivals.

Council of Governments- Council Member Roman said they discussed Measure C.

Council Member Reports- Council Member Hurtado commented that she had a great time at the Swedish Festival and the City Awards Ceremony. Council Member Roman spoke about the ribbon cutting at Linnaea Villas, it is a beautiful facility. She is impressed with the Fresno Housing Authority’s quality of the projects. She spoke about free zoo tickets that will be given out in Fresno County with FCRTA proving rides. Council Member Pursell, Jr. enjoyed the Swedish Festival. He said it was nice to hear that senior residents from Kingsburg were able to move to Linnaea Villas to be able to stay in town. Council Member Roman thanked the Chamber of Commerce, Lions, and city staff for a successful Swedish festival. Mayor Pro Tem Palomar thanked Rotary for honoring his dad for his 40th consecutive Dala Horse Trot. He said Linnaea Villas is really nice.

City Manager’s Report -City Manager Henderson spoke about the State Water Board Emergency Conservation Regulation. We are handing out citations, no more warning. Council Member Roman asked how do you want people to report overwatering. City Manager Henderson said it is best to go to the City’s website and enter it in the request tracker. Council Member Roman asked who is in charge of monitoring over watering. City Manager Henderson said it is water department. Fire is doing weed abatement. Having a specific location is important when reporting over watering. Wells may have to be metered in the future.

The street projects and the Madsen trail will being next week.

Future Agenda Items:

Public Hearings:

1. Landscape and Lighting Assessment District No. 93-01

2. Fiscal Year 2022/2023 Executive Budget

3. Annual Allocation And Issuance Of Residential Housing Units Sponsor: City Staff
Kingsburg City Council Minutes
May 31, 2022
At 7:22pm the Kingsburg City Council adjourned out of the Regular Calendar into Closed Session to discuss the following item(s):

9.1 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
California Government Code Section 54956.8
Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel Number: APN: 394-042-04 City Negotiator: Alexander J. Henderson
Under Negotiation: Rental Terms and Conditions
At 7:41 P. M. the City Council Adjourned out of Closed Session into the Regular Kingsburg City Council Meeting and report out of Closed Session.

City Attorney Michael Noland said that there is nothing to report.

The Regular Kingsburg City Council Meeting was adjourned at 7:41 P. M.

Submitted by:
____________________________________
Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk
Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
marshaa
6/6/2022 1:04 PM
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
81400 3005 AFLAC 05/13/2022 863.54
81401 3006 AIRGAS NCN 05/13/2022 235.78
81402 3007 ALERT-O-LITE, INC. 05/13/2022 163.20
81403 4532 ALTA TESTING SERVICES 05/13/2022 55.00
81404 3565 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 05/13/2022 507.26
81405 4545 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. 05/13/2022 86.50
81406 3891 AMERICAN BUSINESS MACHINES 05/13/2022 15.00
81407 3001 AMERICAN RED CROSS 05/13/2022 615.00
81408 3029 AT&T CALNET 3 05/13/2022 141.50
81409 3300 AVENU INSIGHTS & ANALYTICS 05/13/2022 450.00 81410 3035 BAUER COMPRESSORS, INC. 05/13/2022 1,258.52
81411 3054 BSK ASSOCIATES 05/13/2022 685.00
81412 3056 CAL STATE TERMITE AND PEST 05/13/2022 460.00 81413 3059 CALIFORNIA FORENSIC INSTITUTE 05/13/2022 2,000.00 81414 3063 CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS' ASSOC 05/13/2022 348.00 81415 3831 ADAM CASTANEDA 05/13/2022 35.00
81416 3079 CENTRAL VALLEY SWEEPING, INC. 05/13/2022 16,317.50 81417 4681 JAN CHALEPH 05/13/2022 350.00
81418 3918 CINTAS 05/13/2022 1,023.76
81419 3101 CITY OF SANGER 05/13/2022 413.00
81420 4688 MANDY COLBY 05/13/2022 121.46
81421 3853 ATTN: GEMT PROG STACY FOX DHCS-SAFETY NET 05/13/2022 10,666.77 81422 4229 EBA&M CORPORATION 05/13/2022 2,380.00
81423 4615 EMERALD TEXTILES SERVICES 05/13/2022 133.54
81424 3158 ENER POWER 05/13/2022 4,223.00
81425 3765 EWING IRRIGATION 05/13/2022 305.70
81426 4683 FIELD HOUSE PHOTOGRAPHY 05/13/2022 1,000.00
81427 3185 FRESNO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS 05/13/2022 10,000.00 81428 3845 FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF-CORONER 05/13/2022 200.00 81429 4686 RACHEL GARZA 05/13/2022 800.00
81430 3219 HEALTHWISE SERVICES 05/13/2022 347.50
81431 3222 HENRY SCHEIN, INC. 05/13/2022 2,870.37
81432 3225 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 05/13/2022 847.08 81433 3230 IACP 05/13/2022 99.00
81434 3999 IRON MOUNTAIN 05/13/2022 167.36
81435 3520 IRVINE & JACHENS, INC 05/13/2022 211.16
81436 3248 KAHN, SOARES & CONWAY, LLP 05/13/2022 5,500.00 81437 3249 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC05/13/2022 5,410.54 81438 4509 KCAPS 05/13/2022 17,030.63
81439 3686 KINGSBURG AUTO CARE 05/13/2022 113.12
81440 3253 KINGSBURG CHAMBER OF COMMERCE05/13/2022 2,500.00 81441 3254 KINGSBURG CHEVRON 05/13/2022 305.00
81442 3255 KINGSBURG ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 05/13/2022 250.00 81443 3625 KINGSBURG MEDIA FOUNDATION 05/13/2022 4,208.60 81444 3259 KINGSBURG SUPERMARKET, INC. 05/13/2022 149.36 81445 3266 BRENT KROEGER 05/13/2022 120.90
81446 4517 LECHOWICZ & TSENG MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS 05/13/2022 6,290.72 AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date (6/6/2022 1:04 PM) Page 1 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
81447 3275 LIEBERT, CASSIDY, WHITMORE 05/13/2022 668.50 81448 3277 LINCOLN AQUATICS 05/13/2022 3,061.61
81449 4588 MARK J. WHITTENBERG TRAINING, INC. 05/13/2022 375.00 81450 3293 MID VALLEY DISPOSAL 05/13/2022 113,703.29
81451 3997 MID VALLEY DISPOSAL RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION 05/13/2022 781.55 81452 3466 NAPA AUTO PARTS 05/13/2022 1,349.09
81453 4684 NATIONAL DEMOGRAPHICS INC. 05/13/2022 23,000.00 81454 3793 NVB EQUIPMENT, INC 05/13/2022 280.69
81455 4682 OLD REPUBLIC TITLE CO. 05/13/2022 400.00
81456 3312 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 05/13/2022 297.49
81457 4685 MELISSA ORNELAS 05/13/2022 90.00
81458 3611 HOLLY OWEN 05/13/2022 35.00
81459 3315 P G & E 05/13/2022 1,543.93
81460 3316 CORINA PADILLA 05/13/2022 638.54
81461 3450 ABIGAIL PALSGAARD 05/13/2022 35.00
81462 3320 PEPSI COLA 05/13/2022 1,080.81
81463 3329 POLYACK MARKETING 05/13/2022 3,300.00
81464 4030 PRINT THEORY 05/13/2022 601.57
81465 3334 PROFESSIONAL PRINT & MAIL, INC 05/13/2022 1,296.48 81466 3341 QUINN COMPANY 05/13/2022 319.50
81467 3537 SECOND CHANCE ANIMAL SHELTER 05/13/2022 3,000.00 81468 3903 SHADOW LOCKSMITH 05/13/2022 75.00
81469 3369 SILVAS OIL COMPANY, INC. 05/13/2022 9,024.08 81470 3378 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 05/13/2022 1,129.28
81471 3380 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-D O J 05/13/2022 315.50
81472 3381 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-D O T 05/13/2022 2,129.24 81473 3382 SHAUN STEPHENS 05/13/2022 726.30
81474 3385 STRYKER SALES CORPORATION 05/13/2022 2,999.80 81475 4028 SUPERIOR POOL CARE 05/13/2022 2,600.00
81476 3389 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD SWRCB - DWOCP 05/13/2022 105.00 81477 3805 USA BLUE BOOK 05/13/2022 873.88
81478 3419 VIKING CLEANING SERVICE 05/13/2022 3,500.00
81479 3421 VINCENT COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 05/13/2022 119.19 81480 4689 WATERMEN 05/13/2022 1,254.02
81481 3469 WECO SUPPLY CO., INC. 05/13/2022 32.40
81482 3448 CHRISTINA WINDOVER 05/13/2022 35.00
81483 3430 WONG, ANDY & BETTY 05/13/2022 2,600.00
81484 4584 DEVIN YOUNG 05/13/2022 48.00
Total for 5/13/2022: 285,700.11
81485 4690 ACME 05/19/2022 315.04
81486 4429 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC 05/19/2022 445.75 81487 3175 FIVE CITIES EDA 05/19/2022 978.52
81488 3994 GUARDIAN 05/19/2022 7,770.68
81489 4650 INTERWEST 05/19/2022 23,299.25
81490 3625 KINGSBURG MEDIA FOUNDATION 05/19/2022 43.58
81491 4329 MCI COMM SERVICES 05/19/2022 34.57
81492 4691 STEPHANIE MORALES 05/19/2022 75.00
81493 4635 PAYCHEX 05/19/2022 425.00
81494 3363 SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS 05/19/2022 249.17
81495 3369 SILVAS OIL COMPANY, INC. 05/19/2022 5,892.22 81496 3396 THE BUSINESS JOURNAL 05/19/2022 330.00
81497 3397 THE GAS COMPANY 05/19/2022 6,082.10
Total for 5/19/2022: 45,940.88
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date (6/6/2022 1:04 PM) Page 2 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
ACH 3231 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION - WIRE 05/20/2022 1,283.65 ACH 3470 Internal Revenue Service - ACH 05/20/2022 57,081.70 ACH 3471 Employment Development Department - ACH05/20/2022 10,598.01 ACH 3472 CalPERS - ACH 05/20/2022 45,504.81
ACH 3475 Empower 05/20/2022 3,582.84
ACH 3476 CHILD SUPPORT STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - ACH 05/20/2022 240.46 ACH 3526 Public Employees Retirement System 457 Plan-Deferred Comp - ACH 05/20/2022 327.35 Total for 5/20/2022: 118,618.82
81498 4692 ADVENTIST HEALTH- HANFORD 06/02/2022 632.75
81499 3005 AFLAC 06/02/2022 766.70
81500 3006 AIRGAS NCN 06/02/2022 1,280.28
81501 4481 ALERT-ALL 06/02/2022 1,149.69
81502 4545 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. 06/02/2022 81.54
81503 3891 AMERICAN BUSINESS MACHINES 06/02/2022 15.00
81504 4695 AP TRITON, LLC 06/02/2022 6,485.20
81505 3029 AT&T CALNET 3 06/02/2022 80.00
81506 3030 AT&T MOBILITY 06/02/2022 1,409.11
81507 3054 BSK ASSOCIATES 06/02/2022 406.00
81508 4429 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC 06/02/2022 983.77 81509 4696 JEREMY CAZARES 06/02/2022 32.50
81510 3079 CENTRAL VALLEY SWEEPING, INC. 06/02/2022 16,317.50 81511 4546 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 06/02/2022 878.25
81512 3101 CITY OF SANGER 06/02/2022 442.50
81513 3102 CITY OF SELMA 06/02/2022 1,800.00
81514 4647 FERNANDO CONCHAS 06/02/2022 205.00
81515 3119 COOK'S COMMUNICATIONS CORP. 06/02/2022 125.00 81516 3127 COUNTY OF FRESNO-TREASURER 06/02/2022 648.80 81517 3540 FAILSAFE TESTING 06/02/2022 2,189.65
81518 4536 FlowMSP, INC. 06/02/2022 995.00
81519 3179 LEE FORLINES 06/02/2022 189.34
81520 3221 ALEX HENDERSON 06/02/2022 94.00
81521 3222 HENRY SCHEIN, INC. 06/02/2022 1,265.76
81522 4649 KIMBERLY HOFF 06/02/2022 2,280.00
81523 3225 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 06/02/2022 19.10
81524 3999 IRON MOUNTAIN 06/02/2022 42.40
81525 3534 JACK'S REFRIGERATION, INC. 06/02/2022 601.92 81526 4440 J'S MOBILE DETAILING INC 06/02/2022 5,030.00 81527 3686 KINGSBURG AUTO CARE 06/02/2022 729.75
81528 4648 KINGSBURG EXPRESS LUBE INC. 06/02/2022 87.85 81529 3625 KINGSBURG MEDIA FOUNDATION 06/02/2022 1,585.97 81530 3266 BRENT KROEGER 06/02/2022 1,242.80
81531 3518 METRO UNIFORM 06/02/2022 939.59
81532 3997 MID VALLEY DISPOSAL RECYCLING & TRANSFER STATION 06/02/2022 823.90 81533 3844 NATHAN MOON 06/02/2022 1,136.88
81534 3308 NELSON'S POWER CENTER 06/02/2022 63.17
81535 3315 P G & E 06/02/2022 42,707.25
81536 3319 KEVIN PENDLEY 06/02/2022 688.26
81537 3327 PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL FINANCIAL SVC'S. LLC 06/02/2022 186.23 81538 4313 POLLARDWATER 06/02/2022 1,208.71
81539 3329 POLYACK MARKETING 06/02/2022 3,300.00
81540 4063 PRESIDIO JJR SUMMERLIN 123, LLC 06/02/2022 232,840.30 81541 3335 PROFORCE LAW ENFORCEMENT 06/02/2022 4,137.08 81542 3885 RACHELLE RESENDEZ 06/02/2022 550.00
81543 3537 SECOND CHANCE ANIMAL SHELTER 06/02/2022 1,750.00 81544 3961 SHARP AMBULANCE BILLING 06/02/2022 3,925.72
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date (6/6/2022 1:04 PM) Page 3 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
81545 3369 SILVAS OIL COMPANY, INC. 06/02/2022 3,473.87 81546 4262 SILVERFOX ELECTRIC, INC. 06/02/2022 1,950.59 81547 4142 SPARKLETTS 06/02/2022 130.88
81548 3380 STATE OF CALIFORNIA-D O J 06/02/2022 747.00
81549 3216 THE SENTINEL 06/02/2022 2,863.13
81550 3414 ERIC VASQUEZ 06/02/2022 1,242.80
81551 3416 VERIZONWIRELESS 06/02/2022 1,133.78
81552 3421 VINCENT COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 06/02/2022 543.61 81553 4693 DESTINY ZUNIGA 06/02/2022 25.00
Total for 6/2/2022: 356,460.88
ACH 3231 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION - WIRE 06/03/2022 1,283.65 ACH 3470 Internal Revenue Service - ACH 06/03/2022 59,506.01 ACH 3471 Employment Development Department - ACH06/03/2022 11,101.30 ACH 3472 CalPERS - ACH 06/03/2022 45,209.08
ACH 3475 Empower 06/03/2022 3,578.43
ACH 3476 CHILD SUPPORT STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT - ACH 06/03/2022 240.46 ACH 3526 Public Employees Retirement System 457 Plan-Deferred Comp - ACH 06/03/2022 327.35 Total for 6/3/2022: 121,246.28
Report Total (168 checks): 927,966.97
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date (6/6/2022 1:04 PM) Page 4

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor North & City Council
REPORT FROM: Christina Windover, Admin. Services Director REVIEWED BY: AH AGENDA ITEM: COVID-19 Prevention Plan Update
ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance ___Resolution ____Motion ____Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On April 21, 2022, the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (“OSHSB”) amended and re-adopted the Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (“ETS”). This is the third re-adoption of the ETS, which will remain in effect through December 31, 2022, unless extended, modified or rescinded in the interim.

The ETS is intended to assist employers in modifying their workplace health and safety policies, procedures, and practices, including their COVID-19 Prevention Programs (“CPP”) to comply with operative legal obligations.

Substantive changes to the City of Kingsburg’s CPP:
• Notice regarding Exclusion Periods and Return to Work Requirement: Pursuant to Executive Order N-84- 20, in circumstances where the ETS provides for a lengthier exclusion period than is required by the California Department of Public Health (“CDPH”), the regulatory requirements are suspended and the public health guidance applies.
• COVID-19 test: self-administered and self-read tests now qualify as a COVID-19 test to return to work, so long as the test can be independently verified, such as by a time-stamped photograph. • Fully vaccinated: no longer distinguish between employees based on their vaccination status. • Returned case: employers are not required to make COVID-19 testing available to returned cases due to a workplace exposure. A returned case is an employee who is within 90 days from onset of symptoms, or 90 days from the date of first positive test if asymptomatic. • Face coverings: employees who are not fully vaccinated are no longer required to wear a face covering indoors or in vehicles.
• Disinfection: employers are no longer required to disinfect frequently touched surfaces, areas, and equipment that was touched by someone with COVID-19.
• Respirators: any employee, regardless of vaccination status, may request an employer-provided respirator for their own voluntary use when working indoors with more than one person. • Testing: employers must make free testing available to any employee with COVID-19 symptoms.

Employees are paid for this time.
• Exclusion of COVID-19 Cases and Close Contacts: employees who have had a close contact exposure, but are asymptomatic do not need to quarantine, but should be tested three to five days after the close contact exposure and wear a face covering when around others for 10 days. • Return to work – COVID-19 Cases: two different return to work criteria depending on whether the employee is symptomatic and whether their symptoms are resolving/improving.

Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 5.3

RECOMMENDED ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL

1. Approve the City of Kingsburg COVID-19 Prevention Plan.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Council could choose to provide direction on an amended the policy that is above and beyond the regulations set forth by Executive Order N-23-21 for the third re-adoption of the Emergency Temporary Standards.

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
• Council approved the last COVID-19 Prevention Plan on 12/29/2020. Subsequent updates are required by law.

ATTACHED INFORMATION

1. Revised City of Kingsburg COVID-19 Prevention Plan
FISCAL IMPACT:

1. Is There A Fiscal Impact? Yes

2. Is it Currently Budgeted? No

3. If Budgeted, Which Line? Varies
The City of Kingsburg
COVID-19 Prevention
Program
June 15, 2022
Table of Contents
Scope ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Authority and Responsibility....................................................................................................... 1 Identification and Evaluation of COVID-19 Hazards ................................................................... 1 Employee Participation........................................................................................................... 2 Employee Screening .............................................................................................................. 2 Ventilation and Filtration Efficiency ......................................................................................... 2 Correction of COVID-19 Hazards............................................................................................... 2 Control of COVID-19 Hazards.................................................................................................... 3 Face Coverings ...................................................................................................................... 3 Vaccination Verification or Testing in High Risk Settings (If Applicable).................................. 4 Testing Requirements for Unvaccinated in High Risk Settings (If Applicable)......................... 4 Vaccinations (If Applicable) .................................................................................................... 5 Engineering Controls.............................................................................................................. 5 Hand Sanitizing ...................................................................................................................... 5 Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Used to Control Employees’ Exposure to COVID-19 .. 6 Investigating and Responding to COVID-19 Cases.................................................................... 6 System for Communicating ........................................................................................................ 6 Training and Instruction.............................................................................................................. 7 Exclusion of COVID-19 Cases ................................................................................................... 8 Reporting, Record Keeping, and Access.................................................................................... 9 Return-to-Work Criteria.............................................................................................................. 9 Appendices
A. Identification of COVID-19 Hazards
B. COVID-19 Inspections
C. Employee Self-Screening Checklist
D. Investigating COVID-19 Cases
E. Potential COVID-19 Exposure Contact Tracing
F. COVID-19 Training Roster
G. Definitions
H. COVID Vaccination Self- Attestation Statement (If Applicable) I. COVID Vaccination Verification for High Risk Settings (If Applicable) Additional Considerations

1. Multiple COVID-19 Infections and COVID-19 Outbreaks

2. Major COVID-19 Outbreaks

3. COVID-19 Prevention in Employer-Provided Housing

4. COVID-19 Prevention in Employer-Provided Transportation to and from Work 1 This COVID-19 Prevention Program (CPP) is designed to control exposures to the SARS-CoV-2 virus that may occur in our workplace.

Date: June 15, 2022
Scope
(Note: See Executive Order N-84-20, issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which in certain circumstances, replaces, for the duration of the Executive Order, the exclusion period and requirements of this Emergency Temporary Standard with the California Department of Public Health’s (CDPH) isolation and quarantine periods and requirements. The isolation and quarantine periods and requirements are reflected under the Exclusion of COVID-19 Cases and Return-toWork Criteria sections of this program.) This policy applies to all employees with the following exceptions:
a. Work locations with one employee who does not have contact with other persons b. Employees working from home
c. Employees with occupational exposure as defined by Cal/OSHA Title 8 Section 5199, when covered by that section
d. Employees teleworking from a location of the employee’s choice that is not under the control of City of Kingsburg
City of Kingsburg will check for the most current information from the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) including guidance documents, Health Orders, and Executive Orders from the Governor’s Office and county and local health departments and follow the most current information. Some provisions of Cal/OSHA’s COVID-19 emergency regulation may be suspended, or more stringent requirements may need to be implemented based on updated guidance and orders from the CDPH and the Governor’s Office through the issuance of updated or new Executive Orders and county or local health department regulations.

Authority and Responsibility
Alex Henderson has overall authority and responsibility for implementing the provisions of this CPP in our workplace. In addition, all department heads, managers, and supervisors are responsible for implementing and maintaining the CPP in their assigned work areas and for ensuring employees receive answers to questions about the program in a language they understand.

All employees are responsible for using safe work practices; following all directives, policies, and procedures; and assisting in maintaining a safe work environment.

Identification and Evaluation of COVID-19 Hazards
2 We will implement the following in our workplace:
• Conduct workplace-specific evaluations using the Appendix A: Identification of COVID-19 Hazards form
• Evaluate employees’ potential workplace exposures to all persons at or who may enter our workplace
• Review applicable orders and general and industry-specific guidance from the State of California, Cal/OSHA, and the local health department related to COVID-19 hazards and prevention
• Evaluate existing COVID-19 prevention controls in our workplace and the need for different or additional controls
• Conduct periodic inspections using the Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections form as needed to identify unhealthy conditions, work practices, and work procedures related to COVID-19 and to ensure compliance with our COVID-19 policies and procedures Employee Participation
Employees and their authorized employee representatives are encouraged to participate in the identification and evaluation of COVID-19 hazards by reporting hazards, assisting in hazard assessments and hazard identification.

Employee Screening
Self-screen according to California Department of Public Health guidelines.

Ventilation and Filtration Efficiency
For indoor locations, we will evaluate how to maximize ventilation with outdoor air to the highest level of filtration efficiency compatible with the existing ventilation system and whether the use of portable or mounted high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration units, or other air cleaning systems, would reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission.

We will review applicable orders and guidance from the State of California and the local health department related to COVID-19 hazards and prevention. These orders and guidance are both information of general application, including Interim Guidance for Ventilation, Filtration, and Air Quality in Indoor Environments by the CDPH and information specific to our industry, location, and operations.

Correction of COVID-19 Hazards
Unsafe or unhealthy work conditions, practices, or procedures will be documented on the Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections form and corrected in a timely manner based on the severity of the hazards, as follows:
• The severity of the hazard will be assessed, and correction timeframes assigned accordingly.
• Individuals are identified as being responsible for timely correction. • Follow-up measures are taken to ensure timely correction. 3 Control of COVID-19 Hazards
Face Coverings
Face coverings or masks are recommended for all individuals in the following indoor settings:
• On public transit (examples: airplanes, ships, ferries, trains, subways, buses, taxis, and ride-shares) and in transportation hubs (examples: airport, marina, train station, seaport, or other port station, or any other area that provides transportation) • Indoors in K-12 schools, childcare
• Emergency shelters and cooling centers
Face coverings or masks are required for all individuals in the following indoor settings:
• Healthcare settings
• State and local correctional facilities and detention centers • Homeless shelters
• Long-term care settings and adult and senior care facilities We will provide face coverings and ensure they are worn where required by orders from the CDPH.

We will ensure required face coverings are available, clean and undamaged, and they are worn over the nose and mouth.

Example:

Masks are provided to all employees, and they may ask their department head or manager if additional masks are needed.

When employees are required to wear face coverings under section 3205 or sections 3205.1 through 3205.4, the following exceptions apply:
a. When an employee is alone in a room or vehicle.
b. While eating or drinking at the workplace, provided employees are at least six feet apart and outside air supply to the area, if indoors, has been maximized to the extent feasible. c. Employees who cannot wear face coverings due to a medical or mental health condition or disability or who are hearing-impaired or communicating with a hearing-impaired person. Alternatives will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Any employee not wearing a face covering, pursuant to the exceptions listed in items (c), and not wearing a non-restrictive alternative when allowed by Section 3205 (c)(6)(E) shall be tested at least weekly for COVID-19 during employee paid time and at no cost to the employee.

When face coverings are not required by this section, section 3205, or sections 3205.1 through 3205.4, we will provide face coverings to employees upon request. 4 Vaccination Verification or Testing in High Risk Settings As required by the CDPH Health Order of July 26, 2021, all facilities identified below in these highrisk settings must verify vaccine status of all workers:

A. High-Risk Congregate Settings:
• Adult and Senior Care Facilities
Only the following modes may be used as proof of vaccination:
• COVID-19 vaccination record card (issued by the Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control & Prevention or World Health Organization Yellow Card) that includes name of person vaccinated, type of vaccine provided, and date last dose administered); OR
• A photo of a vaccination record card as a separate document; OR • A photo of the client’s vaccination record card stored on a phone or electronic device; OR • Documentation of COVID-19 vaccination from a health care provider; OR • Digital record that includes a QR code that when scanned by a SMART Health Card reader displays to the reader client name, date of birth, vaccine dates, and vaccine type. The QR code must also confirm the vaccine record as an official record of the State of California; OR
• Documentation of vaccination from other contracted employers who follow these vaccination record guidelines and standards.

In the absence of knowledge to the contrary, a facility may accept the documentation presented as valid.

Facilities must have a plan in place for tracking verified worker vaccination status. Records of vaccination verification must be made available, upon request, to the local health jurisdiction for purposes of case investigation.

Workers who are not fully vaccinated, or for whom vaccine status is unknown or documentation is not provided, must be considered unvaccinated.

Testing Requirements for Unvaccinated in High Risk Settings As required by the CDPH Health Order of July 26, 2021, COVID-19 testing will be required of unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated employees in high risk settings:

A. High-Risk Congregate Settings and Other Health Care Settings

1. Asymptomatic unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated workers are required to undergo diagnostic screening testing.

2. Workers may choose either antigen or molecular tests to satisfy this requirement, but unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated workers must be tested at least once weekly with either PCR testing or antigen testing. Any PCR (molecular) or antigen test used must either have Emergency Use Authorization by the U.S. Food and Drug 5 Administration or be operating per the Laboratory Developed Test requirements by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

B. All Facilities

1. Unvaccinated or incompletely vaccinated workers must also observe all other infection control requirements, including masking and are not exempted from the testing requirements even if they have a medical contradiction to vaccination, since they are still potentially able to spread the illness. Previous history of COVID-19 from which the individual recovered more than 90 days earlier, or a previous antibody test for COVID-19, do not waive this requirement for testing.

2. Diagnostics screening testing of asymptomatic fully vaccinated workers is not currently required. However, fully vaccinated workers may consider continuing routine diagnostic screening testing if they have underlying immunocompromising conditions (e.g. organ transplantation, cancer treatment), that might impact the level of protection by COVID-19 vaccine.

3. Facilities with workers required to undergo workplace diagnostic screening testing should have a plan in place for tracking results, conducting workplace contact tracing, and must report results to local public health departments. There are IT platforms that can facilitate these processes for facilities.

Vaccinations
We will document vaccinations in the following manner:
• Employees will sign a document to self-attest to their COVID vaccination status and Human Resources will maintain a record of the signed COVID status statements (See Appendix H).

Human Resources will provide supervisors and managers with a list of which employees are fully vaccinated, so they are able to enforce the face covering requirements for unvaccinated employees as specified in this plan.

Engineering Controls
We maximize, to the extent feasible, the quantity of outside air for our buildings with mechanical or natural ventilation systems by:

We have evaluated whether it is possible to increase filtration efficiency to the highest level compatible with the worksites’ and facilities’ existing ventilation systems. We have taken into consideration circumstances where the amount of outside air needs to be minimized due to other hazards, such as heat or wildfire smoke. All systems will be properly maintained and adjusted as required by the manufacturer’s instructions.

Hand Sanitizing
In order to implement effective hand sanitizing procedures, we:
• Evaluated handwashing facilities
6 • Determined the need for additional facilities
• Encourage and allowing time for employee handwashing
• Providing employees with an effective hand sanitizer and prohibiting hand sanitizers that contain methanol (i.e., methyl alcohol)
• Encouraging employees to wash their hands for at least 20 seconds each time Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Used to Control Employees’ Exposure to COVID-19 We evaluate the need for PPE (such as gloves, goggles, and face shields) as required by CCR Title 8, section 3380, and provide such PPE as needed.

Upon request, we will provide respirators for voluntary use, in compliance with subsection 5144 (c)(2) to all employees who are working indoors or in vehicles with more than one person. We will encourage their use and ensure employees are provided with a respirator of the correct size.

We provide and ensure use of eye protection and respiratory protection in accordance with section 5144 when employees are exposed to procedures that may aerosolize potentially infectious material such as saliva or respiratory tract fluids.

Additional measures will be utilized as required by state and local health departments.

We will make COVID-19 testing available, during employee paid time, at no cost to employees with COVID-19 symptoms.

Investigating and Responding to COVID-19 Cases
This will be accomplished by using the Appendix D: Investigating COVID-19 Cases form.

Employees who had potential COVID-19 exposure in our workplace will be:
• Informed of their possible exposure to COVID-19 in the workplace while maintaining confidentiality
• Offered COVID-19 testing through their health provider or if not covered by insurance offered testing through another provider at no cost during their working hours • Provided information on benefits as outlined in the Training and Instruction section System for Communicating
Our goal is to ensure we have effective two-way communication with our employees in a form they can readily understand, and it includes the following information:
• Requiring employees to report COVID-19 symptoms and possible hazards to their manager, supervisor, or Human Resources Department.
• Instructing employees not to report to work when sick. • Informing employees, they can report symptoms and hazards without fear of reprisal. • Providing reasonable accommodations for employees with medical or other conditions 7 that put them at increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness when possible. • Within one business day of the time the City of Kingsburg knew or should have known of a COVID-19 case, a written notice will be given to all persons at the worksite who may have been exposed to COVID-19. The written notice shall be written in a way that it does not reveal any personal identifying information of the COVID-case and in the manner that City of Kingsburg normally uses to communicate employment-related information. The notice shall include the cleaning and disinfection plan required by Labor Code section 6409.6 (a)(4). The notice must be sent to all employees who were on the premises at the same worksite as the COVID-19 case during the infectious period. The notice must also be sent to independent contractors and other employers on the premises at the same worksite as the COVID-19 cases during the infectious period. • City of Kingsburg will make testing available at no cost, during paid time, to all employees of the City of Kingsburg who had close contact in the workplace and provide them with the information on benefits described in Title 8, Section 3205. • Where testing is not required, advising employees to contact their personal physician, or the county health department for information on where they can access COVID-19 testing.

In the event the entity is required to provide testing because of a workplace exposure or outbreak, we will communicate the plan for providing testing and inform affected employees of the reason for the testing and the possible consequences of a positive test. • Providing information about COVID-19 hazards to employees (and other employers and individuals in contact with our workplace) who may be exposed on what is being done to control those hazards and our COVID-19 policies and procedures. • In the event we are required to provide testing because of a workplace exposure or outbreak, we will communicate the plan for providing testing and inform affected employees of the reason for the testing and the possible consequences of a positive test.

Training and Instruction
We will provide effective training and instruction that includes:
• Our COVID-19 policies and procedures to protect employees from COVID-19 hazards, and how to participate in the identification and evaluation of COVID-19 hazards. • Information regarding COVID-19-related benefits to which the employee may be entitled under applicable federal, state, or local laws. This includes any benefits available under legally mandated sick and vaccination leave, if applicable, workers’ compensation law, local governmental requirements, our leave policies, and leave guaranteed by contract, and Section 3205.
• The fact that:
o COVID-19 is an infectious disease that can be spread through the air when an infectious person talks or vocalizes, sneezes, coughs, or exhales. o COVID-19 may be transmitted when a person touches a contaminated object and then touches their eyes, nose, or mouth, although that is less common, and that an infectious person may have no symptoms.
o The fact that particles containing the virus can travel more than six feet, especially indoors, so physical distancing, face coverings, increased ventilation indoors, and 8 respiratory protection decrease the spread of COVID-19 but are most effective when used in combination.
• Our policy for providing respirators and the right of employees to request a respirator for voluntary use as stated in this program without fear of retaliation and at no cost to employees. Whenever respirators are provided for voluntary use under this section or section 3205.1 through 3205.4, training will be provided on how to properly wear the respirator and how to perform a seal check according to the manufacturer’s instructions each time a respirator is worn and the fact that facial hair interferes with the seal. • The importance of frequent handwashing with soap and water for at least 20 seconds and using hand sanitizer when employees do not have immediate access to a sink or handwashing facility and that hand sanitizer does not work if the hands are soiled. • Proper use of face coverings and the fact that face coverings are not respiratory protective equipment. COVID-19 is an airborne disease. N95s and more protective respirators protect the users from airborne disease while face coverings are intended to primarily protect people around the user.
• COVID-19 symptoms and the importance of obtaining a COVID-19 test and not coming to work if the employee has COVID-19 symptoms.
• Information on our COVID-19 policy, how to access COVID-19 testing and vaccination and the fact that vaccination is effective at preventing COVID-19, protecting against both transmission and serious illness or death.
• The conditions under which face coverings must be worn at the workplace and that employees can request face coverings from the employer at no cost to the employee and can wear them at work, regardless of vaccination status, without fear of retaliation.

Appendix F: COVID-19 Training Roster will be used to document this training.

Exclusion of COVID-19 Cases
Refer to CDPH isolation and quarantine recommendations dated 12/30/21. City of Kingsburg will check for the most current information from the CDPH including guidance documents, health orders, and executive orders from the governor’s office and county and local health departments and follow the most current information.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/Guidance-on-Isolation-andQuarantine-for-COVID-19-Contact-Tracing.aspx Where we have a COVID-19 case in our workplace and employees who had a close contact, we will limit transmission by:
• Ensuring COVID-19 cases are excluded from the workplace until our return-to-work requirements are met,
• Reviewing current CDPH guidance for persons who had close contacts, including guidance regarding quarantine or other measures to reduce transmission. We will develop, implement, and maintain effective policies to prevent transmission of COVID-19 by persons who have close contacts.
9 • If City of Kingsburg does not exclude an employee who had a close contact as permitted by the exceptions noted above, City of Kingsburg shall provide the employee with information about any applicable precautions recommended by CDPH for persons with close contact.
• Continuing and maintaining an employee’s earnings, seniority, and all other employee rights and benefits whenever we’ve demonstrated that the COVID-19 exposure is work related. This will be accomplished by:
o Allowing them to work remotely when they can fulfill their duties from home o Employer-provided employee sick leave benefits, payments from public sources or other means of maintaining earnings, rights and benefits, where permitted by law and when not covered by workers’ compensation.
• Providing employees at the time of exclusion with information on available benefits.

Reporting, Record Keeping, and Access
It is our policy to:
• Report information about COVID-19 cases at our workplace to the local health department whenever required by law, and provide any related information requested by the local health department.
• Maintain records of the steps taken to implement our written COVID-19 Prevention Program in accordance with CCR Title 8 section 3203(b). • Make our written COVID-19 Prevention Program available at the workplace to employees, to authorized employee representatives, and to representatives of Cal/OSHA immediately upon request.
• Use the Appendix D: Investigating COVID-19 Cases form to keep a record of and track all COVID-19 cases. The information will be made available to employees, authorized employee representatives, or as otherwise required by law, with personal identifying information removed.

Return-to-Work Criteria
Refer to CDPH isolation and quarantine recommendations dated 12/30/21. City of Kingsburg will check for the most current information from the CDPH including guidance documents, health orders, and executive orders from the governor’s office and county and local health departments and follow the most current information.
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/Guidance-on-Isolation-andQuarantine-for-COVID-19-Contact-Tracing.aspx The following return to work criteria shall apply to COVID-19 cases and employees excluded under sections 3205.1 and 3205.2. We will meet the requirements listed below:
10 • COVID-19 cases, regardless of vaccination status or previous infection, who do not develop COVID-19 symptoms or whose COVID-19 symptoms are resolving, shall not return to work until:
o At least five days have passed from the date that COVID-19 symptoms began or, if the person does not develop COVID-19 symptoms, from the date of first positive COVID-19 test;
o At least 24 hours have passed since a fever of 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or higher has resolved without the use of fever reducing medications; and o A negative COVID-19 test from a specimen collected on the fifth day or later is obtained; or, if unable to test or The City of Kingsburg chooses not to require a test, 10 days have passed from the date that COVID-19 symptoms began or, if the person does not develop COVID-19 symptoms, from the date of first positive test.
• COVID-19 cases, regardless of vaccination status or previous infection, whose COVID-19 symptoms are not resolving, may not return to work until:
o At least 24 hours have passed since a fever of 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or higher has resolved without the use of fever-reducing medication; and o Symptoms are resolving or 10 days have passed from when the symptoms began.
• Regardless of vaccination status, previous infection, or lack of COVID-19 symptoms, a COVID-19 case shall wear a face covering in the workplace until 10 days have passed since the date that COVID-19 symptoms began or, if the person did not have COVID-19 symptoms, from the date of their first positive COVID-19 test. • The requirements in this section apply regardless of whether an employee has previously been excluded or other precautions were taken in response to an employee’s close contact or membership in an exposed group.

If an order to isolate, quarantine, or exclude an employee is issued by a local or state health official, the employee will not return to work until the period of isolation or quarantine is completed or the order is lifted. If no period was specified, then the period shall be in accordance with the return to work period(s) listed in the return-to-work criteria in this program.

Title of owner or top management representative
Signature Date
Appendices
Appendix A: Identification of COVID-19 Hazards
All persons regardless of symptoms or negative COVID-19 test results will be considered potentially infectious. Particular attention will be paid to areas where people may congregate or come in contact with one another, regardless of whether employees are performing an assigned work task or not. For example: meetings, entrances, bathrooms, hallways, aisles, walkways, elevators, break or eating areas, cool-down areas, and waiting areas.

Evaluation of potential workplace exposure will be to all persons at the workplace or who may enter the workplace, including coworkers, employees of other entities, members of the public, customers or clients, and independent contractors. We will consider how employees and other persons enter, leave, and travel through the workplace, in addition to addressing fixed work locations.

Person conducting the evaluation: Enter Name(s)
Date: Enter Date
Name(s) of employee and authorized employee representative that participated: Enter Name(s) Interaction, area, activity, work task,
process, equipment, and material that
potentially exposes employees to COVID19 hazards
Places
and
times
Potential for COVID-19 exposures and
employees affected, including members
of the public and employees of other
employers
Existing and/or additional COVID19 prevention controls, including barriers, partitions and ventilation
Appendix B: COVID-19 Inspections
This form is only intended to get you started. Review the information available at www.dir.ca.gov/dosh/coronavirus/ for additional guidance on what to regularly inspect for, including issues that may be more pertinent to your particular type of workplace. You will need to modify this form accordingly.

Date: Enter date
Name of person conducting the inspection: Enter names
Work location evaluated: Enter information
Exposure Controls Status Person Assigned
to Correct
Date
Corrected
Engineering
Barriers/partitions
Ventilation (amount of fresh airand filtration
maximized)
Additional room air filtration
Add any additional controls your workplace is
using
Administrative
Respiratory protection
Hand washing facilities (adequate numbers and
supplies)
Disinfecting and hand sanitizing solutions being used
according to manufacturer instructions
Add any additional controls your workplace is using
PPE (not shared, available and being worn)
Face coverings (cleaned sufficiently often)
Gloves
Face shields/goggles
Add any additional controls your workplace is using
Appendix C: Employee Self-Screening Checklist
Today’s Date:

For your safety and the safety of our staff and the community, all employees are required to complete a COVID-19 self-screening just prior to the start of each workday.

Review the following symptoms and potential COVID-19 exposures:

1. Have you experienced any of the following symptoms in the past 48 hours? Fever or chills Y N Cough Y N Shortness of breath Y N
Difficulty breathing Y N Fatigue Y N Muscle or body ache Y N Headache Y N New loss of taste/smell Y N Sore throat Y N Congestion/runny nose Y N Nausea or vomiting Y N Diarrhea Y N

2. Are you isolating or quarantining because you tested positive for COVID-19 or are worried you may be sick with COVID-19? Y N

3. Have you been in close contact in the last 14 days with:
• Anyone who is known to have laboratory-confirmed COVID-19? OR
• Anyone who has any symptoms consistent with COVID-19? Y N

4. Are you currently waiting on the results of a COVID-19 test? IMPORTANT: ANSWER “NO” IF YOU ARE WAITING ON THE RESULTS OF A PRE-TRAVEL OR POST-TRAVEL COVID-19 TEST
Y N
Today’s Date:

I certify that my responses are true and correct.  Initial Did you answer NO to ALL QUESTIONS? Access to this facility is APPROVED.

Did you answer YES to ANY Question?
Access to this facility is NOT APPROVED.

Please contact ENTER NAME OR TITLE OF

WHO THE EMPLOYEE SHOULD CONTACT
for further screening and assessment.

Note: This form was developed based on the CDC screening checklist.

Appendix D: Investigating COVID-19 Cases
All personal identifying information of COVID-19 cases or symptoms will be kept confidential. All COVID-19 testing or related medical services provided by us will be provided in a manner that ensures the confidentiality of employees, with the exception of unredacted information on COVID19 cases that will be provided immediately upon request to the local health department, CDPH, Cal/OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), or as otherwise required by law.

All employees’ medical records will also be kept confidential and not disclosed or reported without the employee’s express written consent to any person within or outside the workplace, with the following exceptions: (1) Unredacted medical records provided to the local health department, CDPH, Cal/OSHA, NIOSH, or as otherwise required by law immediately upon request; and (2) Records that do not contain individually identifiable medical information or from which individually identifiable medical information has been removed.

Date: Enter date
Name of person conducting the investigation: Enter name(s) COVID-19 Case Investigation Information
Employee (or nonemployee*) name:Occupation (if nonemployee, why they were in the workplace):

Location where
employee worked (or
non-employee was
present in the
workplace):

Date investigation was
initiated:

Was COVID-19 test
offered?
Name(s) of staff
involved in the
investigation:

Date and time the
COVID-19 case was last
present in the
workplace:

Date of the positive or
negative test and/or
diagnosis:

Date the case first had
one or more COVID-19
symptoms:

Information received
regarding COVID-19
test results and onset
of symptoms (attach
documentation):

Results of the evaluation
of the COVID-19 case
and all locations at the
workplace that may
have been visited by the
COVID-19 case during
the high-risk exposure
period and who may
have been exposed
(attach additional
information):

Notice given (within one business day, in a way that does not reveal any personal identifying information of the COVID-19 case) of the potential COVID-19 exposure to:

All employees who may
have had a close contact
with a COVID-19 case
and their authorized
representatives.

Date:

Names of employees that
were notified:

Independent contractors
and other employers
present at the workplace
during the high-risk
exposure period.

Date:

Names of individuals that
were notified:

What were the workplace
conditions that could
have contributed to the
risk of COVID-19
exposure?
What could be done to
reduce exposure to
COVID-19?
Was local health
department notified? Date:
*Should an employer be made aware of a non-employee infection source COVID-19 status.

Appendix E: Potential COVID-19 Exposure Contact Tracing Name/Title of Person Being Traced: ____________________________________ Date Form was Completed: _________________
Date
I was within 6 feet (with
or without a mask) of
this person
Duration
(Total number of minutes
during a 24-hour period)
Name/Title
of the Person Involved
Location/Task
Where Contact was Made
Appendix F: COVID-19 Training Roster
Date: Enter date
Person that conducted the training: Enter name(s)
Employee Name Signature
Appendix G: Definitions
Close Contact Being within six feet of a COVID-19 case for a cumulative total of 15 minutes or greater in any 24-hour period within or overlapping with the “infectious period” defined by this section, regardless of the use of face coverings, unless close contact is defined by regulation or order of the CDPH. If so, the CDPH definition shall apply.

Exception: Employees have not had a close contact if they wore a respirator required by employer and used in compliance with section 5144, whenever they were within six feet of the COVID-19 case during the infectious period.

COVID-19 Coronavirus disease, an infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)
COVID-19 Case A person who:
(1) Has a positive “COVID-19 test”; or
(2) Has a positive COVID-19 diagnosis from a licensed health care provider; or
(3) Is subject to COVID-19-related order to isolate issued by a local or state health official; or
(4) Has died due to COVID-19, in determination of a local health department or per inclusion in the COVID-19 statistics of a county.

COVID-19
Hazard
Exposure to potentially infectious material that may contain SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Potentially infectious materials include airborne droplets, small particle aerosols, and airborne droplet nuclei, which most commonly result from a person or persons exhaling, talking or vocalizing, coughing or sneezing, or from procedures performed on a person that may aerosolize saliva or respiratory tract fluids.

COVID-19
Symptoms
Fever of 100.4 degrees Fahrenheit or higher, chills, cough, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle or body aches, headache, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, congestion or runny nose, nausea or vomiting, or diarrhea, unless a licensed health care professional determines the person’s symptoms were caused by a known condition other than COVID-19.

COVID-19 Test A test for SARS-CoV-2 that is:
(1) Cleared, approved, or authorized, including in an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to detect current infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus (e.g., a viral test); and
(2) Administered in accordance with the authorized instructions; (3) To meet the return to work criteria set forth in Section 3205 subsection (c)(10), a COVID-19 test may be both self-administered and self-read only if another means of independent verification of the results can be provided (e.g., a time-stamped photograph of the results) Exposed Group All employees at a work location, working area, or a common area at work, where an employee was present at any time during the infectious period. A common area at work includes bathrooms, walkways, hallways, aisles, break or eating areas, and waiting areas. The following exceptions apply:

A) For the purposed of determining the exposed group, a place where persons momentarily pass through while everyone is wearing face coverings, without congregating, is not a work location, working area, or a common area at work.

B) If the COVID-19 case was part of a distinct group of employees who are not present at the workplace at the same time as other employees, for instance a work crew or shift that does not overlap with another work crew or shift, only employees within that distinct group are part of the exposed group.

C) If the COVID-19 case visited a work location, working area, or a common area at work for less than 15 minutes during the infectious period, and all persons were wearing face coverings at the time the COVID-19 case was present, other people at the work location, working area, or common area are not part of the exposed group.

NOTE: An exposed group may include the employees of more than one employer. See Labor Code sections 6303 and 64304.1.

Face Covering A surgical mask, a medical procedure mask, a respirator worn voluntarily, or a tightly woven fabric or non-woven material of at least two layers that completely covers the nose and mouth and is secured to the head with ties, ear loops, or elastic bands that go behind the head. If gaiters are worn, they shall have two layers of fabric or be folded to make two layers. A face covering is a solid piece of material without slits, visible holes, or punctures, and must fit snugly over the nose, mouth, and chin with no large gaps on the outside of the face. A face covering does not include a scarf, ski mask, balaclava, bandana, turtleneck, collar, or single layer of fabric.

This definition includes clear face coverings or cloth face coverings with a clear plastic panel that otherwise meet this definition and that may be used to facilitate communication with people who are deaf or hard-of-hearing or others who need to see a speaker’s mouth or facial expressions to understand speech or sign language respectively.

Infectious
Period
The following time period, unless otherwise defined by CDPH regulation or order, in which case the CDPH definition shall apply:
(1) For COVID-19 cases who develop COVID-19 symptoms: from 2 days before they first develop symptoms until all of the following are true; it has been 10 days since symptoms first appeared, 24 hours have passed with no fever without the use of fever-reducing medications, and symptoms have improved
(2) For COVID-19 cases who never develop COVID-19 symptoms: from 2 days before until 10 days after the specimen for their first positive test for COVID-19 was collected.

Respirator A respiratory protection device approved by the NIOSH to protect the wearer from particulate matters, such as an N95 filtering facepiece respirator.

Returned Case A COVID-19 case who returned to work pursuant to Section 3205 subsection (c)(10) and did not develop any COVID-19 symptoms after returning. A person shall only be considered a returned case for 90 days after the initial onset of COVID-19 symptoms or, if the person never developed COVID-19 symptoms, for 90 days after the first positive test. If a period of other than 90 days is required by a CDPH regulation or order, that period shall apply.

Worksite For the limited purposes of sections 3205 through 3205.4 only, is a building, store, facility, agricultural field, or other location where a COVID-19 case was present during the infectious period. It does not apply to buildings, floors, or other locations of the employer that a COVID-19 case did not enter, locations where the workers worked by themselves without exposure to other employees or to a worker’s personal residence or alternative work location chosen by the worker when working remotely.

Appendix H: COVID Vaccination Self- Attestation Statement City of Kingsburg
I, _____________________________, attest that I:
 Have been fully vaccinated for COVID-19
 Have not been fully vaccinated for COVID-19
 Choose not to disclose my vaccination status
I understand that:
• Cal/OSHA requires I wear face coverings when required by CDPH. • City of Kingsburg will provide me with face coverings that are clean and undamaged, and that I may contact my supervisor for replacements.
• City of Kingsburg will provide a respirator if I request one, and it is my responsibility to wear it properly and ensure I have a proper seal when I wear it. ____________________________ _________________
Name of Employee Date
Appendix I: COVID Vaccination Verification for High Risk Settings City of Kingsburg
Employee Name (Print) _____________________________
Date of 1st
Vaccine
Type of Vaccine Provided
(ex. Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson
and Johnson)
Date of 2nd
Vaccine
Date of Booster
Date of Booster
Choose one of the following forms of COVID-19 vaccine verification:
 COVID-19 vaccination record card
 A photo of vaccination record card
 A photo of employee’s vaccination record card stored on a phone/electronic device  Documentation of COVID-19 vaccination record from a healthcare provider  A digital record that includes a QR code to confirm the vaccine record  Documentation of vaccination from other contracted employers who follow CDPH vaccination record guidelines and standards
____________________________ _________________
Reviewer’s Name Date
I understand that:
• if I am unvaccinated or choose not to disclose my vaccination status, the CDPH requires me to undergo semiweekly or weekly COVID-19 testing based on the high risk settings outlined in the CDPH Health Order of July 26, 2021.
• if I am unvaccinated or choose not to disclose my vaccination status, the CDPH requires I wear FDA-cleared surgical masks in indoor settings anywhere I am working with another person.
• City of Kingsburg will provide me with FDA-cleared surgical masks that are clean and undamaged, and I may contact my supervisor for replacements. • City of Kingsburg will provide a respirator if I request one, and it is my responsibility to wear it properly and ensure I have a proper seal when I wear it. ____________________________ _________________
Employee Signature Date

Additional Considerations
Additional Consideration #1
Multiple COVID-19 Infections and COVID-19 Outbreaks
This section of the CPP will stay in effect until there are no new COVID-19 cases detected in our workplace for a 14-day period.

COVID-19 testing
• We will make COVID-19 testing available at no cost to all employees within the exposed group except for employees who were not present during the period of an outbreak identified by a local health department or the relevant 14-day period and for returned cases who did not develop symptoms after returning to work pursuant to subsections 3205(c)(11)(A) or (B), no testing is required. COVID-19 testing will be provided at no cost to employees during employees’ working hours.
• COVID-19 testing consists of the following:
o City of Kingsburg shall make testing available to all employees in the exposed group, regardless of vaccination status, and then again one week later. Negative COVID-19 test results of employees with COVID-19 exposure will not impact the duration of any quarantine period required by, or orders issued by, the local health department.
o After the first two COVID-19 tests, we will continue to make COVID-19 testing available once a week at no cost to all employees in the exposed group who remain at the workplace at least once per week, or more frequently if recommended by the local health department, until this section no longer applies, pursuant to more protective stringent state or local health department mandates or guidance. o Employees who had close contacts shall have a negative COVID-19 test taken within three and five days after the close contact or shall be excluded and follow the return to work requirements of this policy starting from the date of the last known close contact.

All employees in the exposed group shall wear face coverings when indoors or when outdoors and less than six feet from another person, unless one of the exceptions in subsection 3205 (c)(6)(C) applies.

Notice shall be given to employees in the exposed group of their right to request a respirator for voluntary use under subsection 3205(c)(7)(C)2.

An evaluation of the worksite will be completed to determine whether to implement physical distancing of at least six feet between persons or, where six feet of physical distancing is not feasible, as much distance between persons as feasible.

COVID-19 investigation, review and hazard correction
In addition to our CPP Identification and Evaluation of COVID-19 Hazards and Correction of COVID-19 Hazards, we will immediately perform a review of potentially relevant COVID-19 policies, procedures, and controls and implement changes as needed to prevent further spread of COVID-19.

The investigation and review will be documented and include:
• Investigation of new or unabated COVID-19 hazards including:
o Our leave policies and practices and whether employees are discouraged from remaining home when sick.
o Our COVID-19 testing policies.
o Insufficient outdoor air.
o Insufficient air filtration.
o Lack of physical distancing.
• Updating the review:
o Every thirty days that the outbreak continues.
o In response to new information or to new or previously unrecognized COVID-19 hazards.
o When otherwise necessary.
• Implementing changes to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 based on the investigation and review. We will consider:
o Moving indoor tasks outdoors or having them performed remotely. o Increasing outdoor air supply when work is done indoors. o Improving air filtration.
o Increasing physical distancing as much as possible.
o Respiratory protection.

In buildings or structures with mechanical ventilation, we will filter recirculated air with minimum efficiency reporting value (MERV) 13 or higher efficiency filters if compatible with the ventilation system. If MERV-13 or higher filters are not compatible with the ventilation system, we will use filters with the highest compatible filtering efficiency. We will also evaluate whether portable mounted high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration units or other air cleaning systems would reduce the risk of transmission and, if so, will implement their use to the degree feasible.

Additional Consideration #2
Major COVID-19 Outbreaks
This section of the CPP will stay in effect until there are fewer than three COVID-19 cases detected in the exposed group for a 14-day period.

COVID-19 testing
We will continue to comply with Section 3205.1 and Additional Consideration #1, except that COVID-19 testing described in section 3205.1(b) shall be required of all employees in the exposed group, regardless of vaccination status twice a week, or more frequently if recommended by the local health department. Employees in the exposed group shall be tested or shall be excluded and follow the return to work requirements of subsection 3205 (c)(10) starting from the date that the outbreak begins. COVID-19 testing will be provided at no cost to employees during employees’ working hours.

We will provide a respirator for voluntary use in compliance with subsection 5144 (c)(2) to employees in the exposed groups and will determine the need for a respiratory protection program or changes to an existing respiratory protection program under section 5144 to address COVID19 hazards.

Any employees in the exposed group who are not wearing respirators required by this policy and used in compliance with section 5144 shall be separated from other persons by at least six feet, except where it can be demonstrated that six feet of separation is not feasible, and except momentary exposure while persons are in movement. Methods of physical distancing include:
telework or other remote work arrangements; reducing the number of persons in an area at one time, including visitors; visual cues such as signs and floor markings to indicate where employees and others should be located or their direction and path of travel; staggered arrival, departure, work, and break times; and adjusted work processes or procedures, such as reducing production speed, to allow greater distance between employees. When it is not feasible to maintain a distance of at least six feet, individuals shall be as far apart as feasible.

We will evaluate whether to halt some or all operations at the workplace until COVID-19 hazards have been corrected.

Additional Consideration #3
COVID-19 Prevention in Employer-Provided Transportation Assignment of transportation
To the extent feasible, we will reduce exposure to COVID-19 hazards by assigning employees sharing vehicles to distinct groups and ensuring that each group remains separate from other such groups during transportation, during work activities, and in employer-provided housing. We will prioritize shared transportation assignments in the following order:
• Employees residing in the same housing unit will be transported in the same vehicle. • Employees working in the same crew or workplace will be transported in the same vehicle.
• Employees who do not share the same household, work crew, or workplace will be transported in the same vehicle only when no other transportation alternatives are feasible.

Face coverings and respirators
We will ensure that the:
• Face covering requirements of subsection 3205 (c)(6) if applicable are followed for employees waiting for transportation.
• We will review CDPH and local health department recommendations regarding face coverings and implement face covering policies that effectively eliminate or minimize transmission in vehicles.
• We will provide training to employees on CDPH and local health department recommendations regarding face coverings and our own policies. • Upon request, we shall provide respirators for voluntary use in compliance with subsection 5144 (c)(2) to all employees in the vehicle.

Screening
We will develop, implement, and maintain effective procedures for screening and excluding drivers and riders with COVID-19 symptoms prior to boarding shared transportation.

Ventilation
We will ensure that vehicle windows are kept open, and the ventilation system set to maximize outdoor air and not set to recirculate air. Windows do not have to be kept open if one or more of the following conditions exist:
• The vehicle has functioning air conditioning in use and excessive outdoor heat would create a hazard to employees.
• The vehicle has functioning heating in use and excessive outdoor cold would create a hazard to employees. Protection is needed from weather conditions, such as rain or snow.
• The vehicle has a cabin air filter in use and the U.S. EPA Air Quality Index for any pollutant is greater than100.

Hand hygiene
We will provide hand sanitizer in each vehicle and ensure that all drivers and riders sanitize their hands before entering and exiting the vehicle. Hand sanitizers with methyl alcohol are prohibited.

This section shall take precedence when in conflict with 3205.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor North & City Council
REPORT FROM: David Peters, City Engineer REVIEWED BY: AP AGENDA ITEM: Consider Adoption of the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines
ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance _√___Resolution ____ Motion √ Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Historically, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has required lead agencies to evaluate transportation impacts from projects against the level of service (LOS) standards established by the appropriate agency’s general plan. LOS considers congestion and automobile delay as the factors for determining the significance of environmental impacts. In an effort to transition traffic analysis to a method that considers generation of greenhouse gases as opposed to delay, Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) was passed by the California Legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown in 2013. SB 743 requires lead agencies to examine vehicles miles traveled (VMT) generated by a project.

The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) contracted with LSA Associates, Inc., a transportation planning firm, to prepare VMT guidelines for the Fresno County area for use by FCOG’s member agencies. Following extensive public review, FCOG adopted the “Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines” in June 2020.

The City of Kingsburg is required to adopt VMT standards for use in evaluation of environmental impacts for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

RECOMMENDED ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL

1. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 2022-040 adopting the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines for VMT evaluations within the City of Kingsburg with a 13% threshold over existing VMT as the significance criteria for determining transportation impacts.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S)
The Council could choose to not adopt the guidelines and/or provide other direction to staff as deemed appropriate.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/KEY METRIC
To adopt policies allowing projects to be evaluated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 5.4

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

FINANCIAL SUMMARY
None.

PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
None.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Historically, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has required lead agencies to evaluate transportation impacts from projects against the level of service (LOS) standards established by the appropriate agency’s general plan. LOS considers congestion and automobile delay as the factors for determining the significance of environmental impacts. In an effort to transition traffic analysis to a method that considers generation of greenhouse gases as opposed to delay, Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) was passed by the California Legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown in 2013. SB 743 requires lead agencies to examine vehicles miles traveled (VMT) generated by a project, with a mandatory transition for all analysis from LOS to VMT by July 1, 2020. As opposed to mitigation for LOS impacts, which generally results in street widening, the addition of vehicle travel lanes, and traffic signal installation; mitigation for VMT impacts often consists of programs that reduce reliance on driving (e.g., public transit improvements or vouchers/passes, ride-sharing programs) or that encourage use of alternative transportation (e.g., installation of sidewalks, bicycle paths/lanes). SB 743 does not affect the City’s ability to maintain LOS standards as part of its General Plan and to continue to require street improvements in conjunction with future development; these LOS considerations are simply no longer thresholds under CEQA.

Understanding this new requirement would result in a paradigm shift and that many public agencies would not have the means or expertise to establish their own methodologies, SB 743 charged the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) with developing VMT guidance that could be used by any public agency for its CEQA analyses. This guidance came in the form of a Technical Advisory that was completed in 2018; however, it was acknowledged that such a universal set of guidelines would not be comprehensive and may not be ideal for use by every public agency. Therefore, agencies are allowed to either follow the OPR Technical Advisory or to create their own VMT standards, provided that such standards are developed and adopted based on substantial evidence that they will accomplish the intent of SB 743.

The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) is a metropolitan planning organization responsible for coordinating (but not regulating) topics related to transportation and housing throughout Fresno County. FCOG contracted with LSA Associates, Inc., a transportation planning firm, to prepare VMT guidelines for the Fresno County area for use by FCOG’s member agencies. Following extensive public review, FCOG adopted the “Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines” in July 2020.

FISCAL IMPACT:

1. Is There A Fiscal Impact? No.

2. Is it Currently Budgeted? N/A

3. If Budgeted, Which Line? N/A
The methodology for determining the potential for VMT impacts consists of comparing the project- generated VMT to the VMT threshold within the subject traffic analysis zone (TAZ). Kingsburg is represented by TAZs in both its incorporated area and sphere of influence. When a project is proposed, the FCOG Travel Demand Model is used to determine its VMT/capita or VMT/employee, as appropriate. Since the intention of SB 743 is to promote projects that result in a reduction in VMT (and therefore greenhouse gases), OPR recommends a threshold of 15% below existing VMT; considering the more rural nature of much of Fresno County and the corresponding reliance on automobiles, the Guidelines instead utilize a threshold of 13% below existing VMT.

Accordingly, under the Guidelines, if the project VMT is at least 13% less than the TAZ VMT, there is a less than significant transportation impact. If the project VMT is greater than 13% below the TAZ VMT, the project must implement mitigation to reduce the impacts to the extent feasible. The Guidelines provide numerous mechanisms for mitigation, including but not limited to:
• Identify and correct gaps in alternative transportation features near the project site. • Implement alternative transportation programs (carpooling, ridesharing, bus improvements). • Implement programs such as telecommuting and/or providing education about travel behavior. • Include affordable housing in otherwise market-rate projects. • Complete or contribute to projects listed in the Fresno COG Regional Active Transportation Plan.

ATTACHED INFORMATION

1. Resolution 2022-040

2. Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines RESOLUTION NO. 2022-040

A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF KINGSBURG ADOPT THE FRESNO COUNTY SB 743

IMPLEMENTATION REGIONAL GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2013, the Governor of the State of California signed Senate Bill 743, which included the addition of Section 21099 to the Public Resources Code, calling for the development and adoption of criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts and consideration of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the metric; and
WHEREAS, on December 28, 2018 the California Office of Administrative Law issued a Notice of Approval of Regulatory Action, approving the California Natural Resources Agency’s amendments and updates to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (2018 CEQA Amendments); and
WHEREAS, the 2018 CEQA Amendments included the addition of CEQA Guidelines Section which establishes that VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts and sets forth criteria for analyzing transportation impacts; and WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(4) authorizes a lead agency to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s VMT impacts and Section 15064.3(c) states that the provisions of Section 15064.3 shall apply statewide as of July 1, 2020; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Appendix G, Section XVII pertaining to transportation impacts requires the lead agency to determine if a project would have a significant impact with respect to VMT; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(a) defines a threshold of significance as “an identifiable quantitative, qualitative, or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) states that “[t]hresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process and supported by substantial evidence;” and WHEREAS, in order to facilitate orderly development within the City of Kingsburg and implement a threshold of significance that is relevant to the City’s development patterns and established based upon data unique to the region, and in order to ensure consistency in significance determinations for projects within the City of Kingsburg, the City has elected to adopt a citywide threshold of significance to measure VMT; and
WHEREAS, the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG), a metropolitan planning organization within Fresno County, hired LSA Associates, Inc., a transportation planning consultant, to develop a set of regional guidelines regarding VMT (Guidelines) for use in reviewing the environmental effects of projects within the County; and WHEREAS, the Guidelines were developed through a public review process as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b); and
WHEREAS, it was Fresno COG’s intention that the Guidelines could be adopted by any or all of its member agencies for their respective use in analyzing the potential environmental effects of their projects related to VMT; and WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c) states that “when adopting or using thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence;” and
WHEREAS, the Guidelines were drafted to comply with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7 including the identification of substantial evidence supporting the proposed VMT thresholds; and
WHEREAS, substantial evidence has been provided to support adoption of such thresholds; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the Guidelines would consist solely of establishment of a threshold for analysis of VMT and does not approve or endorse any physical activity by the City or by any other entity; does not enact or amend a zoning ordinance or a general plan or any element thereof; does not result in support to any entity via contract, grant, subsidy, loan, or other form of assistance; and does not result in issuance to any entity of any lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use, which does not constitute a “project” as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a).

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Kingsburg hereby:

1. Adopts the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines dated January 2021, attached hereto as Exhibit A.

2. Determines that a threshold of 13% below existing VMT will be utilized to determine the project has a less than significant transportation impact. Projects exceeding 13% below the existing VMT will be determined to have a significant transportation impact.

3. Determines that the Guidelines were prepared consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7 and the Guidelines contain substantial evidence necessary to support adoption of thresholds of significance for vehicle miles traveled for general use as part of the City’s environmental review process for the purpose of assessing the transportation impacts for projects within the City of Kingsburg’s jurisdiction.

4. Determines that adoption of the Guidelines is in the best interest of the City of Kingsburg and that adoption of the Guidelines does not meet the definition of “project” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a).
******
I, Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk of the City of Kingsburg, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Kingsburg City Council held on the ___ day of ________2022, by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers:

Noes: Councilmembers:

Absent: Councilmembers:

Abstain: Councilmembers:

Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk
City of Kingsburg
January 2021
FRESNO COUNTY SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION

REGIONAL GUIDELINES
This page intentionally left blank
January 2021
FRESNO COUNTY SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION

REGIONAL GUIDELINES
Submitted to:

Fresno Council of Governments
2035 Tulare Street, Suite 201
Fresno, California 93721
Prepared by:

LSA Associates, Inc.
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92614
(949) 553‐0666
This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Senate Bill (SB) 743, signed in 2013,
and codified in the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines in January 2019, changes
the way transportation impacts are
analyzed in the CEQA process. Vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) replaces auto
delay and level of service (LOS) as the
metric for transportation impact
determination. SB 743 takes effect
statewide on July 1, 2020. In order to
assist the member agencies in their
shift from delay based LOS approach to
VMT analysis, Fresno Council of
Governments (COG) has prepared this
document as a regional guide for the
16 member jurisdictions (illustrated in
Figure S1). The local governments can
take the recommendations in the
regional guidelines as appropriate based on
their individual circumstances, such as
growth policies and economic development goals.

This document discusses in further detail the following:
 Context for VMT analysis.
 Project screening.
 VMT significance thresholds and VMT analysis for land use development projects, transportation projects, and land use plans.
 Feasible mitigation strategies applicable for the Fresno region.

Figure S1: Fresno COG Member Jurisdictions—
County of Fresno and 15 Cities
Source: Fresno County.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
ii
This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. i TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................. iii FIGURES AND TABLES ................................................................................................. v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .................................................................vii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2. DEFINITION OF REGION: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED CONTEXT................... 5 CHAPTER 3. PROJECT SCREENING................................................................................ 7

3.1 Land Use Development Projects.......................................................................................... 7

3.2 Transportation Projects...................................................................................................... 12 CHAPTER 4. THRESHOLD AND VMT ANALYSIS FOR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS .......................................................................................................... 21

4.1 Thresholds for Land Use Projects....................................................................................... 21

4.2 Land Use Projects VMT Analysis/Mitigation Process......................................................... 23 CHAPTER 5. THRESHOLD AND INDUCED VMT ANALYSIS FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS .......................................................................................................... 31 CHAPTER 6. THRESHOLD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LAND USE PLANS....................... 39 CHAPTER 7. MITIGATION STRATEGIES ....................................................................... 41

7.1 Definition of Mitigation...................................................................................................... 41

7.2 Mitigation Measures.......................................................................................................... 43

7.3 Funding Mechanisms ......................................................................................................... 45

APPENDICES
A:   INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR ESTIMATING INDUCED VMT
B: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (CAPCOA)
C:   VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (CARB PAPERS)
D:   VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR COMMUNITY PLANS AND GENERAL PLANS

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
iv
This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
v

FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURES
Figure S1: Fresno COG Member Jurisdictions—County of Fresno and 15 Cities ..................................... i Figure 1: VMT Per Capita Compared to Population in California........................................................... 2 Figure 2: 2017 GHG Emissions in California by Scoping Plan Sector and Sub‐Sector Category.............. 3 Figure 3: Percentage of Total Tours Having Origins/Destinations within Fresno County and Terminating within or outside the County.................................................................................... 5 Figure 4: High‐Quality Transit Area within Fresno County..................................................................... 9 Figure 5: Average VMT per Capita for Member Jurisdictions Compared to Countywide Average VMT Per Capita .............................................................................................................. 13 Figure 6: Average VMT per Employee for Member Jurisdictions Compared to Countywide Average VMT per Employee........................................................................................................ 13 Figure 7: VMT per Capita Screening Map for Fresno County............................................................... 15 Figure 8: VMT per Employee Screening Map for Fresno County ......................................................... 17 Figure 9: SB 375 Regional Plan Climate Targets for California’s 18 MPOs........................................... 22 Figure 10: VMT Analysis Process for Land Use Development Projects................................................ 25 Figure 11: Induced Travel – VMT Attributable to a Project ................................................................. 32 Figure 12: Caltrans Induced Travel Calculator...................................................................................... 33 Figure 13: Conceptual Methodology for Calculating Induced Demand for Transportation Projects........................................................................................................................................ 37 Figure 14: VMT Per Capita and VMT per Employee Comparisons ‐ City of Fresno General Plan versus Fresno County under Existing Conditions........................................................................ 40 TABLES
Table A: Representative VMT and GHG Emissions from CalEEMod..................................................... 11 Table B: VMT Thresholds for Residential and Office Projects in Fresno County.................................. 25

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
vi
This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ABM activity‐based model
ADT average daily trips
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
COG Council of Governments
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EO Executive Order
FAR floor‐to‐area ratio
GHG greenhouse gas
GPA General Plan Amendment
GWP global warming potential
HOT high‐occupancy toll
HOV high‐occupancy vehicle
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS level of service
LRTP Long‐Range Transportation Plan
mi mile
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organizations

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
viii
MT metric ton
NCST National Center for Sustainable Transportation
ND Negative Declaration
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
PRC Public Resources Code
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency
SB Senate Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SOC Statement of Overriding Considerations
TA Technical Advisory
TDM transportation demand management
VMT vehicle miles traveled
ZC Zone Change
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
1 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
Senate Bill (SB) 743, signed in 2013, changes the way transportation impacts are analyzed in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) replaces auto delay and LOS as the metric for transportation impact determination. For land use development projects, VMT is simply the product of the daily trips generated by a new development and the distance those trips travel to their destinations. For capital projects, impacts are identified as the new VMT attributable to the added capital project, both from the installation of the facility and the induced growth—a new term in the CEQA lexicon—generated as a result of induced land use.

In January 2019, the Natural Resources Agency and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) codified SB 743 into the Public Resources Code (PRC) and the State CEQA Guidelines. The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b) states:

1. Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one‐half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.

2. Transportation Projects. Transportation projects that reduce, or have no impact on, vehicle miles traveled should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. For roadway capacity projects, agencies have discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements. To the extent that such impacts have already been adequately addressed at a programmatic level, such as in a regional transportation plan EIR, a lead agency may tier from that analysis as provided in Section 15152.

3. Qualitative Analysis. If existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle miles traveled for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze the project’s vehicle miles traveled qualitatively. Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors such as the availability of transit, proximity to other destinations, etc. For many projects, a qualitative analysis of construction traffic may be appropriate.

4. Methodology. A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revisions to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.

The OPR provides a Technical Advisory (TA) as a guidance document to establish thresholds for this new VMT metric. The laws and rules governing the CEQA process are contained in the CEQA statute (PRC Section 21000 and following), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14,

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
2 Section 15000 and following), published court decisions interpreting CEQA, and locally adopted CEQA procedures. The TA is intended as a reference document; it does not have the weight of law. Yet, deviating from the TA is best undertaken with substantial evidence to support the agency action.

The State of California is committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and achieving long‐term climate change goals. To achieve these climate change goals, California needs to reduce VMT. As illustrated in Figure 1, over the last 40 years, with increase in statewide population, the overall VMT has also increased. As illustrated in Figure 2, transportation is the single largest sector contributing to the State’s GHG emissions. More than 40 percent of the GHG emissions come from the transportation sector, primarily passenger cars and light‐duty trucks. Reducing the number of vehicle trips and the length of the trips are expected to result in reduced VMT and reduced GHG emissions. The new State CEQA Guidelines and the establishment of VMT thresholds for CEQA analyses is linked to GHG reduction strategies and overall statewide climate change goals.

Figure 1: VMT Per Capita Compared to Population in California Source: https://ca50million.ca.gov/transportation/
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
3 Figure 2: 2017 GHG Emissions in California by Scoping Plan Sector and Sub‐Sector Category
This document provides a guide and substantial evidence for Fresno Council of Governments (COG) and its member jurisdictions in setting the thresholds of significance for CEQA transportation studies. It is divided into chapters, including:
 Chapter 2 – Definition of Region: This chapter describes what the comparative is for analysis purposes. Each project will be compared to an existing regional average. The geographical area that defines the region is defined and described.
 Chapter 3 – Project Screening: OPR acknowledges that certain projects are either low VMT generators or by virtue of their location would have a less than significant impact. The Fresno COG member jurisdictions may use these screening criteria and should offer substantial evidence for other circumstances that would lead to a less than significant impact.  Chapter 4 –Threshold and VMT Analysis for Land Use Development Projects: In this chapter, thresholds that would define a significant CEQA impact are identified. The actual VMT metric (either an efficiency rate or total VMT) is described. The process of VMT analysis is also described in this chapter.
 Chapter 5 –Threshold and Induced VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects: This chapter describes the method to evaluate significant CEQA impacts associated with transportation projects. Many non‐vehicular capital projects are presumed to have a less than significant Source: California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017 Trends of Emissions and Other Indicators (California Air Resources Board Report).

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
4 impact. Capacity enhancing projects may have significant impacts and may be subject to a detailed analysis that will include measuring induced travel.  Chapter 6 – Threshold Recommendations for Land Use Plans: This chapter provides guidance and substantial evidence to support the threshold recommendation for land use plans and CEQA transportation analyses by Fresno COG members.
 Chapter 7 – Mitigation Strategies: Potential mitigation strategies are indicated in this chapter. It is noted that this discussion is not intended as a full list of measures Fresno COG members sanction as feasible. As in previous CEQA practice, it is generally the practitioner who identifies mitigation measures to offset the specific project related impacts identified in individual environmental document. The discussion here is intended as a guide for possible strategy for applicants who may wish to investigate methods to offset their specific project‐related significant impacts.

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
5 CHAPTER 2. DEFINITION OF REGION: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED CONTEXT The question of context is the definition of the scope of the VMT analysis. The common term for this in previous delay‐based LOS analyses is project study area. In the delay‐based LOS analyses, a project study area is generally determined based on the incremental increase in traffic from the project and its potential to create a significant LOS impact. This generally includes intersections and roadway segments where the project would add a prescribed number of peak‐hour trips. Many times, lead agencies stop study area boundaries at their jurisdictional borders.

Unlike delay‐based LOS analyses, VMT is a regional effect not defined by roadway, intersection, or pathway. The OPR acknowledges this in its TA (page 6), which states, Lead agencies should not truncate any VMT analysis because of jurisdictional or other boundaries….

Furthermore, the recommendations for thresholds for the primary land use types (residential and office) are based on a comparison to a regional average. Region is not defined further in the TA.

Instead, the OPR offers the following suggestions:

1. In cases where the region is substantially larger than the geography over which most workers would be expected to live, it might be appropriate to refer to a smaller geography, such as county, that includes the area over which nearly all workers would be expected to live (page 16).

2. For residential projects in unincorporated county areas, the local agency can compare a residential project’s VMT to (1) the region’s VMT per capita, or (2) the aggregate population weighted VMT per capita of all cities in the region (page 15).

LSA surveyed other large urbanized areas
around the State to identify what region
has been established for VMT thresholds.

In most cases, the County boundary has
been identified as the region selected for
VMT analysis. Mobility can be studied
using a trip‐based approach or a tour‐
based approach. The OPR TA states that
“where available, tour‐based assessment
is ideal because it captures travel behavior
more comprehensively.” Since Fresno
COG’s model is an Activity‐Based Model
(ABM),1 a tour‐based approach has been
followed. COG’s ABM was used to
examine the tours into and out of Fresno
County. As such, consistent with the OPR
TA, only tours having origins or

1 Fresno COG ABM Update Report: https://www.fresnocog.org/wp‐content/uploads/2017/06/Fresno‐COG‐ ABM‐Report.pdf.

Figure 3: Percentage of Total Tours Having
Origins/Destinations within Fresno County and
Terminating within or outside the County
Source: Fresno COG Activity Based Model
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Total Tours
Within County Ouside County

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
6 destinations or both within Fresno County were considered. External pass‐through trips were not considered. As illustrated in Figure 3, out of the total tours, about 93 percent originate or are destined within Fresno County. The remaining 7 percent tours are pass through trips and do not have stops within Fresno County.

Because the majority of the tours are contained within Fresno County or have origins or destinations within the County, the County line may be used to define the region. It should be noted that, for residential projects, the TA states that “Existing VMT per capita may be measured as regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita. Proposed development referencing a threshold based on city VMT per capita (rather than regional VMT per capita) should not cumulatively exceed the number of units specified in the [sustainable community strategy] SCS for that city, and should be consistent with the SCS.” As such, this analysis evaluated residential VMT per capita for all 16 member jurisdictions using Fresno County as the region as well as individual City boundaries as the region.

Fresno COG recommends that each member evaluate the findings of the analysis to determine the appropriate region for its respective jurisdictions. For office, retail, and all other non‐residential projects, consistent with the TA, Fresno COG recommends using Fresno County as the region. The other OPR guidance recommends consistency in approach; once a region is established, that region should be used for all subsequent traffic analyses.

In some cases, this County boundary has other names, such as the Council of Governments boundary. Nonetheless, County is a common and reoccurring context for CEQA VMT analyses throughout the State.

It should be recognized that the use of the County as the region defines the comparative, or the denominator, in the identification of project‐related impact. The numerator is the project’s VMT contribution. This project‐related VMT profile may go beyond the County boundary and not be truncated by a jurisdictional boundary. For example, a new, large employment generating land development proposed near Fresno County’s northern boundary may include VMT from as far away as Madera, Tulare, or Kings Counties, or other communities in the San Joaquin Valley. In that case, it would be the responsibility of the applicant and their traffic study preparer to include the project VMT regardless of geographical limit to the satisfaction of the agency staff. This project‐related VMT profile would be compared against the Fresno County regional average.

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
7 CHAPTER 3. PROJECT SCREENING
The TA does acknowledge that certain activities and projects may result in a reduction in VMT and GHG emissions and, therefore, a less than significant impact to transportation and circulation. A variety of projects may be screened out of a complicated VMT analysis due to the presumption described in the TA regarding the occurrence of less than significant impacts.

3.1 Land Use Development Projects
The TA acknowledges that conditions may exist that would presume that a land use development project has a less than significant impact. These may be size, location, proximity to transit, or trip‐ making potential. For example, land use development projects that have one or more of the following attributes may be presumed to create a less than significant impact:
 The project is within 0.5 mile (mi) of a transit priority area or a high‐quality transit area unless the project is inconsistent with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/SCS, has a floor area ratio (FAR) less than 0.75, provides an excessive amount of parking, or reduces the number of affordable residential units. In accordance with SB 743, “transit priority areas” are defined as “an area within one‐half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included in a Transportation Improvement Program. A Major transit stop means: “a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.” A high‐quality transit area or corridor is a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.

Figure 4 depicts transit priority areas within Fresno County, including high‐quality transit areas (within 0.5 mile of a major transit stop) served by the Fresno Area Express (FAX) with service intervals of 15 minutes or less. Projects proposed in these areas may be presumed to have a less‐than‐significant transportation impact unless the project is inconsistent with the RTP/SCS, has an FAR less than 0.75, provides an excessive amount of parking, or reduces the number of affordable residential units.
 The project involves local‐serving retail space of less than 50,000 square feet (sf).  The project has a high level of affordable‐housing units.2  The project generates fewer than 500 average daily trips (ADT).  The TA recommends a volume of 110 ADT. This recommendation is not based on any analysis of GHG reduction but, rather, on a CEQA categorical exemption. This exemption criterion states that for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures of up to 10,000 sf, the project is exempted from CEQA as long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the project is not located in an

2 The affordable‐housing requirement to meet the screening criteria is to be determined by each Fresno COG jurisdiction.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
8 This page intentionally left blank
ÄÆ99
ÄÆ180
ÄÆ168
ROUTE 9
R
O
U
TE 1/Q
R
O
U
TE 38
ÄÆ41
Gettysburg
Shepherd
SR 99
SR 41
West
Santa Fe
Temperance
Ventura
Figarden
Bullard
California
Clovis
Temperance
SR 180
Airway
McKinley
Clovis
Walnut
Herndon
American
Bullard
Central
SR 99
Fowler
SR 180
North
McKinley
Shields
Peach
A St
Fresno
Abby
Maple
Cedar
Third
Leonard
Herndon
Belmont
First
Blackstone
Amador
Fowler
Ashlan
Orange
Fifth
Golden Stat
Whites Brid
Shields
Weber
Polk
Blythe
Ashlan
H St.

Marks
Palm
Kings Canyo
SR 168
Shaw
Mil bl urn
McKinley
Chestnut
Chestnut
B St.

Cedar
First
Belmont
Marks
Braw el y
Audubon
De Wolf
Shields
Fresno SR 41
Nees
Auberry
Jensen
Wil ol w
Copper
Elm
DeWolf
Bullard
Cornelia
Behymer
Minnewawa
West
Golden Sta
Friant
Champlain
Jensen
Peach
Clovis
Fowler
Fresno
SOURCE: Fresno Area Express (FAX) (03/20), City of Fresno (04/20), ESRI C:\Users\DSinha\Documents\Works\CFO1802\fig_4_HQ Transit.mxd (4/30/2020) FIGURE 4
Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines High-Quality Transit Area Within Fresno County
S
!!
N
LEGEND
Cities with Sphere of Influence
Route 1/Q (Bus Rapid Transit)
Route 9
0 4000 8000 Route 38
FEET
Half-Mile Buffer
Route 9 (Headway more than 15 Mins.)
Route 38 (Headway more than 15 Mins.)

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
10 This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
11 environmentally sensitive area (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, subdivision (e)(2). As stated in the OPR TA, for projects that have a linear increase in trip generation with respect to the building footprint, the daily trip generation is anticipated to be between 110 and 124 trips per 10,000 sf. Therefore, based on this assumption, the OPR recommends 110 ADT as the screening threshold. However, the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) was used to characterize the effect of changes in project‐related ADT to the resulting GHG emissions. This model was selected because it is provided by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to be used statewide for developing project‐level GHG emissions. CalEEMod was used with the built‐in default trip lengths and types to show the vehicular GHG emissions from incremental amounts of ADT. Table A shows the resulting annual VMT and GHG emissions from the incremental ADT.

Table A: Representative VMT and GHG Emissions from CalEEMod Average Daily Trips (ADT) Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) GHG Emissions (Metric Tons CO2e per year) 200 683,430 258
300 1,021,812 386
400 1,386,416 514
500 1.703,020 643
600 2,043,623 771
Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2.

CalEEMod = California Emissions Estimator Model
CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent
GHG = Greenhouse Gas
A common GHG emissions threshold is 3,000 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalent3 (CO2e) per year.4 The vehicle emissions are typically more than 50 percent of the total project GHG emissions. Thus, a project with 500 ADT would generally have total project emissions that could be less than 1,300 MT CO2e/year (i.e., 50 percent or 643 MT CO2e/year from vehicle emissions and the other 50 percent coming from other project activities). As this level of GHG emissions would be less than 3,000 MT CO2e/year, the emissions of GHG from a project up to 500 ADT would typically be less than significant. Therefore, it is recommended that projects be screened out if they generate fewer than 500 ADT.
 The development of institutional/government and public service uses that support community health, safety and welfare may also be screened from subsequent CEQA VMT analysis. These facilities (e.g. police stations, fire stations, community centers, refuse stations) are already part of the community and, as a public service, the VMT is accounted for in the existing regional average. Many of these facilities generate fewer than 500 ADT and/or use vehicles other than passenger cars or light‐duty trucks. These other vehicle fleets are subject to regulation outside of CEQA, such as CARB and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The local

3 Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a concept developed to provide one metric that includes the effects of numerous GHGs. The global warming potential (GWP) of each GHG characterizes the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another GHG. The GWPs of all GHGs are combined to derive the CO2e. 4
Source: http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules‐compliance/ceqa/air‐quality‐analysis‐handbook/ghg‐ significance‐thresholds.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
12 jurisdiction will have the discretion to determine whether such facilities, that provide safety, security, and serve the local communities, can be screened out from the VMT analysis.  The TA states “Residential and office projects that are located in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold VMT. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps may be used to screen out residential and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.” VMT per capita was calculated for each member jurisdiction and compared with the VMT per capita of the entire Fresno County. Figure 5 illustrates a comparison between average VMT per capita for each member jurisdiction compared to the countywide average. This provides an overview of member jurisdictions’ average VMT profile (high, medium, and low) compared to the regional average. Figure 6 illustrates a similar comparison for VMT per employee. Region‐wide screening maps were also created for residential and office projects.

Figure 7 illustrates the VMT per capita screening map for the region. Figure 8 illustrates the VMT per employee screening map for the region.

Based on the individual COG agency traffic study guidelines or existing CEQA guidelines, other conditions may apply to screen out projects. Consistency with other plans to reduce GHG emissions may also reflect substantial evidence supporting a screening out, or the agencies may adopt the TA recommendations in total.

Additionally, the 2020 State CEQA Guidelines Section 15007 (c) states that “if a document meets the content requirements in effect when the document is sent out for public review, the document shall not need to be revised to conform to any new content requirements in Guideline amendments taking effect before the document is finally approved.” Therefore, if a land use development/ transportation project is already cleared by a certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or an adopted Negative Declaration (ND)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), then subsequent projects that are consistent with the approved project will not require a new VMT analysis.

The Fresno COG VMT Screening Tool can be used to determine whether a land use development project may be screened from a detailed VMT analysis. It should be noted that if a project constitutes a General Plan Amendment (GPA) or a Zone Change (ZC), none of the above screening criteria may apply. The City will be required to evaluate such projects on a case‐by‐case basis to determine whether a VMT analysis would be required. The VMT screening tool is available on Fresno COG’s website at https://www.fresnocog.org/project/sb743‐regional‐guidelines‐ development/.

3.2 Transportation Projects
The primary factor to consider for transportation projects is the potential to increase vehicle travel, sometimes referred to as “induced travel.” Based on the OPR TA, while the lead agency has discretion to continue to use a delay‐based LOS analysis for CEQA disclosure of transportation projects, changes in vehicle travel must also be quantified. The lead agency may solely use VMT F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
13 Source: Fresno COG Activity Based Model.

Figure 5: Average VMT per Capita for Member Jurisdictions Compared to Countywide Average VMT Per Capita
Source: Fresno COG Activity Based Model.

Figure 6: Average VMT per Employee for Member Jurisdictions Compared to Countywide Average VMT per Employee

0.0 5.0

10.0 15.0

20.0 25.0

30.0 Average VMT per Capita Fresno County Average VMT per Capita

0.0 5.0

10.0 15.0

20.0 25.0

30.0 35.0

40.0 45.0
Average VMT per Employee Fresno County Average VMT per Employee

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
14 This page intentionally left blank
Ã99
Ã180
Ã168
§¨¦5
Ã41
I5
Manning
SR 180
Mark
S
s
R 145
Elm
SR 168
Russell
SR 99
SR 41
Cedar
McCall
Auberry
Jensen
Shaw
Jayne
Mt.Whitney
Elkhorn
SR 33
SR 63
Alta
San Diego
Rose
Nees/SR 180
Piedra SR 269
American
SR 198
Kamm
Ll Panoche
Dinky Creek
SR 33/198
Friant
Herndon
Fairfax
Millerton
Napa
Harlan
Jameson
SR 245
West
Mt.Whitney
SR 168
Kamm
SOURCE: Fresno COG Activity Based Travel Demand Model (2019) R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\GIS\VMT_Maps_12-2-2020\fig18_County_All.mxd (1/8/2021) FIGURE 7
Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines VMT per Capita Screening Map for Fresno County
S
!!
N
VMT per Capita
No Population
Less than 14.0

14.0 - 18.2
Greater than 18.2
Cities Including Sphere of Influence
Fresno County Average VMT per Capita: 16.1
Threshold: 13%

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
16 This page intentionally left blank
Ã99
Ã180
Ã168
§¨¦5
Ã41
I5
Manning
SR 180
Mark
S
s
R 145
Elm
SR 168
Russell
SR 99
SR 41
Cedar
McCall
Auberry
Jensen
Shaw
Jayne
Mt.Whitney
Elkhorn
SR 33
SR 63
Alta
San Diego
Rose
Nees/SR 180
Piedra SR 269
American
SR 198
Kamm
Ll Panoche
Dinky Creek
SR 33/198
Friant
Herndon
Fairfax
Millerton
Napa
Harlan
Jameson
SR 245
West
Mt.Whitney
SR 168
Kamm
SOURCE: Fresno COG Activity Based Travel Demand Model (2019) R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\GIS\VMT_Maps_12-2-2020\figXX_Fresno_County_VMT_Emp.mxd (1/8/2021) FIGURE 8
Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines VMT per Employee Screening Map for Fresno County
S
!!
N
VMT per Employee
No Employment
Less than 22.3

22.3 - 28.9
Greater than 28.9
Cities Including Sphere of Influence
Fresno County Average VMT per Employee: 25.6
Threshold: 13%

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
18 This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
19 analysis for CEQA disclosure of transportation projects, but can also require an LOS analysis for design, traffic operations, and safety purposes. The TA lists a series of projects that would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel and which would, therefore, not require an induced travel analysis. These include the following:
 Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts; Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, or signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity.
 Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such as median barriers and guardrails.  Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes.
 Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than 1 mi in length designed to improve roadway safety.  Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left‐, right‐, and U‐turn pockets, two‐way left‐turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes.
 Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets, provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit.  Conversion of existing general‐purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel.  Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles.  Reduction in the number of through lanes.
 Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians, or bicycles, or to replace a lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., high‐occupancy vehicles [HOVs], high‐ occupancy toll [HOT] lane traffic, or trucks) from general vehicles.  Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority features.
 Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs, and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow.  Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow.  Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles.
 Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices.  Adoption of or increase in tolls.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
20  Addition of tolled lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase.  Initiation of a new transit service.
 Conversion of streets from one‐way to two‐way operation with no net increase in the number of traffic lanes.
 Removal or relocation of off‐street or on‐street parking spaces.  Adoption or modification of on‐street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs).  Addition of traffic wayfinding signage.
 Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity.  Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights‐of‐way.
 Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi‐use paths, or other off‐road facilities that serve nonmotorized travel
 Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure.  Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake‐check lanes in rural areas that do not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor.

Additionally, transit and active transportation projects generally reduce VMT and, therefore, may be presumed to cause a less than significant impact on transportation. This presumption may apply to all passenger rail projects, bus and bus rapid‐transit projects, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects. The agency may use this CEQA presumption of less than significant impact to aid in the prioritization of capital projects, as the CEQA process for any of these project types would be more streamlined than other capacity‐enhancing capital projects.

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
21 CHAPTER 4. THRESHOLD AND VMT ANALYSIS FOR LAND USE DEVELOPMENT

PROJECTS

4.1 Thresholds for Land Use Projects
The TA states that SB 743 and all CEQA VMT transportation analyses refer to automobiles. Here, the term automobile refers to on‐road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light duty trucks (page. 4). Heavy‐duty trucks can be addressed in other CEQA sections (air quality, greenhouse gas, noise, and health risk assessment analysis) and are subject to regulation in a separate collection of rules under CARB jurisdiction. This approach was amplified by Chris Ganson, Senior Advisor for Transportation at OPR, in a recent presentation at the Fresno Council of Governments (October 23, 2019) and by Ellen Greenberg, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Deputy Director for Sustainability, at the San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies’ Directors’ Committee meeting (January 9, 2020).

The OPR has identified the subject of the thresholds as the primary trips in the home‐based typology: specifically, home‐based work tours. This includes residential uses, office uses, and retail uses. The home‐based work tour type is the primary tourmaking during the peak hours of commuter traffic in the morning and evening periods.

The impact of transportation has shifted from congestion to climate change, and the purpose of the CEQA analysis is to disclose and ultimately reduce GHG emissions by reducing the number and length of automobile trips. As part of the SB 375 land use/transportation integration process and GHG goal setting, the State and Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) have agreed to reduce GHG through integrated land use and transportation planning by a statewide average of approximately 15 percent by 2035. Figure 9 illustrates SB 375 regional GHG emissions reduction targets for all the 18 Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) in California that CARB established in 2018. Furthermore, in its 2017 Scoping Plan‐Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals, the CARB recommends total VMT per capita rates approximately 15 percent below existing conditions.

The TA therefore recommends:

A proposed (residential) project exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing regional average VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact.

A similar threshold would apply to office projects (15 percent below existing regional average VMT per employee).

VMT generated by retail projects exceeding 50,000 sf would indicate a significant impact for any net increase in total VMT.

It is noted that the aggregate GHG emission reduction sought after by CARB in the 2017 Scoping Plan is 15 percent statewide. This is one reason OPR believes the 15 percent reduction in VMT is appropriate. The aggregate 15 percent GHG emission reduction applies across all land use and transportation activities and would indicate that the State and its individual MPOs are compliant with the SB 375 goals, the overall State climate change strategy, and Scoping Plan objectives.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
22 Source: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our‐work/programs/sustainable‐communities‐program/regional‐plan‐targets.

Figure 9: SB 375 Regional Plan Climate Targets for California’s 18 MPOs CARB establishes GHG targets for each of the 18 MPOs in the State, reviews the SCSs and makes a determination whether the SCSs would achieve GHG reduction targets if implemented. Fresno COG’s 2018 RTP/SCS demonstrated a GHG reduction of 10 percent by 2035 through the integrated land use, transportation initiatives, and capital project listing, which meets the targets set by the CARB. All reviewing federal and State authorities, including the CARB, approved Fresno COG’s 2018 RTP/SCS. In the spring of 2018, CARB adopted new GHG targets for all the 18 MPOs in the State based on the 2017 Scoping Plan and other new data. CARB established a 13 percent GHG reduction target for 2035 for the Fresno region’s third RTP/SCS. The State recognizes that Fresno County’s contribution to the aggregate 15 percent statewide GHG emission reduction is 13 percent. Other regions may achieve greater reductions to achieve the aggregate statewide goal.5 As such, reduction in GHG directly corresponds to reduction in VMT. In order to reach the statewide GHG reduction goal of 15 percent, the Fresno region must reduce GHG by 13 percent. The method of reducing GHG by 13 percent is to reduce VMT by 13 percent as well.

Therefore, Fresno County member jurisdictions may establish a threshold for land use developments, specifically residential and office, of exceeding 13 percent below the existing regional VMT per capita as indicative of a significant environmental impact.

No other discrete land use types are identified for threshold development. Mixed‐use projects may be evaluated for each component of the project independently, or the lead agency may use the predominant land use type for the analysis. The lead agency will make a determination of the

5 The latest GHG targets by region can be found at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our‐work/programs/ sustainable‐communities‐program/regional‐plan‐targets.
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
2020 2035
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
23 predominant land use type on a case‐by‐case basis based on the project description. Credit for internal trip capture should be made. Internal trip capture may be calculated using the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook (for smaller projects), the Fresno COG ABM (for larger projects), or other applicable sources approved by the agency. The TA suggests that lead agency may, but is not required to, develop thresholds for any other use. This method may underreport the benefits of mixed‐use by only evaluating the predominant land use or by limiting the acknowledgment of trip savings to internal capture in trip generation. The results will most likely over‐report the project VMT and overstate the potential CEQA impacts from these beneficial project types.

For land use types other than residential, office, and retail, one approach is to review the agency General Plan and/or the Fresno COG RTP/SCS and identify whether the implementation of the plan would result in a reduction of VMT and GHGs. If it does, the lead agency may conclude the implementation of the plan, including all the other land use types will achieve the regional climate change goals. Therefore, consistency with the plan and no net change in VMT per employee for the other land use types is a rational threshold. However, for projects seeking a GPA, a project exceeding a level of 13 percent below the existing County average VMT per employee would indicate a significant transportation impact.

This approach would require disclosure of substantial evidence, including the General Plan findings, and other supporting traffic and air quality forecasting support. Additionally, if the agency wishes to establish some other threshold less stringent than the 13 percent recommended for residential and office projects, a body of substantial evidence would be necessary.

Table B summarizes the 13 percent and 15 percent VMT per capita and VMT per employee thresholds for residential and office projects respectively, using both the County and the local jurisdiction as the region for residential projects and the County as the region for non‐residential projects.

4.2 Land Use Projects VMT Analysis/Mitigation Process
Figure 10 demonstrates the potential land use development entitlement process to comply with the State CEQA Guidelines related to VMT and transportation impacts. It provides the path from application filing through determination of impacts. It is presented as the standard process; each development application is considered unique and may create alternative or modified steps through the process. Each step that diverges from this standard process should be accompanied with substantial evidence demonstrating compliance with other climate change and GHG emission reduction laws and regulations.

4.2.1 Agency Communication
At the outset of the project development process, the applicant should seek a meeting with the lead agency’s staff to discuss the project description, the transportation study content and the analysis methodology. Key elements to address include a description of the project in sufficient detail to generate trips and identify the potential catchment area (i.e., trip lengths if no modeling is undertaken), estimate project VMT, discuss project design features that may reduce the VMT from

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
24 This page intentionally left blank
Jurisdiction
Regional Average
VMT/Capita
VMT/Capita
(13% threshold)
VMT/Capita
(15% threshold)
Regional Average
VMT/Capita
VMT/Capita
(13% threshold)
VMT/Capita
(15% threshold)
Regional Average
VMT/Employee
VMT/Employee
(13% threshold)
VMT/Employee
(15% threshold)
Clovis 16.1 14.0 13.7 16.0 13.9 13.6 25.6 22.3 21.8Coalinga 16.1 14.0 13.7 10.7 9.3 9.1 25.6 22.3 21.8Firebaugh 16.1 14.0 13.7 14.5 12.6 12.3 25.6 22.3 21.8Fowler 16.1 14.0 13.7 20.1 17.5 17.1 25.6 22.3 21.8Fresno 16.1 14.0 13.7 13.1 11.4 11.2 25.6 22.3 21.8Unincorporated County 16.1 14.0 13.7 14.2 12.4 12.1 25.6 22.3 21.8Huron 16.1 14.0 13.7 16.3 14.2 13.9 25.6 22.3 21.8Kerman 16.1 14.0 13.7 16.5 14.4 14.0 25.6 22.3 21.8Kingsburg 16.1 14.0 13.7 24.9 21.7 21.2 25.6 22.3 21.8Mendota 16.1 14.0 13.7 13.2 11.5 11.2 25.6 22.3 21.8Orange Cove 16.1 14.0 13.7 12.1 10.5 10.3 25.6 22.3 21.8Parlier 16.1 14.0 13.7 16.8 14.6 14.3 25.6 22.3 21.8Reedley 16.1 14.0 13.7 16.9 14.7 14.4 25.6 22.3 21.8San Joaquin 16.1 14.0 13.7 14.2 12.4 12.1 25.6 22.3 21.8 Sanger 16.1 14.0 13.7 15.5 13.5 13.1 25.6 22.3 21.8Selma 16.1 14.0 13.7 17.8 15.5 15.1 25.6 22.3 21.8 Table B ‐ VMT Thresholds for Residential and Office Projects in Fresno County Residential Projects Office Projects
Region ‐ Fresno County Region ‐ Local Jurisdiction Region ‐ Fresno County R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\PDF_LSA\Analysis for VMT Graphics.xlsx\VMT Thresholds Table_New Data (1/8/2021)

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
26 This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
27 Figure 10: VMT Analysis Process for Land Use Development Projects

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
28 the project development, and discuss the project location and associated existing regional VMT percentages. As a result of the meeting, the applicant or their consultant shall prepare a transportation analysis scope of work for review and approval by the agency.

Projects that will have impact on Caltrans facilities may be subject to the Caltrans Local Development‐Intergovernmental Review program. Caltrans may review the VMT analysis methodology, findings, and mitigation measures for each one of these development projects that is determined to affect the State highway system and falls within Caltrans jurisdiction.

4.2.2 Project Screening
Once a development application is filed and the meeting is held, project screening is conducted as the initial step. If the project meets any one of the screening criteria, the project may be presumed to create a less than significant impact. No further VMT analysis is necessary. The CEQA document should enumerate the screening criterion and how the project meets or exceeds that threshold. If project screening does not apply, a VMT analysis may be required. The extent of this analysis may be a simple algebraic demonstration or a more sophisticated traffic modeling exercise. This distinction is addressed later.

4.2.3 Development Project VMT Analysis
The first step is to identify the project land use type and the appropriate metric to use, i.e., VMT per capita, VMT per employee, or total VMT. The metric should be VMT per capita for residential projects, VMT per employee for office projects, and total VMT for retail projects. For mixed‐use projects, after taking credit for internal trip capture, the project VMT can be estimated based on each component of the project independently, or the lead agency may use the predominant land use type for the analysis. For all other uses, the metric used should be VMT per employee.

4.2.3.1 Small Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
Project VMT may be calculated using the Fresno COG VMT Calculation Tool for residential projects with 500 dwelling units or fewer, office projects with 375 employees or fewer. The tool can also be used to calculate VMT for mixed‐use projects (mix of single‐family and multifamily residential uses, or residential and office uses), which generate less than 5,000 daily trips. The daily trips may be calculated using rates from the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual. For all other projects, the VMT analysis should be performed using the Fresno COG ABM. The VMT calculation tool can be found at: https://www.fresnocog.org/project/sb743‐regional‐guidelines‐development/.

4.2.3.2 Large Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
Large or multi‐use projects require the use of the Fresno COG ABM. For purposes of agency review, all development projects, other than residential uses with less than or equal to 500 dwelling units or offices with less than or equal to 375 employees, should use the Fresno COG ABM. At this level of trip generation, the probability of trip fulfilment expands to an area greater than the immediate project location and may include a greater regional attraction. The Fresno COG ABM can more accurately define the project trip characteristics and the total VMT generated by the project.

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
29 Next, the project generated VMT per capita/VMT per employee/total VMT is compared to the appropriate significance threshold. This is either equal to or more than 13 percent below the existing regional average per capita or employment for specific uses or no net increase in total VMT for retail or other uses that are consistent with the General Plan. For those projects that require a GPA, a threshold of exceeding 13 percent below existing regional average is appropriate, as the project has yet to be evaluated as part of the agency’s ultimate land use development vision.

If the project VMT metric is less than the significance threshold, the project is presumed to create a less than significant impact. No further VMT analysis is required. If the project is greater than the significance threshold, mitigation measures are required.

4.2.4 Mitigation Measures
The applicant is required, per CEQA, to identify feasible offsets to completely or to extent possible mitigate the impact created by the project. These can come from the mitigation strategies provided by the agency (Appendices B and C), or selected based on the applicant and their CEQA team experience. The agency must approve and accept the ultimate mitigation ascribed to the project and the related VMT percentage reduction.

If the mitigation measures mitigate the project impact to less than the jurisdictional threshold, the project is presumed to have an impact mitigated to a less than significant level. No further VMT analysis is required. If the project’s VMT impact cannot be mitigated, the agency may 1) request the project be redesigned, relocated or realigned to reduce the VMT impact, or 2) require the preparation of an EIR with a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for the transportation impacts associated with the project. All feasible mitigation measures must be assigned to and carried out by the project even if an EIR/SOC is prepared.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
30 This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
31 CHAPTER 5. THRESHOLD AND INDUCED VMT ANALYSIS FOR TRANSPORTATION

PROJECTS
The 2020 State CEQA Guidelines include Section 15064.3.b.(2) to address transportation projects. It reads:

For roadway capacity projects, agencies have the discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements.

Lead agencies may continue to use delay and LOS for transportation projects for design and traffic operations purposes as long as impacts related to “other applicable requirements” are disclosed.

This has generally been interpreted as VMT impacts and other State climate change objectives.

These other applicable requirements may be found in other parts of an environmental document (i.e., air quality, GHG), or may be provided in greater detail in the transportation section.

For projects on the State highway system, Caltrans will use and will require sponsoring agencies to use VMT as the CEQA metric, and Caltrans will evaluate the VMT “attributable to the project” (Caltrans Draft VMT‐Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide, 2020).

The assessment of a transportation project’s VMT should disclose the VMT without the project and the difference in VMT with the project. Any growth in VMT attributable to the transportation project would result in a significant impact.

Capacity improvement projects have the potential of producing significant transportation impacts because they are likely to induce travel. According to the OPR TA, induced travel is the additional vehicle travel that is caused by the new capacity on the roadway. The induced travel could include route switching, time‐of‐day change, model shift, longer trips, new trips to existing destinations, and additional travel due to new development. Many traffic models have limited abilities to forecast new trips and new developments associated with the capacity improvements, as their land use or socioeconomic databases are fixed to a horizon date. OPR refers to a limited set of reports that would indicate elasticities.

The most recent major study (Duranton & Turner 2011, p. 24), estimates an elasticity of 1.0, meaning that every 1 percent change in lane miles results in a 1 percent increase in VMT.

The TA presents one method to identify the induced growth, as follows.

To estimate VMT impacts from roadway expansion projects:

1. Determine the total lane‐miles over an area that fully captures travel behavior changes resulting from the project (generally the region, but for projects affecting interregional travel look at all affected regions).

2. Determine the percentage change in total lane miles that will result from the project.

3. Determine the total existing VMT over that same area.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
32 4. Multiply the percentage increase in lane miles by the existing VMT, and then multiply that by the elasticity from the induced travel literature:
[% increase in lane miles] × [existing VMT] × [elasticity] = [VMT resulting from the project]
Figure 11 provides a representative illustration of induced VMT attributable to a project.

Source: Presentation: Caltrans Transportation Analysis under CEQA or TAC: Significance Determinations for Induced Travel Analysis (SHCC Pre‐Release Session 2 Jeremy Ketchum, Division of Environmental Analysis, Caltrans; March 2, 2020).

Figure 11: Induced Travel – VMT Attributable to a Project Caltrans has identified a computerized tool that estimates VMT generation from transportation projects. It was developed by the National Center for Sustainable Transportation (NCST) at University of California, Davis and is based on elasticities and the relationship of lane mile additions and growth in VMT. It uses Federal Highways Administration definitions of facility type and ascribes VMT increases to each facility. Output includes increases on million vehicle miles per year. Caltrans is investigating its use for all its VMT analyses of capital projects on the State Highway System. The NCST tool is available at https://blinktag.com/induced‐travel‐calculator. Figure 12 provides an illustration of that tool.

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
33 Source: https://blinktag.com/induced‐travel‐calculator/index.html Figure 12: Caltrans Induced Travel Calculator

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
34 The TA provides other options to identify induced growth‐ and project‐related VMT. These include:

1. Employ an expert panel. An expert panel could assess changes to land use development that would likely result from the project. This assessment could then be analyzed by the travel demand model to assess effects on vehicle travel. Induced vehicle travel assessed via this approach should be verified using elasticities found in the academic literature.

2. Adjust model results to align with the empirical research. If the travel demand model analysis is performed without incorporating projected land use changes resulting from the project, the assessed vehicle travel should be adjusted upward to account for those land use changes. The assessed VMT after adjustment should fall within the range found in the academic literature.

3. Employ a land use model, running it iteratively with a travel demand model. A land use model can be used to estimate the land use effects of a roadway capacity increase, and the traffic patterns that result from the land use change can then be fed back into the travel demand model. The land use model and travel demand model can be iterated to produce an accurate result.

The TA provides a final warning:

Whenever employing a travel demand model to assess induced vehicle travel, any limitation or known lack of sensitivity in the analysis that might cause substantial errors in the VMT estimate (for example, model insensitivity to one of the components of induced VMT described above) should be disclosed and characterized, and a description should be provided on how it could influence the analysis results. A discussion of the potential error or bias should be carried into analyses that rely on the VMT analysis, such as greenhouse gas emissions, air quality, energy, and noise.

Due to the lack of sensitivity of the NCST tool to project location, roadway type, congestion level, surrounding land uses, and localized trip characteristics, it was determined that the Fresno COG ABM is able to provide a more robust and comprehensive estimation of the VMT generated by capacity projects if combined with an integrated land use modeling process. The Fresno COG ABM is a tour‐based model that is sensitive to route switching, mode shift, time‐of‐day change, longer trips, and new trips to existing destinations due to capacity improvements to the transportation system.

In order to address the induced travel generated from new land use due to capacity improvements, which the ABM is not sensitive to by itself, Fresno COG staff and the Resource Systems Group, Inc. (RSG) have prepared a detailed iterative and integrated process for the induced VMT analysis. The methodology looks at induced VMT from new land uses generated by transportation capacity improvement projects. It provides iterative and incremental feedback between the Fresno COG ABM and the land‐use growth allocation model such that changes in the traffic network are incorporated into land‐use allocation, and vice‐versa. For capacity projects that are not under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, it is recommended that the Fresno COG ABM in combination with the expanded land use tool be utilized to calculate project‐related induced VMT. As illustrated in Figure 11, VMT attributable to the project must be calculated by evaluating no project and with project conditions F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
35 under the horizon year scenario using Fresno COG ABM. Net increase in induced VMT will result in a significant impact for the proposed project.

Figure 13 illustrates a conceptual overview of the methodology to be followed to calculate induced demand. As illustrated in Figure 13, the effect of induced VMT will be required to be evaluated with an integrated land use and travel demand modeling process.

Detailed description of the integrated process for estimating induced VMT is provided in Appendix A.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
36 This page intentionally left blank

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
38 This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
39 CHAPTER 6. THRESHOLD RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LAND USE PLANS The OPR guidance has provided guidance on traffic analyses for land use plans in the TA. The TA reiterates previous direction regarding individual land use assessments:
 Analyze the VMT outcomes over the full area over which the plan may substantively affect travel patterns (the definition of region).
 VMT should be counted in full rather than split between origins and destinations (the full impact of the project VMT).

The TA provides a single sentence as consideration for land use plans. It states, “A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if proposed new residential, office or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective thresholds recommended above.” This recommendation refers to a threshold of exceeding 13 percent below the existing regional average, for residential and office uses and no net gain for retail land uses.

To assess a land use plan, use of a traffic‐forecasting tool is recommended. Therefore, Fresno COG recommends use of the ABM to asses VMT for land use plans. The total VMT for the plan may be identified for all tour types and all potential VMT contributors within the plan area. Model runs may be conducted for the existing base year and the horizon year with project (plan).

The SB 375 process establishes ambitious and achievable GHG reduction targets for the 18 MPOs in the State. The achievements of the targets are provided through the integration of land use and transportation planning, not solely through the imposition of regulation on passenger cars and light‐ duty trucks. CARB reviews the strategies and programs that the regional agencies put in place in the SCS to achieve the GHG reduction. The CARB approved the new GHG reduction targets for all the 18 MPOs in the State in the spring of 2018. The 2018 targets are applicable to the third SCSes for the MPOs.

Other legislative mandates and State policies speak to GHG reduction targets. A sample of these include:
 Assembly Bill 32 (2006) requires statewide GHG emissions reductions to 1990 levels by 2020 and continued reductions beyond 2020.
 SB 32 (2016) requires at least a 40 percent reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels by 2030.
 Executive Order (EO) B‐30‐15 (2015) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
 EO S‐3‐05 (2005) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
40  EO B‐16‐12 (2012) specifies a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 specifically for transportation.

Therefore, the recommended methodology for conducting VMT assessments for land use plans is to compare the existing VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee for the region with the expected horizon year VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee for the land use plan of the jurisdiction. If there is a net increase in the VMT metric under horizon year conditions, then the project will have a significant impact. Figure 14 illustrates the comparison of VMT per capita and VMT per employee under the horizon year for the City of Fresno General Plan compared to the existing regional VMT per capita and existing VMT per employee, respectively.

Source: Fresno COG Activity Based Model
Figure 14: VMT Per Capita and VMT per Employee Comparisons ‐ City of Fresno General Plan versus Fresno County under Existing Conditions

0.0 5.0

10.0 15.0

20.0 25.0

30.0 35.0
VMT per Capita VMT per Employee
City of Fresno (General Plan Conditions) Fresno County (Existing Conditions) F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
41 CHAPTER 7. MITIGATION STRATEGIES
When a lead agency identifies a significant CEQA impact according to the thresholds described above, the agency must identify feasible mitigation measures in order to avoid or substantially reduce that impact. Although previous LOS impacts could be mitigated with location‐specific LOS improvements, VMT impacts will require mitigation of regional impacts through more behavioral changes. Enforcement of mitigation measures will be still be subject to the mitigation monitoring requirements of CEQA, as well as the regular police powers of the agency. These measures can also be incorporated as a part of plans, policies, regulations, or project designs.

7.1 Definition of Mitigation
Section 15370 of the 2020 State CEQA Guidelines defines mitigations as follows:
“Mitigation” includes:
a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action. b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment.
d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action.
e. Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments, including through permanent protection of such resources in the form of conservation easements.

Section 15097 of the State CEQA Guidelines states that “the public agency shall adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects.” VMT mitigations may not be physical improvements; rather, they are complex in nature and will significantly depend on changes in human behavior. Therefore, it will be important that lead agencies develop a proper monitoring program to ensure the implementation of these mitigation measures, throughout the life of a project, in compliance with CEQA. Lead agencies must also coordinate with other responsible agencies as part of this monitoring program to determine the feasibility of the mitigations and whether they would last in perpetuity.

Historically, mitigation measures for LOS based transportation impacts have addressed either trip generation reductions or traffic‐flow‐capacity enhancements. LOS mitigation measures include adding capacity to intersections, roadways, ramps, and freeways. However, transportation demand management (TDM) actions, active transportation amenities, and other measures to reduce the number of trips creating an impact are also possible mitigation strategies.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
42 LOS based mitigations are mostly physical improvements whose benefits are observable, measurable, and virtually perpetual. The addition of a left‐turn lane at an intersection will behave similarly regardless of location and will continue to perform as intended until the lane is removed or modified. A lane mile of roadway will carry a similar volume of traffic if designed consistently across most jurisdictions in California, and it will continue to do so as long as the lane exists.

The definition of VMT mitigation measures is somewhat different. Most VMT mitigations may seem feasible from a theoretical perspective, but practical implementation of these strategies as formal CEQA mitigation measures in perpetuity is yet to be tested. Several of these mitigations are contextual and behavioral in nature. Their success will depend on the size and location of the project as well as expected changes in human behavior. For example, a project providing a bike share program does not necessarily guarantee a behavioral change within the project’s population; the level of improvement may be uncertain and subject to the whim of the population affected.

LOS mitigations (such as addition of turn lanes) focus more on rectifying a physical CEQA impact (strategy “c” of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15370). On the contrary, the majority of VMT mitigations (such as commute trip‐reduction programs) will aim at reducing or eliminating an impact over time through preservation and monitoring over the life of the project (strategy “d” of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15370). Additionally, some VMT mitigations (such as those focused on land use/location‐based policies) will aim at minimizing impacts by reducing the number of trips generated by the projects (strategy “b” of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15370).

Furthermore, it may be that identified VMT impacts cannot be mitigated at the project‐specific level.

Most VMT impacts are in the context of the region of analysis. The incremental change in VMT associated with a project in the particular setting in which it may be located would suggest a greater VMT deficit than individual strategies can offset. Only a regional solution (e.g., completion of a transit system, purchase of more transit buses, or gap closure of an entire bicycle master plan system) may offer the incremental change necessary to reduce the VMT impact to a level of insignificance. Also, VMT, as a proxy for GHG emissions, may not require locational specificity. A project does not necessarily need to diminish the VMT at the project site to gain benefit in VMT and GHG reduction in the State. Offsets in an area where the benefit would be greater will have a more effective reduction in VMT and GHG and contribute to the State’s ultimate climate goals. This is the basis for the cap‐and‐trade strategies.

These issues of regional scale, partial participation, and geographic ambiguity confound the certainty of agency identification of VMT mitigation measures. Section 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines states, “Where several measures are available to mitigate an impact, each should be discussed and the basis for selecting a particular measure should be identified. Formulation of mitigation measures shall not be deferred until some future time [emphasis added].” Certainty does not yet exist that partial participation in VMT mitigation measures is permissible. Regional VMT mitigation is considered the most effective method for large‐scale VMT reduction, yet the cost and implementation barriers are greater in most cases than one project can undertake. The only exception may be where VMT mitigation strategies are provided at a regional level in the form of mitigation banks, fees, and exchanges and the projects are subject to contribute to these fee F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
43 programs consistent with applicable provision to ensure compliance and consistency with CEQA and other legal requirements.

Section 21099 (b) (4) of the PRC states, “This subdivision [requiring a new transportation metric under CEQA] does not preclude the application of local general plan policies, zoning codes, conditions of approval, thresholds, or any other planning requirements pursuant to the police power or any other authority.” Hence, despite the fact that automobile delay will no longer be considered a significant impact under CEQA, the lead agency can still require projects to meet the LOS standards designated in its zoning code or general plan. Therefore, in that case, the project might still be required to propose LOS improvements for congestion relief in addition to VMT strategies as CEQA mitigation measures.

7.2 Mitigation Measures

7.2.1 Land Use Development Projects and Community/General Plans Mitigations and project alternatives for VMT
impacts have been suggested by the OPR and are
included in the TA. VMT mitigations can be
extremely diverse and can be classified under
several categories such as land use/location, road
pricing, transit improvements, commute trip
reduction strategies, and parking pricing/policy.

However, the issue with VMT mitigations is the
quantitative measurement of the relief provided by
the strategies. How much VMT reduction does a
TDM program, a bike share program, a transit route,
or 1 mile of sidewalk provide? Improvements related
to VMT reduction strategies have been quantified in
sources such as the California Air Pollution Control
Officers Association (CAPCOA) report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (CAPCOA Green Book) and CARB sources, and are generally presented in wide ranges of potential VMT reduction percentages.

Appendix B is a summary of the different VMT mitigation measures and project alternatives stated in the CAPCOA Green Book (only those strategies directly attributed to transportation) and the OPR TA for land use development projects. It also refers to mitigation measures listed in other sources such as the VMT Measurement Calculator for the City of Los Angeles, the transportation analysis guidelines for the City of San Jose and the San Diego Region, and the memorandum Analysis of VMT Mitigation Measures Pursuant to SB 743, prepared by Iteris, Inc., for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Bus Rapid Transit in City of Fresno
Fresno County Transportation
Authority’s Measure C Program
Source: https://abc30.com/3126364/
Source:
https://www.fresnocog.org/
project/measure‐c/

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
44 Appendix C provides a list of mitigations for land use development projects based on the research work
performed by Deborah Salon, Marlon G. Boarnet, Susan
Handy, Steven Spears, and Gil Tal with the support of
CARB. For a few mitigation measures, Fresno COG staff
conducted additional research as applicable to the
Fresno COG region using the Fresno COG ABM and
locally available empirical data. Based on that analysis, specific VMT reduction percentages were developed for
these mitigation measures. Details about these
mitigation measures are provided in the Fresno County
SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines – Technical
Documentation.

For all other mitigation measures, the project applicant will be required to provide a substantial evidence while identifying a project‐specific value. In case that information is not available, consistent with the Fresno COG’s recommendations, the project should apply the low‐point of provided ranges for VMT reduction. Where a mitigation strategy does not have an identified VMT reduction range, the project applicant would be required to provide a reduction estimate supported by evidence.

As for land use plans, the potential mitigation measures for community/general plans would be similar to those for land use development projects, with certain modifications. The OPR TA does not specifically state any VMT mitigations for land use plans. However, the transportation impact study guidelines for the San Diego Region list potential mitigation measures. These measures have been summarized in Appendix D along with corresponding VMT reduction percentages obtained from CAPCOA.

It must be noted that Appendices B through D provide only summaries of the mitigations stated in the sources mentioned above. The reader should refer to the original source for further details and for subsequent updates to the mitigation measures. Also, Appendices B through D do not provide an exhaustive list of mitigation measures to offset the CEQA impacts. Other measures can also be accepted by agencies based on provision of substantial evidence.

As additional mitigation measures are developed to offset VMT impacts in the future for the State CEQA Guidelines process, linkages between the strategy and the incremental effect and quantified offset must be made. This can be based on other sources’ observations and measurements or the agency’s experience in these practices. The key to mitigation is to base its efficacy on real and substantial evidence.

7.2.2 Transportation Projects
Although OPR provides detailed guidance on how to assess induced‐growth impacts associated with transportation projects, it leaves the subject of mitigation measures vague. Only four strategies are suggested as mitigation measures:

Bike Routes in the City of Fresno
Source: https://www.fresno.gov/publicworks/wp‐
content/uploads/sites/17/2016/09/170022FresnoA
TPFinal012017.pdf
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
45 Toll Lanes
 Tolling new lanes to encourage carpools and fund
transit improvements.
 Converting existing general‐purpose lanes to HOV
or HOT lanes.
 Implementing or funding off‐site travel demand
management.
 Implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems
strategies to improve passenger throughput on
existing lanes.

No quantified reduction percentage is allocated to
these strategies, and LSA could find no substantial
evidence that would provide guidance to levels of
significance after implementation of these strategies. Review of the four recommended strategies suggests that OPR is directing strategies away from general‐purpose mixed‐flow lanes on expressways, freeways, and arterial highways. Inasmuch as these are the project descriptions and Purpose and Need, the project intent and the project mitigation may be at odds. The lead agency would be subject to an SOC for the capital project VMT impact.

7.3 Funding Mechanisms
The change in the metric for transportation impacts from LOS to VMT will lead to a shift in impacts and mitigation measures from being local and project‐specific to being more regional in nature. OPR acknowledges the regional nature of VMT impacts and states that regional VMT reduction programs and fee programs (in‐lieu fees and development impact fees) may be appropriate forms of mitigation. Fee programs are particularly useful to address cumulative impacts. It is very important for the agencies to coordinate with the RTPA or the MPO to develop such mitigation programs that would fund transit, develop active transportation plans, etc. These programs are regional in nature and best suited for administration by the regional agency. Regional agencies may also wish to coordinate with appropriate stakeholders, including participating local jurisdictions, developers, and other interests while conducting nexus studies and checking for rough proportionality and compliance with CEQA.

Most of the VMT mitigations included in Appendix B are applicable in urban areas. They are less effective in suburban and rural contexts, where TDM strategies may become diluted or are not applicable. Thus, site‐specific strategies are more suitable in urban areas, whereas program‐level strategies are more suitable for projects in suburban/rural areas. In the latter approach, cumulative contributions for development mitigations can pay for VMT reduction strategies that would not be feasible for the individual projects to implement themselves. Apart from fee programs, program‐ based mitigation approaches may include mitigation exchanges and mitigation banks. The mitigation exchange concept requires a developer to implement a predetermined project that would reduce VMT in order to propose a new one. On the other hand, the concept of mitigation banks seeks to establish monetary values for VMT reductions so that developers can purchase VMT reduction credits.

Source: https://medium.com/@davidcanepa/toll‐
lanes‐good‐for‐the‐rich‐bad‐for‐the‐environment‐
4f1ec24105d3

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
46 As previously stated, VMT impacts are more regional in nature. Hence, there might be requirements for mitigations outside the control of the lead agency, and without consent from the agency controlling the mitigations, the impacts might remain significant and unavoidable. Additionally, identification of regional improvements where projects can contribute their fair share to mitigate impacts might prove to be difficult. Therefore, it is recommended that local agencies working collaboratively within their regions to ultimately establish fee programs, mitigation banks, and exchanges as the most efficient way to establish a regional mitigation pathway where the projects can contribute. Procedural flow charts for VMT banks, exchanges, and impact fees are on the following pages.

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
47 Source: VMT Mitigation Through Banks and Exchanges: Understanding New Mitigation Approaches. A White Paper by Fehr & Peers (January 2020).

Procedural Flow Chart – VMT Bank

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
48 Source: VMT Mitigation Through Banks and Exchanges: Understanding New Mitigation Approaches. A White Paper by Fehr & Peers (January 2020).

Procedural Flow Chart – VMT Exchange
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
49 Source: Understanding New Mitigation Approaches. A White Paper by Fehr & Peers (January 2020).

Procedural Flow Chart – VMT Impact Fee

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
50 This page intentionally left blank
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA

APPENDIX A

INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR ESTIMATING INDUCED VMT
1 Appendix A: Estimating Induced Demand for Roadway
Capacity Projects
Short Term Induced Demand
Increasing roadway capacity is primarily aimed at decreasing auto travel times, either by adding capacity to existing facilities or by providing a more direct travel route between origins and destinations. The term 'induced demand' is used to describe an economic concept where increased supply (in this case, road capacity) results in an increase in demand. In transportation, increased demand can be measured a number of ways. In cases where capacity is added to an existing facility, volume can be compared before and after the capacity increase. However, this is not a useful measure in cases where a new facility is added to the system. Therefore, total vehicle miles of travel is often used as a systemwide measure of induced demand.

In his seminal book Stuck In Traffic (Brookings Institution Press, 1992), economist Anthony Downs describes a concept termed "Triple Convergence". This refers to the idea that if roadway capacity is added to a new road overnight, the next day there would be much less congestion on the road. But over time, the road would fill back up with traffic and the travel time would be close to or as congested as it was before capacity was added. The reason for this is because of three behavioral responses; travelers who were taking alternative routes would switch to the new road (route switching), travelers who were traveling in off‐peak time periods would switch to peak periods (time‐of‐day switching), and travelers who were traveling by alternative modes would switch to auto (mode switching).

There are actually two other effects that Downs doesn't consider: travelers could select new destinations in the corridor if faster travel times make more destinations accessible to activities, and travelers could travel more frequently in total if faster travel times made time available for new activities that were not possible before. For example, people going to work instead of telecommuting or people going to a movie instead of watching one at home.

The Fresno activity‐based model (FresnoABM) comprises of demand and network models that fully cover the above described behavior. DaySim is the activity‐based model component. It consists of a series of sub‐models including long‐term choices such as work and school location choice, and auto ownership, and short‐term choices such as tour and stop generation, tour and stop time‐of‐day choice, tour and stop mode choice, and other choices – see Figure 1. The result of the activity‐based model is travel demand for the residents of Fresno County. These models are sensitive to accessibilities (e.g. travel time) throughout the model system. Therefore, changes in travel times affect all of the model components.

Once travel demand is generated, auto trips are assigned to the auto network using Cube software.

Level‐of‐service skims are built based on the congested travel times in the network and used for the next iteration of demand. . In total, the model is run three times to achieve convergence, where the travel times input to the model are consistent with the travel times generated by the demand in the model. This can be thought of as an equilibrium solution between supply and demand. Iteration is also 2 FIGURE 1: DAYSIM SUB‐MODELS
used within the traffic assignment step itself, according to a process that seeks to find a condition known as 'Wardrop's User Equilibrium' where, given fixed demand (from the last iteration of the travel model) no user can switch their route and find a lower cost path. This process accounts for the effects of congestion on route choice. The other aspects of changes of travel behavior referred to above (time of day switching, mode switching, destination switching, and frequency of travel) are considered explicitly by DaySim.

It should also be pointed out that because equilibrium is achieved both in traffic assignment and in global feedback loops, the result of the model is one in which travelers may be switching multiple times in multiple directions to achieve equilibrium. What we observe at the end of the process is what Downs 3 observes after capacity increases over time; the roadway capacity increase may lead to increased volumes, which results in increased congestion which could be close to or the same as the congestion before the roadway capacity increase, albeit with more vehicles and an overall increase in utility.

In 2008, Sacramento Area Council of Government (SACOG) performed several tests using DaySim to examine sensitivity to induced travel. The results were documented in a report (https://www.sacog.org/sites/main/files/file‐attachments/appendix_c‐ 4_travel_model_documentation.pdf) and also published in a scientific journal paper (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534513700277).

Long Term Induced Demand
According to many studies and literatures such as Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US Cities  (Duranton and Turner, 2011),  and Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced Travel on Passenger vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy Brief (Handy and Boarnet, 2014), transportation capacity projects also have long term impacts on vehicle miles traveled. One of the long term impacts from capacity improvement is land use changes, which may include more dispersed development in remote areas if no proper land use control policy is in place. Such more dispersed development in remote areas will lead to additional VMT should it be allowed to happen without any mitigation. Since most travel demand models, including ABMs, have a separate land use modeling process, the land use changes generated by the new capacity improvements are generally not reflected in the traditional travel demand forecasting process. In order to address the long term VMT impacts from land use changes generated by capacity improvement projects, Fresno COG, in collaboration with RSG Inc., developed an integrated process to estimate both the short term and long term VMT impacts from new capacity improvement.

The following methodology is employed to estimate the effect of induced VMT from new land uses generated due to transportation capacity improvement projects.  This process provides iterative and incremental feedback between the activity‐based travel‐demand model (ABM) and the land‐use growth allocation model such that changes in the traffic network are incorporated into land‐use allocation, and vice‐versa.

Step 1: Base Year Model Run
A full ABM run is performed with base year network and socioeconomic data.

Step 2: Incremental Land‐Use Allocation
An increment period is determined for the land‐use allocation (e.g. 3 years).  Growth targets are established for the new year at the zone, jurisdiction, and regional level.  Planned transportation improvements for the new target year are incorporated into the model network.

For each incremental target year, skim results from the previous target year’s ABM run are analyzed and fed into the land‐use allocation model.  The skims essentially indicate the accessibility of each zone by mode, i.e. a time‐weighted aggregation of housing and services reachable by that zone using the coded traffic network.  This takes into account both the relative location of each zone to destinations in other zones, as well as the nature and quality of the transportation choices available to that zone to reach those destinations.
4 The base parcel fabric is then analyzed for development attractiveness, including factors such as existing development characteristics, planned land‐use characteristics, proximity to high‐quality transit, intersection with conservation zones, etc.  Also considered are the skim results from the previous run, making parcels in zones with high accessibility to jobs and housing via the previous model network (including transportation improvements) more attractive to new development.  In this way, the transportation projects reflected in the previous run contribute to the accessibility of each zone and, consequently, the attractiveness of parcels for new development.

Each of the factors considered above are weighted and aggregated to create a total development score for each parcel in the planning area, where higher scores denote parcels that are more likely to attract future development.

Finally, development is assigned beginning with the highest‐scoring parcels until growth targets are achieved – first at the zone level, then at the jurisdictional and regional levels.  The character and intensity of each parcel’s development is consistent with the planned land use designated to that parcel by the applicable jurisdiction’s general and/or specific plans.  The new land‐use pattern (along with the improved model network) is then run through the ABM process again, and the procedure repeats for the next increment period.  This iterative process continues until the horizon year is met.

Land‐Use Allocation Tool
The land‐use allocation tool has the following parameters:

Data Inputs
 Base Year Socioeconomic Data.  This includes population, housing, and employment data at the parcel, microzone (MAZ) and traffic analysis zone (TAZ) levels.  Demographic Forecast.  Detailed growth forecast data providing jurisdiction‐level (i.e. spheres of influence) growth targets.
 ABM Skim Results.  The allocation model incorporates ABM skim results for the following modes: bike (MAZ‐level), transit (TAZ‐level), and SOV (TAZ‐level).  Development Type Data. Future growth is allocated by using archetypal development types that are designed to be reflective of the land‐use designations described in the general and specific plans of the jurisdictions in the region.  Each parcel eligible for future growth is assigned development types that represent, respectively, low‐intensity, moderate‐intensity, and high‐ intensity development.
 Cube Land Model Results (optional). The land‐use allocation model supports the incorporation of TAZ‐level growth targets from a Cube Land run, controlled to a user‐provided level of confidence.

Input Parameters
 Target Year
 Parameter Weights.  The user can indicate the weight of each of the following parameters when determining a parcel’s development attractiveness score:
o Infill Weight. Parcels closer to city limits or the geographic center of an unincorporated community have a higher infill score.
5 o Conservation Weight. Parcels are given conservation scores based on the percentage of their area that does not intersect with any conservation resources (e.g. important farmland).
o TOD Weight. Parcels closer to high‐quality transit can be given a higher weight. o DT Weight. Parcels located in the downtown region of the FMCA can be given a higher weight.
o Bike Weight. Parcels in zones with more favorable bike skim results have a higher bike score.
o Transit Weight. Parcels in zones with more favorable transit skim results have a higher transit score.
o SOV Weight. Parcels in zones with more favorable SOV skim results have a higher SOV score.
o Density Weight. Parcels whose development types have higher net density are given higher density scores. Used to calibrate region‐wide density measures. o Single‐Family Weight. Parcels with single‐family units in their development types are given higher SF scores. Used to calibrate region‐wide housing mix measures. o Mixed‐Use Weight. Parcels with mixed‐use development in their development types are given higher MU scores. Used to calibrate region‐wide housing mix measures. o Infill Penalty. The total score of parcels within city limits can be penalized. Used to calibrate regional infill goals.
o Redevelopment Penalty. The total score of parcels with existing development can be penalized. Used to calibrate regional redevelopment goals.  Forecast Adjustments.  The following adjustments can be made if the user wishes to deviate from the demographic forecast:
o Population Adjustment. The region‐wide population growth target can be increased or decreased.
o Employment Adjustment. The region‐wide employment growth target can be increased or decreased.
o Vacancy Rate Adjustment. The region‐wide vacancy rate can be increased or decreased. o Urban Adjustment. The region‐wide share of population and employment growth allocated to the urban area can be increased or decreased.  Redevelopment Minimum Density.  The minimum net density increase (combined housing and employment) can be set to screen out developed parcels that are unlikely to be redeveloped.  Cube Factor.  The TAZ‐level growth controls from the Cube Land run, if any, are scaled to match the jurisdiction‐level forecast data and then adjusted by this factor.  This allows the user to control how much confidence is to be given to the Cube Land results and, alternately, how much influence and flexibility should be given to the land‐use allocation model.

Output Parameters
 Socioeconomic Data for target year (parcel level)
 Performance Metric Report
 PopulationSim Input Files:
o mazData.csv
o gq_maz.csv
6 o countyData.csv
 ABM Input Files:
o maz_parks.csv
o se_detail.csv
Figure 2 below is a flowchart that demonstrates how the iterative modeling process will be conducted.

FIGURE 2 INTEGRATED INDUCED DEMAND MODELING PROCESS
Calibration and Validation
While calibrating what weight should be given to accessibility results across the various travel modes presents myriad challenges, including a lack of literature on the subject, Fresno COG will perform calibration runs and sensitivity analyses to ensure that the land‐use allocation model is sensitive to these factors in intuitive and appropriate ways, using detailed land‐use data for the Fresno County region from 2014 and 2019 to compare projected results from the allocation model to known data.

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
This page intentionally left blank

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA

APPENDIX B

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND USE

DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (CAPCOA)
# Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction1 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)2 CAPCOA3 OPR TA4 Los Angeles Metro5 City of San Jose6 City of Los Angeles7 San Diego Region8 Notes 1 Provide a Bus Rapid Transit System (Addition of a New Route) 0.02% – 3.20% Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation

Y Y YNNY
Notes: CAPCOA TST‐1 (Applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context; appropriate for specific or general plans). This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service.' 2 Provide a Bus Rapid Transit System (Substitution of an Existing Bus Route with a BRT Route) 0.02% – 3.20% Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation

Y Y YNNY
Notes: CAPCOA TST‐1 (Applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context; appropriate for specific or general plans). This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service.' 3 Implement a local carpool program 1.00% – 15.00% commute VMT Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
YYYYYY
Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐3 [Provide Ride‐Sharing Programs: applicable in urban and suburban context; Negligible impact in many rural contexts, but can be effective when a large employerin a rural area draws from a workforce in an urban or suburban area, such as when a major employer moves from an urban location to a rural location; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Ride share for employment uses only]; City of LA [Measured in terms of employees eligible (%)] 4 Implement a local vanpool program

0.30% ‐ 13.40% commute VMT reduction (for CAPCOA
TRT‐11: Provide Employer‐Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle);

7.20% ‐ 15.80% school VMT reduction (for CAPCOA TRT‐
10: Implement a School Pool Program)
Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
YYYYYY
Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT‐11 (Provide employer‐sponsored vanpool/shuttle) ‐ themeasure is applicable for urban, suburban, and rural context, and is appropriate for office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects); City of San Jose [Similar measure is Subsidize Vanpool]; City of LA [Similar measure is Employer sponsored vanpool or shuttle (Degree ofimplementation (low, medium, high), employees eligible (%), employer size (small, medium, large)]
5 Expand transit network (Addition of a New Transit Line) 0.10% – 8.20% Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
YYYYYY
Notes: CAPCOA TST‐3; Measure applicable in urban and suburban context, maybe applicable in rural context but no literature documentation available, appropriate for specific or general plans. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Increase transit accessibility to improve last‐mile transit connections; Improve network connectivity/design to make destinations andlow‐carbon travel modes accessible; both applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Existing transit mode share (as a percent of total daily trips) (%), Lines withinproject site improved (<50%, >=50%)] 6 Incorporate bike lane street design (on‐site)
1% increase in share of workers commuting bybicycle (for each additional mile of bike lanes per square mile) (Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in
Major U.S. Cities: If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use Them – Another Look by Dill and Carr (2003)); 0.075%
increase in bicycle commuting with each mile of bikeway per 100,000 residents (If You Build Them, Commuters
Will Use Them; Cross‐Sectional Analysis of Commuters
and Bicycle Facilities by Nelson and Allen (1997))
Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
YYYYYY
Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐5 [Grouped strategy, benefits of Bike Lane Street Design are small and should be grouped with the LUT‐9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to strengthen street network characteristics and enhance multi‐modal environments], the measure is applicable in urban and suburban contexts and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Expand the reach of bike access with investment in infrastructure: applicable for both residential andemployment uses]; City of LA [Provide bicycle facility along site (Yes/No)] 7 Subsidize vanpool 0.30% ‐ 13.40% commute VMT N/A YYNYYY Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐11 (Provide employer‐sponsored vanpool/shuttle) ‐ the measure isapplicable for urban, suburban, and rural context, and is appropriate for office, industrial, andmixed‐use projects); City of San Jose [Subsidize Vanpool]; City of LA [Employer sponsoredvanpool or shuttle (Degree of implementation (low, medium, high), employees eligible (%), employer size (small, medium, large)]
8 Improve or increase access to transit
CAPCOA TST‐2: Not quantified alone, grouped strategywith TST‐3 'Expand transit network' and TST‐4 'Increase transit service frequency/speed'; CAPCOA LUT‐5: 0.50% ‐

24.60%

N/A YYYYYY
Notes: CAPCOA TST‐2: Implement Transit Access Improvements (applicable in urban andsuburban context, and appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrialprojects); CAPCOA LUT‐5: Increase Transit Accessibility [May be grouped with CAPCOA measures LUT‐3 (mixed use development), SDT‐2 (traffic calmed streets with good connectivity), and PPT‐1 through PPT‐7 (parking management strategies); measures are applicable in urban and suburban contexts; appropriate in rural context if development site is adjacent to a commuter rail station with convenient rail service to a major employment center; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Increase transit accessibility to improve last‐mile transit connections; Improve network connectivity/design to make destinations and low‐carbon travel modes accessible;both applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Existing transit mode share (as a percent of total daily trips) (%), Lines within project site improved (<50%, >=50%)] Table B ‐ Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects Mitigation Measures with Percentage VMT Reductions calculated using Fresno COG ABM/Locally available emperical dataMitigation Measures with Percentage VMT Reductions from CAPCOA only R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (7/27/2020) # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction1 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)2 CAPCOA3 OPR TA4 Los Angeles Metro5 City of San Jose6 City of Los Angeles7 San Diego Region8 Notes Table B - Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects 9 Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and daycare Similar to CAPCOA LUT‐3 (Increase Diversity of Urban
and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use)): 9.00% ‐

30.00% VMT reduction and CAPCOA LUT‐4 (Increase
Destination Accessibility): 6.70% ‐ 20.00% VMT reduction

N/A Y Y Y Y N Y
Notes: Similar to CAPCOA LUT‐3 (Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) ‐ Applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context (unless the project is a master‐planned community; appropriate for mixed‐use projects) and CAPCOA LUT‐ 4 (Applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects); City of San Jose [Access to Neighborhood Schools: Applicable for residential uses only]; City of San Jose [Very similar to measure 'Increase diversity of uses' ‐ Applicable for residential and employment uses] 10 Incorporate affordable housing into the project 0.04% ‐ 1.20% N/A YYYYNY Notes: Similar measure is CAPCOA LUT‐6 [Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing] ‐ [Applicable in urban and suburban contexts; negligible impact in a rural contextunless transit availability and proximity to jobs/services are existing characteristics;appropriate for residential and mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Similar to measure 'Integrate affordable and market rate housing] ‐ Measure is applicable for residential uses only
11 Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle network 0.50% ‐ 12.70% N/A Y Y Y N N Y Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐3 [Neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) would result in a mode shift and therefore reduce the traditional vehicle VMT and GHG emissions. Range depends on the available NEV network and support facilities, NEV ownership levels, and the degree of shift from traditional; measure is applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context, for small citywide or large multi‐use developments, and appropriate for mixed‐use projects] 12 Orient project towards transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities `1) 0.25% ‐ 0.5% (0.25% reduction is attributed for aproject oriented towards a planned corridor and 0.5% reduction is attributed for a project oriented towards an existing corridor) (as per the Sacramento Metropolitan
Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD)Recommended Guidance for Land Use Emission Reductions), 2) 0.5% reduction in VMT per 1% increase
in transit frequency and per 10% increase in transitridership (as per the Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) Transportation Emission Guidebook )

N/A Y Y Y N N Y
Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐7 [Orient project toward non‐auto corridor]; Grouped strategy with LUT‐ 3 (Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) ; there is no sufficient evidence that the measures results in non‐negotiable trip reduction unless combined with other measures, including neighborhood design, density and diversity of development, transit accessibility and pedestrian and bicycle network improvements; the measure is applicable forurban or suburban context (may be applicable in a master‐planned rural community) and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed use projects 13 Provide pedestrian network improvements 0.00% ‐ 2.00% N/A Y Y Y Y Y Y Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐1 [applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects; reduction benefit only occurs if the project has both pedestrian network improvements on site and connections to the larger off‐site network]. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Provide pedestriannetwork improvements for active transportation: applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Included (within project and connecting off‐site/within projectonly)] 14 Increase transit service frequency/speed 0.02% – 2.50% N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA TST‐4, applicable in urban and suburban context, maybe applicable in rural context but no literature documentation available, appropriate for specific or general plans.

This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Similar to measure 'Subsidize public transit service upgrades']; City of LA [Reduction in headways (increase in frequency) (%)] 15 Required project contributions to transportation infrastructure improvement projects Not Quantified: Grouped strategy (with RPT‐2 and TST‐1 through 7) N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA RPT‐3 (Applicable in urban, suburban and rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); measure similar to some of the measures discussed above. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service.' 16 Increase destination accessibility 6.70% – 20.00% N/A Y Y Y Y Y Y Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐4 [Destination accessibility measured in terms of the number of jobs or other attractions reachable within a given travel time, which tends to be the highest at centrallocations and lowest at peripheral ones; the location of the project also increases the potential for pedestrians to walk and bike to these destinations and therefore reduces VMT; applicable for urban and suburban contexts, negligible impact in a rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Increase transit availability to improve last‐mile transit connections; Improve network connectivity/design to make destinations and low‐carbon travel modes accessible; both applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Lines within project site improved (<50%, >=50%)]
17 Provide traffic calming measures 0.25% – 1.00% N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐2 [applicable in urban, suburban, and rural contexts; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Streets with traffic calming improvements (%), intersections with traffic calming improvements (%)] R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (7/27/2020) # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction1 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)2 CAPCOA3 OPR TA4 Los Angeles Metro5 City of San Jose6 City of Los Angeles7 San Diego Region8 Notes Table B - Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects 18 Provide bike parking in non‐residential projects 0.625% (as per the Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) Transportation Emission Guidebook ) N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐6 [Bike Parking in Non‐Residential projects has minimal impacts as a standalone strategy and should be grouped with the LUT‐9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to encourage bicycling by providing strengthened street network characteristics and bicycle facilities]; the measure is applicable in urban, suburban, and rural contexts; appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects; City of San Jose [Provide bike parking and end‐of‐trip facilities such as bike parking, bicycle lockers, showers, and personal lockers (Applicable for both residential and employment uses)]; City of LA [Include bike parking/lockers, showers, & repair station (Y/N)]
19 Provide bike parking with multi‐unit residential projects Not Quantified N/A Y Y Y Y Y Y Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐7 [Grouped Strategy; the benefits of Bike Parking with Multi‐Unit Residential Projects have no quantified impacts and should be grouped with the LUT‐9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to encourage bicycling by providing strengthened street network characteristics and bicycle facilities. The measure is applicable in urban, suburban, or rural contexts. It is appropriate for residential projects.]; City of San Jose [Provide bike parking and end‐of‐trip facilities such as bike parking, bicycle lockers, showers, and personal lockers (Applicable for both residential and employment uses)]; City of LA [Include bike parking/lockers, showers, & repair station (Y/N)] 20 Limit or eliminate parking supply 5.00% ‐ 12.50% N/A Y Y Y Y Y Y Notes: CAPCOA PDT‐1 (applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects); reduction can be counted only if spillover parking is controlled (via residential permits and on‐street market parking); follow multi‐faceted strategy including 1) elimination/reduction of minimum parking requirements, 2) creation of maximum parking requirements, and 3) provision of shared parking; City of San Jose [Decrease project parking supply at the project site to rates lowerthan the standard parking minimums where allowable in the San Jose Municipal Code (applicable for employment uses)]; City of LA [City code parking provision (spaces), actualparking provision (spaces)] 21 Unbundle parking costs from property costs 2.60% ‐ 13.00% N/A Y Y Y Y Y Y Notes: CAPCOA PDT‐2 (applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial and mixed‐use projects; complimentary strategies include workplace parking pricing); City of San Jose [Unbundle On‐Site Parking Costs: Application for Residential Uses Only]; City of LA [Monthly cost for parking ($)] 22 Provide parking cash‐out programs 0.60% – 7.70% commute VMT N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐15 [Implement employee parking "cash‐out"; the term “cash out” is used to describe the employer providing employees with a choice of forgoing their current subsidized/free parking for a cash payment equivalent to the cost of the parking space to the employer. The measure is applicable in urban and suburban context; it is not applicable in rural context; it is appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects. Restrictionsare applied only if complementary strategies are in place: a) Residential parking permits and market rate public on‐street parking to prevent spill over parking; b) Unbundled parking ‐ is not required but provides a market signal to employers to forgo paying for parking spaces and “cash‐out” the employee instead. In addition, unbundling parking provides a price with which employers can utilize as a means of establishing “cash‐out” prices; City of San Jose [Parkingcash‐out: Employment uses only]; City of LA [Parking cash‐out: Employees eligible (%)] 23 Implement or provide access to a commute reduction program ‐ Voluntary 1.00% ‐ 6.20% commute VMT N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐1: Commute Trip Reduction Program – Voluntary, is a multi‐strategy program that encompasses a combination of individual measures described CAPCOA measures TRT‐3 through TRT‐9. It is presented as a means of preventing double‐counting ofreductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within a voluntary program. The main difference between a voluntary and a required program is: A)Monitoring and reporting is not required B) No established performance standards (i.e. no trip reduction requirements). The measureis applicable in urban and suburban contexts, negligible in a rural context, unless largeemployers exist and suite of strategies implemented are relevant in rural settings. The measure is appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects; City of San Jose[Applicable for employment uses only]; City of LA [Employees and residents participating (%)] 24 Implement car‐sharing program 0.40% – 0.70% N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐9 [urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, and appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Car share project setting (urban, suburban, all other)]
R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (7/27/2020) # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction1 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)2 CAPCOA3 OPR TA4 Los Angeles Metro5 City of San Jose6 City of Los Angeles7 San Diego Region8 Notes Table B - Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects 25 Implement bike‐sharing program
Taking evidence from the literature, a 135‐300%increase in bicycling (of which roughly 7% are shifting from vehicle travel) results in a negligible impact (around

0.03% VMT reduction)

N/A Y Y N Y Y Y
Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐12 [This measure has minimal impacts when implemented alone. The strategy's effectiveness is heavily dependent on the location and context. Bike‐sharing programs have worked well in densely populated areas (examples in Barcelona, London, Lyon, and Paris) with existing infrastructure for bicycling. Bike sharing programs should be combined with Bike Lane Street Design (SDT‐5) and Improve Design of Development (LUT‐9).

The measure is applicable in urban and suburban‐center context only; it is negligible in a rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects; City of San Jose [Bike share for employment and residential uses]; City of LA [bike share ‐ within 600 feet of existing bike share station ‐ OR ‐implementing new bike share station (Y/N)] 26 Provide transit passes
Similar to CAPCOA TRT‐4 [Implement Subsidized or
Discounted Transit Program]; for TRT‐4, commute VMT
reduction is 0.30% ‐ 20.00%

N/A YYYYYY
Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT‐4 [Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program]; City of San Jose [Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program]; City of LA [Employees and residents eligible (%), amount of transit subsidy per daily passenger (daily equivalent) ($)] 27 Implement a school pool program 7.20% ‐ 15.80% school VMT reduction N/A Y Y N Y Y Y Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐10 [This project will create a ridesharing program for school children.

Most school districts provide bussing services to public schools only. School Pool helps match parents to transport students to private schools, or to schools where students cannot walk or bike but do not meet the requirements for bussing. The measure is applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context and is appropriate for residential and mixed‐use projects.]; City ofSan Jose [School carpool program ‐ residential uses only)]. This measure can be considered under the Technical Advisory Measure 'Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ride matching services.'; City of LA [School carpool program‐ level of implementation (low, medium, high) 28 Operate free direct shuttle service
CAPCOA TST‐6 (Provide Local Shuttles): Not Quantified;

0.30% ‐ 13.40% commute VMT reduction (for CAPCOA
TRT‐11: Provide Employer‐Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle)

N/A Y Y N Y Y Y
Notes: CAPCOA TST‐6 (Provide Local Shuttles ‐ grouped strategy with TST‐5 'Provide Bike Parking Near Transit' and TST‐4 'Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed') ‐ Applicable in urban/suburban context; appropriate for large residential, retail, office, mixed use, andindustrial projects; solves the "first mile/last mile" problem; CAPCOA TRT‐11 (Provide employer‐sponsored vanpool/shuttle) ‐ the measure is applicable for urban, suburban, and rural context, and is appropriate for office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects. This measure can be considered under the Technical Advisory Measure 'Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ride matching services.'; City of San Jose [Employment uses only]; City of LA [Employer sponsored vanpool or shuttle (Degree of implementation (low, medium, high), employees eligible (%), employer size (small, medium,large)] 29 Provide teleworking options 0.07% ‐ 5.50% commute VMT N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐6 [Applicable in urban, rural, and suburban contexts; appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Alternative work schedules and telecommute (employment land uses only)]; City of LA [Alternative work schedules and telecommute (employees participating (%), type of program)] 30 Subsidize public transit service upgrades Not Quantified N/A Y Y N Y N Y Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TST‐2 through TST‐4; City of San Jose [Subsidize transit service through contributions to the transit provider to improve transit service to the project (e.g. frequency and number of routes); applicable for both residential and employment uses]. The measure is included under the Technical Advisory Measure 'Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single‐occupancy vehicle.' 31 Implement subsidized or discounted transit program 0.30% – 20.00% commute VMT N/A YYYYYY Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐4 [Implement subsidized or discounted transit program (the measure is applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in a rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects); The project will provide subsidized/discounted daily or monthly public transit passes. The project may also provide free transfers between all shuttles and transit to participants. These passes can be partially or wholly subsidized by the employer, school, or development. Many entities use revenue fromparking to offset the cost of such a project. The measure is included under the Technical Advisory Measure 'Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single‐occupancy vehicle.'; City of San Jose [Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program]; City of LA [Transit subsidies measured by employees and residents eligible (%), and amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent) ($)] 32 Providing on‐site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools, secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms
22% increase in bicycle mode share (UK National TravelSurvey)/2%‐5% reduction in commute vehicle trips (Transportation Demand Management
Encyclopedia )/0.625% reduction in VMT (Center for
Clean Air Policy (CCAP) Emission Guidebook )

N/A Y Y Y Y Y Y
Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐5 [Provide End of Trip Facilities]: End‐of‐trip facilities have minimal impacts when implemented alone. This strategy’s effectiveness in reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) depends heavily on the suite of other transit, pedestrian/bicycle, and demand management measures offered. End‐of trip facilities should be grouped with Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Programs (TRT‐1: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program ‐ Voluntary through TRT‐2: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program – RequiredImplementation/Monitoring) and TRT‐3 (Provide Ride‐Sharing Programs); City of San Jose [Similar measures include 'Provide bike parking/end of trip bike facilities', 'Implement carsharing programs']; City of LA [Include bike parking/lockers, showers, & repair station (Y/N)] 33 Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites Not Quantified N/A Y Y Y N N Y Included as part of CAPCOA TRT‐1 (Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program ‐ Voluntary)34 Provide a guaranteed ride home service to users of non‐auto modes Not Quantified N/A N Y Y N N Y R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (7/27/2020) # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction1 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)2 CAPCOA3 OPR TA4 Los Angeles Metro5 City of San Jose6 City of Los Angeles7 San Diego Region8 Notes Table B - Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects 35 Locate project in an area of the region that already exhibits low VMT 10.00% ‐ 65.00% N/A Y Y Y N N Y Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐2 (Applicable in urban and suburban contexts; negligible in rural contexts; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects) 36 Locate project near transit 0.50% ‐ 24.60% N/A Y Y Y N N Y Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐5 [May be grouped with CAPCOA measures LUT‐3 (mixed use development), SDT‐2 (traffic calmed streets with good connectivity), and PPT‐1 through PPT‐7 (parking management strategies); measures are applicable in urban and suburban contexts; appropriate in rural context if development site is adjacent to a commuter rail station with convenient rail service to a major employment center; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects]
37 Increase project/development density 1.50% ‐ 30.00% N/A Y Y Y Y N Y Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐1 (Applicable in urban and suburban contexts only; negligible in rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects); City ofSan Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses] 38 Increase the mix of uses within the project or within the project's surroundings 9.00% ‐ 30.00% N/A Y Y Y Y N Y Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐3: Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) [Applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, and appropriate for mixed‐use projects]; City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses] 39 Improve network connectivity and/or increase intersection density on the project site Similar measure is CAPCOA LUT‐9 [Improve Design of Development]: 3.0% ‐ 21.3% reduction in VMT N/A YYYYNY Notes: Similar measure to CAPCOA LUT‐9 (Improve Design of Development); City of San Jose [Build new street connections and/or connect cul‐de‐sacs to provide pedestrian and bicycle access: applicable for both residential and employment uses] 40 Price workplace parking 0.10% ‐ 19.70% commute VMT N/A Y N N Y Y N Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐14 [Urban and suburban context; Negligible impact in a rural context;Appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects; Reductions applied only if complementary strategies are in place:
o Residential parking permits and market rate public on‐street parking ‐ to prevent spill‐over parkingo Unbundled parking ‐ is not required but provides a market signal to employers to transfer over the, now explicit, cost of parking to the employees. In addition, unbundling parkingprovides a price with which employers can utilize as a means of establishing workplace parking prices; City of San Jose [Price On‐Site Workplace Parking (for employment uses only)]; City of LA [Daily parking charge ($), Employees subject to priced parking (%)] 41 Locate project near bike path/bike lane 0.625% N/A Y N Y N N N Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐8 (Grouped strategy with 'Increase Destination Accessibility'; the measure is most effective when applied in combination of multiple design elements that encourage this use; strategy should be grouped with 'Increase Destination Accessibility' strategy to increase the opportunities for multi‐modal travel; measure is applicable in urban or suburban context, may be applicable in a rural master planned community; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects 42 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing 0.80% ‐ 4.00% commute VMT N/A Y N Y Y N N Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐7 (applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects); City of San Jose [Employment uses only]
43 Education and encouragement ‐ Voluntary travel behavior change program 1.00% ‐ 6.20% commute VMT N/A Y N N Y Y N Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT‐1 (Implement Commute Reduction Program ‐ Voluntary); City of San Jose [For both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Employees and residents participating (%)]
44 Education and encouragement ‐ Promotions and marketing 0.80% ‐ 4.00% commute VMT N/A YNNY YN Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT‐7 [Implement Commute Reduction Marketing]; City of San Jose [Similar measure might be 'Implement commute trip reduction marketing/educational campaign' (applicable for employment uses)]; City of LA [Employees and residents participating (%)]
45 Implement neighborhood shuttle Not Quantified N/A Y N N Y Y N Notes: CAPCOA TST‐6 (Provide Local Shuttles ‐ grouped strategy with TST‐5 'Provide Bike Parking Near Transit' and TST‐4 'Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed') ‐ Applicable in urban/suburban context; appropriate for large residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects; solves the "first mile/last mile" problem; City of San Jose [Similar measure:'Operate a free direct shuttle service' (applicable for employment uses only)]; City of LA[Degree of Implementation (low/medium/high), employees and residents eligible (%)] 46 Install park‐and‐ride lots
Two sources: 0.10% ‐ 0.50% VMT reduction (as per 2005
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) study) and0.50% VMT reduction per day (as per Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT))

N/A YNNNNN
Notes: CAPCOA RPT‐4 (Applicable in suburban and rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); Grouped strategy with RPT‐1, TRT‐11, TRT‐3, and TRT‐1 through 6
47 Electrify loading docks and/or require idling‐reduction systems 26% ‐ 71% reduction in Truck refrigeration units (TRU) idling GHG emissions N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA VT‐1 (Measure applicability: Truck refrigeration units (TRU)) 48 Utilize alternative fueled vehicles Reduction in GHG emissions varies depending on vehicle type, year, and associated fuel economy N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA VT‐2 (Measure applicability: vehicles) 49 Utilize electric or hybrid vehicles 0.40% ‐ 20.30% reduction in GHG emissions N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA VT‐3 (Measure applicability: vehicles) 50 Provide bike parking near transit Not Quantified N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA TST‐5 (should be implemented with other two measures as mentioned to encourage multi‐modal use in the area and provide ease of access to nearby transit for bicyclists (measure applicable in urban and suburban context; appropriate for residential,retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); Grouped strategy (with measures TST‐3 'Expand transit network' and TST‐4 'Increase transit service frequency/speed') R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (7/27/2020) # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction1 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)2 CAPCOA3 OPR TA4 Los Angeles Metro5 City of San Jose6 City of Los Angeles7 San Diego Region8 Notes Table B - Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects 51 Improve design of development 3.00% ‐ 21.30% N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA LUT‐9 (Include design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity; improved street network characteristics within a neighborhood such as street accessibility; design also measured in terms of sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, pedestrians crossings, presence of street trees, and a host of other physical variables thatdifferentiate pedestrian‐oriented environments from auto‐oriented environments); measure is applicable in the urban and suburban contexts, negligible impact in rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed‐use projects 52 Provide electric vehicle parking Not Quantified N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐8 [This is a grouped strategy and the benefits of electric vehicle parking may be quantified when grouped with the use of electric vehicles and or SDT‐3 (Implement a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Network). This measure is applicable in urban or suburban contexts and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrialprojects.] 53 Dedicated land for bike trails Not Quantified N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA SDT‐9 [Larger projects may be required to provide for, contribute to, or dedicate land for the provision of off‐site bicycle trails linking the project to designated bicycle commuting routes in accordance with an adopted citywide or countywide bikeway plan. The benefits of Land Dedication for Bike Trails have not been quantified and should begrouped with the LUT‐9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to strengthen street network characteristics and improve connectivity to off‐site bicycle networks. The measure is applicable in urban, suburban, or rural contexts and is appropriate for large residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects.]
54 Implement school bus program 38.00% ‐ 63.00% school VMT reduction N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐13 [Applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context; appropriate for residential and mixed‐use projects] 55 Implement preferential parking permit program Not Quantified N/A Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA TRT‐8 [The project will provide preferential parking in convenient locations (such as near public transportation or building front doors) in terms of free or reduced parking fees, priority parking, or reserved parking for commuters who carpool, vanpool, ride‐ share or use alternatively fueled vehicles. The project will provide wide parking spaces to accommodate vanpool vehicles. The impact of preferential parking permit programs has not been quantified by the literature and is likely to have negligible impacts when implemented alone. This strategy should be grouped with Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Programs (TRT‐1 and TRT‐2) and TRT‐3 (Provide Ride‐Sharing Programs) as a complementary strategy forencouraging non‐single occupant vehicle travel. This measure is applicable in urban and suburban contexts and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrialprojects.] Notes:

VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled; CAPCOA = California Air Pollution Control Officers Association; Fresno COG = Fresno Council of Governments; ABM = Activity‐Based Model, OPR = Office of Planning and Research; TA = Technical Advisory; HOV = High Occupancy Vehicle; HOT = High Occupancy Toll; ITS = Intelligent Transportation System CAPCOA Transportation Mitigation Categories (LU = Land Use/Location, SD = Neighborhood/Site Enhancements, PD = Parking Policy/Pricing, TR = Commute Trip Reduction Programs, TS = Transit System Improvements, RP = Road Pricing/Management; V = Vehicles) 1 VMT reduction numbers obtained from Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures published by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association in August 2010.2 Fresno COG VMT reduction recommendation for these measures obtained based on analysis conducted by Fresno COG staff and LSA using local data and/or the COG's Activity Based Model. Details are provided in the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical Documentation.3 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures published by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association in August 2010.4 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA published by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research State of California in December 2018.5 Analysis of VMT Mitigation Measures Pursuant to SB 743 prepared by Iteris, Inc. in February 2018.6 City of San Jose Transportation Analysis Handbook (dated April 2018).7 City of Los Angeles VMT Calculator Version 1.28 Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region developed by San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Diego Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC) in January 2019.

R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (7/27/2020)

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
This page intentionally left blank

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA

APPENDIX C

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND USE

DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (CARB PAPERS)
# Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction2 Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local Data/Fresno COG ABM)3 Notes 1 Provide Bicycling Network Improvements No effect on VMT Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
2 Implement Transit Improvements No effect on VMT
Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
3 Improve or increase access to transit 1.3% ‐ 5.8% N/A Variable: Various factors associated with proximity to transit stop (please refer to How do Local Actions Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.)
4 Land Use Mix Elasticity: 0.02 ‐ 0.10 N/A Variable: Entropy ‐ variety and balance of land‐use types within a neighborhood 5 Regional Accessibility Elasticity: 0.05 ‐ 0.25 N/A
Variable: Various factors associated with job accessibility and distance to CBD (please refer to How do Local Actions Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.)
6 Job‐Housing Balance Elasticity: 0.06 ‐ 0.31 for commute VMT N/A Variable: Various factors associated with job accessibility (please refer to How do Local Actions Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.)
7 Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements Elasticity: 0.00 ‐ 0.02 for sidewalk length, 0.19 for Pedestrian Environment Factor N/A 8 Voluntary Travel Behavior Change (VTBC) Program 5% ‐ 12% N/A 9 Implement Employer‐Based Trip Reduction (EBTR) Program 1.33% ‐ 6% of commute VMT N/A 10 Provide telecommuting options
Home‐based telecommuting: 48.1% for household VMT,

66.5% ‐ 76.6% for all personal VMT, and 90.3% forcommute VMT only; Center‐based telecommuting: 53.7%‐ 64.8% for all personal VMT and 62.0% ‐ 77.2% for commute VMT only
N/A
11 Increase Project/Development Density Elasticity: <=0.07 ‐ 0.19 N/A Variable: residential density 12 Improve network connectivity and/or increase intersection density on the project site Elasticity: ‐0.46 ‐ 0.59 N/A Variable: Various factors associated with intersection or street density (please refer to How do Local Actions Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.)
13 Implement Parking Cash‐out Programs or Workplace Parking Pricing 12% of commute VMT (parking cash out); 2.3% ‐ 2.9% for
$3 per day workplace parking price; 2.8% for price
increase equivalent to 60% hourly value of commuter
travel time cost
N/A
Notes:

VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled
1 All mitigation measures have been obtained from How do Local Actions Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.).2 All VMT reduction numbers have been obtained from How do Local Actions Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Empirical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.).3 Table C‐ Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Land Development Projects (CARB Papers)1 **Highlighted VMT Reduction Numbers are yet to be Finalized** Fresno COG VMT reduction recommendation for these measures obtained based on analysis conducted by Fresno COG staff and LSA using local data and/or the COG's Activity Based Model. Details are provided in the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical Documentation.

R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Boarnet and Handy (7/1/2020)

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
This page intentionally left blank

F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA

APPENDIX D

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR

COMMUNITY PLANS AND GENERAL PLANS
# Mitigation Measure CAPCOA VMT Reduction
Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local
Data/Fresno COG ABM)2
1 Shift single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling by providing ride‐matching services or shuttle services

0.30% ‐ 13.40% commute VMT
reduction (for CAPCOA TRT‐11: (Provide
Employer‐Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle));
Grouped strategy (for CAPCOA TST‐6
(Provide Local Shuttles))
Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
2 Provide enhanced bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities

0.00% ‐ 2.00% (for pedestrian network
improvements); Multiple measures for
bike facilities, refer to Table A for VMT
reduction percentages
Information included in the Fresno County SB 743
Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical
Documentation
3 Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than a single‐occupancy vehicle

0.30% ‐ 13.40% commute VMT
reduction (for CAPCOA TRT‐11: (Provide
Employer‐Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle));
Grouped strategy (for CAPCOA TST‐6
(Provide Local Shuttles)); 0.30% ‐

20.00% commute VMT reduction (for
CAPCOA TRT‐4 (Implement Subsidized
or Discounted Transit Program))
N/A
4 Modify land use plan to increase development in areas with low VMT/capita characteristics and/or decrease development in areas with high VMT/capita characteristics Not quantified in CAPCOA N/A 5 Add roadways to the street network if those roadways would provide shorter travel paths for existing and/or future trips Not quantified in CAPCOA N/A 6 Improve or increase access to transit
CAPCOA TST‐2 (Implement transit
access improvements): Not quantified
alone, grouped strategy with TST‐3
(Expand transit network) and TST‐4
(Increase transit service
frequency/speed); CAPCOA LUT‐5
(Increase transit accessibility): 0.50% ‐

24.60%
N/A
7 Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and daycare Similar to CAPCOA LUT‐3 (Increase
Diversity of Urban and Suburban
Developments (Mixed Use)): 9.00% ‐

30.00% VMT reduction and CAPCOA
LUT‐4 (Increase Destination
Accessibility): 6.70% ‐ 20.00% VMT
reduction
N/A
8 Incorporate a neighborhood electric vehicle network 0.50% ‐ 12.70% N/A 9 Provide traffic calming 0.25% – 1.00% N/A
10 Limit or eliminate parking supply 5.00% ‐ 12.50% N/A Table D ‐ Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Community Plans and General Plans1 R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Use Plans (7/1/2020) # Mitigation Measure CAPCOA VMT Reduction
Local VMT Reduction Calculations (Local
Data/Fresno COG ABM)2
Table D ‐ Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Measures for Community Plans and General Plans1 11 Implement or provide access to a commute reduction program ‐ Voluntary 1.00% ‐ 6.20% commute VMT N/A 12 Provide car‐sharing, bike sharing, and ride‐sharing programs % ‐ 0.70% (

0.40% ‐ 0.70% VMT reduction (for car
sharing); 1.00% ‐ 15.00% commute VMT
reduction (for ride‐sharing); a 135% ‐
300% increase in biking (of which
roughly 7% are shifting from vehicle
travel) results in a negligible impact
(around 0.03% VMT reduction)
N/A
13 Provide partially or fully subsidized transit passes Similar to CAPCOA TRT‐4 [ImplementSubsidized or Discounted TransitProgram]; for TRT‐4, commute VMT reduction is 0.30% ‐ 20.00%
N/A
14 Provide telework options 0.07% ‐ 5.50% commute VMT N/A 15 Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites Not quantified in CAPCOA N/A16 Provide a guaranteed ride home service to users of non‐auto modes Not quantified in CAPCOA N/A Notes:

VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled; Fresno COG = Fresno Council of Governments; ABM = Activity‐Based Model; CAPCOA = California Air Pollution Control Officers Association 12 CAPCOA Transportation Mitigation Categories (LU = Land Use/Location, SD = Neighborhood/Site Enhancements, PD = Parking Policy/Pricing, TR = Commute Trip Reduction Programs, TS = Transit System Improvements, RP = Road Pricing/Management; V = Vehicles)All mitigation measures have been obtained from the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region developed by San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Diego Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC) in January 2019.

Fresno COG VMT reduction recommendation for these measures obtained based on analysis conducted by Fresno COG staff and LSA using local data and/or the COG's Activity Based Model. Details are provided in the Fresno County SB 743 Implementation Regional Guidelines ‐ Technical Documentation.

R:\FCG1901 FresnoCOG VMT\VMT Mitigations\VMT Mitigations_FresnoCOG.xlsx\Land Use Plans (7/1/2020)

F RESNO C OUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS

F RESNO C OUNTY , C ALIFORNIA
F RESNO C OUNTY SB 743 I MPLEMENTATION REGIONAL G UIDELINES J ANUARY 2021
This page intentionally left blank

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor North & City Council
REPORT FROM: David Peters, City Engineer REVIEWED BY:

AGENDA ITEM: Accept Tract 6306 Improvements
ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance ___Resolution ____Motion ____Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
San Joaquin Valley Homes, a California Corporation, is developing a 158-lot residential subdivision near the intersection Madsen Avenue (Road 16) and Kern Street (Avenue 396). The project is mostly located in Tulare County with a portion of the proposed project located in the City of Kingsburg and is being developed in three phases. Tract 6306 is Phase 2 of the project and consists of 49 lots. The developer entered into a subdivision agreement with the City of Kingsburg to complete infrastructure improvements associated with the tract. The improvements have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Public Works Director.

RECOMMENDED ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL

1. Staff recommends accepting the infrastructure improvements to Tract 6306 and authorize the City Engineer to file the Notice of Completion.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S)
Council could choose not to accept the infrastructure improvements to Tract 6306.

STRATEGIC GOAL(S) MET:

The infrastructure improvements to Tract 6306 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Public Works Director.

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
See executive summary.

ATTACHED INFORMATION
None
Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 5.5
FISCAL IMPACT:

1. Is There A Fiscal Impact? No

2. Is it Currently Budgeted? N/A

3. If Budgeted, Which Line? N/A

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor North & City Council
REPORT FROM: David Peters, City Engineer REVIEWED BY:

AGENDA ITEM: SB 1 Resolution FY 2022/23
ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance ___Resolution ___Motion _____Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Each year, the City is required to update and provide a list of proposed projects to receive funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), also known as SB 1. This list must include:
• Location of the project
• Proposed schedule of completion
• Estimated useful life of the improvement
For FY22/23, the City is expected to receive $289,734 from the RMRA fund. Based on the recently adopted Pavement Management System adopted by the City in 2019, staff has identified two candidate projects for the RMRA funding program. Candidate projects were identified utilizing the pavement condition index (PCI) identified for each city roadway segment and the funding levels available in the current fiscal year. Larger PCI values represent better condition roads and lower PCI values represent poorer condition roads.

The candidate projects for FY 22-23 are:

Project Description Location PCI
18th Avenue
Rehabilitation
Resurface roadway Earl Street to Kern Street 40
Sophia Lane Resurface roadway 21st Avenue to Madsen Avenue 46 Staff is recommending the 18th Avenue Rehabilitation be selected as the project for FY22-23.

Additionally, each year cities and counties must adopt via resolution a project list comprised of projects they anticipate funding with SB1 funds. These project lists must be submitted to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) by July 1st to be eligible for SB 1 funding for the following fiscal year.

Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 6.6

RECOMMENDED ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL

1. Review the proposed project list and approve Resolution 2022-039 as presented.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S)
Council could choose to make amendments to the proposed list.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/KEY METRIC

1. Ensure Financial Stability

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
No prior action has been taken by the City Council for FY 2022-23 RMRA funds.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
In April 2017, the California State Legislature passed Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. As part of the Bill, specific transparency and accountability provisions must be met in order to ensure that the public is aware of the projects that have been completed utilizing SB 1 funds. Each agency receiving funds must report the project in which the funds are used and submit the project lists by July 1st of each year.

In 2019 all of the city streets were evaluated and rated as part of a pavement management system update. The streets have been evaluated to determine their Pavement Condition Index (PCI). The PCI scale ranges from 100 (new road) to 0 (gravel road). Typically, street maintenance strategies are aligned with the following PCI scale:

PCI Range Treatment
100-85 No Treatment
85-70 Slurry Seal
70-50 Cape Seal or Thin Overlay
50-25 Thick Overlay
25-0 Reconstruction

ATTACHED INFORMATION

1. Proposed Resolution 2022-039
FISCAL IMPACT:

1. Is There A Fiscal Impact? Yes

2. Is it Currently Budgeted? No

3. If Budgeted, Which Line? N/A
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-039

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KINGSBURG ADOPTING A LIST OF PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 FUNDED BY SB 1:

THE ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 in order to address the significant multi-modal transportation funding shortfalls statewide; and
WHEREAS, SB 1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of the City of Kingsburg are aware of the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the City of Kingsburg must include a list of all projects proposed to receive funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by SB 1, in the City of Kingsburg budget, which must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kingsburg, will receive an estimated $289,734 in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2022-23 from SB 1; and
WHEREAS, this is the sixth year in which the City of Kingsburg is receiving SB 1 funding and will enable the City to continue essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, repairing and replacing aging bridges, and increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have otherwise been possible without SB 1; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kingsburg has undergone a robust public process to ensure public input into our community’s transportation priorities/the project list; and WHEREAS, the City of Kingsburg used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB 1 project list to ensure revenues are being used on the most high-priority and costeffective projects that also meet the communities priorities for transportation investment; and WHEREAS, the funding from SB 1 will help the City of Kingsburg maintain and rehabilitate one (1) streets/roads within the City of Kingsburg this year and similar projects into the future; and
WHEREAS, the 2018 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment found that the City of Kingsburg’s streets and roads are in an “at-risk” condition and this revenue will help us increase the overall quality of our road system and over the next decade will bring our streets and roads into a “good” condition; and WHEREAS, the SB 1 project list and overall investment in our local streets and roads infrastructure with a focus on basic maintenance and safety, investing in complete streets infrastructure, and using cutting-edge technology, materials and practices, will have significant positive co-benefits statewide.

NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Kingsburg, State of California, that:

1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.

2. The following list of proposed projects will be funded in-part or solely with fiscal year 2022-23 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues:

Project Description Location Estimated
Useful
Life
Anticipated
Year of
Construction
18th Avenue
Rehabilitation
Resurface roadway Earl Street to Kern
Street
10-15 Yr 2023
******
I, Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk of the City of Kingsburg, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Kingsburg City Council held on the ___ day of ________2022, by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers:

Noes: Councilmembers:

Absent: Councilmembers:

Abstain: Councilmembers:

Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk
City of Kingsburg

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor Roman & City Council
AP
REPORT FROM: Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk REVIEWED BY: AH AGENDA ITEM: Amendment No. 1 CDBG Agreement No. 19392-CV ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance ____Resolution √ Motion ______Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On December 15, 2020 the County and the City entered into agreement where $52,604 CDBG-CV (Cares Act) funds were made available for the Kingsburg Senior Meals Project. The attached amendment will add the City’s remaining CDBG-CV (Cares Act) funds in the amount of $28,056.03 to the Kingsburg Senior Meals projects, making the total sum $80,660.03.

RECOMMENDED ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL

1. Authorize City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 of Agreement CDBG CV19392 and transmit the document to the County of Fresno for consideration by the Board of Supervisors.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Reject the amendment and maintain current funding levels for the project.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/KEY METRIC

1. Ensure Financial Stability

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ATTACHED INFORMATION

1. Amendment No. 1 to Agreement CDBG CV19392
Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 5.7
FISCAL IMPACT:

1. Is There A Fiscal Impact? Yes

2. Is it Currently Budgeted? Yes

3. If Budgeted, Which Line?
1 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 AMENDMENT I TO AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT I TO AGREEMENT, (“Amendment I”), is made this ____ day of ______________, 2022 (“Effective Date”), by and between the COUNTY OF FRESNO, a political subdivision of the State of California ("County"), and the CITY OF KINGSBURG ("City").

WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, the County has received funds to administer and implement the program for the Community Development Block Grant Coronavirus Response (“CDBG-CV”) Program activities of the County, and its participating cities, in accordance with the provisions of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (“HCD Act”), the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, (“CARES Act”); Public Law 93-383; and the laws of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, on December 15, 2020, the County and the City entered into Agreement 20- 513, ("Agreement"), whereby $52,604 in CDBG-CV funds were made available to the City for the Kingsburg Senior Meals, Project No. 19392-CV ("Project"); and WHERAS, on January 28, 2022, the Director approved an extension to the close out date of the project to June 30, 2023, per the terms of Section VII, Paragraph D; and WHEREAS, the City now has an additional $28,056.03 from its allocation of CDBG-CV funds that may be made available to the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City has requested these additional CDBG-CV funds in the amount of $28.056.03 be made available to the Project for the purposes of this Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises as hereinafter set forth, the City and the County agree to amend the Agreement as follows:

1. Page 1, Lines 17-19, is amended to read:
“WHEREAS, the Subrecipient has estimated that the total cost of the Project is $80,660.03, and has requested the sum of $80,660.03 from the County's allocation of CDBG-CV funds to complete the Project; and”

2. The budget for the Project on Page 2, Lines 7 and 8, is amended to read:
2 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 " Meal Procurement $80,660.03
Total $80,660.03"

3. The proposed funding summary for the Project on Page 2, Lines 14 and 15, is amended to read:
"CDBG-CV $80,660.03
Local Contribution $ 0
Total $80,660.03"

4. That the dollar figure set forth on Page 2, Line 11, Page 3, Lines 1 and 21, and

County and City agree that this Amendment I is sufficient to amend the Agreement, and that upon execution of this Amendment I, the Agreement and this Amendment I together shall be considered the Agreement.

The Agreement, as hereby amended, is ratified and continued. All remaining provisions, terms, covenants, conditions, and promises contained in the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
3 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment I as of the day and year first hereinabove written.

CITY OF KINGSBURG COUNTY OF FRESNO
By:________________________________ _______________________________ City Manager Brian Pacheco, Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors of the
County of Fresno

Date: _____________________________ Date: ___________________________ ATTEST: ATTEST:

Bernice E. Seidel
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Fresno, State of California
___________________________________ By:______________________________ City Clerk, City of Kingsburg
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
_______________________________
City Attorney
REMIT TO:

FUND NO: 0001 City of Kingsburg
SUBCLASS NO: 10000 Attention: Alex Henderson,
ORG NO: 7205 City Manager
ACCOUNT NO: 7885 1401 Draper Street
PROJECT NO: CV19392 Kingsburg, CA 93631
ACTIVITY CODE: 7307 Telephone: (559) 897-5821
SW:JA: G:\7205ComDev\~Agendas-Agreements\2022\0712_Kingsburg Senior Meals CDBG 19392-CV Amend 1_AGT.docx May 24, 2022

MINUTES FOR THE JOINT MEETING OF THE KINGSBURG CITY COUNCIL, BOARD OF

DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF KINGSBURG PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY, AND

BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE KINGSBURG

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
JUNE 16, 2021
THE COUNCIL CHAMBER WAS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AT 100% CAPACITY.

PURSUANT TO EXECUTIVE ORDER N-29-20, ISSUED BY GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM, THE PUBLIC HAD THE OPTION TO CALL 1 (425) 436-6335, PASSCODE 5290024, TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT. WRITTEN COMMENTS COULD BE SUBMITTED BY MAIL OR EMAIL TO [email protected]. THE CUT OFF FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS WAS 6/15/2021 AT 4:30 P. M. THEY WILL NOT BE READ OUT LOUD.

Invocation was given by Pastor Ricky Chambers, Kingsburg Community Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Laura North

REGULAR SESSION MEETING
This meeting is a joint meeting of the Kingsburg City Council, the Board of Directors of the City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority, and the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency. During the joint meeting, the Members of the Kingsburg City Council will be concurrently sitting as the Members of the Board of Directors of the City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and the Board of Directors of the City of Kingsburg Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency.

At 6:05 P. M. Mayor Laura North called the joint meeting of the Kingsburg City Council, Board of Directors of the City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority, and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency, to order.

ROLL CALL FOR EACH ENTITY:

PRESENT - Jewel Hurtado, Vince Palomar, Brandon Pursell, Jr., Michelle Roman, and Laura North.

STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Alexander Henderson, City Attorney Michael Noland, Finance Director Alma Colado, City Engineer Dave Peters, Fire Chief Daniel Perkins, and City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Public Comments: None.

Approve Joint Meeting Agenda: Action by the Council and respective Boards of Directors to approve the Joint Meeting Agenda or to make modifications. Items that can be added to the Joint Meeting Agenda is constrained by State law. A motion was made by Council Member/Agencies Board Member Michelle Roman and seconded by Council Member/Agencies Board Member Vince Palomar, to approve the Joint Meeting Agenda, as published. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote of Council Members/Agencies Board Members.

Presentations: Swearing-In of Diego Rodriguez who promoted to Fire Engineer. Presentation by Fire Chief Daniel Perkins.

Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 16, 2021
Chief Perkins presented the promotion of Diego Rodriguez, Fire Engineer, who was congratulated by the City Council.

Consent Calendar:

A motion was made by Council Member Roman, seconded by Council Member Hurtado, to approve Items 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 appearing on the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

5.1 Approval of City Council Minutes: Approve the minutes from the June 1, 2021, Regular City Council Meeting as prepared by City Clerk Abigail Palsgaard.

Sponsor: City Clerk’s Office

5.2 Check Register: Ratify/approve payment of bills listed on the check register for the period May 27, 2021, through June 9, 2021, as prepared by Accounts Payable Clerk Grace Reyna.

Sponsor: Finance Department

5.3 Adopt Resolution 2021-037 Accepting the Funding Claim for Local Transportation Funds (TDA) and State Transit Assistance Funds (STAF) apportionment and authorize the Finance Director to sign and submit the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Transportation Funding Claim - Staff Report prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado.

A motion was made by Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Member Brandon Pursell Jr., seconded by Board Member Michelle Roman, to approve Item No. 5.4 of the Consent Calendar. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

5.4 Approve the Minutes from the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency held on June 17, 2020, as prepared by Agency Secretary Abigail Palsgaard.

A motion was made by Board of Directors of the Kingsburg Public Financing Authority Member Vince Palomar, seconded by Board Member Brandon Pursell Jr., to approve Item No. 5.5 on the Consent Calendar.

The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

5.5 Approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Kingsburg Public Financing Authority held on June 17, 2020, as prepared by Agency Secretary Abigail Palsgaard.

REGULAR KINGSBURG CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR
PUBLIC HEARING-Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District No. 93-01- Consider Approval of Engineer's Report and Levy and Collection of Assessments within such District for Fiscal Year 2021/2022- Staff Report Prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado (Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Finance Department
Open Public Hearing – The Public Hearing was opened at 6:13 P. M.

Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 16, 2021
Presentation by Finance Director Alma Colado – Ms. Colado explained that City staff works with Wildan Financial Services on the preparation and filing of necessary documents and the calculation of levy for the FY 2021/22 Improvement Funding.

Open Council Discussion 6:14 P. M. None.

Open Public Comment 6:14 P. M. None.

Close Public Comment 6:15 P. M.

Continued Council Discussion – None.

Close Public Hearing 6:15 P. M.

Adopt Resolution No. 2021-033 Approving the Engineer's Report for Assessment District No. 93-01 and the Levy and Collection of Assessments within such District for Fiscal Year 2021/2022 and Confirming Diagrams and Assessments Pursuant to the Provisions of Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code and as Provided by Article XIII D of the CaliforniaConstitution. (Action by City Council Only) A motion was made by Council Member Roman, seconded by Council Member Hurtado, to adopt Resolution No. 2021-033 as stated above. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

PUBLIC HEARING - Fiscal Year 2021/2022 Budget Review-Consider 2021/2022 Fiscal Year Recommended ExecutiveBudget
Sponsor: City Manager’s Office
Open Public Hearing – 6:16 P. M.

Presentation by City Manager Alexander Henderson
Mr. Henderson reviewed the $26.6 million all funds Budget.

Council Discussion - 6:19 P. M. – Mayor North thanked the City Manager and staff for all the hard work on the Budget.

OpenPublicComment - 6:20 P. M.

Lance Jackson, resident, asked where Public Works wages and benefits are located. He asked about wage increases including the City Manager’s rate of increase and other departments.

Brenda Prado asked if there is money in the budget for animal control.

ClosePublicComment – 6:26 P. M.

Continued Council Discussion – City Manager Alexander Henderson explained that his wage isn’t higher. The increase is for PERS for existing retirees. Planning and Development have higher costs but also higher revenue. There is no amount budgeted for an Animal Control Officer. Council Member Hurtado asked about electronic document filing. Council Member Roman commented that, compared to other cities, we are doing a good job and said thank you. Mayor North asked if the meal Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 16, 2021
supplements for the seniors will be on going? Mr. Henderson said that we may reinstate contracts in July. He is not sure.

Close Public Hearing – 6:41 P. M.

A motion was made by Council Member Pursell, Jr., seconded by Council Member Roman, to Adopt Resolution No. 2021-034 approving theCity of Kingsburg 2021/2022 Fiscal Year Budget; including the Kingsburg Public Finance Authority and Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency budgets. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

Gann Limit Adoption for 2021-2022 Fiscal Year Budget Figures-Staff Report Prepared by Finance Director Alma Colado
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Finance Department
Following brief comment, a motion was made by Council Member Palomar, seconded by Council Member Hurtado, to Adopt Resolution No. 2021-035 for the adoption of the 2021-22 Gann Limit. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

Community Facilities District 2017-01 FY 2021-22 Levy- Staff Report prepared by City Manager Alexander Henderson
(Action only by the City Council) Sponsor: City Manager’s Office Valerie Merklin, Senior Associate, DTA, presented the rates for the 2021-2022 FY. City Manager Alexander Henderson explained that it is like the Landscape and Lighting District, but it pays for more services from the City.

Adopt Resolution No. 2021-036 – Resolution of the City Council of the City of Kingsburg, Acting in its Capacity as the Legislative Body of Community Facilities District No. 2017-1 (Public Services District) Authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax for Fiscal Year 2021-2022.

A motion was made by Council Member Michelle Roman, seconded by Council Member Vince Palomar, to Adopt Resolution No. 2021-036 as stated above. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

Vaccination Clinic and American Rescue Plan Act Update - Staff Report by City Manager Alexander Henderson
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: City Manager’s Office
City Manager Alexander Henderson stated that the local vaccination site will close June 30th. Through the American Rescue Plan, we can get funding to the end of June, maybe early July. The new estimate is $2,896,491. Funds must be obligated by 2024 and must be spent by 2025. He went over some allowable uses.

Council Member Hurtado asked if we are still not charging penalties on utilities and if we can use ARPA Funds for people who are behind (on their utility payments) and asked if we are not turning off water for non-water payments. The State is going to relieve the debt in his (the Governor’s) newest Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 16, 2021
proposal. Council Member Pursell, Jr. asked for the estimated loss from unpaid utility bills - $2,000- $4,000.

Agreement with Lechowicz & Tseng to Complete a Solid Waste Rate Study- Staff Report prepared by Public Works Director Daniel Galvez
(Action only by the City Council)
Sponsor: Department of Public Works
Public Works Director Daniel Galvez spoke about how Mid Valley Disposal has increased costs and we haven’t raised our solid waste fees. The last increase was in 2009. To raise rates, the City will need to go through the Prop 218 process. Three proposals have been reviewed by the Finance Committee. This is the first step. After the rate study, then workshops, followed by a public hearing.

Council Member Roman asked how long for the study? Mr. Galvez said about 6 months. Council Member Roman asked when the RFP for Waste Disposal would go out? Mr. Galvez said that the City can extend 2 times for 5 years
A motion was made by Council Member Pursell Jr., seconded by Council Member Palomar, to approve the Agreement with Lechowicz & Tseng Municipal Consultants to Complete a Solid Waste Disposal Rate Study. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) FY2022-2023 Project Discussion - Staff Report by City Engineer Dave Peters
(Action only by the City Council) Sponsor: Engineering Department Presentation by City Engineer Dave Peters – Mr. Peters stated that the City has been allocated approximately $180,000 for CDBG eligible projects for FY 22-23. He presented 4 options, stating that there are only enough funds for one of the projects. Recommended action is that Council consider the projects and provide direction regarding preferred project, setting of a public hearing, and submission of application. He stated that Council could choose to not apply for FY 22-23, and we could loan the money to another agency and do a bigger project in the future. Council discussed the options. Mayor North stated that Mariposa Street is rated so low. Council Member Pursell Jr. said that he thinks Mariposa Street is used by the most people out of all these options.

Informational- No action necessary now.

Council Reports and Staff Communications
Community Services Commission – Mayor North reported that they meet next Wednesday.

Public Safety Committee – Council Member Palomar reported that they have not met.

Chamber of Commerce – Council Member Pursell Jr. reported that Concerts in The Park are on Thursdays at 8:00 P. M. and will have Farmers Markets from 5-8:00 P.M. Fireworks are on July 3rd.

People can come to the grass to watch and there will be food and drinks. The Chamber is scheduling a truck show for October 9th.

Economic Development Committee - Council Member Roman reported that they met on Tuesday and focused on the Downtown Strategic Plan, Business Improvement District, and Agri-tourism.

Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 16, 2021

7.5 Finance Committee – Council Member Pursell Jr. reported that it has not met.

7.6 Planning Commission – Mayor North reported that they met last week and discussed a truck terminal and moved forward with zoning and annexing.

7.7 South Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Joint Powers Authority (SKGSA) – Council Member Hurtado reported that they met and approved the Prop 68 Grant Agreement.

7.8 Downtown Business Improvement District – Council Member Hurtado reported that they have met twice. The Downtown Strategic Plan was presented. They discussed social media on what they can afford and what they are.

7.9 Council of Governments – Council Member Roman reported that they meet next week.

7.10 Council Member Reports- Council Member Hurtado stated that she met with Supervisor Mendes about water and concern of the drought. She shared about Officer Carey who went over and beyond regarding a damaged flagpole. He gave her a new American flag. She spoke about moving tables for disruptive kids at Athwal Park to get them away from the play structure.

Council Member Palomar stated that last Monday night they had the ribbon cutting ceremony at the new Hash Youth Baseball Field.

Council Member Roman brought up the Swedish Mill and having an update to see what the plan is. It is looking bad again.

Mayor North reported that the opening of the State Shoot is June 22 at the Kingsburg Gun Club.

She invited Council to attend with her. She spoke about a magazine that would like to feature Kingsburg.

City Manager’s Report – Mr. Henderson reminded Council of the cancellation of the July 7th meeting.

Future Agenda Items - None
Water Board Notice of Drought Conditions - City Manager Alexander Henderson said that they met to talk about conservation or possible mandates.

Adjourn the Joint Meeting of the Board of Directors of The City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and the Board of Directors of The Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency - 7:20 P. M.

The Kingsburg City Council adjourned into Closed Session at 7:20 P. M. to discuss the following items:

9.1 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
California Government Code Section 54956.8
Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel Number: APN: 396-111-15T (tax exempt) City Negotiator: Alexander J. Henderson
Kingsburg City Council, City of Kingsburg Public Financing Authority and Board of Directors of the Successor Agency of the Kingsburg Redevelopment Agency Joint Meeting Agenda June 16, 2021
Under Negotiation: Rental Terms and Conditions

9.2 CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR
California Government Code Section 54956.8
Tulare County Assessor’s Parcel Number: APN: 028-430-001 City Negotiator: Alexander J. Henderson
Under Negotiation: Purchase and Sale Terms and Conditions

9.3 CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
California Government Code Section 54957.6
City Designated Representative: Alexander Henderson
Employee Organization: Un-Represented, City Department Heads.

The Kingsburg City Council Adjourned out of Closed Session into the Regular Kingsburg City Council Meeting at 8:24 P. M.

Report out of Closed Session.

The City Attorney said that there is no report out.

Adjourn Regular Kingsburg City Council Meeting – 8:25 P. M.

Submitted by:
____________________________________
Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor North & City Council
REPORT FROM: Holly Owen, AICP REVIEWED BY: AH
Community Development Director
AGENDA ITEM: Awarding of Competitive Allocations for Residential Development for 2022 ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance ___Resolution ____Motion ______Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Growth Management System (Attachment B) was enacted in November, 2004 as Measure N, Charter Amendment to the City of Kingsburg Charter. The Growth Management System was brought about by concerns regarding unplanned and uncoordinated growth in the City. The Growth Management System allows for 115 annual housing unit allocations to be made available at the beginning of each calendar year, with a potential two rounds of applications for allocation units per year. With the downturn in the market, allocations for housing units continued to accrue, resulting in City Council Resolution 2013-38 (Attachment C) which allowed units to accumulate for a period of three years. With that accrual, there are currently 240 single family allocation units available in 2022.

RECOMMENDED ACTION BY CITY COUNCIL

1. Adopt Resolution 2022-034, awarding of 114 housing units as the 2022 housing unit allocation.

POLICY ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Council could choose not to award housing unit allocations, or only award one project allocations, for 2022.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION/KEY METRIC:

1. Promote Sustainable Development

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

PRIOR ACTION/REVIEW
On May 12, 2022, at a regularly scheduled meeting, the Kingsburg Planning Commission held a public hearing and adopted Resolution 2022-01, recommending the award of housing allocation units for the two proposed projects identified in Attachment E.

Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 6.1
FISCAL IMPACT:

1. Is There A Fiscal Impact? No

2. Is it Currently Budgeted? No

3. If Budgeted, Which Line? N/A

Discussion:

The following is a brief description of each proposed project seeking allocation of housing units:

A) 63 Lot Single Family Development (West Star Construction, applicant) on 18.85 acres, northwest corner of Mendocino and Solig Avenues, to develop single-family residential lots for custom home construction – allocate 63 single family residential housing units.

B) 51 Lot Single Family development (Bonadelle Homes, Inc., applicant) on 14.42 acres, west of Mendocino, north of Kamm, south of Caruthers Avenues, to develop 51 single family residential lots-allocate 51 single family residential housing units.

All the proposed development projects are in the North Kingsburg Specific Plan Area, will be processed as Planned Unit Developments, and are subject to the design standards and other requirements set forth in the North Kingsburg Specific Plan. Attachment D contain the submittal details. Additionally, the land upon which each project will be constructed must be annexed to the City of Kingsburg through Fresno LAFCo process. The allocation of housing units to each proposed project does not constitute approval of any proposed project or lessen the need to obtain all required land use entitlements and environmental assessments for each proposed project.

As described in Section 16.09.070 of the Kingsburg Municipal Code, a rating and ranking criteria is applied to each project with the use of a 100-point scoring system. A number of criteria are considered, including suitability of location, availability of utility services, architectural design and aesthetic considerations. The Planning Commission is required to review the rating and ranking recommendations prepared by City Planning Staff and to forward to City Council its recommendation for allocation of housing units. Attachment A is the Staff’s recommendation for rating and ranking the proposed projects. The rating and ranking is based upon the project as identified in the application for allocation of housing units. Any changes in the project after housing units are awarded will be subject to the provisions of Section 16.09.020(C) of the Kingsburg Municipal Code.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
See Prior Action/Review section, above.

ATTACHED INFORMATION

1. Resolution 2022-034

2. Rating and ranking of allocation submittals for 2022

3. Kingsburg Municipal Code Chapter 16.09, Growth Management System

4. City Council Resolution 2013-38, approving accumulation of unused allocations for a period of three years

5. Allocation submittals for Bonadelle Homes, Inc;, and West Star Construction, Inc.

6. Planning Commission Resolution 2022-01, recommending to Council the awarding of allocation units for the 2022 calendar year

7. Location map of proposed projects

8. Allocation chart
1 RESOLUTION 2022-034

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KINGSBURG

APPROVING AWARDS OF ALLOCATION FOR HOUSING UNITS UNDER CHAPTER

16.09, GROWTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

OF THE KINGSBURG MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, on November 2, 2004 the citizens of the City of Kingsburg did approve Measure N, Charter Amendment 2004-01, amending the City Charter to state that the City shall establish growth control regulations to place a limit on the number of residential permits which may be issued annually; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2005-05, adding Chapter 16.09 Growth Management System to the City Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, an application for the allocation of housing units was received from Bonadelle Homes, Inc and from West Star Construction and met the requirementsfor the competitive allocation process per 16.09.060 of the Kingsburg Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, Staff evaluated the project according to the Rating and Ranking Criteria per

16.09.070 of the Kingsburg Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS the public hearing for the City Council’s consideration of this process was properly noticed in accordance with applicable law by posting the notice of public hearing at the City of Kingsburg City Hall Bulletin Board, placing the notice of public hearing on the City of Kingsburg website and publishing the notice of public hearing in the Kingsburg Recorder.

WHEREAS, the allocation of housing units under 16.09.060 of the Kingsburg Municipal Code is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), and is not considered a project. The Amendment to the Kingsburg Municipal Code is a government administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment, and
WHEREAS, the Kingsburg Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter at their May 12, 2022 meeting; received public testimony, and reviewed the staff report on this matter, and WHEREAS, upon completion of the public hearing on this matter the Kingsburg Planning Commission recommended approval of said Allocation to the Kingsburg City Council.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Kingsburg City Council accepts the recommendation of the Kingsburg Planning Commission regarding the request by Bonadelle, Homes, Inc., for an allocation of 51 housing units and by West Star Construction for 63 housing units and hereby awards and allocates 51 housing units to Bonadelle Homes, Inc. and to West Star Construction for 63 single-family residential units.
2 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kingsburg duly called and held on the 15th day of June, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: Council Member(s):

NOES: Council Member(s):

ABSENT: Council Member(s):

ABSTAIN: Council Member(s):

ATTEST: ________________________________
Abigail Palsgaard, City Clerk

ATTACHMENT D
Discussion:

Two projects were submitted for the 2022 allocation process. Due to the preliminary nature of the submissions, Staff is scoring the applications based on information submitted by the applicant with the knowledge that given the requirements of the NKSP for master planning, and with the need for annexation for all submittals, the proposed projects will contain more of the required details needed for approval at the time that they submit for entitlements.

SUITABILITY OF LOCATION (25 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: The City promotes compact and efficient development. Concentric patterns of growth are preferred. Infill development within the Urban Limit Boundary is encouraged. Leapfrog development and irregular boundaries are discouraged. Islands or corridors of unincorporated territory are to be avoided.

Projects will not be considered if the property identified in the application is not sufficiently contiguous to the City limits to allow for a logical and reasonable extension of the City limits as determined by the City. Using this information give details of your project. (Documentation may include a map and verbal description of location.) 25 POINTS Property is within City limits.
20 POINTS Infill project sufficiently surrounded by urban development. 15 POINTS Property is bordered by the City on more than one side. 10 POINTS Property is adjacent to the City within the Urban Limit Boundary. 5 POINTS Property is adjacent to the City but outside the Urban Limit Boundary. 0 POINTS Property is outside the Sphere of Influence and annexation is required.

Analysis:

The points system places emphasis on concentric and infill development and minimization of negative impacts to infrastructure and services. The West Star project is bordered on two sides, and the Bonadelle project is not currently bordered on any sides by City parcels. Both are adjacent to the City, but outside the City Limits. Both will need annexation and are outside the Urban Limit Boundary as identified by the North Kingsburg Specific Plan Land use and Circulation Diagram (Figure III-1).

West Star= 15 points
Bonadelle=5 points
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING (15 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: The adopted Housing Element of the Kingsburg General Plan has an inclusionary housing policy calling for at least 15 percent of the housing units provided by each project to be affordable to low-income or very lowincome households. If the affordable units are not incorporated into the project, the developer may be able to comply with the policy by assisting the City in providing an equal number of affordable housing units elsewhere in the City by dedicating appropriate land or paying an in-lieu fee amount acceptable to the City. For each percentage point of affordable housing included in or provided for by a project, one scoring system point will be awarded up to a maximum of 15 points.

Analysis: These proposed projects contain no affordable housing units. Responses from applicants to this item are that they are supportive of inclusionary housing but dies not include it (Bonadelle) and regret that at this time this project does not have low to very low income housing (West Star). The City is aware of the challenges in meeting this criteria.

In the context of housing, there is a difference between having a wide range of housing affordability, driven by size of the lot, house and pricing, and what is termed inclusionary housing. Currently inclusionary housing is driven by complex tax credits and is a specialty of certain developers, often those who have projects statewide. A suggestion would be to alter this criteria for the next allocation period to award points based on a wide range of housing options (multifamily, large lot, etc) rather than use the term ‘inclusionary’ or ‘affordable housing,’ terms that mean, for the time being, the involvement of a particular type of specialized financing.

Although the NKSP calls for a ‘full range of housing through the Planned Unit Development process (III-9)’, the City would benefit from further analysis as to how that goal can be accomplished.

West Star=0 points
Bonadelle=0 points
MEETING NEEDS, DEMANDS AND OBJECTIVES (20 points possible) Criteria from the allocation application form: The City’s adopted Housing Element emphasizes the accommodation of special-needs populations. Points will be awarded for projects that provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects. Examples include, without limitation, handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families. (Documentation may include descriptions of existing housing inventory and market conditions, demographics, explanations of challenges confronted by the developers, descriptions or drawings of proposed housing features, etc.) Points will be awarded to projects that:

1. Provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects, such as handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families.

2. Expand the range of housing choices available in the community by offering configurations, densities and/or price ranges that are not otherwise readily available.

3. Satisfy demonstrated market demands (e.g. large lots, senior housing).

4. Utilize properties that have been bypassed because they are challenging to develop.

Analysis:

Four specific criteria are cited. If all are weighted equally, five points are available for each category.

The proposed project by Bonadelle appears to have the greater variety of offerings, highlighting the multigenerational living spaces with several of their two-story models.

This may also be offered by West Star, and has been their previous developments, but was not included in their narrative for this round of allocations.

Both projects cited meeting ‘demonstrated market demands’ as rationale for point awards and received equal points for that requirement.

The Bonadelle project received two points for highlighting the recently discussed sewer capacity concerns as a challenge to development.

West Star= 10 points
Bonadelle= 17 points
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (25 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: Preference will be given to projects that have the most positive impacts and/or the least negative impacts on infrastructure and services provided by the City and other service entities that operate within or provide services to the City. Documentation of infrastructure considerations and property dedications can take the form of written descriptions and commitments, maps and diagrams. Conservation features can also be documented with industry or manufacturer data and literature.

Scoring shall be based on the following criteria:

1. Proximity to existing infrastructure systems.

2. The extent of extension or expansion needed to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure to serve the proposed development and, if appropriate, future development.

3. The willingness of the developer to enter into a reimbursement agreement if the project involves construction of master-planned facilities and such an agreement is appropriate.

4. Agreement to construct and install new oversized infrastructure and/or construct and install new infrastructure that extends beyond the developer’s project in order to service future growth, with reimbursement to the developer pursuant to a reimbursement agreement providing for reimbursement by future development connecting to the oversized and/or extended infrastructure.

5. Dedication of real property to the City to improve systems and services, including, without limitation, rights-of-way for streets, alleys or green belts, or sites for water wells, lift stations, drainage basins (in accordance with the Storm Drain Master Plan), parks, and schools sites, etc.

6. Incorporation of resource conservation features, including, without limitation, active or passive solar systems, water conservation features, drought-tolerant landscaping and energy-efficient appliances.

Analysis:

Both applications indicated a willingness to dedicate property for systems and services.

Dedications of real property for other uses, such as pedestrian paths and open space required by the NKSP was mentioned by the West Star project. The Bonadelle project not only would be willing to expand the existing storm drain basin (on Azalea and 14th Avenue) if needed, but also has begun discussions with SKF over the infrastructure chokepoint that limits development at this time for their property. They expressed a willingness if necessary to enter into a reimbursement agreement to help to resolve this issue.

Both projects will incorporate rain sensing technology and efficient appliances within the home.

West Star= 19 points
Bonadelle=24 points
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS (15 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: Kingsburg continues to project an image as “The Swedish Village” which gives the City a unique identity. Residential housing should include distinctive design, quality construction and accompanying amenities. In addition to written descriptions, diagrams and maps, such documentation as elevations, renderings, floor plans and photographs of similar developments may help to illustrate the proposed project. In the case of walled and gated communities, aesthetics and amenities that are generally viewed by and available to residents and selected guests exclusively will not be considered in scoring in this Architectural Design and Aesthetic Considerations category. Only those features that are visible to the general citizenry outside of the walled and gated community will be evaluated.

Features that will receive points through the scoring system include:

1. Custom homes or customized features on tract homes that prevent houses in the same development from appearing repetitious.

2. Fostering of neighborhood character.

3. Compatibility with neighboring developments (for example lot sizes and square footage of homes).

4. Utilization of alleys for garage access from the rear.

5. Variable front yard setbacks.

6. Landscaping of street medians and parkways.

7. Green belts with pathways for pedestrians, skaters and bicyclists.

8. Pedestrian-friendly design.

9. Bicycle lanes in appropriate locations.

10. Preservation of existing trees.

11. Open space and recreation facilities.
(Specific examples are cited: custom homes or features on tract homes that keep them from appearing repetitious; fostering of neighborhood character; compatibility with neighboring developments; utilization of alleys for rear access; variable front yard setbacks; landscaping of medians and parkways; greenbelts with pathways for pedestrians, skaters and bicyclists; open space and recreation facilities; and pedestrianfriendly design.) Analysis:

Project will be held to development standards under the NKSP for single family residential projects. These standards include all the above requirements, and the project descriptions indicate an understanding of those design standards and required amenities and a willingness to comply with them. Both projects have alleys, West Star has open space and pedestrian connectivity to surrounding areas. Both applications included elevations and renderings.

West Star= 15 points
Bonadelle=15 points

RECOMMENDED
POINTS

SUMMARY
Points
Available/Category Total
Residential Bonadelle
West
Star
25 Location 25 5 15
15 Inclusionary housing 15 0 0
20 Needs, demands,
objectives
20 17 10
25 Infrastructure and
services
25 24 19
15 Design and aesthetics 15 15 15
100 TOTALS 100 61 59
5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
1/11
A.

B.

A.

B.

Chapter 16.09 - GROWTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
Sections:

16.09.010 - Purpose.

This chapter implements a growth management system that will manage regulating residential development so that it is compatible with the character and service capabilities of the city and other service providers within the city. This chapter implements the growth management amendment to the city charter passed by the voters of the city in the election of November 2, 2004.

This chapter establishes a growth management system to limit the rate of residential growth in the city to a level compatible with the size, financial limitations, resource constraints, and services capabilities of the city and service providers within the city. This chapter also seeks to maintain aesthetic goals of the city. This chapter implements fundamental policies of the general plan including particular provisions of the land use and housing elements of the general plan. The growth management system will assist the city in addressing its responsibility to share in the provision of housing for households of various income levels as determined by the regional housing needs allocation plan prepared by the council of Fresno County governments and approved by the State Department of Housing and Community Development. (Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.020 - Allocations for housing units.

One hundred fifteen (115) new allocations of housing units will become available at the beginning of each calendar year. Allocation is defined as the right to apply for a building permit to construct one single-family residence or one multi-family residential housing unit. The allocations are divided between two categories of housing: multiple-family housing units with thirty-five (35) allocations (less any allocations issued to multi-family small projects as defined in Section

16.09.050 of this chapter) per year (thirty percent (30%)) and single-family housing units, with eighty (80) allocations per year (seventy-percent (70%)). Of the eighty (80) allocations (less any allocations issued to small projects as defined in Section 16.09.050 of this chapter) per year of single-family housing units, twenty (20) allocations shall be reserved for large lot development on parcels of at least ten thousand (10,000) square feet.

Allocations which are issued pursuant to the provisions of this chapter are issued to the specific residential development project identified and described in the application for allocations.

Allocations are not issued to any person or entity. Allocations cannot be assigned, transferred or conveyed to another residential development project
5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
2/11
C.

1. 2.

3. 4.

D.

Except as otherwise set forth in this subsection, if after allocations are awarded, a residential housing project receiving allocations is modified or changed in any way, the allocations awarded to that residential housing project shall automatically terminate and become unused allocations subject to reallocation at the time of the next award of allocations. In order to obtain allocations, the modified or changed residential housing project must apply for allocations as a new residential housing project. Except that, a residential housing project may file an application with the city requesting that the allocations not terminate but remain with the changed or modified residential housing project. The city council may grant such application only if the city council can make all of the following findings:

The city council determines that: (i) any modification or change in the type (i.e., single-family, multi-family, senior, etc.) of residential housing; or (ii) any modification or change in any aspect of the residential housing project which is subject to the rating and ranking criteria set forth in Section 16.09.070 of this chapter, identified in the original application for allocations, satisfies a current specific housing need in the city of Kingsburg; Any modification or change: (i) in the number of residential housing units; or (ii) any modification or change in any aspect of the residential housing project which is subject to the rating and ranking criteria set forth in Section 16.09.070 of this chapter, identified in the original application for allocations, results solely from a modification or change identified in subsection (C)(1) of this section and does not result in a need to increase the allocations initially issued to the residential housing project identified in the original application; The competitive points the modified or changed residential housing project receives as determined by city staff's reevaluation of the modified or changed residential housing project pursuant to the competitive allocation process identified in Section 16.09.060 of this chapter, does not result in a competitive points ranking different from the residential housing project identified in the original application and does not effect the competitive points ranking of any other residential housing project that competed for allocations with the residential housing project identified in the original application;
No entitlements have been approved or issued for the residential housing project prior to its application seeking to retain the awarded allocations.

After allocations are issued as provided in this chapter, all development entitlements (i.e., parcel maps, subdivision maps, environmental review, etc.) associated with said allocations are required by the city or applicable law, rule or regulation must be approved by the city in order to use the issued allocations. If any required development entitlements are denied, or expire, the issued allocations related thereto shall automatically expire. The city will not accept any application for development entitlements unless allocations have been approved and issued for said development entitlements. Also for issued allocations to remain effective, complete development entitlement applications (including the payment of any and all required fees) for all required 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
3/11
E.

F.

G.
development entitlements must be submitted to the city within one hundred eighty (180) days after the date of issuance of the allocations and construction of off-site improvements, including, without limitation, installation of utilities and construction and installation of streets, must commence within three hundred sixty-five (365) days after the date of approval of all required development entitlements ("construction start date"). No fees paid by an applicant to the city as part of the entitlement process will be reimbursed by the city should the applicant fail to satisfy the requirements of this chapter.

An applicant may request an extension of the construction start date by submitting a written application for such extension on the form required by the city. In order to grant an extension request, the city council, upon recommendation by the planning commission, must find that the failure of the applicant to commence construction of off-site improvements on or before the construction start date was beyond the reasonable control of the applicant.

The city council, may, in its discretion, allow unused allocations to be carried over for a period of up to three years and allocated to first allocations and/or second allocations or both (as those terms are defined in Section 16.09.060 of this chapter). Unused allocations are allocations: (i) which were never issued; or (ii) previously issued and expired because of denial of development entitlements, failure to commence construction of off-site improvements on or before the construction start date or any extension thereof; or (iii) failure of the applicant to comply with the provisions of this chapter.

In order to meet the housing needs of persons who will reside in mobilehome parks or multifamily housing developments, an applicant seeking to develop a mobilehome park with more than fifteen (15) spaces and/or multi-family housing development with more than fifteen (15) units may request issuance of allocations which would otherwise be issued over a three-year period. The purpose of this three-year allocation is to satisfy the housing needs of persons who wish to reside in mobilehome or multi-family developments, through the development of a project which is larger than would otherwise be allowed with only one year of allocations. An applicant may request a three-year allocation by submitting a written application to the city on the form required by the city.
(Ord. 2007-06 § 1, 2007: Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.030 - Senior housing allocations.

Demand for senior housing in the city exceeds the supply of senior housing within the city. As a result, and in order to address this need for more senior housing, allocations for a senior housing project shall be issued on the basis of one-half of one allocation for each senior housing unit to be constructed. Senior 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
4/11
A.

B.

C.

D.

E.

F.

G.

1. 2.
housing is defined as residential housing which requires that at least one person in residence in each dwelling unit be fifty-five (55) years of age or older. The residential dwelling units must include each of the following elements:

Entryways, walkways, and hallways in the interior common areas of the development, and doorways and paths of access to and within the housing units, shall be as wide as required by current laws applicable to new multi-family housing construction for provision of access to persons using a standard-width wheelchair.

Walkways and hallways in the common areas of the development shall be equipped with standard height railings or grab bars to assist persons who have difficulty with walking.

Walkways and hallways in the common areas shall have lighting conditions which are of sufficient brightness to assist persons who have difficulty seeing.

Access to all common areas and housing units within the development shall be provided without use of stairs, either by means of an elevator or sloped walking ramps.

The development shall be designed to encourage social contact by providing at least some common open space.

Refuse collection shall be provided in a manner that requires a minimum of physical exertion by residents.

The development shall comply with all other applicable requirements for access and design imposed by law, including, but not limited to, the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. Section 3601 et seq.), the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. Section 12101 et seq.), and the regulations promulgated at Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations that relate to access for persons with disabilities or handicaps. If a senior housing project includes the seven elements listed previously in this section and one of the three enhancements listed in subsection (G)(1) through (3) which follow in this section, allocations for that senior housing project shall be issued on the basis of one-third of one allocation for each senior housing unit to be constructed. If a senior housing project includes the seven elements listed previously in this section and two of the three enhancements listed in subsections (G)(1) through (3) which follow in this section, allocations for that senior housing project shall be issued on the basis of one-fourth of one allocation for each senior housing unit to be constructed. If a senior housing project includes the seven elements listed previously in this section and all three of the enhancements listed in subsections (G)(1) through (3) which follow in this section, allocations for that senior housing project shall be issued on the basis of one-fifth of one allocation for each senior housing unit to be constructed. Enhancements are:

Development of congregate housing at a density that would meet the medium or high density residential standard in the general plan, at least seven dwelling units per net acre.

Provision of support services that would enable senior citizens who are otherwise able to 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
5/11

3. A.

B.

C.

A.

B.
live independently to remain in their homes for a longer time. Examples of such services are provision of community meals, transportation, laundry services and cleaning services.

Meeting the housing element inclusionary housing goal by making at least fifteen percent (15%) of the housing units affordable to households of low or very low income (less than eighty percent (80%) of the local median income for households of the same size). (Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.040 - Exemption to allocation requirements.

The following types of residential housing may be constructed without the issuance of allocations:

Residential housing units constructed upon parcels that were previously fully developed and which have adequate infrastructure to service the new residential development as determined by the city.

Second housing units added to lots with single-family homes in conformance with the city zoning ordinance and applicable California law.

Residential housing projects which received all required development entitlements prior to enactment of this chapter.
(Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.050 - Small projects.

New multi-family or single-family residential developments of four or fewer dwelling units ("small projects") will automatically receive allocations and will not be required to participate in the competitive allocation process identified in Section 16.09.060 of this chapter. (Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.060 - Competitive allocations.

Allocations for residential projects consisting of five or more dwelling units will compete for allocations in accordance with the process identified in this section. Each calendar year, the maximum number of allocations that can be issued through the competitive process for any one application for development entitlements to construct residential housing units is twenty-five (25) allocations for single-family housing or multiple-family housing, or thirty-five (35) allocations for mixed-density projects which include at least ten (10) single-family homes and at least ten (10) multiple-family dwelling units.

Applications for competitive allocations must be filed with the planning and development department on or before four o'clock p.m. on September 30th of each calendar year. If 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
6/11
C.

D.

E.

F.

September 30th falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday when the city offices are closed, the time for filing applications for competitive allocations shall be extended to four o'clock p.m. on the next business day. The development proposals identified in the applications shall be rated and ranked in accordance with the rating and ranking criteria identified in this chapter by planning staff during the month of October and the planning staff shall make its recommendations for competitive allocations to the planning commission.

An application may not identify more than five model homes to be constructed for each group of twenty-five (25) allocations issued. At the election of the applicant, the model homes will or will not be counted as part of the allocations issued to the applicant. If the applicant elects not to include model homes as part of the allocations issued to the applicant, no certificate of occupancy will be issued for the model homes until allocations are issued for the model homes in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

At its first meeting each November, the planning commission will conduct a public hearing to review staff's rating and ranking recommendations for the competitive allocations and make recommendations to the city council regarding the competitive allocations. At its first regular meeting in December, the city council will consider the recommendations of the planning commission and will issue allocations for the next calendar year ("first allocations").

If not all available allocations are issued in December, then at its first meeting in February of the next year, the city council may authorize staff to conduct a second competitive allocation process ("second allocations"). If a second allocation is authorized by the city council, the application process shall be the same as for the first allocations, except that all applications must be received by the planning and development department by four o'clock p.m. on March 31st. If March 31st falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday when the city offices are closed, the time for filing applications for second allocations shall be extended to four o'clock p.m. on the next business day. City staff will perform its ranking and rating process during the month of April and a public hearing will be held by the planning commission at its first regular meeting in May to review staff's rating and ranking recommendations for the second allocation and make recommendations to the city council regarding the second allocation. At its first regular meeting in June, the city council will consider the recommendations of the planning commission and determine the number of second allocations to be issued, if any.

If there is only one application for second allocations, the city council may authorize the issuance of all allocations available in the second allocation to the sole applicant, even though the allocations available in the second allocation exceed the maximum annual number of allocations available for issuance under this section of this chapter and even though the sole applicant for the second allocations received first allocations.
(Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005) 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
7/11
A.

16.09.070 - Rating and ranking criteria.

Projects seeking allocations will be rated using a one hundred (100) point scoring system and then ranked. Rating and ranking will be based on information submitted by the applicants in their application materials, backup documentation provided by applicants and other documents and information the city deems relevant to each respective project. Lists of supporting materials likely to be included in a typical application are found at the end of the description of each scoring category. Applicants are encouraged to submit any other materials that are relevant in supporting their applications. The scoring system will be based on the following criteria:

Suitability of Location (Twenty-five (25) Points). The city promotes compact and efficient development. Concentric patterns of growth are preferred. Infill development within the urban limit boundary is encouraged. Leapfrog development and irregular boundaries are discouraged. Islands or corridors of unincorporated territory are to be avoided. Projects will not be considered if the property identified in the application is not sufficiently contiguous to the city limits to allow for a logical and reasonable extension of the city limits as determined by the city. Scoring for this category is as follows:
25 points The property proposed for development is
already within the city limits.
20 points An infill project sufficiently surrounded by
urban development as determined by the
city.
15 points The property is bordered by the city on more
than one side.
10 points The property is adjacent to the city limits and within the urban limit boundary, allowing for
a logical and reasonable extension of the city
limits, as determined by the city.
5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
8/11
B.

C.
5 points The property is adjacent to the city limits,
allowing for a logical and reasonable
extension of the city limits as determined by
the city, but the property is outside of the
urban limit boundary.
0 points The property is outside of the sphere of
influence and annexation to the sphere is
required.

Documentation may include a map and verbal description.

Inclusionary Housing (Fifteen (15) Points). The adopted housing element of the Kingsburg general plan has an inclusionary housing policy calling for at least fifteen percent (15%) of the housing units provided by each project to be affordable to low-income or very low-income households. If the affordable units are not incorporated into the project, the developer may be able to comply with the policy by assisting the city in providing an equal number of affordable housing units elsewhere in the city by dedicating appropriate land or paying an inlieu fee. For each percentage point of affordable housing included in or provided for by a project, one scoring system point will be awarded up to a maximum of fifteen (15) points.

Documentation must include a detailed written commitment to provide the affordable housing described in the application. It must include calculation of the probable rental or mortgage costs of the housing units in the project proposed; calculation of the housing costs a low-income household can afford (which can be based on eighty percent (80%) of the median household incomes for Fresno County for the current year as provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development); and an explanation of how any "gap" between the two calculations will be eliminated. The "gap" is the basis for determining an appropriate in-lieu fee, or an appropriate value for land to be dedicated for affordable housing purposes. If third-party subsidies are proposed through use of governmental grant funds or partnership with non-profit affordable housing organizations, the commitment on the part of any third-party entity must be documented in writing.

Meeting Special Needs, Demonstrated Market Demands and Community Objectives (Twenty (20) Points). City's adopted housing element emphasizes the accommodation of special-needs populations. Points will be awarded for projects that provide housing for populations that are 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
9/11

1. 2.

3. 4.

D.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.
underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects. Examples include, without limitation, handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families. Points will be awarded to projects that:

Provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects, such as handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families;
Expand the range of housing choices available in the community by offering configurations, densities and/or price ranges that are not otherwise readily available; Satisfy demonstrated market demands (e.g., large lots, senior housing); and Utilize properties that have been bypassed because they are challenging to develop.

Documentation may include descriptions of existing housing inventory and market conditions, demographics, explanations of challenges confronted by the developers, description or drawings of proposed housing features, etc.

Infrastructure and Services (Twenty-five (25) Points). Preference will be given to projects that have the most positive impacts and/or the least negative impacts on infrastructure and services provided by the city and other service entities that operate within or provide services to the city. Scoring shall be based on the following criteria:

Proximity to existing infrastructure systems;
The extent of extension or expansion needed to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure to serve the proposed development and, if appropriate, future development;
The willingness of the developer to enter into a reimbursement agreement if the project involves construction of master-planned facilities and such an agreement is appropriate; Agreement to construct and install new oversized infrastructure and/or construct and install new infrastructure that extends beyond the developer's project in order to service future growth, with reimbursement to developer pursuant to a reimbursement agreement providing for reimbursement by future development connecting to the oversized and/or extended infrastructure;
Dedication of real property to the city to improve systems and services, including, without limitation, rights-of-way for streets, alleys or green belts, or sites for water wells, lift stations, drainage basins, parks, and schools sites, etc; Incorporation of resource conservation features, including, without limitation, active or passive solar systems, water conservation features, drought-tolerant landscaping and energy-efficient appliances.
5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
10/11
E.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. 10.

11. Documentation of infrastructure considerations and property dedications can take the form of written descriptions and commitments, maps and diagrams. Conservation features can also be documented with industry or manufacturer data and literature.

Architectural Design and Aesthetic Considerations (Fifteen (15) Points). Kingsburg continues to project an image as "the Swedish Village" which gives the city a unique identity. Residential housing should include distinctive design, quality construction and accompanying amenities.

Features that will receive points through the scoring system include:

Custom homes or customized features on tract homes that prevent houses in the same development from appearing repetitious;
Fostering of neighborhood character;
Compatibility with neighboring developments (e.g., lot sizes and square footage of homes);
Utilization of alleys for garage access from the rear;
Variable front yard setbacks;
Landscaping of street medians and parkways;
Green belts with pathways for pedestrians, skaters and bicyclists; Pedestrian-friendly design;
Bicycle lanes in appropriate locations;
Preservation of existing trees;
Open space and recreation facilities.

In addition to written descriptions, diagrams and maps, such documentation as elevations, renderings, floor plans and photographs of similar developments may help to illustrate the proposed project.

In the case of walled and gated communities, aesthetics and amenities that are generally viewed by and available to residents and selected guests exclusively will not be considered in scoring in this architectural design and aesthetic considerations category. Only those features that are visible to the general citizenry outside of the walled and gated community will be evaluated. (Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.080 - Phased projects.

Projects having more residential units than the maximum allocation allowable or available in a single allocation period may be phased. Allocations for phased projects may include allocations for the calendar year and allocations for up to two years thereafter. Approval of allocations for a phased project shall identify the number of allocations that will be issued by the city and used by the applicant during each phase of the 5/31/22, 9:10 AM Kingsburg, CA Code of Ordinances
11/11
A.

B.
project. A separate final map is not required for each phase of a residential subdivision project. Phasing requirements, including, without limitation, number of allocations available for use in each phase, numbers of units that can be constructed and timing of construction, will be enforced as conditions of approval of the tentative tract map and final tract map and as provisions of the subdivision agreement. If a multiple-family residential project includes phasing, phasing requirements including those identified in this section will be enforced through conditions of approval of the site plan or planned unit development and as provisions of the development agreement if one is required by the city. (Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005)

16.09.090 - Exceptions and changes.

The provisions of Chapter 16.40 of this title shall not apply to this chapter.

The city council shall have the power to increase, decrease, change or reallocate allocations by resolution of the city council.
(Ord. 2006-09 § 1 (part), 2006: Ord. 2005-05 § 2 (part), 2005) RESOLUTION NO. 2013-38

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KINGSBIJRG

APPROVING THE UNIT ALLOCATIONS TO ACCUMULATE FOR A PERIOD OF

THREE YEARS AND TO ALLOW EXTENDED ISSUED ALLOCATIONS FOR THE LIFE OF A TENTATIVE MAP.

WHEREAS, on November 2, 2004 the citizens of the City of Kingsburg did approve Measure N, Charter Amendment No. 2004-1 amending the City Charter to state that the City shall establish growth control regulations to place a limit on the number of residential permits which may be issued annually; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2005-05 adding Chapter 16.09 Growth Management System to the City Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, Section 16.09.020F allows the City Council to allow unused allocations to be carried over for a period of up to three years; and, WHEREAS, the unused allocations for the past three years total is 298 units; and, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Kingsburg City Council affirms that the following findings can be made:

1. That economic conditions have impacted residential growth in the City of Kingsburg

2. That economic conditions that resulted in minimal development may result in a shortage of housing units in the future.

3. That allowing unit allocations to accumulate will allow the City of Kingsburg greater flexibility to meet the pent up demand for housing that may occur in the future.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Kingsburg City Council approves the accumulation of unused allocations for a rolling period of three years.

I, Sue Bauch, City Clerk of the City of Kingsburg, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Kingsburg City Council held on the 6th day of November, 2013 by the following vote:

Ayes: Council Member(s): Creighton, Karstetter, Blayney, Roman, and Mayor Reilly Noes: Council Member(s): None

Absent: Council Member(s) None
Abstain: Council Member(s) None
Sue Much, City lerl

CITY OF KINGSBURG

SUBMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS

GUILDING PERMITS)
APPLICANT: West Star Construction, lnc DATE September 25,2020 ADDRESS: 13837 S. Zediker Avenue START DATE Mar 2024
Kingsburg, CA 93631 TRACT 4 TBD
TELEPHONE: 559-897-0 349 I 559-977 -2396
(f Applicable)
PROJECT NAME:

E-MAIL : [email protected] Estates V
LOCATION OF PROJECT: 13665 S. Mendocino, Kingsburg cA 93631 A.P.N 393-121-37 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Subdivide approximately 18.85 acres into a 63 Lot P.U.D single family dwellinq product
TOTAL ACREAGE. 18.85 TOTAL UNITS: 63 MODEL HOMES:

SINGLE FAMILy:Q9_ MULTI-FAMILY: -0- SENIOR: -0- MOBILE HOME: -0- OWNER'S NAME Allen Jackson
ADDRESS.13665 S Mednocino, Kingsburg CA 93631
. 897-0349 I 559-97 7 -2396 E-MAIL [email protected]
DO YOU OWN ADJACENT PARCELS: YES tr NO g
LOCATION: North West Corner of Mendocino Ave and Solig (A.P.N. 393-121-37) DEVELOPER: West Star Construction, lnc
ADDRESS 13837 S. Zediker, Kingsburg CA 93631
TELEPHONE . 897-0 349 I 559 -97 7 -2396 E-MAIL . sand [email protected] Rating and ranking will be based on information submitted by the applicants in their application materials. Backup documentation and other documents and information provided by applicants which the City deems relevant to each respective project should also be included. Applicants are encouraged to submit any other materials that are relevant in supporting their applications.

C:\Documents and SettingsWary Colby\My Documents\Allocation 1 information\RATlNc AND RANKING APPLICATION-doc

CITY OF KINGSBURG

SUBMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS
(BUILDING PERMITS)
The scoring system will be based on the following criteria:

SUITABILITY OF LOCATION UP TO 25 POINTS
The City promotes compact and efficient development. Concentric patterns of growth are preferred. Infill development within the Urban Limit Boundary is encouraged. Leapfrog development and irregular boundaries are discouraged. Islands or corridors of unincorporated territory are to be avoided. Projects will not be considered if the property identified in the application is not sufficiently contiguous to the City limits to allow for a logical and reasonable extension of the City limits as determined by the City. Using this information give details of your project. (Documentation may include a mnp and verbal description of localion) Property is within City limits
Infill project and is substantially surrounded by urban development Property is bordered by the City on more than one side
Property is adjacent to the City, within the Urban Limit Boundary, allowing for logical growth
Property is adjacent to the City but outside the Urban Limit Boundary Property is outside the Sphere of Influence and annexation is required 25 POINTS
20 POINTS
15 POINTS

IO POINTS
5 POINTS

O POINTS
1S-Points - Property is bordered by the City on more than one side iry
This project will be bounded by development on three of it's four sides, proposed fifth phase of Kings Estates.

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING UP TO 15 POINTS
The adopted Housing Element of the Kingsburg General Plan has an inclusionary housing policy calling for at least 15 percent of the housing units provided by each project to be affordable to low-income or very low-income households. If the affordable units are not incorporated into the project, the developer may be able to comply with the policy by assisting the City in providing an equal number of affordable housing units elsewhere in the City by dedicating appropriate land or paying an in-lieu fee amount acceptable to the City. For each percentage point of affordable housing included'in or provided for by a project, one scoring system point will be awarded up to a maximum of 15 points. (Documentation must include a detailed written commitment to provide the affordable housing described in the application. It must include calculation of the probable rental or mortgage costs of the housing units in the project proposed; calculation of the housing costs a low-income household can afford (which can be based on 80 percent of the median household incomes for Fresno County for the cunent year as provided by the California Department of Housing snd Community Development); and an explanation of how any "gap" is the basisfor determining an appropriate in-lieufee, or an appropriate valuefor Iand to be dedicatedfor affordable housing purposes. If third-party subsidies are proposed through use of governmental grantfunds or partnership with non-proftt affordable housing organizations, the commitment on the part of any third-parly entity must be documented in writing.)
C:\Documents and SettingsWary ColbyMy Documents\Allocation information\RATlNc AND RANKING APPLICATION.doo 2

CITY OF KINGSBURG

SUBMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS

GUILDING PERMITS)
Regretfully the Kings Estates project at this time does not have low-income to very-low MEETING SPECIAL NEEDS. DEMONSTRATED iVT{RKET DEI\4T{NDS AND COMMLINITY OBJECTIVES UP TO 20 PQINTS
The City's adopted Housing Element emphasizes the accommodation of special-needs populations. Points will be awarded for projects that provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects. Examples include, without limitation, handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families. (Documentation may include descriptions of existing housing inventory and market conditions, demographics, explanations of challenges confronted by the developers, description or drawings of proposed hoasingfealures, etc.) Points will be awarded to projects that:

1. Provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects, such as handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families.

2. Expand the range of housing choices available in the community by offering configurations, densities and/or price ranges that are not otherwise readily available.

3. Satisff demonstrated market demands (e.g. large lots, or senior housing).

4. Utilize properties that have been bypassed because they are challenging to develop.

Check any appropriate category and provide details
n Handicapped accessible units m Senior citizenhousing
Large family housing t] Difficult property to develop
^o-Points - Kings Estate project willoffer a variety of plans ranging from 1671 to 3180 square feet as shown in Elevations Package "A". The variety of sizes in homes allow will appeal to empty nesters, senior eitizens and first time home huyers. This Froiect will allow for handicapped accessible features offered to all our Single Family C:\Documents and Settings\Mary ColbyMy Documents\Allocation information\RATlNc AND RANKING APPLICATION.doc J

CITY OF KINGSBURG

SUBMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS

GUILDING PERMITS)
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES UP TO 25 POINTS
Preference will be given to projects that have the most positive impacts and/or the least negative impacts on infrastructure and services provided by the City and other service entities that operate within or provide services to the City. (Documentation of infrastructure considerations and property dedications can take theform of written descriptions and commitments, maps and diagrams. Conservationfeatares can also be documentedwith industry or manufacturer data and literature.)
Scoring shall be based on the following criteria:
l. Proximity to existing infrastructure systems.

2. The extent of extension or expansion needed to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure to serve the proposed development and, if appropriate, future development.

3. The willingness of the developer to enter into a reimbursement agreement if the project involves construction of master-planned facilities and such an agreement is appropriate.

4. Agreement to construct and install new oversized infrastructure and/or construct and install new infrastructure that extends beyond the developer's project in order to service future growth, with reimbursement to developer pursuant to a reimbursement agreement providing for reimbursement by future development connecting to the oversized andlor extended infrastructure.

5. Dedication of real property to the City to improve systems and services, including, without limitation, rights-of-way for streets, alleys or green belts, or sites for water wells, lift stations, drainage basins, (in accordance with the Storm Drain Master Plan) parks, and schools sites, etc.

6. Incorporation of resource conservation features, including, without limitation, active or passive solar systems, water conservation features, drought-tolerant landscaping and energy-effi cient app liances.

Check the appropriate category and provide details
Exi sting infrastructure
Reimbursement agreement
fV Some infrastructure needed
lA Resource conservation features
A Dedication of property for systems and services
25 Peints Kings Estates will extend eurrent infrastrueture running aleng the west ef the , a 10" sewer main line, a 12" water main line alo Mendocino Ave. s property a g an e access to re ne g
areas fer system and serviees will be granted: This prejeet will ineerperate conservation features such as Auto Rain sensing irrigation controls; Solar/battery pewer, This projeet has been designed greater that 557o-ef lets oriented in a north/south direction to take advantage of natural heating and cooling opportunities.

AND TO 15
Kingsburg continues to project an image as'oThe Swedish Village" which gives the Crty a unique identity. Residential housing should include distinctive design, quality construction and accompanying amenities. (In addition to written descriptions, diagrams and maps, such documentation as elevations, renderings,Jloor plans and photographs of similar developments C:\Documents and SettingsMary ColbyMy Documents\Allocation information\RATlNc AND RANKING APPLICATION.doo 4

CITY OF KINGSBURG

STTBMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS

GUILDING PERMITS)
may hetp to illustrate the proposed project. In the case of walled and gated communities, aesthetics and amenities that are generally viewed by and available to residents and selected guests exclusively will not be considered in scoring in this Architectural Design andAesthetic Considerations category. Only thosefeatures that are visible to the general citizenry oatside of the walled and gated community will be evoluated.)
Features that will receive points through the scoring system include:

1. Custom homes or customized features on tract homes that prevent houses in the same development from appearing repetitious.

2. Fostering of neighborhood character.

3. Compatibility with neighboring developments (for example lot sizes and square footage of homes).

4. Utilization of alleys for garage access from the rear.

5. Variable front yard setbacks.

6. Landscaping of street medians and parkways.
7 . Green belts with pathways for pedeshians, skaters and bicyclists.

8. Pedestrian-friendly design.

9. Bicycle lanes in appropriate locations.

10. Preservation of existing trees.
1L Open space and recreation facilities.

Check the appropriate categories and provide details.
fZ Custom homes or features on tract homes that keep them from appearing repetitious V fandscaping of medians and parkways
Z] Fostering of neighborhood character
E Co.patibility with neighboring developments
V Utititation of alleys for rear access
V Yariable front yard setbacks
Zl G.".nbelts with pathways for pedestrians, skaters, and bicyclists Zl gicy"le lanes in appropriate locations
[Z P."r"rvation of existing trees
Open space and recreation facilities EPedestrian-friendly design {
exterior finishes, variable front yard set backs which will give the neighborhood a unique feel be installpd The connectivity and pedestrian path way fosters a goorl neighbnrhood character. plans from 1671 sq. ft to 3180 sq. ft., which compliments the neighboring C:\Documents and Settings\lvlary ColbyMy Documents\Allocation information\RATlNc AND RANKING APPLICATION-doc 5

CITY OF KINGSBURG

STIBMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS
(BUILDING PERMITS)
Projects having more residential units than the maximum allocation allowable or available in a single allocation period may be phased. Allocations for phased projects may include allocations for the calendar year and allocations for up to two years thereafter. Approval of allocations for a phased project shall identifu the number of allocations that will be issued by the City and used by the applicant during each phase ofthe project.

A separate final map is not required for each phase of a residential subdivision project. Phasing requirements, including, without limitation, number of allocations available for use in each phase, numbers of units that can be constructed and timing of construction, will be enforced as conditions of approval of the tentative tract map and final tract map and as provisions of the subdivision agreement.

If a multiple-family residential project includes phasing, phasing requirements including those identified in this paragraph will be enforced through conditions of approval of the site plan or Planned Unit Development and as provisions of the development agreement if one is required by the City.

PHASING REQUIRED NO
Please allow time for each submittal to be thoroughly reviewed. A letter of acceptance will be sent to each applicant when submittal is deemed complete. City Staff can only rute applications based on information received therefore please include all supporting documents.

ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PACKET DOES NOT DEEM AN APPLICATION COMPLETE.

C:V)ocuments and SettingsWary Colby\N,Iy 6
Documents\Allocation information\RATlNG AND RANKING APPLICATION.doc

CITY OF KINGSBURG
SI]BMITTAL FOR ALLOCATIONS

GUILDING PERMITS)
d.*****:1.*t€tl€{<*{<**{<**{<:1.t {.*****,1.{<{.*{<*****'f t<***{<*{'t**{€:l'**{'*:F******!F:f ***t'****!F:F*t<{'*****{'

TYPE OF S MTTTAL DATE

CONCEPTUAL

TENTATIVE
FINAL

COMMENTS

ALLOCATIONS AWARDED

LOCATION

LOW-INCOME

SPECIAL NEEDS

INFRASTRUCTURE

ARCHITECTURE

TOTAL POINTS
C:\Documents and SettingsWary Colby\My Documents\Allocation information\RATlNc 7 AND RANKING APPLICATION-doc
(
ANI !
F
II
It_
EzdH

1.,I
@.6
-t
r. g'
I
I
'o* 6q
G
s Ft't
za
8a
.Eor
sg
;6oT
ll tl
ry't
at
B
!ra
7od
,G
{4
.6
o
F srot Es
LF
-t
d
1 I
d1
o
I,_esEfmlsu-cs-q,asFE- .6
,6
I .6 .@
rl
trgg __-ry
562 I req
I
@
TsiffiS-n-orfrNiF5-
I
t,- €'ff'E
ozoznffio
rcucs sw lgs ff,/! ,09 &r&Nr ivcrd
'sotot!! beuo zs99ou5 'oN slrnaoo I '266t 9L lvfr 0!c803!t m0 !H Nt 0!sBs0 I ON*J fO !Nno' 3U Ot @M!9 NOtSOd IVU CNU!aF ofr nwoto*uoua7-_1/P1/Q
sslwcnEndlolGutsiloMoNEStts o (rouoN) Mrc3s ssou3 ff/u .9ll ilv oNwEn 's!&csnMa lo lNt& d !!i 9r 0N so$ a s sttN 1H58 1v !rN!H:sooa 0t s06 $Dw AtB rv *N3U :S00A t 6il 99W lHoE 1! !3N3il :S0@ 0a ruON :amil tNNNn! cN N@ls ofts r0 uuvno lsdnos !R ro aasno F:HjUON !ru lO !20a lSHn6 lS NO Srod V rV gNrCNl{ilO! ost lNtod !U Of BHaNr 9 @ t0 0M GA]A€o 1o& tO lNfr HSON lru cNon rs 3cNN1 rsos 0z MoN 3cMil l$HcNl 9 0w E! s ts!tr DMru :$O! 0Z ilnOS 0M OE rO lNrl S !U 9NO1 la€H 9NTNNN oNv Nou3ls orts lo &cvno lsNtnos *l l0 wno siluoN 3Nt 3U rO ff ronOS 3[ lO llNAoa $EUoN lNt lV !MCN!^[o' [l9doBd E -:oN30f'l 'Nnd qJcus gtngseNx utoN !u Aa oilott lvHt Nwr $n 3€ toN ffis xn tot !u rcwr o3sodold 3u lol lvss393N
sNo[rcrc3o aFdo rrucv No o3ffi Ntlu3H NffoHS rw! rcri&wmBs!{lrlurv^w^Iw xn=Frol oSsdoldSHl T acv dw
NOF^OSOS !U N q3ohold W S33anG l9rfN3 slqVreMHON ruESN@fruS3tm€n Sr10 0N S3UNnSGdO 9Nt@C OW gNIEH 3NSSVd OW lWnrVN lfWOdUO9Nl TUS5tgt$lr|{3E3Htol'Nolslao€ns3u Jo N9ls30 !u z 'srctrrcBp3ds oNv sNnd woNvls o!n8$Nu lo uc !3d o31M6Nt!€ ot $En3AOldU €3aS ONV 'S1H0U l!!US 'gtreOF OW'$Ung 'ssnc !scN@'lewtwo roots 's 'airvM'a!Ns o36odoud ! 'scaocla smc 0N$& '10!Es rfrd mrlo l|r d SNroroa NnEr 0N 3S Ol€il! InO{ M Z? 3CN3 ',MG 91 lHSNilOl il NODSS $ lsno s[un6 lFt lo wo s@N 3H l0 JM Nfos 3u isrcrd sv @€H3s sr 0w lNaolm $ ilvs 0N& $ lNnoc 3& 30 ElV 0!V80dU0CNNn 34 Nr aaruB S 01 Ga&! aNfr !ro troTfiInrt$rr.r95lr
\...

S0@I INM &oL ts dro
:S3ION
azt .09 ,0€ 0 :r hL:tras .9
s
slotu3Hrc trv3cN3J o@a
3nN3AV Ugr NO StOl gNOV rVM )SrS :$Wm?CN3l
9UCV/nO O9
slNn e9:sxNn tf,of
s3ucv t9 zr :[tsN:o EN ]v10f3rcv/oo re
slNn rg:s!Nn rvlol s3ury 94 St :USN30 $Oae tv10r
siot69 :slotao
(yos) sfot 9!:stot u3sn lo $ @b! (%9, SlOt Zf.gor ls o@'o r or rs oo fl (%o)$oro :ss4toslot!s@!/ Ee41t-
;F
'! osm's '! 6Z9'0t '! msl11 :asfot 39wsv Easrcrwn{ww ;zstol NnwNlw usN30 .$
3A9d :ffi lWnfVN oans9NDjouc qsnrl f,rw :3Ndga gtn8wNry louc !pd :[tctu3]3 s3lsun rcv€,0t
3GtS l33US Or ':OF E (egvm ,oz) rNou! ,9 ! lVUNiltStsl INr SleNF NCV 0av
x
cv 98 8r
lFtzt{6e
r9cw3s 4n4rNln
;3Sn GSOdOAd :fsn eNretE
:io3sodo&) gNtNoz j(eN[stF) eNNoz
:3N@ OOO]I s@3v
:VIVO SIIS
.*r'
sNosh3a
h,frr,{t - I T.0. +mz+ImmaIzooc@9. z! Izm6IImaTIamq 5o oo ii tP= mlo Q<r oA2 >T6) =*s oit c azu zoa F; City of Kingsburg
Al location Appl ication
Kings Estates V
Elevation and Floor
Package tt A"
Kings states
-2
ABC
Two Story 3,180 Sq. Ft. - 3 to 5 Bedrooms - 3 Baths -ZCt Garage Living & Family Room - Kitchen with Island - Walk-In Pantry - Spacious Master Suite - Bonus Room/2nd Suite .1.

H
!
!
AT I{OME OFFICE/

FLAY ROOM/
FAMILY
ROOM
DININO
ROOM

DOUBIS HEIOH'
oFril 6Ptrl

EEDROOM
$
First Floor
Second Floor
ENTRY E...t... .J

COVEREO
PATIO
NOOK

KITCHEN
LIVINO
ROOM 56dflg
I
T
BEOROOM 6
a r

OPTIONAL

REPLACING
'1
BEOROOM 6

LIVING ROOM
BEOROOM 3
rAtiloaY
'';,
MAgTER
gUITE
BEOROOM 2
West Star Cnnstruction reserves the right to change elevatiorrs, specifications, materials, and. -t\- prices without notice. All square footages are approximate. Window location, porches, frI ceiling heights and room dimensions vary per elevation. The arailability of certain options is lfit subleit to"construction status and schedule. optional features may be predelerminecl and Er'#fP"'"ti+9 included at additional cost on select homes. Flenderings are artists conception only. www.kingsburgnewhomes, com
info@ kingsburgnewholnes.corl
ri
.t.t F kh
ge'loc.!-c.t sIsJ ;izJ F-, - - - -ifi&

2.CAR OARAGE
t:

E
Kings states
fi'u il[ n m^ I
lr
A B C
One Story 1,67L Sq. Ft. - 4 Bedrooms - 2 Baths - 2 Car Garage Great Room - targe Back Patio
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-l

COVERED PATIO
...... tBEDROOM 2 DINING
GREAT
ROOM
gAfH2
BEDROOM 4
BEDROOM 3

COVERED
PORCH
____"d
Floor Plan
West Star Construction reseryes the right tr:l change elevations, specifications, materials, and prices without notice. All square footages ate approximate. Window location, porches, ceiling heights and room dimeneions vary per elevation. The availability of certain options is subject to construction status and schedule. Optional features may be predetermined and included at additional cost on select homes, Flenderings are ariist's conception only MASTER
SUITE
6 www.kingsburgnewhomes.com
[email protected]
$
h

2.CAR GARAGE
!o!A!HOUSlf,O otpoFrg{rrv
Kings states
L
A
One Story 1,828 Sq. Ft. - 3 Bedrooms -2Baths -2 ot3 Cat Garage Great Room with 12' Slider - Kitchen with Island - Master Suite -Large Back Patio - Den - 10' Ceilings E
I

COVERED PATIO
12'SLIDER

OPTIONAL

BUILT-IN DRESSER
NOOK
GREAT
ROOM
B C
WALKJN

CLOSET MASTER
SUITE
t€'coor{
JOP

KITCHEN
ll
lt
H
\-
BEDROOM 3

DINING/DEN

OFFICE/PLAY
::;il-l
tl
tl
tl

COVEREO
PORCH
..,,1..-
-- --d
2€AR GAMGE KARffiil
Floor Plan
West Star Cnnshuction reserves the right to change elevations, specifications, materiale , and -3\- prices wit6out notice. All square footages are approximate. Windovr ls,cation, porches, f=\} leitin-q heights and room dimensions vary per eiwation. The arailability of certain options is t;!1l suble"ct to"construction status and schedule. Optional features may be predetermined and 3"r"j"";f,y,?ii9 includeci at additional cost on select homee. Renderings are artist's conception only www.kingsburgnewhomes.com
info@ kingsburgnewhomes.com
Trotr [Li

WALK-IN
c[oBEr
BEDROOM 2
-2
C
One Story 1,828 Sq. Ft. - 4 Bedrooms - 2 Baths -2 or 3 Car Garage Great Room with 12' Slider - Kitchen with Island - Den - Large Back Patio - l0' Ceilings Kings states
Etltt
A B
lI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l--

COVERED PATIO
MASTER
SUITE
,I2'SLIDER
GREAT
ROOM BEDROOM 2

KITCHEN
BEDROOM 4
DENOPTId
BEOROOM 3

DINING/DEN

OFFICE/PLAY
- -Ei
2-CAR GARAGE
Floor Plan
West Star ConskLtction reserves lhe light to change elevations, specifications, materials, and prices without notice. All scluare footages are approximate. Window location, porches, ceiling heighls and room dimensions vary per elevation, The arailability of certain options is subject to construction status and schedule. Optional features may be predetermined and included at additional cost on select homes. Renderings are artisfs conception only NOOK
I
DEN

OPTIONAL DEN
REPTACING BEDROOM 4

COVEREO
PORCH
kaaffifl
www.kingsburgnewhomes. com
info@kingsburgnewhomes,com
EOUAL HOUSIf,C
O"OBYU{ITY
Kings states
A C
One Story 2,03L Sq. Ft. - 3 to 4 Bedrooms - 2 Baths -2or 3 Car Garage Large Front & Back Porch - Great Room with L2'slider - Kitchen with Island - 10' Ceilings ENTRY
DINING
ROOM

COVERED PATIO DINING
MASTER
SUITE
B
12'SLIDER
GREAT
ROOM

KITCHEN
4 i BEDRooM2

COVERED
PORCH
BEDROOM 3
2-CAR GAMGE
Floor Plan
West Star Construction reserves the right lr: change elevations, specificatione, materials, and prices without notice, All square footages are approximate. window location, porches, ceiling heights ancl room dimensions vary per elevation The availability of certain options is subject to construction status and schedule. Optional features rnay be predetermined and included at additional cost on select homes. Renderings are artisfs conception only. s'

OPTIONAL DEN/OFFICE/PLAY ROOM
REPLACING BEDROOM 4
ENTRY

DEN/OFFICE/

PLAY ROOM

OPTIONAL DENIOFFICE/PLAY ROOM
www.kingsburgnewhomes.com
info@ kingsburgnewhomes,com
ENTRY
rcAR ffim
6EOUAI HOUSINO orPontu{rrv
Kings
I
FULL BATH 3

REPLACING POWDER ROOM

FROM CLOSET TO LAUNDRY
t
FULL BATH 3

POWDER ROOM
states
ENTRY
1 ABC
One Story 2,466 Sq. Ft. - 3 to 5 Bedrooms - 2.5 Baths - 2 ot 3 Car Garage Large Front & Back Porch - Great Room with 12' Slider
Kitchen with Island - Den - 10'Ceilings

COVERED
PATIO

COVERED
PORCH
L. a

OPTIONAL

DEN/OFFICE
DINING
ROOM
ROOM 6
l.CAR GARAGE
Floor Plan
West Star Construction reserves the right to change elevaliorrs, specifications, materials, and prices without notice. All square footages are approximate. window lscation, pr:rches, ceiling heights and room dimensions vary per elevation. The availability of certain options is subject to construction status and schedule. Optional leatures may be predeterrnined and ncludecj at additional cost on select hornee. Flenderings are artist's conception only.

REPLACING BEDROOM 3
www.kingsburgnewhomes. com
info@ kingsburgnewholnes.c om
I rr l1nh'
MASTER
BATH
IHELVE6

2.CAR GARAGE
12'SLIDER
I
I
a
E
F
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 3
DINING f,MM ffiId
DINING

KITCHEN
ENTRY
MASTER
SUITE
FAMILY
ROOM

DEN/OFFICE/

PLAY ROOM
EEOROOM 6 OPrcN
BEDROOM 4
/
BEDROOM 5
IOUAL HOUIIi6
Kings states
1 ABC
TwoStory 2,898 Sq. Ft. - 3 to5 Bedrooms - 3 Baths - 3 CarGarage Living & Family Room - Kitchen with Island - Walk-In Pantry - Spacious Master Suite - Play/Den I
FAMILY
ROOM
DINING
ROOM
H
H

PIAY/DEN
effim
tcnnomlge
g:.",-- -
E-:-::....:-
I EnrnY
COr'ERED
PATIO
d
U
e
tn
o
NOOK
LIVIN6

KIICHEN
ROOM slffi@u
I
J
BEOROOM 4
t:,
OPTIONAL BSOROOM 4
REPIACINO PLAY/OEN First Floor
OilEL€ HEIOHT
OP€N SPAdE
UUXORY
SEDROOM 2
Second Floor
West Star Conskuction reserves the right to change ele.vations, specifications, materials, and prices without notice. All square footages are approximate. Window location, porches, ceiling heighte and room dimensions vary per elevation, The availability of certain options is subject to construction status and schedule. Optional features may be predelermined and included at additional cost on select homes. Renderings are artist's conception only 1 BEOROOM 3
BEDROOM 5
OPTIONAL AEOROOM 5
REPLACINO IIVING R@M
www.kingsburgnewhomes. corn
[email protected]
!
I
MASTER
SUITE
|-
+:Lfg. fuFJ' *
Itt [f! n
E
louaL Houtllo optoFtulltY

,'1i fFI
't{
:
.,,'"ip;t1
.tryryf.]rllrrq
*--€'-
il.
r.d.t&g
'h?L
-i
i.
:: +t
.J
.;
:t' a
'a
nr
EItIttI
t.
!.tI
't
taII
:,
.-l
:l
t!
ta
t
tr
P1
l.' , I?!a
I
x: It3:
--
*r
I:r
!' eF
Et
Fr 1&
i..i i : I
El-F€ I
'j;:i'j' -:
z-f I
\,
t.'
,l
'1:
,il"'l
j,' Y''
'A +
,i ' .:l
$&,
'i?i
:r.r
{
!,
i

,fl
FE
q
0 4
I ft;t tl
!:lE n
rl'irtt
./
I
!
I
ri
ii
1i
t
'!
I
i1
.
i
''t
I
t
I

-
I
i
J
t',
0 I
F
F
I
t
j
:

F
:

F
F
&
I,
€
I
I
mt
5 *
t
aE
t
/
I
I
I
I
, + :=,
€**- -
{I i
,l
+i3
E. Et
j
',: Lrta
rlt
Ir
'; :;l;l n{@,ffi{vrFffie
e
sls
Il I
.1.
-'i
/4/.1
+
i
{
!
.{
ffi
1:
f
c k
)i
ri
I
t'
ir
l,
i
1,,111 tl
, i
I {
(
_i
..,',ii+
'-'L"
0 Irl?t
ft
*r
"1r
g
&
st
H
ffi
ffi
&i
ffi
t
tiill Illiltt
'|ll
{riilii
;illllillr
",j,
I
,,1,
rli
;
i,
}J
'l
;
il
i
It
I
L
ri?
TI*I-
:ii: -
II
I
I . i..l billil
iftTiffi-!
t1
t..
lYl
i\
t
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
l
!
trrseq
I

3.& lrtril
i
l
r
c!itrrtt
F r!!6
q! lttl
t
'a
1 !
i.
i
I
I
I
r
\-_
,.,"i' ' lXr i,'r, t1#l: il i r.
..-'-r+'-,-
h-
F l )
!:l
':'- '-:!* rr *- "
{1fi;$,$i 'trl}i
ir *. ffi{ {'li
;
I
!
I
I
s"
?
j
a'a
,
F
rJ
t
IT
M "r r' .t1t1,fiffifrfi&*.5r&-1:r rys r*,{**-,$".,

I

I jflt
*' { ,-. .'
E
€
.E*
:
g'
F
&
-
,-* _a,l
::
i;
F,
c
t;
I
:I
:
':: i
Eg

ATTACHMENT D
Discussion:

Three projects were submitted for the 2022 allocation process. Due to the preliminary nature of the submissions, Staff is scoring the applications based on information submitted by the applicant with the knowledge that given the requirements of the NKSP for master planning, and with the need for annexation for all submittals, the proposed projects will contain more of the required details needed for approval at the time that they submit for entitlements.

SUITABILITY OF LOCATION (25 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: The City promotes compact and efficient development. Concentric patterns of growth are preferred. Infill development within the Urban Limit Boundary is encouraged. Leapfrog development and irregular boundaries are discouraged. Islands or corridors of unincorporated territory are to be avoided.

Projects will not be considered if the property identified in the application is not sufficiently contiguous to the City limits to allow for a logical and reasonable extension of the City limits as determined by the City. Using this information give details of your project. (Documentation may include amap and verbal description of location.) 25 POINTS
20 POINTS
15 POINTS
10 POINTS
5 POINTS

O POINTS
Property is within City limits.

Infill project sufflrciently surrounded by urban development.

Property is bordered by the City on more than one side.

Property is adjacent to the City within the Urban Limit Boundary.

Property is adjacent to the City but outside the Urban Limit Boundary' Property is outside the Sphere of Influence and annexation is required' Analysis:

The points system places emphasis on concentric and infill development and minimization of negative impacts to infrastructure and services. The West Star project is bordered on two sides, and the Bonadelle project is not currently bordered on any sides by City parcels. Both are adjacent to the City, but outside the City Limits. Both will need annexation and are outside the Urban Limit Boundary as identified by the North Kingsburg Specific Plan Land use and Circulation Diagram (Figure III-1).

West Star= 15 points
Bonadelle=S points
INCLUSIONARY HOaSING (15 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: The adopted Housing Element of the Kingsburg General Plan has an inclusionary housing policy calling for at least 15 percent of the housing units provided by each project to be affordable to low-income or very lowincome households. If the affordable units are not incorporated into the project, the developer may be able to comply with the policy by assisting the City in providing an equal number of affordable housing units elsewhere in the City by dedicating appropriate land or paying an in-lieu fee amount acceptable to the City. For each percentage point of affordable housing included in or provided for by a project, one scoring system point will be awarded up to a maximum of 15 points.

Analysis: These proposed projects contain no affordable housing units. Responses from applicants to this item are that they are supportive of inclusionary housing but dies not include it (Bonadelle) and regret that at this time this project does not have low to very low income housing (West Star). The City is aware of the challenges in meeting this criteria.

In the context of housing, there is a difference between having a wide range of housing affordability, driven by size of the lot, house and pricing, and what is termed inclusionary housing. Currently inclusionary housing is driven by complex tax credits and is a specialty of certain developers, often those who have projects statewide. A suggestion would be to alter this criteria for the next allocation period to award points based on a wide range of housing options (multifamily, large lot, etc) rather than use the term 'inclusionary' or 'affordable housing,' terms that mean, for the time being, the involvement of a particular type of specialized financing.

Although the NKSP calls for a 'full range of housing through the Planned Unit Development process (III-9)', the City would benefit from further analysis as to how that goal can be accomplished.

West Star:O points
Bonadelle=0 points
MEETING NEEDS, DEMANDS AND OBJECTIVES (20 points possible) Criteria from the allocation application form: The City's adopted Housing Element emphasizes the accommodation of special-needs populations. Points will be awarded for projects that provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects. Examples include, without limitation, handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families. (Documentation may include descriptions of existing housing inventory and market conditions, demographics, explanations of challenges confronted by the developers, descriptions or drawings of proposed housing features, etc.) Points will be awarded to projects that:

1. Provide housing for populations that are underserved or have special needs that are not generally met in other projects, such as handicapped-accessible units or housing for senior citizens or large families.

2. Expand the range of housing choices available in the community by offering configurations, densities and/or price ranges that are not otherwise readily available.

3. Satisfu demonstrated market demands (e.g. large lots, senior housing).

4. Utilize properties that have been bypassed because they are challenging to develop.

Analysis:

Four specific criteria are cited. If all are weighted equally, five points are available for each category.

The proposed project by Bonadelle appears to have the greater variety of offerings, highlighting the multigenerational living spaces with several of their two-story models.

This may also be offered by West Star, and has been their previous developments, but was not included in their narrative for this round of allocations.

Both projects cited meeting odemonstrated market demands' as rationale for point awards and received equal points for that requirement.

The Bonadelle project received two points for highlighting the recently discussed sewer capacily concerns as a challenge to development.

West Star: 10 points
Bonadelle= 17 points
INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES (25 points possible)
Criteria from the allocation application form: Preference will be given to projects that have the most positive impacts andlor the least negative impacts on infrastructure and services provided by the City and other service entities that operate within or provide services to the City. Documentation of infrastructure considerations and property dedications can take the form of written descriptions and commitments, maps and diagrams. Conservation features can also be documented with industry or manufacturer data and literature.

Scoring shall be based on the following criteria:
l. Proximity to existing infrastructure systems.

2. The extent of extension or expansion needed to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure to serve the proposed development and, if appropriate, future development.

3. The willingness of the developer to enter into a reimbursement agreement if the project involves construction of master-planned facilities and such an agreement is appropriate.

4. Agreement to construct and install new oversized infrastructure and/or construct and install new infrastructure that extends beyond the developer's project in order to service future growth, with reimbursement to the developer pursuant to a reimbursement agreement providing for reimbursement by future development connecting to the oversized and/or extended infrastructure.

5. Dedication of real property to the City to improve systems and services, including, without limitation, rights-of-way for streets, alleys or green belts, or sites for water wells, lift stations, drainage basins (in accordance with the Storm Drain Master Plan), parks, and schools sites, etc.

6. Incorporation of resource conservation features, including, without limitation, active or passive solar systems, water conservation features, drought-tolerant landscaping and energy-efficient appliances.

Analysis:

Both applications indicated a willingness to dedicate property for systems and services.

Dedications of real property for other uses, such as pedestrian paths and open space required by the NKSP was mentioned by the West Star project. The Bonadelle project not oniy *onid be willing to expand the existing storm drain basin (on Azalea and 14th Avenue) if needed, but also has begun discussions with SKF over the infrastructure chokepoint that limits development at this time for their property. They expressed a willingness if necessary to enter into a reimbursement agreement to help to resolve this issue.

Both projects will incorporate rain sensing technology and efficient appliances within the home.

West Star= L9 points
Bonadelle=24 points
ARCHITECTIIRAL DESIGN AND AESTHETIC CONSIDERATIONS (15 points Possihle)
Criteriafrom the allocation applicationform: Kingsburg continues to project an image as "The Swedish Village" which gives the City a unique identity. Residential housing should include distinctive design, quality construction and accompanying amenities. In addition to written descriptions, diagrams and maps, such documentation as elevations, renderings, floor plans and photographs of similar developments may help to illustrate the proposed project. In the case of walled and gated communities, aesthetics and amenities that are generally viewed by and available to residents and selected guests exclusively will not be considered in scoring in this Architectural Design and Aesthetic Considerations category. Only those features that are visible to the general citizenry outside of the walled and gated community will be evaluated.

Features that will receive points through the scoring system include:

1. Custom homes or customized features on tract homes that prevent houses in the same development from appearing repetitious.

Fostering of neighborhood character.

Compatibility with neighboring developments (for example lot sizes and square footage of homes).

Utilization of alleys for garage access from the rear.

Variable front yard setbacks.

Landscaping of street medians and parkways.

Green belts with pathways for pedestrians, skaters and bicyclists.

Pedestrian-friendly design.

Bicycle lanes in appropriate locations.

Preservation of existing trees.

Open space and recreation facilities.
2 J

4. 5.

6. 7.

8. 9.
l0
l1
(Specific examples are cited: custom homes or features on tract homes that keep them from appearing repetitious; fostering of neighborhood character; compatibility with neighboring developments; utilization of alleys for rear access; variable front yard setbacks; landscaping of medians and parkways; greenbelts with pathways for pedestrians, skaters and bicyclists; open space and recreation facilities; and pedestrianfriendly design.) Analysis:

Project will be held to development standards under the NKSP for single family residential projects. These standards include all the above requirements, and the project descriptions indicate an understanding of those design standards and required amenities and a willingness to comply with them. Both projects have alleys, West Star has open space and pedestrian connectivity to surrounding areas. Both applications included elevations and renderings.

West Star= L5 points
Bonadelle=l5 points

RECOMMENDED
POINTS

SUMMARY
Points
Available/Category
Total
Residential Bonadelle
West
Star
25 Location 25 5 15
l5 Inclusionary housing 15 0 0
20 Needs, demands,
obiectives
20 t7 10
25 Infrastructure and
services
25 24 t9
15 Design and aesthetics 15 l5 15
lOO TOTALS 100 6l 59
Trad 6151
.FFrq€4
Ttu 6141
ffi14
lrid.6242
: I agpu 5g
lr.d6t22*F.d€0
Td 5073ApF.6 39
i;.;n-j r jjj'I: -r:r'?:i !ial
i!-!i .;n s;: :sit i !
Exhibit L
RESOLUTION 2022-OI

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF KINGSBURG

RECOMMENDING TO THE

CITY COUNCIL THE AWARD OF'ALLOCATIONS FOR HOUSING UNITS UNDER CHAPTER 16.09 OF THE KINGSBURG MTJNICIPAL CODE

GROWTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
WHEREAS, on November 2,2004 the citizens of the City of Kingsburg approved Measure N, Charter Amendment 2004-0l,amending the City Charter to state that the City shall establish growth control measures to place annual limits on the number of residential building permits which may be issued in any given year; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Charter Amendment 2004-0l,the City Council adopted Ordinance 2005-05, adding Chapter 16.09 Growth Management System to the Kingsburg Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, two applications for 2022 housing units allocations were received by the City in accordance with the provisions of Section 16.09.060 of the Kingsburg Municipal Code, and WHEREAS, City Staff rated and ranked the applications and the development proposals identified in the applications in accordance with the rating and ranking criteria set forth in Section 16.09.070 of the Kingsburg Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, on May l2,2022,the Planning Commission's held a duly and lawfully noticed public hearing to review City Staff s rating and ranking recommendations for the two applications for competitive allocation of housing units for 2022; and
yHEREA5, the award of housing units is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b(5)), as the award of housing units is an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment and therefore the award of housing units not considered a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Kingsburg Planning Commission adopts this Resolution 2022-01, and recommends the Kingsburg City Council award 114 housing units as the 2022housing unit allocation as follows:

West Star Construction, Inc., 13665 S. Mendocino Avenue (18.85 acres): Sixty-three (63) single family housing units.

Bonadelle Homes Inc., 13539 S. Mendocino Avenue (14.42 acres): Fifty-one (51) single family housing units.

I, Karyl Bartel, Secretary of the Kingsburg Planning Commission, do hereby certifr that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopte d at a regular meeting of the Kingsburg Planning Commission held on the l2th day of May, 2022, by the following vote:
1 Ayes: Planning Commissioners: Brock, Gonzales, Ruch, Yaldez, Blaney and Krupper Noes: Planning Commissioners: None

Absent: Planning Commissioners: Ekizian
Abstain: Planning Commissioners: None
l Bartel, Secretary
Planning Commission Secretary for City of Kingsburg
2 393-121-37
West Star
393-121-42 & 43
Bonadelle

Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Year Project Single
Family MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF 2012
Chelsea (3) - Now Linnaea
(units expired) 48 24
2015 Lennar - 6094 34 34
Crinklaw - 6122 (phase 1) 60 60
Crinklaw - 6167 (phase 3/4) 121 20 16 80 5
Erickson - 6151 (CC) 64 64
2017 Kingsburg Housing LLC
(Tract 6141) - Crown 44 44
2018 Linnaea Villas 60 30
2018 Sohal (2*) 21 21 35
2018 Crinklaw - 6242 (phase 2) 59 59
2018 Summerlyn 24 24
Allocations Applied for 427 60 34 24 80 0 80 0 80 0 26 0 68 0 59 30 0 0 0 35 0 0 Annual Allocations 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 80 35 Total Available (3 year
running) 206 58 126 81 46 81 0 105 54 105 66 105 87 75 113 75 181 75 240 115 UNUSED ALLOCATIONS 206 58 126 81 46 81 0 105 54 105 111 105 87 75 113 75 181 40 240 70 Notes
• Each year, 115 units are allocated. Of those, 70% are reserved for Single Family dwellings (80 units) and 30% for Multi Family dwellings (35 units) • Of the 80 single family units, 20 should be reserved for lots over 10,000 sf in size. (1) Units assigned over multiple years
(2) Allocation expired - project not built
(3) As an incentive, senior housing projects are assessed at 1/2 a "normal" unit *6122 units applied for in 2015 - units delegated to 2013 based upon rolling 3-year available units *6094 units applied for in 2014 - units delegated to 2012 based upon rolling 3-year available units *6151 units applied for in 2015 - units delegated to 2014 based upon rolling 3-year available units *6167 units applied for in 2015 - units delegated to multiple years based upon rolling 3-year available units and phased of project to future years *Linnaea count as half units due to low/mod factor
*Marion Villas (2011) count as half units due to low/mod factor *Sohal Allocations (21) expired ; requested and received 35 MF allocations in 2020 *Summerlyn Project includes only lots in Fresno Co.
6141 units applied for in 2018 - units delegated to 2017 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

REQUESTS BY YEAR
2016
Total Unit Requests 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2021
2021
2018
2018
2019
2019
2020
2020

CITY COUNCIL MEETING STAFF REPORT
REPORT TO: Mayor North & City Council
REPORT FROM: Alexander J. Henderson, City Manager; ICMA-CM REVIEWED BY: AP AGENDA ITEM: Adopt Resolution No. 2022-035 approving the City of Kingsburg 2022/2023 Fiscal Year Budget; including the Kingsburg Public Finance Authority and Kingsburg Redevelopment Successor Agency budgets
ACTION REQUESTED: ___Ordinance ___Resolution ___Motion _____Receive/File

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In accordance with City Charter 2.08.090(G), please find the City Manager’s proposed FY2022/2023 Operating and Capital Improvement Budget. This is the major policy document for the City for the coming year. It is based on the Strategic Planning principles as adopted by Council:

1. Ensure Financial Stability

2. Improve Public Safety

3. Provide Recreation Opportunities for All Ages

4. Improve Community Communication

5. Increase Retail Opportunities

6. Promote Sustainable Development
The financials were presented in their entirety during the May 31, 2022, regular council meeting. The complete document includes narrative additions that help shape the development of the document and tell the story of budgeted needs, including:

1. Letter from the City Manager

2. Kingsburg Demographic/Cultural
Information

3. 5-Year Strategic Plan & Performance
Measurement Program

4. CalPERS Employee Pension Information

5. Financial Policies

6. Glossary
We are pleased to present the document which includes the Finance Authority (borrowing agency) and Redevelopment Successor Agency budgets. The FY23 All-Funds budget is ~$31.64M, an 19% increase over FY22.

This increase can be attributed to the return of normal programming after two years of imposed or self-imposed reductions in forecasting COVID-19 impacts. We are projecting that our 7/1/23 All-Funds fund balance will be

9.55% higher when compared to the anticipated 7/1/22 fund balance. The budget also includes nearly $10M for fifty-seven (57) capital improvement projects, including $3.2M for the installation of a fiber optic broadband network city-wide.

An adopted Budget marks an end of the annual process of evaluating the City’s fiscal health, community priorities, infrastructure needs, and daily operations. The City remains fiscally sound thanks to prudent and conservative planning by the City Council. As such, the FY23 budget is structurally balanced, as there are no expected uses of reserve funds to cover projected deficits. The budget maintains or increases city staffing levels, includes funding for our successful public/private partnership programs, and continues to address infrastructure needs and quality of life improvements for all residents. A special thank you to the City’s Finance Director, Alma Colado, Administrative Services Director, Christina Windover, City Clerk, Abigail Palsgaard, and all staff who were a part of Meeting Date: 06/15/2022
Agenda Item: 6.2