Agenda packet — Livingston City Council, October 6, 2026 (part 1 of 3)

1 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL AND REGULAR

MEETING AGENDA
OCTOBER 6, 2026
SPECIAL MEETING: 6:00 P.M. – 7:00 P.M
REGULAR MEETING: 7:00 P.M.

WE ENCOURAGE ALL MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING VIA TELECONFERENCE BY CALLING (520) 525-8911. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC

PARTICIPATING VIA TELECONFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT.

ADDITIONALLY, THE REGULAR MEETING WILL BE STREAMED ON YOUTUBE LIVE https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCB_ZmQZIHELh-ECEPZ2VwZg Notice is hereby given that the City Council will hold a Special and Regular Meeting at the City Council Chambers, 663 Main Street, Livingston, California. Assistance will be provided to those requiring accommodations for disabilities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Persons requesting accommodation should contact the Deputy City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to this meeting at (209) 394-8041, Ext. 121. Any writings or documents pertaining to an Open Session item provided to a majority of the members of the legislative body less than 72 hours prior to the meeting shall be made available for public inspection by email if requested. Public comments can be submitted via emailed at [email protected]. Comments must be received by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the City Council meeting in order for them to be distributed to the Council prior to consideration of the matter. You will need to provide: Meeting date, item number, name, email and comment (please limit to 300 words or 3 minutes).

Please include: PUBLIC COMMENT in the subject for the email. Written comments will not be read aloud at the meeting, but will be reported as received for the record. If you do not receive an acknowledgement of receipt by 4:00 p.m., please call the City Clerk’s Office at (209) 394-8041, Ext. 121 (Note: This technology is not a guaranteed method).

Page 1 of 311 ends

2 SPECIAL MEETING

1. Call to Order

2. Roll Call

3. Pledge of Allegiance.

4. Moment of Silence – First Responders and Military Members.

5. Citizen Comments

CLOSED SESSION
A “Closed” or “Executive” Session of the City Council or the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Livingston may be held in accordance with state law which may include, but is not limited to, the following types of items:
personnel matters, labor negotiations, security matters, providing instructions to real property negotiators, conference with legal counsel regarding pending litigation. The Closed Session will be held in the City Council Chambers located at 663 Main Street, Livingston, California. Any public comment on Closed Session items will be taken before the Closed Session. Any required announcements or discussion of Closed Session items or actions following the Closed Session will be made in the City Council Chambers, 633 Main Street, Livingston, California.

6. Conference with Labor Negotiator (Government Code Section 54957.6) Labor Negotiator:

Jose Antonio Ramirez, City Manager
Employee Organizations: OE3- Clerical Bargaining Unit
Police Supervisory Employees Association
Livingston Police Officer Association

7. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(2), (e)(1) (2 matters).

8. Public Employee Appointment, Pursuant to Government Code section 54957 Title: Chief of Police.

REGULAR MEETING

CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance.

Moment of Silence – First Responders and Military Members.

Roll Call.

Page 2 of 311 ends

3 Closed Session Announcement
Changes to the Agenda.

CITIZEN COMMENTS
This section of the agenda allows members of the public to address the City Council on any item NOT on the agenda. Members of the public, when recognized by the Mayor, should come forward to the lectern, and identify themselves. Comments are normally limited to three (3) minutes. In accordance with State Open Meeting Laws, no action will be taken by the City Council this evening.

COUNTY SUPERVISOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
Supervisor Jim Pacheco Announcements and Reports.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
City Staff Announcements and Reports.
• Mario Gouveia, City Engineer – Project Updates.

City Manager Announcements and Reports.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DECLARATION
Members of the City Council will declare an actual or apparent conflict of interest before discussions or decisions about any matters in which they or anyone with whom they have a close personal relationship could directly or indirectly benefit or where such a benefit could be perceived.

CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine or non-controversial and will be enacted by one vote, unless separate action is requested by a member of the public, the City Manager or City Council Member. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the public, City Council or City Manager request that specific items be removed. Public comment on consent agenda items shall be limited to three (3) minutes perperson regardless of the number of items contained within the consent agenda.

1. Ratify Warrants Register Dated September 18, 2026.

2. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on September 15, 2026.

3. Second Reading and Adoption of An Ordinance Amending Livingston Municipal Code Chapter 1-11 To Establish Updated Procurement and Contract Execution Policies and Procedures.

4. Second Reading and Adoption of An Ordinance Approving Rezone Application No. (RZN 2022-01) To Amend The Official Zoning Map Of The City Of Livingston To Rezone 4.58-Acre Of The Five Parcels Located Between Sixth Street And The Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks And South Of C Street And

Page 3 of 311 ends

4 North Of D Street From M-1 (Limited Industrial) To P-F (Public Or Quasi-Public Facilities) Consisting Of Assessor Parcel Numbers 024-153-003, 024-153-004, 024-153-011, 024-154-004, And 024-154-005.

5. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A First Amendment To The Agreement With Stephanie R. Dietz To Extend The Term For Six Months At The Existing Rate With No Additional Funding Required.

6. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution (1) Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A Professional Service Agreement With Subsurface Technologies, Inc. To Provide Rehabilitation To Well 13 In An Amount Not To Exceed $185,102.88; (2) Authorize The Finance Department To Make A Supplemental Appropriation To The Water Enterprise Fund In The Amount Of $35,102.88; (3) Waive Formal Bidding Requirements As Outlined In Section 1-11-6, And (4) Authorizing The City Manager To Execute All Required Documents.

7. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the 2026-2027 Strategic Plan and Its Identified Priorities.

8. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the Submittal of a 2024 NOFA application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development HOME Program for a First-Time Homebuyer Program in an amount of $500,000 and Authorizing the City Manager and Director of Finance to Execute all Required Documents as Applicable.

PUBLIC HEARING

9. Introduce and Waive First Reading of (1) Ordinance Amending Sections 9-5-45, 9-5-71, And 9-5-72 Of Chapter 9-5 (Water Service Regulations) Of The Livingston Municipal Code To Conform With Chapter 9- 13 (Water Conservation Requirements); (2) Ordinance Amending Section 9-12-7 Of Chapter 9-12 (Urban Stormwater Quality Management) Of The Livingston Municipal Code To Conform The Irrigation LeakCorrection Period With Chapter 9-13 And The City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan; and (3) Ordinance Adding A New Chapter 9-13, Water Conservation Requirements, To The Livingston Municipal Code To Formalize A Comprehensive Water Conservation Framework To Respond To Water Waste And Water Shortages And To Provide For Enforcement Of Conservation Measures.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
City Council Members’ Announcements and Reports.

Mayor’s Announcements and Reports.

Robert Wallis
• Special City Selection Committee of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Board Robert Wallis, Representative and Japjeet Uppal, Alternative. • City Council Liaison - Livingston Planning Commission – Jason Roth and Alternate Robert Wallis.
• Utility Stakeholders Committee – Japjeet Uppal and Robert Wallis.

Page 4 of 311 ends

5 Jason Roth
• Merced County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Jason Roth, Representative.
• Merced County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Directors – Gurpal Samra, Representative and Jason Roth, Alternate.
• City Council Liaison - Livingston Planning Commission – Jason Roth and Alternate Robert Wallis.

Japjeet Uppal
• Central Valley Division League of California Cities – Jose Moran, Representative and Japjeet Uppal, Alternate.
• Special City Selection Committee of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Board – Robert Wallis, Representative and Japjeet Uppal, Alternative. • City Council Liaison - Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission – Jose Moran and Alternate Liaison Japjeet Uppal.
• Merced Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (MIRWMA) – Japjeet Uppal, Representative and Robert Wallis, Alternate Representative. • Utility Stakeholders Committee – Japjeet Uppal and Robert Wallis.

Gurpal Samra
• Merced County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Directors – Gurpal Samra, Representative and Jason Roth, Alternate.
• Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) Governing Board – Gurpal Samra, Representative and Jose Moran, Alternate.

Jose Moran
• Central Valley Division League of California Cities – Jose Moran, Representative and Japjeet Uppal, Alternate.
• Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) Governing Board – Gurpal Samra, Representative and Jose Moran, Alternate.
• City Council Liaison - Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission – Jose Moran and Alternate Liaison Japjeet Uppal.

COUNCIL DIRECTION ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT

Page 5 of 311 ends

STAFF REPORT
1 AGENDA ITEM: Warrant Register September 18

MEETING DATE: October 6, 2026

PREPARED BY: Consuelo Moreno, Account Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Happy Bains, Finance Director
RECOMMENDATION:

Ratify the warrant register dated September 18, 2026
DISCUSSION:

Government Code sections 37208(b) and 37209 provide that accounts payable warrants or checks drawn in payment of demands certified or approved by the finance director as conforming to a budget approved by ordinance or resolution of the legislative body need not be audited by the legislative body prior to payment.

In addition, Government Code section 37208(a) provides that payroll warrants or checks need not be audited by the legislative body prior to payment. Payrolls shall be presented to the legislative body for ratification and approval at the first meeting after delivery of the payroll warrants or checks. The sum of any payroll checks issued within the week prior to the date of the check register is also noted on the accompanying check register.

The following checks have been certified to be in accordance with the City’s approved budget.

The checks have been issued, and the check register is presented to the City Council for ratification:

September 5th–September 18th, 2026

CHECKS #
NET PAYROLL……………………...........…. $ 176,526.42 4298-4316 GENERAL WARRANTS……………………. $ 919,592.10 16632-16750
ACH WARRANTS…………………………….$ 173,361.48
PAYROLL WARRANTS…………..….…...…$ 86,360.49

TOTAL WARRANTS………………………… $ 1,355,840.49
ATTACHMENTS:

Warrant Register (detailed by date and check number)

Page 6 of 311 ends

Billing Status
Dependent upon scope of work
Monthly
Monthly
Total for 9/4/2026: 380,340.62
16675 277 Valley Farm Supply Stores, Inc. 09/04/2026 127.96 16676 608 Vision Service Plan- CA 09/04/2026 457.50
16673 625 United Rentals 09/04/2026 307.77
16674 314 Valley Coffee & Water 09/04/2026 36.75
16671 1834 Team Topia, Inc. 09/04/2026 125.40
16672 564 Texas Life Insurance 09/04/2026 496.94
16669 1606 SVA Architects, Inc. 09/04/2026 9,200.00
16670 1829 Synergy Site Services Inc. 09/04/2026 605.18 16667 265 Resourceability 09/04/2026 2,990.93
16668 598 Standard Insurance Company RB 09/04/2026 2,868.46 16665 201 O'reilly Automotive, Inc. 09/04/2026 219.60
16666 1735 BlueTriton Brands, Inc Primo Brands 09/04/2026 649.70 16663 437 Operating Engineers Local 3 09/04/2026 477.00 16664 438 Operating Engineers Local Union No.3 09/04/2026 720.00 16661 949 Nova Heating and Air Conditioning 09/04/2026 185.00 16662 302 Office Depot, Inc./ODP Business Solutions, LLC09/04/2026 13.04 16659 395 Navia Benefit Solutions 09/04/2026 150.00
16660 199 Northstar Chemical 09/04/2026 1,514.12
16657 524 Merced Chevrolet 09/04/2026 70.45
16658 170 MintierHarnish Planning Consulants 09/04/2026 3,782.75 16655 276 Livingston True Value Hardware, Inc. 09/04/2026 98.21 16656 1170 Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. 09/04/2026 812.29 16653 675 Lance, Soll & Lunghard, LLP 09/04/2026 5,187.50 16654 612 Livingston Peace Officers Association 09/04/2026 1,570.00 16651 786 J.B, Anderson Land Use Planning 09/04/2026 39,052.90 16652 1130 Kellogg Supply 09/04/2026 711.09
16649 388 Interstate Battery System of Fresno 09/04/2026 2.00 16650 165 J L Analytical Services, Inc. 09/04/2026 25.16 16647 266 Hilmar Lumber 09/04/2026 120.44
16648 501 Hunt & Sons, LLC 09/04/2026 4,525.04
16645 685 Global Equipment Company, Inc. 09/04/2026 6,931.06 16646 356 Gouveia Engineering, Inc. 09/04/2026 75,298.96 16643 1856 Dannis Woliver Kelley 09/04/2026 2,184.00
16644 164 Garza Tire & Wheel, Inc 09/04/2026 800.90
16641 418 Central Valley Concrete 09/04/2026 1,729.13
16642 447 Conco West, Inc 09/04/2026 194,380.41
16639 446 Belkorp Ag, LLC 09/04/2026 164.12
16640 546 Bogie's Pump Systems 09/04/2026 6,491.97
16637 397 American Fidelity Assurance Company 09/04/2026 1,295.78 16638 1810 Amerine Systems Inc. 09/04/2026 3,520.94
16635 1307 Amazon Capital Services 09/04/2026 312.02
16636 396 American Fidelity Assurance 09/04/2026 3,239.17 16633 434 AFSCME District Council 57 09/04/2026 863.94
16634 747 All Star Elite Sports 09/04/2026 5,530.04
Check Date Check Amount
16632 1754 5 E's Enterprises, LLC. 09/04/2026 495.00
Accounts Payable
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Date
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name

Page 7 of 311 ends

City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Bi-Weekly
Bi-Weekly
Total for 9/12/2026: 76,972.72
1000526 1861 MidAmerica Administrative & Retrirement Solutions 09/15/2026 29.80 1000532 SIT State Tax Payments 09/12/2026 9,704.78
1000533 VALIC Variable Annunity Life Ins. 09/12/2026 1,620.00 1000530 PERS Public Employ Retire System 09/12/2026 36,708.36 1000531 PTS PTS - Part Time Seasonal 457 Plan 09/12/2026 332.24 1000528 FIT Federal Tax Payments 09/12/2026 26,747.50
1000529 NBS1 National Benefit Services - AltaMont St Clair 09/12/2026 1,859.84 16705 314 Valley Coffee & Water 09/10/2026 8.00
Total for 9/10/2026: 237,552.03
16703 530 Telstar Instruments 09/10/2026 4,086.00
16704 975 The Sign Works 09/10/2026 188.56
16701 1284 State of California 09/10/2026 65.08
16702 1068 Steele Public Safety Systems 09/10/2026 930.00 16699 265 Resourceability 09/10/2026 443.10
16700 989 Jasneil Singh 09/10/2026 25.00
16697 431 Monte Vista Small Animal Hospital 09/10/2026 185.71 16698 1818 Moore Twinning Associates, Inc. 09/10/2026 800.00 16695 1671 Merced County Auditor/Controller's Office 09/10/2026 546.00 16696 180 Mission Linen Service 09/10/2026 14.04
16693 1623 Bulmaro Lopez 09/10/2026 115.00
16694 1723 Jatinder Mann 09/10/2026 25.00
16691 1551 Mohinder Kanda 09/10/2026 25.00
16692 276 Livingston True Value Hardware, Inc. 09/10/2026 69.83 16689 1864 Hydropower Engineering Company LLC. 09/10/2026 5,488.44 16690 1726 International Tele-Path 09/10/2026 5,286.05
16687 262 Gilton Solid Waste 09/10/2026 199,436.23
16688 685 Global Equipment Company, Inc. 09/10/2026 9,871.15 16685 488 FluidSecure 09/10/2026 1,721.51
16686 1758 Garda CL West, Inc. Lockbox #233209 09/10/2026 217.40 16683 1790 Stephanie R. Dietz 09/10/2026 625.00
16684 1151 Jose Flores 09/10/2026 25.00
16681 393 California State Disbursement Unit 09/10/2026 1,159.37 16682 1239 Clark Pest Control of Stockton, Inc. 09/10/2026 346.00 16679 1693 California Consulting, Inc 09/10/2026 4,750.00 16680 1890 California PoliceTraining Managers Association09/10/2026 250.00 16677 1307 Amazon Capital Services 09/10/2026 824.56
16678 162 Steve Bassi 09/10/2026 25.00
1000525 405 Premier Access Insurance Company 09/09/2026 3,214.10 Total for 9/9/2026: 116,150.97
1000524 1861 MidAmerica Administrative & Retrirement Solutions 09/09/2026 155.88 ACH 401 Keenan & Associates 09/09/2026 107,493.00
Total for 9/8/2026: 65,868.48
1000523 1863 Benistar Admin Services, Inc. 09/09/2026 5,287.99 ACH 203 PG&E 09/08/2026 58,423.10
ACH 272 Charter Communications Holdings, LLC 09/08/2026 383.85 ACH 188 Frontier 09/08/2026 7,061.53

Page 8 of 311 ends

Dependent upon scope of work
Monthly
Dependent upon scope of work
Monthly
Quarterly
Report Total (134 checks): 1,179,314.07
16750 409 Willdan Financial Services 09/18/2026 18,634.88 Total for 9/18/2026: 301,699.45
16748 1893 Armando Villanueva 09/18/2026 350.00
16749 608 Vision Service Plan- CA 09/18/2026 2,085.41
16746 284 Trans Union LLC 09/18/2026 224.17
16747 277 Valley Farm Supply Stores, Inc. 09/18/2026 59.94 16744 598 Standard Insurance Company RB 09/18/2026 2,861.42 16745 1803 Toshiba Financial Services 09/18/2026 1,632.54 16742 579 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District09/18/2026 80.00 16743 309 St. Francis Electric 09/18/2026 400.00
16740 430 Quadient Finance USA, Inc. 09/18/2026 500.00
16741 1047 Julio Ruiz 09/18/2026 6,900.00
16738 1104 Pacific Bay Equipment Service & Sales 09/18/2026 534.36 16739 1828 PG&E Nuclear Deco Charges 09/18/2026 5.10
16736 302 Office Depot, Inc./ODP Business Solutions, LLC09/18/2026 410.10 16737 201 O'reilly Automotive, Inc. 09/18/2026 613.54
16734 395 Navia Benefit Solutions 09/18/2026 150.00
16735 199 Northstar Chemical 09/18/2026 3,429.96
16732 180 Mission Linen Service 09/18/2026 512.94
16733 194 Modesto Welding Products 09/18/2026 24.00
16730 278 Merced Irrigation District 09/18/2026 63,930.50 16731 389 Mid Valley IT 09/18/2026 400.00
16728 276 Livingston True Value Hardware, Inc. 09/18/2026 129.79 16729 403 Merced County Association of Governments 09/18/2026 9,773.00 16726 1894 Alexis Jenkins 09/18/2026 2,177.47
16727 675 Lance, Soll & Lunghard, LLP 09/18/2026 6,370.75 16724 501 Hunt & Sons, LLC 09/18/2026 1,431.86
16725 552 J & F AG Welding Shop 09/18/2026 967.78
16722 912 Hach Company 09/18/2026 5,452.90
16723 1768 Robert Haugh 09/18/2026 2,300.00
16720 262 Gilton Solid Waste 09/18/2026 1,296.45
16721 685 Global Equipment Company, Inc. 09/18/2026 995.16 16718 1416 Four Star Investigations, LLC 09/18/2026 9,328.20 16719 1324 Robert Garcia 09/18/2026 1,500.00
16716 258 Ewing Irrigation Products, Inc. 09/18/2026 1,025.77 16717 449 Fineline Striping 09/18/2026 19,850.00
16714 1308 CSG Consultants, Inc. 09/18/2026 1,287.06
16715 548 Dora's Fashion 09/18/2026 1,869.00
16712 1239 Clark Pest Control of Stockton, Inc. 09/18/2026 57.00 16713 283 CoreLogic Solutions, LLC 09/18/2026 200.00
16710 1588 Manuel L. Avila, Jr. 09/18/2026 800.00
16711 291 City of Livingston c/o L &L District Irrigation 09/18/2026 16,099.34 16708 1307 Amazon Capital Services 09/18/2026 1,459.42
16709 1810 Amerine Systems Inc. 09/18/2026 111,278.01
16706 251 ABS Direct, Inc. 09/18/2026 1,511.63
16707 1769 Deanna Alvarez 09/18/2026 800.00
1000527 1018 CalPERS 09/15/2026 700.00
Total for 9/15/2026: 729.80

Page 9 of 311 ends

Page 1 of 9 ends

MEETING MINUTES

SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING

LIVINGSTON CITY COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 15, 2026
A Special and Regular Meeting of the Livingston City Council was held on September 15, 2026, in the City Council Chambers with Mayor Moran presiding.

SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Moran called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m.

ROLL CALL
Mayor Jose A. Moran
Mayor Pro Tem Gurpal Samra
Council Member Singh Uppal
Council Member Jason Roth
Council Member Robert Wallis (Telephonically)
Clerk’s Notes: Council Member Wallis noted that a family emergency prevented him from attending the meeting in person.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited

MOMENT OF SILENCE
There was a moment of silence for First Responders and Military Members.

CITIZEN COMMENTS
Mayor Moran opened and closed citizen comments at 6:05 p.m., as there were no comments from the public, the Council went into Closed Session immediately thereafter to discuss the following matters.

City Manager Jose A. Ramirez noted that there was no update on item 6 and pulled item 7. Since there were no closed session items to discuss the meeting adjourned.

Page 10 of 311 ends

Page 2 of 9 ends

CLOSED SESSION

6. Conference with Labor Negotiator (Government Code Section 54957.6) Labor Negotiator:

Jose Antonio Ramirez, City Manager
Employee Organizations: OE3- Clerical Bargaining Unit
Police Supervisory Employees Association
Livingston Police Officer Association

7. Conference With Legal Counsel: significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code § 54956.9(d)(2), (e)(1) (3 matters).

ADJOURNMENT
The special meeting was adjourned by consensus at approximately 6:06 p.m. since there were no closed session items to discuss.

REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Moran called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was recited.

MOMENT OF SILENCE
There was a moment of silence for First Responders and Military Members.

CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT
Assistant City Attorney Maria Sullivan noted that both closed session items were pulled, so no reportable action was taken.

CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
None.

CITIZEN COMMENTS
Mayor Moran opened and closed citizen comments at 7:02 p.m. as there were no comments from the public.

Page 11 of 311 ends

Page 3 of 9 ends

COUNTY SUPERVISOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
Supervisor Jim Pacheco Announcements and Reports.

None.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
City Staff Announcements and Reports.

None.

City Manager Announcements and Reports.
• Jose A. Ramirez, City Manager

None.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS

1. Presentation by Mayor Moran: Proclamation Recognizing Sister Cities Day.

Mayor Moran introduced this item.

CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine or non-controversial and will be enacted by one vote, unless separate action is requested by a member of the public, the City Manager or City Council Member. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the public, City Council or City Manager request that specific items be removed. Public comment on consent agenda items shall be limited to three (3) minutes per-person regardless of the number of items contained within the consent agenda.

2. Ratify Warrants Register Dated September 4, 2026.

3. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on August 18, 2026.

4. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on August 25, 2026.

5. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on August 26, 2026.

6. Approval of Minutes of Meeting Held on September 1, 2026.

7. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Amending The City’s Conflict Of Interest Code And Accepting The 2026 Local Agency Biennial Notice.

8. Second Reading and Adoption of An Ordinance Amending Chapter 9 Of Title 1 Of The

Page 12 of 311 ends

Page 4 of 9 ends

Livingston Municipal Code Establishing Regulations For The Custody And Use Of The City Seal, City Logo, And City Insignia And Prohibiting The Unauthorized And Deceptive Use Thereof.

9. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A Three-Year Service Agreement With TrueComp For Labor Costing Software.

Mayor Moran opened and closed public comments at 7:11 pm as there were no comments from the public.

Mayor Moran noted a clerical error in the meeting minutes of August 25, 2026, and August 26, 2026.

Motion: M/S Samra/Roth to approve the consent agenda. The motion carried 5-0-0 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members: Uppal, Samra, Wallis, Roth and Moran NOES: Council Members: None
ABSENT: Council Members: None

PUBLIC HEARING

10. Introduce and Waive First Reading of Ordinance Amending Livingston Municipal Code Chapter 1-11 To Establish Updated Procurement and Contract Execution Policies and Procedures.

Assistant City Attorney Maria Sullivan introduced this item.

Mayor Moran opened public comments at 7:12 pm and closed at 7:13 pm as there were no comments from the public.

Motion: M/S Samra/Roth to Introduce and Waive First Reading of Ordinance Amending Livingston Municipal Code Chapter 1-11 To Establish Updated Procurement and Contract Execution Policies and Procedures. The motion carried 5-0-0 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members: Uppal, Samra, Wallis, Roth and Moran NOES: Council Members: None
ABSENT: Council Members: None

11. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Adopting The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration And A Mitigation Monitoring Program Prepared In Compliance With CEQA, And Approving General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-01) Re-Designating Five Properties Located At APN: 024-153-003; 641 Sixth Street (APN: 024-153-011); 1822 C Street (APN: 024-154-005); 1736 C Street (APN: 024-153-004); And 1801 D Street (APN: 024-154-004) From Li, Limited Industrial To PF, Public Facility To Allow For The Development Of A City Recreation Complex (Rec-Plex) and Introduce and Waive First Reading of Ordinance Approving RZN 2022-01 To Amend The Official Zoning Map Of The City Of Livingston To Rezone 4.58-Acre Of The Five Parcels Located Between Sixth Street And The Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks And South Of C Street, East Of Sixth Street From M-1 (Limited Industrial) To P-F (Public Or Quasi Public Facilities) Consisting Of Assessor Parcel Numbers 024-153-003, 024-153-004, 024-153-011, 024-154-004 And 024-154-005.

Assistant Contract City Planner Jailah Smith introduced this item.

Page 13 of 311 ends

I '
e

Page 5 of 9 ends

Mayor Moran opened and closed this meeting at 7:27 pm as there were no comments from the public.

Motion: M/S Samra/Roth to approve Resolution Adopting The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration And A Mitigation Monitoring Program Prepared In Compliance With CEQA, And Approving General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-01) Re-Designating Five Properties Located At APN: 024-153-003; 641 Sixth Street (APN: 024-153-011); 1822 C Street (APN: 024-154-005); 1736 C Street (APN: 024-153-004); And 1801 D Street (APN: 024-154-004) From Li, Limited Industrial To PF, Public Facility To Allow For The Development Of A City Recreation Complex (Rec-Plex). The motion carried 5-0-0 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members: Uppal, Samra, Wallis, Roth and Moran NOES: Council Members: None
ABSENT: Council Members: None

12. Motion: M/S Samra/Roth to Introduce and Waive First Reading of Ordinance Approving RZN 2022-01 To Amend The Official Zoning Map Of The City Of Livingston To Rezone 4.58-Acre Of The Five Parcels Located Between Sixth Street And The Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks And South Of C Street, East Of Sixth Street From M-1 (Limited Industrial) To P-F (Public Or Quasi Public Facilities) Consisting Of Assessor Parcel Numbers 024-153-003, 024-153-004, 024- 153-011, 024-154-004 And 024-154-005. The motion carried 5-0-0 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Council Members: Uppal, Samra, Wallis, Roth and Moran NOES: Council Members: None
ABSENT: Council Members: None

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

13. Review and Discussion of Willdan Utility Rate Study and Status of City’s Water, Wastewater and Sanitation Infrastructure.

City Manager Jose A. Ramirez introduced this item.

Council Member Uppal asked the following questions to staff members:

Questions for Public Works Director Anthony Chavarria

1. Uppal’s question: In your professional opinion, does the City have major infrastructure improvements it needs to make in our water/wastewater system in the next five (5) years? Chavarria’s response: Yes.

2. Uppal’s questions: In your professional opinion, should the City delay any of the infrastructure improvements currently presented in the five-year capital improvement plan referenced in Willdan’s Utility Rates Report?
Chavarria’s response: Does not recommend delaying infrastructure improvement projects.

Questions for Assistant City Manager/Finance Director Happy Bains

Page 14 of 311 ends

Page 6 of 9 ends

1. Uppal’s question: Can you please confirm that money paid by our residents in their water bill is restricted funding that can only be put towards the City’s Water/Wastewater system? Bains’ response: Generally yes, water/wastewater refuse revenues are typically accounted for in the enterprise fund and are subject to Prop 218 requirements. Revenue collected from water, sewer, and refuse rates must be used for providing those services and cannot be used for unrelated general governmental purposes.

2. Uppal’s question: Is the City legally allowed to make any profit from these bills? Bains’ response: Generally no, not in the traditional sense. Prop 218 utility rates cannot exceed the cost of providing services. However, utilities may collect enough revenue to cover operations, maintenance, debt services, and capital improvements, including reserve levels.

Having reserves does not constitute profit.

3. Uppal’s question: In your professional opinion, are lack of reserves in these enterprise funds contributing to the need for large increases in utility rates? Bains’ response: Likely yes. If the reserves have been depleted, rates may need to be increased not only to cover ongoing operations costs but also to rebuild reserves needed for emergencies, capital replacements, and financial stability.

4. Uppal’s question: Can you confirm that reserves for the City’s Sanitation Fund need to be replenished, and that the need for this replenishment is factored into the analysis produced by our consultant?
Bains’ response: Yes.

Questions for City Manager Jose A. Ramirez

1. Uppal’s question: In your professional opinion, are the City’s current utility rates sufficient to cover the future needs of our water/wastewater system?

Ramirez’s response: The adequacy of the city’s current utility rates depends on whether the rates that are being proposed are generating sufficient revenue. Not only to operate and maintain the existing water/wastewater systems and solid waste but also to fund necessary capital improvements, maintain appropriate reserves, and address the system's long-term infrastructure needs. The funding scenarios being proposed take into consideration all these factors while balancing the affordability of our residents. The council as a whole, with the recommendation of the stakeholders, take all those neuroses into account and come up with the proposed rates. If the current rates are covering the day-to-day operations and routine maintenance but are not generating enough funds for replacing aging infrastructure and other planned capital improvements, I would consider them not sufficient to meet the system needs and future needs.

Questions for City Attorney Maria Sullivan

1. Uppal’s question: Can you please confirm that in order to impose utility rate increases on the residents, the City must first go through the Proposition 218 process? Sullivan’s response: Correct.

Page 15 of 311 ends

Page 7 of 9 ends

2. Uppal’s question: Can you please confirm that property owners will have the chance to protest any potential utility rate increases that the City Council may pass? Sullivan’s response: Yes, Prop 218 has built-in protest procedures.

3. Uppal’s question: Can you please state the ballot threshold that is required for a successful Prop 218 protest?
Sullivan’s response: Majority protest ballot (50+1).

Question for City Council

1. Uppal’s question: Do you believe the current city’s utility rates are sufficient to cover the future needs of our water/wastewater system?
Responses from City Council:

Council Member Roth: For him personally and the community as a whole, the rates are high.

There has to be a compromise for the community. The percentage was very high.

Council Member Roth: For some, yes, and for others no. Long term is no.

Mayor Moran: No
Council Member Wallis: No, they are not.

Mayor Pro-Tem Samra: I don’t believe so, but I do believe that we have a stakeholder Committee, which you are already a member of. They are supposed to bring this to us.

Not sure what is the point of this question because that is the job of the stakeholders to bring it to us. If we thought that there were sufficient funds to begin with, we would not have that, so I think these questions have been answered.

Council Member Uppal: No. I don’t believe, based on viewing the information that I have seen from our consultants that the city’s current utility rates are sufficient to cover future needs of our water/ wastewater system. He noted for the record that every member of the council has stated that they do not believe that the city’s current utility rates are sufficient to cover the future needs of the water/wastewater system. He also noted for the record that within the staff report, they are looking at millions of dollars in capital improvements over the next five years.

Council Member Uppal asked for clarification of Council Member Roth’s response when he said, “for some yes, for some no.”
Council Member Roth noted that for people with lower incomes, some can afford it, some can’t. Some have a hard time paying their monthly bills. Overall no.

Mayor Moran opened public comments at 7:53 pm.

Citizen Comments:

Pardeep Uppal

Page 16 of 311 ends

Page 8 of 9 ends

Mayor Moran closed public comments at 7:58 pm as there were no further comments from the public.

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
City Council Members’ Announcements and Reports.
• Council Member Wallis
• Council Member Uppal
• Mayor Pro-Tem Samra
Mayor’s Announcements and Reports.
• Mayor Jose Moran.

Robert Wallis
• Special City Selection Committee of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Board – Robert Wallis, Representative and Japjeet Uppal, Alternative. • City Council Liaison - Livingston Planning Commission – Jason Roth and Alternate Robert Wallis.
• Utility Stakeholders Committee – Japjeet Uppal and Robert Wallis.

Jason Roth
• Merced County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Jason Roth, Representative.
• Merced County Mosquito Abatement District Board of Directors – Gurpal Samra, Representative and Jason Roth, Alternate.
• City Council Liaison - Livingston Planning Commission – Jason Roth and Alternate Robert Wallis.

Page 17 of 311 ends

Page 9 of 9 ends

• City Council Liaison - Parks, Recreation and Arts Commission – Jose Moran and Alternate Liaison Japjeet Uppal.

COUNCIL DIRECTION ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
• When can they expect the Strategic Plan to come back – October 6th. • Donation to the rec-plex to specifically get a washer and dryer.

ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at approximately 8:18 p.m. __________________________________
Deputy City Clerk of the City of Livingston
APPROVED:
_____________________________
Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore
The written meeting minutes reflect a summary of specific actions taken by the City Council. They do not necessarily reflect all of the comments or dialogue leading up to the action. All meetings are digitally recorded and are an official record of the meeting’s proceedings. Digitally recorded verbatim minutes are available upon request and may be obtained at Livingston City Hall.

Page 18 of 311 ends

4934-8560-0710 v1 1

STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council Amending Chapter 1-11 of the Livingston Municipal Code Related to Purchase Policies and Procedures

MEETING DATE: October 6, 2026

PREPARED BY: Jose Antonio Ramirez, City Manager
REVIEWED BY: Jose Antonio Ramirez, City Manager

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council waive the second reading, read the Ordinance by title only, and adopt Ordinance No. 2026-__, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Livingston, Amending Chapter 1-11 of the Livingston Municipal Code related to Purchase Policies and Procedures.

BACKGROUND
The Livingston Municipal Code ("LMC") Chapter 1-11, Purchase Policies and Procedures, has not been comprehensively updated since its adoption in 1987. Inflation, changes in market conditions, advancements in municipal best practices, and evolving legal and audit requirements have rendered many provisions of the original code outdated. To address this, the City has undertaken a comprehensive modernization of Chapter 1-11 to clarify approval limits, strengthen competitive procurement, codify audit and transparency measures, and update the procedures for executing contracts, including authority to sign, consistent with the Government Code and the Public Contract Code.

The Ordinance was introduced, and its first reading waived, at the City Council’s regular meeting of September 15, 2026, at which time the Council scheduled the second reading and adoption for this meeting. No changes have been made to the Ordinance since its introduction.

The Ordinance is now before the Council for second reading and adoption.

As adopted, the Ordinance also incorporates the revisions to the approval and signature authority limits that the City Council directed at its September 1, 2026, meeting, including:

1. Reduce the City Manager’s contract approval and signature authority from $50,000 or less to $30,000 or less.

2. Establish annual aggregate contract limits of $65,000 for goods and services, and $125,000 for Department of Public Works goods and equipment, above which City Council approval is required.

3. Set the City Manager’s contract authority for public projects under the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA), LMC Chapter 1-21, at $30,000 or less, instead of the prior $25,000 or less.

Page 19 of 311 ends

4934-8560-0710 v1 2
The detailed purchasing procedures that implement Chapter 1-11 are set out in a companion Purchasing Procedures Administrative Instruction. Under the Ordinance, the City Manager, as the City's purchasing agent, is authorized to promulgate administrative policies and procedures to implement the chapter, in a form approved by the City Attorney. The Administrative Instruction is therefore being issued administratively by the City Manager and will take effect upon the Ordinance's effective date. It is provided with this item for the Council’s informaiton only.

DISCUSSION
The Ordinance makes several substantive updates to the existing purchasing code, including the following:

1. Adds language outlining the legal prohibition on splitting or segmenting related purchases, contracts, or projects, to increase transparency and accountability, and provides that artificially divided transactions are aggregated for approval, threshold, and bidding purposes.

2. Limits exceptions to specifically enumerated circumstances (emergency purchasing, sole source, best value, cooperative purchasing, and supplies at or under $5,000).

3. Adopts a three-tiered approval structure (Department Head, City Manager, City Council) to streamline the process and ensure consistent application.

4. Defines when open-market/no bid purchasing applies, when informal competitive quotes are required, and when formal bidding and City Council approval are required, and sets out the applicable procedures for each.

The Ordinance’s procurement thresholds and approval authority operate as follows:
• $0 - $5,000 – Department Head or designee; open market, no competition required. • $5,001 - $30,000 – City Manager or designee; informal bidding requiring at least three quotes or proposals.
• Above $30,000 – City Council; formal bidding with Council approval required.

Consistent with these thresholds, the City Manager may approve and sign contracts not to exceed $30,000, Department Heads may sign contracts not to exceed $5,000, and contracts exceeding the City Manager’s authority require City Council approval. A non-competitive (sole source) award may be determined by the City Manager for contracts under $30,000 and by the City Council for contracts of $30,000 or more, supported by a written sole source determination placed in the contract file and maintained as a public record. The City Manager’s contract authority for public projects negotiated under CUPCCAA is set at $30,000 or less, consistent with the approval limits above.

The Ordinance also repeals and supersedes Section 3 of Resolution No. 2025-143 to increase the City Manager’s approval threshold from $25,000 to $30,000 under CUPCCAA, effective concurrently with the effective date of this Ordinance, so that the City’s approval policy is stated in a single, controlling instrument.

If adopted, the Ordinance will become effective 30 days after its adoption. The City Clerk will certify the passage and adoption of the Ordinance and cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law within 15 days after adoption.

Page 20 of 311 ends

4934-8560-0710 v1 3

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") because it does not qualify as a "project" pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility the City's action would cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance No. _____

2. Purchasing Procedures Administrative Instruction

Page 21 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE LIVINGSTON CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING LIVINGSTON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1-11

TO ESTABLISH UPDATED PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACT

EXECUTION POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
WHEREAS, Livingston Municipal Code (“LMC”) Chapter 1-11 (Purchase Policies and Procedures) has not been comprehensively updated since its adoption in 1987; WHEREAS, inflation, changes in marketplace conditions, advancements in municipal best practices, and evolving legal and audit requirements have rendered many provisions of the original code outdated for present-day needs;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the modernization of purchasing and contracting policies is essential to ensure the efficient, transparent, and accountable management of public funds and is responsive to current fiscal realities, legal obligations, and community expectations; WHEREAS, the City desires to modernize and amend LMC Chapter 1-11 to clarify approval limits, strengthen competitive procurement, codify audit and transparency measures, and prevent practices that could result in audit findings or undermine public confidence; WHEREAS, on December 2, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-143, which, among other things, established local City Manager and City Council review and approval thresholds for public projects undertaken under the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act;
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to codify those approved thresholds directly in Livingston Municipal Code Chapter 1-11, to increase the City Manager’s approval threshold from $25,000 to $30,000, and to supersede the corresponding provisions of Resolution No. 2025-143, so that the City’s approval policy is stated in a single, controlling instrument; WHEREAS, the City Council also seeks to amend LMC Chapter 1-11 to clarify and update the procedures for executing contracts, including authority to sign, form requirements, and compliance with Government Code § 40602, to ensure all contracts are executed efficiently, with proper legal review, and in accordance with state law; and WHEREAS, the City affirms its commitment to transparent, ethical, and accountable financial management consistent with the Government Code and Public Contract Code.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings Incorporated. The findings set forth above are incorporated into the body of this Ordinance by reference.

Section 2. Amendment. LMC Chapter 1-11 is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

Chapter 11: Purchasing and Signature Authority
§ 1-11-1 PURPOSE.

Page 22 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
The purpose of this chapter is to establish efficient, transparent, and accountable procedures for the purchase of supplies, materials, equipment, and services for the City; to exercise financial control over public expenditures; to promote competition and best value in municipal purchasing; to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse; and to ensure compliance with applicable laws, ethical standards, and audit requirements. § 1-11-2 DEFINITIONS.

Unless the contrary is stated or clearly appears from the context, the following definitions will govern the construction of the words and phrases used in this chapter:
(A) "Contract" may include a purchase order or professional services agreement as the context may dictate.
(B) "General services" means services that are manual or routine in nature as opposed to services that are predominately intellectual and varied in character or require specialized knowledge of an advanced type generally acquired from study at an institution of higher learning.
(C) “Maintenance services” means routine, recurring and usual work for the preservation or protection of a publicly owned, or publicly operated facility for intended purposes, including, but not limited to: minor repainting; resurfacing streets and highways at less than one inch; landscape maintenance (mowing, watering, trimming, pruning, planting, replacement of plants, and servicing of irrigation and sprinkler systems); work performed to keep, operate, and maintain publicly owned water or waste disposal systems; and other similar services that are generally classified as maintenance and are not public projects.
(D) "Professional services" means those services provided to the city by independent consultants that are predominantly intellectual and varied in character – as opposed to manual or routine in nature – which require specialized knowledge of an advanced type generally acquired from study at an institution of higher learning, and entail the exercise of a wide degree of discretion and judgment when performing the services (e.g., lawyers, engineers, architects, certified public accountants and land-use planners).
(E) “Public project” shall have that meaning provided in § 22002(c) of the Public Contracting Code, and means a project for the construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, installation, painting, repainting, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility. A project consisting of both goods and services shall be considered a public project if the primary purpose is the installation, construction, alteration, or improvement of a public facility.
(F) "Purchase" includes renting, leasing, purchasing, licensing, or a trade of supplies. (G) "Supplies" includes general services; equipment; materials; goods, parts; miscellaneous commodities; and other office supplies. "Supplies" does not include professional services.
§ 1-11-3 PURCHASING AGENT.

Page 23 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
The City Manager is designated as the City's purchasing agent. The City Manager may delegate purchasing agent responsibilities to another appointed agent in writing. Supplies for city departments must be purchased in accordance with this code, any administrative regulations promulgated pursuant to this chapter, and such additional regulations that the city council may adopt by written resolution. The duties of the purchasing agent may be combined with those of any other office or position and include, without limitation, the following:
(A) Purchasing or contracting for supplies required by any department. (B) Promulgating administrative policies and procedures to implement the purposes of this chapter as approved by the City Manager in writing. (C) Facilitating the inspection of all supplies purchased under this chapter to determine their quality and ensure conformance with City specifications. (D) Recommending the transfer of surplus or unused supplies and equipment between departments as needed.
(E) Selling or disposing of supplies cannot be used by any department or which have become unsuitable for city use.
(F) Performing such other tasks as may be necessary for the proper conduct of purchasing of supplies.
§ 1-11-4 PROCUREMENT THRESHOLDS AND APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS.

Amount per purchase or
contract
Approval authority Competitive process required
$0-$5,000 Department Head or
designee
Open market; no competition
required (see § 1-11-4(D))
$5,001-$30,000 City Manager or designee Informal bidding; at least three quotes or proposals
(verbal or written); see § 1-
11-6; approval authority
amounts also apply to public
works contracts under LMC
Chapter 1-21
Above $30,000 City Council Formal bidding; Council
approval required (see § 1-
11-7(A)-(E))
(A) Sole Source. A contract may be awarded without competition when the City determines and documents, after reasonable market research, that there is only one vendor who is capable of providing the required goods or services in a manner that meets the City’s minimum operational, technical, legal, or compatibility requirements.

Page 24 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2

1. In the case of contracts less than $30,000.00, this determination shall be made by the City Manager and, in the case of contracts more than $30,000.00, this determination shall be made by the City Council.

2. The City Manager shall conduct negotiations, as appropriate, as to price, delivery, and terms.

3. A written statement of the basis for the sole source determination shall be placed in the contract file. A record of sole source procurements shall be maintained as a public record for purchases of supplies or services exceeding the amount fixed for solicitation of unsealed quotes. Such records may be destroyed after two (2) years in accordance with Government Code § 34090.
(B) Best Value. The City Manager may select the lowest responsible bidder based on objective criteria for evaluating the qualifications of bidders with the resulting selection representing the best combination of price and qualifications along with the nature of the goods, supplies, or equipment.
(C) Cooperative Purchasing or Piggybacking. Where the City Manager identifies a cooperative competitive bidding procedure, being prepared by and processed through another local, state, or federal governmental agency, the City Manager may join into an existing written purchase contract through a competitive bidding process prepared by and awarded by another local, state or federal governmental agency. (D) Supplies under $5,000. Purchases made for supplies with an estimated value under $5,000 may be purchased on the open market without bidding requirements, provided such purchases are not intentionally split or segmented to avoid competitive bidding (see § 1-11-10 Segmentation Prohibited).
(E) Annual Aggregate Limit. The City Manager is authorized to execute and administer contracts for goods and services without City Council approval, provided that: (1) no individual contract exceeds $30,000, and (2) the aggregate amount of contracts awarded to the same contractor during any fiscal year does not exceed $65,000 for goods and services; provided, however, that for Public Works Department contracts only, the aggregate amount of contracts awarded to the same contractor during any fiscal year for goods and equipment (not services) does not exceed $125,000. § 1-11-5 PUBLIC PROJECTS DISTINGUISHED.

Public projects, as defined in Section 1-11-2 (E), shall be procured in accordance with Chapter 1-21, which implements the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA). Any procurement involving the purchase of goods and services, where the primary purpose is the construction, installation, alteration, renovation, repair, or improvement of a publicly owned facility, shall be treated as a public project and shall be procured in accordance with Chapter 1-21.
§ 1-11-6 INFORMAL BIDDING.

Purchases for supplies with an estimated value of $5,001 up to $30,000 require the following:
(A) Purchases must, whenever possible, be based upon at least three bids or quotes

Page 25 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
and be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.
(B) Bids or quotes may be obtained either verbally or in writing by direct mail requests, checking prices by telephone inquiry, comparing prices on file, or by notice on official city bulletin boards.
(C) Department heads, or designee, may solicit proposals for such supplies. (D) The City Manager shall keep a record of all informally bid purchases and the bidding in competition thereon, and such records shall be open to public inspection. Such records may be destroyed after two (2) years in accordance with Government Code § 34090.
(E) The City Manager may require that supplies purchased pursuant to this section be formally bid and awarded. Before requiring such bidding, the City Manager must promulgate administrative policies and procedures, in a form approved by the City Attorney, establishing such formal bidding procedures.
§ 1-11-7 FORMAL BIDDING; PURCHASING ABOVE $30,000.

Any single purchase or contract for supplies over $30,000, or multiple related purchases or contracts intentionally split to avoid the $30,000 threshold, must comply with the following formal process:
(A) Notice Inviting Bids. Notices inviting formal bids must be posted at City Hall and distributed (either electronically or otherwise) at least ten days before the deadline for submitting bids to all vendors on the City's list for the supplies being sought and to such other vendors as the City Manager deems appropriate. The notice soliciting bids must describe the supplies needed in general and generic terms, identify security required for the bid, how bid specifications can be obtained, and designate the deadline and place for submitting informal bids. The City Manager is responsible for soliciting sealed bids from all responsible prospective vendors whose names are on the bidders' list maintained by the requesting department. (B) Bidder's Security. The City Manager may require bidders to secure bids and performance in a manner approved by the City Manager and in a form approved by the City Attorney. Unsuccessful bidders are entitled to the return of bid security within sixty days after the date of the award. When deemed necessary by the City Manager, bidders' security may be prescribed in the notices inviting bids. Bidders are entitled to return of bid security; provided, that a successful bidder forfeits his or her bid security upon refusal or failure to execute the contract within ten days after the notice of award of contract has been mailed, unless the City is responsible for the delay. If a successful bidder refuses to comply with, or fails to execute, a contract issued by the City within ten days after being awarded the contract, the City may cancel the award and retain any bid security. Compliance with contract requirements includes, without limitation, submission of insurance documentation. Should this occur, the City Council may award the contract to the next lowest responsible bidder. (C) Performance Bonds. The City Council or City Manager may require a performance bond in an amount reasonably necessary to protect the best interests of the City. If the City Council or City Manager requires a performance bond, the form and amount

Page 26 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
of the bond will be described in the notice inviting bids. (D) Bid Opening Procedure. Sealed bids must be submitted to the City Manager in an envelope clearly marked as a bid along with the bidder's name and project number written on the outside. The City Manager will open properly submitted bids at the time and place stated in the notice inviting bids. A written record and tabulation must be made at the time all bids are received and then opened. Bids received after the time specified in the notice inviting bids will not be accepted. (E) Council Approval. All bids received as part of the formal bidding process must be submitted to the City Council by the City Manager. The City Council may reject all bids or award the purchase contract to the best qualified bidder whose bid or proposal fulfills the purpose intended according to criteria designated in the solicitation, provided that the contract award amount is within the unencumbered appropriation for that item. The City Council may waive any minor bid irregularities. If the City does not receive any bids, the City Council may:

1. Abandon the purchase;

2. Authorize rebidding the purchase on an informal basis; or

3. Authorize purchasing the supplies on a direct negotiated contract. (F) Tie Bids. If two or more bids received are for the same total amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, the City Council may accept one of them or accept the lowest bid made by negotiation with the tie bidders at the time of or after the bid opening.
§ 1-11-8 LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER.
(A) For the purposes of this chapter, in addition to price, "lowest responsible bidder" will be determined based on consideration of the following factors:

1. The ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform the contract or provide the supplies;

2. Whether the bidder has the facilities to perform the contract or provide the supplies promptly, or within the time specified, without delay or interference;

3. The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience and efficiency of the bidder;

4. The bidder's record or performance of previous contracts or services;

5. The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws and ordinances relating to the contract;

6. The sufficiency of the financial resources and ability of the bidder to perform the contract; and

7. The quality, availability and adaptability of the supplies to the particular use

Page 27 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
required.
(B) In addition to the foregoing, for the purpose of calculating the lowest responsible bidder, preference will be awarded to local vendors, when the following criteria are met:

1. The vendor is a person or legal entity with a place of business within the City and a valid current business license issued by the City; and

2. The difference between bids from the local vendor and those outside the City is less than the current sales tax benefit the City would receive. § 1-11-9 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.

Professional services may include, but not be limited to, architectural, engineering, testing, land surveying, environmental, accounting, legal, Information Technology, and other related services. (A) The City Manager may contract for professional services in an amount not to exceed $30,000 dollars. Professional services estimated to cost more than $30,000 must be approved by the City Council. The manner by which all professional services are selected and contracted may be governed by administrative policy and procedures promulgated by the City Manager and approved as to form by the City Attorney. (B) When selecting a contractor for professional, personal or specialized services, the skill, ability and expertise of the entity or person performing the services is a key component of the selection criteria. The selection should therefore be on the basis of demonstrated competence, overall value to the City, and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required. Cost is only one factor in determining selection.
§ 1-11-10 SEGMENTATION PROHIBITED.

It is a violation of this chapter to knowingly take action to separate purchases, contracts, projects, or requirements into smaller units or segments solely for the purpose of evading the competitive formal or informal bidding requirements and approval thresholds set forth in this chapter. Any such related or artificially divided transactions shall be aggregated for approval, threshold, and bidding purposes.
§ 1-11-11 EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS.

This Chapter does not apply to the employment of any person by the City at a regular salary. § 1-11-12 EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS.
(A) Generally. The City is not bound by any contract unless the contract is in writing, approved as to form by the City Attorney, and signed on behalf of the City by an officer or officers as set forth in this chapter. Any such officer must sign a contract on the City's behalf when directed to do so by the City Council. No contract will be considered executed or binding unless these requirements are satisfied. (B) City Council authority. Unless otherwise provided in this code, a resolution, or

Page 28 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
ordinance, the City Council must approve all contracts and direct the Mayor, or other officer, to sign a contract on the City's behalf.
(C) Emergency contracting. In the event of a declared state of emergency, the City Manager may bind the City, with or without a written contract, for the acquisition of equipment, materials, supplies, labor, services or other items. (D) Signature authority. In accordance with Government Code § 40602, the following officers are authorized to sign contracts on the City’s behalf:

1. The Mayor or, in the Mayor's absence, the Mayor Pro Tem;

2. The City Manager when directed to do so by the City Council, resolution, ordinance, or any provision of this code;

3. The City Attorney when directed to do so by the City Council, to retain special counsel, retain expert witnesses in anticipation;

4. The City Manager for contracts not to exceed $30,000. This same limit applies to public project agreements negotiated pursuant to § 1-21-4(A); and

5. Department Heads for contracts not to exceed $5,000.

Section 3. Construction. This Ordinance must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Ordinance. It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Ordinance be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Ordinance.

Section 4. Severability. If any part of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

Section 5. Repeal and Supersession of Prior Resolution Provisions. Section 3 of Resolution 2025- 143, adopted December 16, 2025, is hereby repealed and superseded to increase the City Manager’s approval threshold from $25,000 to $30,000, effective concurrently with the effective date of this Ordinance.

Section 6. Recordation; Validity of Previous Code Sections. If this entire Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, any repeal or amendment of the Livingston Municipal Code or other city ordinance by this Ordinance will be rendered void and cause such previous Livingston Municipal Code provision or other the city ordinance to remain in full force and effect for all purposes.

Section 7. Environmental Assessment. The City Council finds that the adoption of this ordinance establishing procedures for purchasing constitutes an administrative activity and is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 California Code of Regulations §§ 15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15378(b)(2), (4). The adoption of this ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. Accordingly, this Ordinance is not subject to further environmental

Page 29 of 311 ends

4919-0195-4743 v2
review under CEQA.

Section 8. Publication. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City of Livingston's book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within 15 days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.

Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance will become effective 30 days after adoption.

Introduced: September 15, 2026
Passed and Adopted:

_____________________________
JOSE MORAN, Mayor
of the City of Livingston

ATTEST:

State of California )
County of Merced )
City of Livingston )

I hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly introduced at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston on the 15th day of September 2026, and was passed and adopted at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston on this _____day of October 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

______________________________________
Monica Cisneros, Deputy City Clerk
of the City of Livingston

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM

___________________________________
City Attorney or Assistant City Attorney
Of City of Livingston

Page 30 of 311 ends

4924-1255-1356 v1

OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
Administrative Instruction
No. 1

PURCHASING PROCEDURES
Effective Date: September ___, 2026

Page 31 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. PURPOSE............................................................................................................ 1 II. POLICY ................................................................................................................ 1 III. APPROVAL AUTHORITY .................................................................................... 1 A. PUBLIC PROJECT CONTRACTS............................................................. 1 B. PURCHASE OF GOODS/SERVICES CONTRACTS ................................ 1 C. EXCEPTIONS TO THE ABOVE APPROVAL AUTHORITY ...................... 2 IV. PURCHASING PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS................................................ 2 A. PUBLIC PROJECT .................................................................................... 2 B. SUPPLIES AND SERVICES...................................................................... 3 C. INFORMAL BIDDING PROCEDURES ...................................................... 3 D. ADDITIONAL TYPES OF PURCHASES ................................................... 4 V. REQUISITION, PURCHASE ORDER, AND ENCUMBRANCE PROCESS.......... 6 VI. CONTRACTS/AGREEMENTS ............................................................................. 7 A. PROCEDURES IF VENDOR WILL NOT ACCEPT TEMPLATE................ 8 B. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS................................................................ 8 C. CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL AS TO FORM........................................... 9 D. CONTRACT AGREEMENT APPROVAL FORM (SEE APPENDIX
III) .............................................................................................................. 9 E. CONTRACT RENEWAL ............................................................................ 9 VII. MISCELLANEOUS............................................................................................... 9 A. LOCAL VENDOR....................................................................................... 9 VIII. DEFINITIONS..................................................................................................... 10 APPENDIX I - INFORMAL BID PROCESS................................................................... 12 APPENDIX II-FORMAL BID PROCEDURES................................................................ 15 APPENDIX VI - QUICK STEPS TO PURCHASING...................................................... 19

Page 32 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 1
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Administrative Instruction is to describe procedures in accordance with City of Livingston Municipal Code (LMC) Chapter 1-11. These procedures are designed to ensure that the City receives competitive prices on its purchases; vendors are chosen in a fair/competitive manner; and the City is shielded from unnecessary legal or liability exposure from activities arising out of purchasing of equipment, goods and services.

II. POLICY
The LMC (Section 1-11-3) designates the City Manager as the City's purchasing authority. In the City of Livingston's decentralized purchasing environment, the City Manager has delegated purchasing authority to each department under the condition that they monitor their department's purchases, including responsibility for not exceeding funds appropriated in the budget process and for adherence to the purchasing guidelines set forth in the municipal code, as well as in this Administrative Instruction.

The guidelines below provide direction on approval authority, purchasing procedure, and when to use which type of City contract/agreement.

III. APPROVAL AUTHORITY
The LMC (Section 1-11-4) establishes monetary thresholds of approval for purchasing acquisitions.

A. PUBLIC PROJECT CONTRACTS

1. Public Projects under $30,000 may be approved by the City Manager.

2. Public Projects $30,000 or over must be approved by the City Council. City Council resolution approving/authorizing the contract must be attached to the packet before circulating the packet for approval signatures.

B. PURCHASE OF GOODS/SERVICES CONTRACTS

1. Contracts for the purchase of goods/services $5,000 or less may be approved by the Department Head.

2. Contracts for the purchase of goods/services between $5,001- $30,000 may be approved by the City Manager.

3. Contracts for the purchase of goods/services over $30,000 must be approved by the City Council. City Council resolution

Page 33 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 2
approving/authorizing the contract must be attached to the packet before circulating the packet for approval signatures.

C. EXCEPTIONS TO THE ABOVE APPROVAL AUTHORITY

1. All real property acquisitions or real property lease contracts with a term of three years of more, regardless of amount, must be approved by City Council.

2. If item or service is explicitly listed and approved in the annual budget book during the budget adoption process by City Council, this may constitute City Council approval. However, this is considered on a case by case basis, determined by purchase amount and description and only with explicit approval by the City Council.

3. The City Manager is authorized to execute and administer contracts for goods and services or public projects without City Council approval provided that: (1) no individual contract exceeds $30,000, and (2) the aggregate amount of contracts awarded to the same contractor during any fiscal year does not exceed $65,000 for goods and services; provided, however, that for the Department of Public Works contracts only, the aggregate amount of contracts awarded to the same contractor during any fiscal year for goods and equipment (not services) does not exceed $125,000.

IV. PURCHASING PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS
Depending on the type of purchase and the value of the contract, formal or informal bidding procedures may be required.

A. PUBLIC PROJECT
The City adopted the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA), governed by Public Contract Code §§ 22000 et seq. (Chapter 1-21).

1. Public Projects $75,000 or less, and amended from time to time by PCC §22032(a), do not require bidding.

2. Public Projects in the amount of $75,001 to $220,000, and amended from time to time by PCC §22032(b), require informal bidding. (Appendix I)

3. Public Projects over $220,000, and amended from time to time by PCC §22032(c), require formal bidding (Appendix II)
Typically, a "public project" is any construction project that is paid

Page 34 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 3
for out of public funds. Determining whether a project is a "public project" is important because when a "public project" is above a certain value, then the Public Contract Code (PCC) requires that public entities engage in specific bidding procedures. If it is a mixed project or it is unclear, consult with the City Attorney for guidance on how the project should be characterized.

B. SUPPLIES AND SERVICES

1. Purchase of Supplies
a. Contracts for the purchases of supplies $5,000 or less do not require competitive bidding.
b. Contracts for the purchases of supplies $5,001 - $30,000 require informal bidding procedures.
c. Contracts for the purchases of supplies over $30,000 require formal bidding procedures.

2. Purchase of Services
a. Contracts for the purchases of services $5,000 or less do not require competitive bidding.
b. Contracts for the purchases of services $5,001 - $30,000 require informal bidding procedures.
c. Contracts for the purchases of services over $30,000 require formal bidding procedures.
d. When selecting a contractor for professional, personal or specialized services, the skill, ability and expertise of the entity or person performing the services is a key component of the selection criteria. The selection should therefore be on the basis of demonstrated competence, overall value to the City, and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required. Cost is only one factor in determining selection (LMC § 1-11-9(B)).

C. INFORMAL BIDDING PROCEDURES
Informal Bidding is the City's vendor selection process for goods and services valued between $5,001-$30,000. The process is outlined in LMC § 1-11-6 and requires department heads to solicit quotes or bids by written request from prospective vendors by telephone, mail, email or by posting a public notice in City Hall or on the City's website. Informal Bidding

Page 35 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 4
Procedures are required for the purchase of goods or services that are in excess of $5,000.

1. For projects of $5,001 - $30,000, the department shall obtain at least three (3) quotes or bids, whenever possible. If the department is unable to obtain three (3) quotes, a written explanation of the attempts that were made and the reasons for the department’s inability to obtain three (3) quotes must be placed in the file. Quotes are typically informal offers to perform work at a stated price. Bids are typically more formalized offers to perform work at a stated price and are often submitted in response to a Request for Proposals (“RFP”).

2. The department shall keep records of all quotes/bids for at least two (2) years after the submission of the quote/bid or placing of the order. These records shall be made available for public review upon request. Records may be destroyed after two years in accordance with Government Code § 34090.

3. Informal bidding procedures are only used for purchases of goods or services. They may NOT be used for "public projects."

4. When selecting a vendor, departments should remember, as stated above, that a professional, personal or specialized services contract is for the skill, ability and expertise of the entity or person and as such the selection should be based on competence and overall value to the city. Cost is only one factor.

D. ADDITIONAL TYPES OF PURCHASES

1. Petty Cash. Authorized purchases made by an employee using personal funds may be reimbursed through Petty Cash.

Requirements for Petty Cash reimbursement are as follows:
a. Purchase may not exceed $200.00 [Finance Department
Memo Oct. 20, 2009].
b. Reimbursement requests must be accompanied by a Petty Cash Voucher.
c. Voucher must be signed by Department Head or Supervisor. d. Receipt for purchase must accompany the voucher.
e. Vouchers can be redeemed by one of the Petty Cash
Custodians, Police Administration or Finance Department.

Page 36 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 5
If total requested reimbursement exceeds $200.00, follow the above guidelines; however, use the Statement of Expense form rather than the Petty Cash Voucher. The Statement of Expense, along with all supporting documentation, will need to be entered into the accounting system, and a check will be issued upon approval.

2. Cooperative Purchasing (“Piggybacking”) Piggybacking can be an efficient and appropriate way to utilize other agencies' bid processes to take advantage of already contracted low bid prices.

LMC § 1-11-4(C) allows for "piggybacking" under the following circumstances:
a. The requesting department verifies with City Attorney, in writing, that all purchases or contracts by other
governmental agencies were made in conformance with
state law.
b. Initial requesting government agency's bid and purchasing process substantially conforms to the procedures
established by state law and the LMC Purchasing
Ordinance.
c. Bid process should be confirmed as completed within the last year. All other purchasing procedures for
contracts/agreements obtained via piggybacking shall be followed in accordance to the terms of this Administrative Instruction and would exclude allowance for public projects over $75,000, which must follow appropriate bid procedures.

3. Sole Source
Sole source procurement is any transaction in which the services and/or supplies can be obtained from only one source. This is usually necessary if the specification or requirement for a purchase is so unique, that only one possible source could meet the established standards. These purchases require documented analysis of sole source requirements as well as possible review by the City Attorney and approval by the City Manager. Justification will be based on the following:
a. After reasonable market research, it is determined that only one source is capable of supplying the required goods or

Page 37 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 6
services in a manner that meets the City’s minimum
operation, technical, legal, or compatibility requirements. b. Compatibility with existing equipment, software, or systems requires procurement from a specific vendor.
c. The goods or services are proprietary and are available from only one supplier.
d. Competition is not feasible for documented operational, technical, or legal reasons. Before a purchase can be made without competition, the requesting department must:
(i) Contact Purchasing and discuss whether the
requirement can be competitively procured.
(ii) Complete a Sole Source Justification Form (See,
Appendix VII).
(iii) Explain why the proposed vendor is the only source capable of meeting the City’s requirements.
(iv) Provide clear and convincing support rather than
general conclusions.

V. REQUISITION, PURCHASE ORDER, AND ENCUMBRANCE PROCESS Purchase orders can be beneficial to ensuring competitive pricing and as such, are part of the City's recommended best practice. The use of purchase orders is strongly recommended when anticipating large or repetitive purchases throughout the year. This is especially important to ensure adequate funding for pending purchases and to also negotiate best pricing on a larger commitment of purchases from a vendor. Purchase orders also encumber funds for items or services ordered, which helps avoid overspending, and provides for appropriation carryover into the following fiscal year in the event that the items or services are not provided and invoiced until then. The sequence of events below demonstrates how to process purchase orders.

A. Department submits requisition to the Finance Department via the accounting system. This should include all documentation, including W9's, bids/quotes, contracts and insurance information. There should also be adequate funding available in the account(s) designated in the request.

B. After receiving the requisition, Finance considers all attached documentation and confirms funding availability and approves the request in the accounting system, thus generating a purchase order number and document. This document is then sent back to the requesting department.

Page 38 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 7
C. Once received, the department may send the purchase order to the vendor, thus allowing them to ship the purchase or provide service. The vendor can then invoice against the purchase order number which should be reflected on the invoices.

D. Issuance of the purchase order creates an encumbrance in the budget line item, thus reserving those funds specifically for those purchases identified in the initial requisition. Any remaining encumbrances that have not been spent down at the end of the fiscal year will have the opportunity to be rolled into the following fiscal year if there is sufficient budget, allowing for continued purchases against that purchase order.

E. To close out a purchase order with any remaining funds, once the purchase is complete, the department should send notification to the Finance Department, and they will unencumber the funds to make them available in the budget line item again.

VI. CONTRACTS/AGREEMENTS
The City has seven (7) contract templates. The type of purchase and the level of complexity of the purchase dictates which contract templates to use. However, due to the unique nature of some purchases, the templates may need to be modified to fit the situation. If you are unclear which template to use, contact the City Attorney for guidance before you start drafting. The seven (7) contract templates are:

CONSULTING SERVICE AGREEMENT
This template should be used for purchases of services from non-design professionals. It can also be used for purchases that are a combination of goods and services.

SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE (SAAS) AGREEMENT
This template should be used for purchases of technology-related services where the City obtains the right to access and use software applications hosted, managed, and maintained by a third-party provider and delivered through a network or internet-based platform, together with any related support, maintenance, storage, or cloud-hosting services.

SHORT FORM SERVICE AGREEMENT
This template should be used for purchases of services from non-design professionals or purchases that are a combination of goods and services that are relatively routine, low-risk, or lower-value.

CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT – DESIGN PROFESSIONALS

Page 39 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 8
This template should be for purchases of services from a design professional, such as a licensed architect, engineer, landscape architect, land surveyor, planner, construction manager, or other design professional for the performance of professional services.

SHORT FORM PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This template should be used for the acquisition of goods, equipment, or other commodities when the purchase is relatively routine, low risk, or below a specified dollar threshold.

MINOR CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
This template should be used for procurement of small-scale construction, repair, alteration, maintenance, or improvement projects that do not warrant the complexity of a full public works construction contract.

PUBLIC WORKS AGREEMENT INCLUDING PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS

AND BOND DOCUMENTS
This template should be used for Public Projects in excess of $75,000 where bidding is required.

A. PROCEDURES IF VENDOR WILL NOT ACCEPT TEMPLATE
In some cases, vendors may refuse to enter into an agreement using the City's templates. It is always preferable to use the City's templates.

However, a department may enter into an agreement using a vendor's template, but the City Attorney's Office and the Risk Manager still need to review and approve the non-City template.

B. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Vendors must provide the City with an insurance certificate that demonstrates that the vendor has sufficient insurance to satisfy the City's insurance requirements. The City's insurance requirements can only be waived with the approval of the City's Risk Manager.

1. A few things to look for on insurance certificates:
a. Does the vendor's certificate show evidence of commercial general liability, automobile, worker's compensation and professional liability insurance (if a licensed professional) for the requisite amounts?
b. Does the certificate indicate that coverage under the policies is on an "occurrence basis"?

Page 40 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 9
c. Does the insurance ce1tificate name "The City of Livingston and its elected and appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, contractors and consultants" as additional insureds? d. Does the insurance certificate indicate whether the vendor has a self- insured retention (SIR)?
e. If the vendor has a SIR, does the certificate indicate that the City can pay the SIR if the vendor refuses or is unable? C. CITY ATTORNEY APPROVAL AS TO FORM
Prior to contract execution, all contracts regardless of amount must be approved by the relevant department head and approved by the City Attorney as to form. In order to approve a contract, the City Attorney must be able to verify that the information contained in the contract is accurate and consistent and the insurance certificate shows that the vendor has obtained all of the required insurance.

D. CONTRACT AGREEMENT APPROVAL FORM (SEE APPENDIX III)
Once the process for obtaining quotes, or bids, informal or formal is complete, the steps outlined in the Contract Agreement Approval form shall be fulfilled accordingly and routed to the appropriate offices for approval.

E. CONTRACT RENEWAL
Contracts for services provided to the City are recommended to be reviewed and renewed every two to three years, including solicitation of new Requests for Proposal. This best practice procedure will ensure the City is continuing to receive favorable pricing and to evaluate if the City's needs for the requested service(s) are being adequately met.

VII. MISCELLANEOUS
A. LOCAL VENDOR
The City of Livingston desires, wherever quality and price are equal, to contract with local qualified vendors to provide goods and services to the City.

Page 41 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 10
VIII. DEFINITIONS
BIDS
Prices provided from the vendor that are fixed in cost or fixed in the cost per unit.

Bids are required for supplies, materials or services where the department is required to take the lowest cost.

ENCUMBRANCE
Process completed by finance staff to reserve funds for purchase orders.

INFORMAL BIDDING (a.k.a “OPEN MARKET”) PROCEDURE
A transparent procurement process designed to encourage fair and competitive pricing and purchasing of materials, supplies, equipment or services.

NON-PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Services that are not considered professional services due to lack of official certification, training or formal education which may include, cleaning services, laborers, or other "learn on the job" professions.

PIGGY-BACKING
A form of intergovernmental cooperative purchasing in which an agency requests competitive bids, enters into a contract and arranges as part of that contract, for other public purchasing agencies to purchase from the selected vendor under the same terms and conditions as itself.

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
Services rendered by members of a recognized profession or those possessing a unique or specialized skill. Such services are generally acquired to obtain information, advice, training, or direct assistance. These include services related to architecture, construction management, construction surveys, material testing, inspection services, appraising, ad campaigns, engineering, environmental, information technology, finance, fine arts, insurance, land surveying, landscape architecture, legal management, and consultants.

PUBLIC PROJECT
A public project is defined by the California Public Contract Code as:
• Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased or operated facility. Painting or repainting of any publicly owned, leased or operated facility.

Page 42 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 11
• Maintenance is excluded from the definition of a Public Project • All cost elements -- personnel, materials, supplies, subcontracts, equipment and overhead -- associated with a project must be recorded and reported at the project level.

PURCHASE ORDER
A legal document sent to a supplier or vendor, authorizing the purchase and subsequent payment of requisitioned items and is used to communicate the City's terms and conditions and authorizes an encumbrance. It is a contractual agreement to pay for agreed upon goods and services received.

QUOTES (PROPOSAL)
Estimates of the costs of supplies and services from a vendor that are subject to variation based on the scope of requested purchase.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
A solicitation made through a bidding process by the City, in the interest of procuring materials, equipment, supplies and/or services.

REQUISITIONS
An internal request made through the accounting system from a department to the Finance Department that communicates the need to enter into a contractual relationship for delivery of goods and/or services. This process creates the purchase order that is issued to the vendor.

SOLE SOURCE
A purchase made from the only source of supply and/or a purchase that has no advantage that can be gained through competitive bidding.

Page 43 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 12

APPENDIX I - INFORMAL BID PROCESS
Informal Public Contract Bidding-Public Projects Between $75,001 to $220,000 The City of Livingston has adopted the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act, Sections 22000 et seq., (Chapter 21 of Title 1), which allows the City to have an informal bid process for public projects valued between $75,001 and $220,000.

A. Create Bidders List
Pursuant to Public Contract Code section 22034, the City may provide notice inviting informal bids by either maintaining a list of qualified contractors identified according to categories of work, by providing notice to the construction trade journals specified pursuant to Public Contract Code section 22036, or by utilizing both methods.

The City elects to maintain a qualified contractors list in accordance with Public Contract Code section 22034 and the criteria established by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission. To develop and maintain the list, the Public Works Department shall annually invite licensed contractors to submit information for inclusion on the City's qualified contractors list by category of work for the following calendar year.

B. Send to Trade Journals
In addition, each November the Public Works Department may mail, email, or fax a written notice inviting licensed contractors to be included on the City's qualified contractors list for the following calendar year. The notice must be provided in accordance with the requirements of the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission and applicable provisions of the Public Contract Code.

The Department may distribute the notice through construction trade journals serving the area in which the City is located, including those trade journals designated by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission pursuant to Public Contract Code section 22036, as amended from time to time.

Contractors may be added to the City's qualified contractors list at any time during the year upon submitting the information required by the City and applicable Commission regulations.

The notice shall require contractors to provide their business name, mailing address, telephone number, contractor license number, license classification(s), and the category or categories of work for which they wish to be included on the City's qualified contractors list.

The notice shall require that the contractor provide their name and address to which a notice to contractors or proposal should be mailed, their phone number, the type of work in which the contractor is interested and currently licensed to do, together with the class of the contractor's license held and contractor license number.

Page 44 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 13
The Public Works Department must revise their bidders list starting January 1st of each year. The Department may include any contractor they so desire, but at a minimum, the list must include contractors that responded to the November list invitation with the required information. It is recommended that contractors who submitted at least one valid bid in the preceding year be included on the list. Contractors may be added to the list at any time by providing Public Works with the required information.

C. Advertising Bids
Not less than 10 calendar days before bids are due, a notice inviting bids shall be mailed or emailed to all contractors on the City's bidder's list for the category of work to be bid and to the trade journals mentioned above. Additional contractors or construction trade journals may be notified at the discretion of the department soliciting bids, provided, however, that (1) if there is no list of qualified contractors for the particular category of work, then the notice shall only be sent to the construction trade journals specified by the Commission; (2) if a product or service is proprietary in nature, such that it can only be obtained from one contractor or contractors, then the notice may be sent exclusively to that one contractor or contractors.

Generally, the bids should include the following information:
• General description of the project
• Method for how to obtain more detailed information about the project • Time and place for submission of bids
• Project title and number
• Cost range
• Location of site
• Who is accepting bids (Project Engineer)
• Date and time that bids are due
• Property owner's address and phone number
• Architect's address and phone number
• Brief description of work to be done
• Where plans may be obtained/deposit required and whether it is or is not refundable.
• Percentage of bid bond/percentage of performance bond/percentage of payment bond

Page 45 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 14
D. Bidder's Security
When deemed necessary, bidder's security may be required for informal public project contract bids between $75,001 and $220,000. See Appendix II(G) for bidder's security requirements.

E. Selection
Opening of bids and selection of the lowest responsible bidder may be done by the department soliciting bids. The City Manager signs all informally bid contracts, regardless of amount, however, contracts $30,001 or more must be brought to the City Council for award.

If the engineer's reasonable estimate is below $220,000, then informal bid procedures may be used. If it turns out that all bids received exceed $220,000, then the City Council may award the contract (with four-fifths vote) up to $235,000 to the lowest responsible bidder.

Page 46 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 15

APPENDIX II-FORMAL BID PROCEDURES
Formal Contract Bidding-Public Projects Over $220,000
1) City Council Authorization to Advertise-For public projects over $220,000, the City Council adopts the plans and specifications and authorizes advertising of the bid. The department prepares a staff report to the City Council recommending this action by resolution. The department should also make sure that there is sufficient budget for the estimated contract cost and make plans for obtaining funding for any shortfall. A budget amendment, if necessary, can be done at this time or when the City Council awards the contract.
2) Specifications-The department requesting the work shall prepare the bid specifications.
a. Quality-In considering and development specifications, it must always be borne in mind that expenditures derived from public sources and administered by public bodies cannot be expected to provide for "deluxe" or luxurious levels of quality. It is, therefore, necessary to follow a general policy of purchasing standard grades of merchandise that represent an optimum relationship between quality and price.
b. Adequacy-Bids and quotations must be based on adequate specifications.

A lengthy specification composed or designed solely for the purpose of eliminating competition other than those able to supply a particular brandname commodity should be avoided. An actual brand name should be used only when no other of its kind would be equally satisfactory.

Specifications should be detailed so as to afford a basis for full and fair competitive bidding upon a common standard, and they should be free from restrictions that would tend to stifle competition. c. Changes-Once an invitation to bid has been mailed, no changes in the specifications can be made unless all prospective bidders are so notified by means of an amendment. This amendment shall be forwarded to the bidders via ebidboard.com, email, or certified mail with return receipt requested. The return receipt request is proof of notification and will be filed with the bid. Amendment may be sent via facsimile machine when time does not permit mailing.
3) Notice Inviting Bids-The department requesting the work shall prepare a notice inviting bids. Such notice shall include the following information:
a. A general description of the project;
b. Where bid blanks and specifications may be secured; and c. The time and place for receiving and opening sealed bids
In order to facilitate the bid process, the department requesting the work shall also:

Page 47 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 16
• Determine a bid number
• Establish the date for bid openings to be included in the notice inviting bids
• Reserve a room for the date of bid openings, either: (a) City Hall Conference Room, or (b) Council Chambers
4) Advertise in Newspaper-The department requesting the work shall advertise the bid in at least one newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City. Usual publications are Merced County Times and the Merced Sunstar. San Jose Mercury News and Fresno Bee may be used for very large jobs:
a. This notice inviting bids shall be published at least 14 calendar days before the date of opening of the bids;
b. Letter listing advertising dates of bid and a copy of the Notice Inviting Bids will be forwarded to the newspaper for advertising. This letter will be acknowledged by signature of newspaper agent and returned to the Engineering Division where it will be filed in the corresponding Bid folder. 5) Advertise to Bidder's List /Trade Journals/City's Website - 30 days before bid opening, the department requesting the work shall mail and email invitations to bid to the contractors on the City's bidder's list and shall mail and email invitations to bid to the construction trade journals listed under the Appendix I (A) "Informal Contract Bidding - Create Bidders List" section above. It is recommended that ebidboard.com be used for advertising all bids. Engineering Division can assist to publish bids on ebidboard.com.

As stated in Section (C) above, the invitations to bid should include a general description of the project, where bid blanks and specifications may be secured, and the time and place for receiving and opening sealed bids. In addition, the invitation to bid should also include the information suggested in Appendix I (B) (project title and number, cost range, location, etc.). The invitation to bid shall also be posted on the City's website or other website used forbidding on public projects. Interested contractors would then contact Engineering Division to get official bid packets. 6) Fee - The department requesting work will notify the Engineering Division of the fee to be charged to recipients of bid packets along with the revenue account number to credit.
7) Bidder's Security - Bidder's security is required for formal public project bids above $220,000. When deemed necessary, bidder's security may be required for informal public project contract bids between $75,001 and $220,000. Bidder's security requirements should be included in the notice of invitation to bid advertised in any newspaper or submitted to any trade journal or sent to contractors on the City's bidder's list.

Page 48 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 17
a. Form - Bidder's Security shall be in the form of a bid bond (signed by bidder and admitted surety insurer), cashier's check, certified check or cash. A personal check is not acceptable. A bid shall not be considered unless one of the forms of bidder's security is enclosed with it. b. Amount - Bidder's Security shall be in the amount of not less than ten percent of the bid amount.
c. Return - Engineering Division shall retain the Bidder's Security of the three lowest bidders until a contract has been entered into between the City and the successful bidder. The department requesting the work will immediately prepare purchase requisition for the contract (with signed copy of contract forwarded to Finance Department via a purchase order requisition), from which the Engineering Division may return the successful Bidder's Security. The Bidder's Security shall be forfeited if the successful bidder fails to execute the contract within ten days after the notice of award of contract has been mailed, unless the City is responsible for the delay. Upon refusal or failure of successful bidder to execute the contract, the City Council may award the bid to the next lowest responsible bidder. The amount of the lowest Bidder's Security shall be applied to the difference between the lowest bid and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. 8) Bid Opening - Sealed bids shall be received by the department identified in the invitation for bids and shall be identified as bids on the envelope. Bids shall be opened at the time and place stated in the public notice.
9) Public Inquiry - The project manager is responsible for responding to public inquiries regarding general bid information ( e.g. telephone calls regarding bid information submitted or copies requested) and the project manager shall receive technical project inquiries. A tabulation of all bids received shall be open for public inspection during regular business hours for a period of not less than 30 calendar days after the bid opening.
10) Award of Bid - The department requesting the work will recalculate the bid and examine the package of the apparent lowest bidder. City Council must award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. Sufficient budget appropriation must exist for the contract. In its discretion, the City Council may reject any and all bids presented and re-advertise for bids.
a. City Council Award-The department requesting the work writes the staff report and drafts a Resolution awarding the contract, then submits the documents to the City Attorney for review. The staff report should include the award amount, a listing of all bids received, a cost summary of project phases and the project budget. If there is insufficient budget for the award, include language in the Resolution to amend the budget.

Page 49 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 18
b. Contract - After Council approval, the department requesting the work will submit three original contracts (signed by vendor), performance bonds, and proof of insurance (if required) to the City Attorney. The City Attorney will review the contract and if complete, will forward the contract to City Manager for signature (see the Contract Routing Form contained Appendix IV). The final signature is by the City Clerk. Originals are given to the vendor, City Clerk, and the department requesting the work. A copy of the contract should be scanned into Laserfiche and attached to the Purchase Order in the Eden financial system.
11) No Bids - If no bids are received, the City Council may award the project by negotiated contract.
12) Tie Bids - If two or more bids are for the same amount or unit price, quality and service being equal, and if the public interest will not permit delay of re-advertising for bids, the City Council may choose which bid to accept, may accept the lowest bid made by negotiation with the tie bidders, or may use a public drawing. 13) Performance Bond - A performance bond may be required before entering a contract.

If required, the form and amount of the performance bond must be described in the notice inviting bids.
14) Rejection of Bids - No bid will be accepted for consideration:
a. If it is received after the time and date specified in the invitation or proposal to bid unless the delay is due to mishandling on the part of a City employee.

Upon receipt of any late bid before or after an award, the bid shall be returned unopened to the bidder (by certified mail). However, a late bid may be opened for identification purposes.
b. If the bid does not contain the bidder's security as requested in the notice and invitation to bid. The bidder's security must be received prior to the time of the opening specified in the notice and invitation to bid. Bids may be rejected if they contain uncalled for items, omissions, and/or irregularities of any kind ( except arithmetic errors).
15) Bid Cutoff Date - All bids (except capital improvement projects) should be opened by May 30 of the fiscal year. This will allow time for contract negotiations and award of bid prior to the fiscal year end cutoff for purchase orders.

Page 50 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 19

APPENDIX VI - QUICK STEPS TO PURCHASING
Quick Steps to Purchasing Services, Supplies and Equipment on Behalf of the City

1. Step 1: Determine What Kind of Purchase
a. Is it a "public project"?
b. Is it a purchase of supplies?
c. Is it a purchase of services?
d. What kind of service? professional service? design service?

2. Step 2. Choose a Vendor-Depending on the type of purchase and the value of the contract, bidding or open market procedures may be required to choose a vendor. a. Public Projects
i. Public Projects $75,000 or less do not require bidding ii. Public Projects between $75,001-$220,000 require informal bidding iii. Public Projects over $220,000 require formal bidding b. Purchase of Supplies
i. Contracts for the Purchases of Supplies $5,000 or less do not require competitive bidding.
ii. Contracts for the Purchases of Supplies $5,001 to $30,000 require informal bidding procedures.
c. Purchase of Services
i. Contracts for the Purchases of Services $5,000 or less do not require competitive bidding.
ii. Contracts for the Purchases of Services $5,001 to $30,000 require informal bidding procedures.
iii. When selecting a contractor for professional, personal or specialized services, the skill, ability and expertise of the entity or person performing the services is a key component of the selection criteria. The selection should therefore be on the basis of demonstrated competence, overall value to the City, and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory

Page 51 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 20
performance of the services required. Cost is only one factor in determining selection (LMC § 1-11-9).

3. Step 3. Prepare a Contract a. Choose a City contract template. The 7 contract templates are:
i. Consulting Services Agreement
ii. Short Form Services Agreement
iii. Consulting Services Agreement-Design Professionals iv. Short Form Purchase Agreement
v. Minor Construction Agreement
vi. Public Works Agreement including Project Specifications and Bond Documents
vii. Software as a Service Agreement

4. Step 4. Obtaining Proper City Approval
a. All Contracts Must Be Approved by City Attorney as to Form b. Public Project Contracts
• Public Projects $30,000 and under may be approved by the City Manager
• Public Projects over $30,000 must be approved by the City Council.

Attach the City Council resolution approving/authorizing the contract to the packet before circulating the packet for approval signatures.
c. Purchase of Goods/Services Contracts
• Contracts for the purchase of goods/services $5,000 or less may be approved by the Department Head.
• Contracts for the purchase of goods/services between $5,001- $30,000 may be approved by the City Manager.
• Contracts for the purchase of goods/services over $30,000 must be approved by the City Council. Attach the City Council resolution approving/authorizing the contract to the packet before circulating the packet for approval signatures.

Page 52 of 311 ends

Administrative Instruction No. 1
4924-1255-1356 v1 21
APPENDIX VII – SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION

Page 53 of 311 ends

4938-3156-Page | 3974 v1 1 Sole Source Form – August 18, 2026 City of Livingston
Sole Source Justification

THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO ANY PURCHASE Contact Finance Department and discuss your rationale before completing this form. If Purchasing can help you make this a competitive purchase, then this form will not be required.

Attach this completed/approved form to requisitions when competitive quotes/bids/proposals are not solicited. (Required for requisitions > $5,000)
Requested Sole Source Supplier:

Company Name: Contact Name:

Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Phone Number ( ) E-Mail
Duration of Contract:

Estimated Cost: $ Funding Source (Account String)
Is the product/service IT related? Yes No If Yes, please attach the approved IT Authorization Form For Product: Is the recommended company the manufacturer of the product? Yes No For Product: Does the manufacturer sell the item(s) through distributors? Yes No Description of Product or Service:

Describe the full scope of work or service contemplated including installation if required; items should include brand, model and part number if applicable; (if additional space is needed, include them in a separate page) Sole Source Rationale: PLEASE ANSWER ALL THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: Explain why the recommended company is the only company that can meet the requirement. Address the following: Are there any other companies who can do this job? What condition (e.g. technological superiority, or performance risks, etc.) exists so that the recommended company has a significant advantage over any other company who can do this job? It is important to sufficiently address the key reason for awarding an order/contract without soliciting competitive bids. The rational must be clear and convincing, avoiding generalities and unsupported conclusions.

Page 54 of 311 ends

4938-3156-Page | 3974 v1 1 Sole Source Form – August 18, 2026 If additional space is needed, continue on a separate page

Page 55 of 311 ends

2 | P a g e
Complete the following checklist
A specific contractor is the only source of the required item because (check all that apply):

The required items are proprietary to the Contractor, and contractor solely transacts (sells) direct to the customer. (There are no dealers or distributors for contractor).

The required items are proprietary to the Contractor, and contractor does not sell direct to the customer. Contractor solely distributes the item or service through only one dealer or distributor in the United States. (There are no dealers or distributors for contractor).

Note: If item or service is available from more than one source, the item or service may be treated as proprietary, but must be competitively solicited from multiple (two or more) sources.

A specific item is needed:

To be compatible or interchangeable with existing hardware As spare or replacement hardware For the repair or modification of existing hardware Federal or state grant names vendor as condition of funding. (Attach copy of grant that names vendor)
There is a substantial risk in contracting with any other contractor, (e.g., only one contractor has been successful to date in implementing a difficult manufacturing process or the services sought). In a brief explanation, provide supporting evidence of why other contractors are considered to be unable to overcome the substantial risk.

Continuation of prior Work – Additional item, service or work required, but not known to have been needed when the original order was placed with vendor, and it is not feasible or practicable to contract separately for the additional need. Provide brief explanation and supporting evidence. (if additional space is needed, include them in a separate page)

Page 56 of 311 ends

□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
3 | P a g e
I acknowledge the City’s requirements for soliciting competitive quotes/bids for purchases over $5,000.00 and the criteria for justification for Sole Source purchases. I have gathered the required information, have made a concerted effort to review comparable/equal equipment/services (e.g., market research), and further affirm that there is no conflict of interest involved in the selection made.

Department:

Requester Name and Title:

Note: Requester must be able to defend this justification.

Date: Phone:

Department Director (Print) (Sign) Date:

Submit completed form to the Purchasing Division (Prior to submission to City Manager)
City Manager
APPROVED: DATE: / /
NOT APPROVED: COMMENTS:

City Manager City Clerk Attesting to Council Approval
(Up to $50,000.00) (Over $50,000.00) (Copy of Minutes may be substituted) Note: Sole Source Procurement requires final approval by the City Manager and/or City Council. Sole Source must be approved by City Manager, PRIOR to Council Approval.

PROCEDURE
Sole Source purchase/service are exceptions to the normal bidding process and require a detailed justification. In processing Sole Source requests for supplies, services and/or equipment, Purchasing adheres to and is governed by the principles set forth in City of Livingston Municipal Code Section 1-11-4 (A), Sole Source Procurement.

If you are requesting a particular vendor, brand or product, you must make this fact clear on your Sole Source form. Your request will then be restrictive and non-competitive, and will fall into a sole source category. If the sole source justification is approved, the requisition can be expedited without the normal bidding requirements.

Such a request should not be made unless you are confident that your request is reasonable and appropriately justified to meet the City’s requirements and withstand any possible audit. The City’s requirements and the format for submitting such requests are contained herein. Sole Source form must be signed by authorized department representative(s). The certification will remain on file for audit purposes.

The following factors DO NOT apply to sole source requests and should not be included in your sole source justification. They will not be considered and only tend to confuse the evaluation process.

1. Personal preference for product or vendor.

2. Cost, vendor performance, and local service (these are generally considered award factors in competitive bidding).

Page 57 of 311 ends

1111

STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance No. ___, Approving Rezone application (RZN 2022-01) to Amend the Official Zoning Map of the City of Livingston designation for approximately 4.58 acres of the five parcels located between Sixth Street and the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks and South of C and North of D Street, from M-1, (Limited Industrial) to P-F, (Public or Quasi-Public Facilities), consisting of Assessor Parcel Numbers 024-153-003, 024-153-011, 024-154-005, 024-153-004, and 024-154-004.

MEETING DATE: October 6, 2026
PREPARED BY: Jailah Smith, Contract City Planner
REVIEWED BY: Miguel Galvez, Contract Planner
REVIEWED BY: Jose A. Ramirez, City Manager
RECOMMENDATION:

Waive the Second Reading of the Ordinance and Adopt Ordinance No. ____, approving Rezone No. RZN 2022-01, amending the Official Zoning Map of the City of Livingston designation for approximately 4.58 acres located between Sixth Street and the Southern Pacific Railroad Tracks and South of C and North of D Street, from M-1, (Limited Industrial) to P-F, (Public or QuasiPublic Facilities), consisting of Assessor Parcel Numbers 024-153-003, 024-153-011, 024-154- 005, 024-153-004, and 024-154-00.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:

In December of 2021, the City of Livingston received 7.39 million dollars from the Prop 68 grant program for the Proposed Project, the Livingston Rec-Plex.

The Proposed Project involves a General Plan Amendment, a Rezone, and Site Plan and Design Review. Collectively, these entitlements will authorize the phased development of a City-owned recreation complex, to be implemented as funding becomes available. The Proposed Project includes partial demolition of the existing Livingston Farmers Association warehouse building to make possible the construction of a new approximately 9,000 square foot recreation building and associated site improvements.

The remainder of the existing warehouse will be retained for a future renovation project, preserving opportunities for phased development. In addition, open areas to the north and northeast of the new recreation building are planned for future park amenities, including basketball

Page 58 of 311 ends

courts, recreational gathering spaces, and on-site parking.

The Project Site is identified with the Assessor Parcel Numbers below.

Location APN Acres Land Use
1 No Address 024-153-003 0.26 Paved parking lot
2 641 Sixth Street 024-153-011 0.79 Warehouse facility (formerly used by the Livingston Farmers Association)
3 1822 C Street 024-154-005 1.0 Unsurfaced outside storage with a metal building and perimeter fencing.
4 1736 C Street 024-153-004 0.26 Single-family home with detached accessory structure
5 1801 D Street 024-154-004 2.27 Vacant land
On September 15, 2026, the City Council voted to adopt Resolution 2026-XX to approve the General Plan Amendment No. 2022-01 to re-designate the General Plan Land Use Designation of the five (5) parcels (APNs: 024-153-003, 024-153-011, 024-154-005, 024-153-004, and 024- 154-004) from Limited Industrial (LI) to Public Facility (PF). The City Council also introduced and waived the first reading of Ordinance ____ to amend the Official Zoning Map of the City of Livingston.

ANALYSIS:

The Project site is currently zoned Limited Industrial (M-1), consistent with its existing development, which includes the Livingston Farmers Association warehouse, as well as surrounding uses such as an automobile dealership and other warehouse and light industrial facilities. The M-1 zoning district is intended to implement industrial land use policies and primarily accommodate industrial, manufacturing, and employment-generating uses, including fabrication, assembly, warehousing, and related commercial-support activities.

In contrast, the Public or Quasi-Public Facilities (PF) zoning district is intended to accommodate public and institutional uses, including parks, recreational facilities, community centers, schools, and other civic-serving developments. The PF zoning district establishes development standards appropriate for these uses, including site planning, building height, setbacks, parking, and landscaping requirements that are tailored to civic and public facilities rather than industrial operations.

A city-owned recreation complex is classified as a civic and institutional use and is therefore generally not permitted within industrial zoning districts. To ensure zoning consistency with the proposed use and the City’s long-term land use objectives, the Proposed Project requires a rezone of the site from M-1, Limited Industrial, to P-F, Public or Quasi-Public Facilities. This rezone will provide the appropriate framework for the Proposed Project and ensure that all future improvements, operations, and site modifications comply with standards applicable to public and community-serving facilities.

ISSUES
Staff did not identify any issues with the Proposed Project.

Page 59 of 311 ends

GENERAL PLAN
The 1999 Livingston General Plan included the following Land Use and Recreation Objectives:
• 3.1 Objective A: A well-balanced mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and open space/public land uses which create and maintain a high-quality environment and a fiscally sound community.
o Policy 4: General Plan amendments shall be processed concurrently with the appropriate rezoning and/or other appropriate special permit application. • 5.3 Objective A: To provide recreational opportunities including local parks for the existing community, and projected population in future growth areas. o Policy 1: Distribute adequate park facilities throughout the City to provide organized and informal recreation opportunities and open space for City residents. o Policy 12: Provide active recreation facilities in several locations in the City to o accommodate community needs.
o Policy 17: Alternative sites to those shown on the Land Use map may be permitted through a General Plan Amendment.
o Policy 23: Seek State, Federal, and local grants to improve City recreation services and facilities.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.), and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.).

The City of Livingston, as the Lead Agency prepared the Initial Study, which considers the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Project. The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the Lead Agency, that the Proposed Project may have a potentially significant effect on the environment, provided that the following mitigation measure are included in the Proposed Project:

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In accordance with Section 15064.5(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps shall be taken:
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
o The coroner of the County in which the remains are discovered must be contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required; o If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
• The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. • The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American. • The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

Page 60 of 311 ends

PUBLIC NOTICE
A Public Hearing Notice announcing the proposed Rezone and the City Council’s consideration of final adoption was published in the Merced Sun Star, a newspaper of general circulation, on September 25, 2026, not less than 10 days before the October 6, 2026, hearing. Any public comments received will be provided to the City Council on the Hearing date.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Staff time and resources have been utilized for the processing of this application.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council take the following actions:

Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. ___, approving Rezone No. RZN 2022- 01, amending the Official Zoning Map to rezone the subject property from M-1 (Limited Industrial) to P-F (Public or Quasi Public Facilities).

ATTACHMENTS:

1. City Council Ordinance ___ for Rezoning Application RZN 2022-01

2. Project Location Maps

3. Existing and Proposed Zoning

4. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

5. Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program

Page 61 of 311 ends

ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON APPROVING REZONE APPLICATION NO. (RZN 2022-01) TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON TO REZONE 4.58-ACRE OF THE FIVE PARCELS LOCATED

BETWEEN SIXTH STREET AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS AND SOUTH OF C STREET AND NORTH OF D STREET FROM M-1 (LIMITED INDUSTRIAL) TO

P-F (PUBLIC OR QUASI-PUBLIC FACILITIES) CONSISTING OF ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 024-153-003, 024-153-004, 024-153-011, 024-154-004, AND 024-154-005.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 5, Chapter 6, Section 2(B)(4) of the Livingston Municipal Code (LMC), the City Planner, by the authority of the City Manager, has prepared rezones to five properties, consisting of approximately 4.58 acres (the "Subject Properties"); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is currently designated Limited Industrial (LI) on the General Plan Land Use Diagram and zoned M-1 (Limited Industrial), and the City proposes to redesignate the Subject Property to Public Facility (PF) and to rezone it to P-F (Public or QuasiPublic Facilities); and WHEREAS, Rezone No. RZN 2022-01 is adopted concurrently with, and to implement, General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, which re-designates the Subject Property to Public Facility; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed general plan amendment and rezone on August 11, 2026, in accordance with California Government Code Sections 65090, 65091, and 65854, and fully considered all comments, whether oral or written, regarding the proposed amendment; and WHEREAS, following its hearing and in accordance with California Government Code Section 65855, the Planning Commission, in a vote of 4-0, adopted a Resolution setting forth its written recommendation that the City Council approve the general plan amendment and rezone, together with the reasons for the recommendation and the relationship of the proposed amendment to the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed general plan amendment and rezone on September 15, 2026, in accordance with California Government Code Section 65856, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, LMC Section 5-6-2(A) provides that City zoning regulations shall be consistent with the General Plan in accordance with California Government Code Section 65860, and the City Council finds that the rezone of the Subject Property to P-F is consistent with the Livingston General Plan, as amended by GPA 2022-01, including General Plan Land Use Element Objective A, “A well-balanced mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and open space/public land uses which create and maintain a high quality environment and a fiscally sound community” and the Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element Objective A, “To provide recreational opportunities including local parks for the existing community, and projected population in future growth areas”; and
WHEREAS, the City of Livingston, as the lead agency, has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration to analyze potential changes in environmental effects associated with General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01 and Rezone No. RZN 2022-01; and

Page 62 of 311 ends

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Intiial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, which determined that the proposed general plan amendment, with mitigation, would have less than significant environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

WHEREAS, in accordance with Senate Bill 18, formal consultation requests were distributed to Native American Tribes on May 12, 2023, for a 90-day period ending on August 10, 2023, and the City did not receive any formal requests for consultation; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Merced Sun Star, a newspaper of general circulation, on September 25, 2026, not less than 10 days before the hearing as required by California Government Code Section 65854, mailed to the owners of property located within 300 feet of the Subject Property and to the applicant, and posted at Livingston City Hall and on the City's website, locations accessible to the public; and WHEREAS, the City Council has exercised its own independent judgment in considering the information contained in this Ordinance and its attachments, the staff report and attachments and other exhibits, and the written and oral testimony presented during the public hearing; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVINGSTON DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Findings. The City Council finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference as findings of the City Council.

Section 2. Environmental Review. The City Council finds that the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15070 through 15075 and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Section 3. Amendment of the Official Zoning Map. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Livingston is hereby amended to reclassify the Subject Properties, identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 024-153-003, 024-153-011, 024-154-005, 024-153-004, and 024-154-004 and consisting of approximately 4.58 acres, from M-1 (Limited Industrial) to P-F (Public or QuasiPublic Facilities), as depicted on the existing and proposed zoning maps attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 4. General Plan Consistency. The City Council finds that the P-F (Public or QuasiPublic Facilities) zoning classification established by this Ordinance is consistent with the Livingston General Plan, as amended by General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, in accordance with California Government Code Section 65860 and LMC Section 5-6-2(A).

Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.

The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Page 63 of 311 ends

Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption, in accordance with California Government Code Section 36937.

Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published and/or posted in the manner required by California Government Code Section 36933 within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.

INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING. The foregoing Ordinance was introduced and given its first reading, and the further reading thereof was waived, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Livingston held on the 15th day of September 2026, and was set for second reading and adoption at a regular meeting to be held on the 6th day of October, 2026.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at first reading by the following vote:

AYES: Moran, Samra, Roth, Uppal, and Wallis
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at the second reading by the City Council of the City of Livingston at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of October, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

By: ___________________________
Jose A. Moran, Mayor
of City of Livingston
ATTEST
_____________________________
Monica Cisneros, Deputy City Clerk
of the City of Livingston

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM
________________________
City Attorney or Assistant City Attorney
of City of Livingston

Page 64 of 311 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
Vicinity Map
Assessor’s Plat Map

Page 65 of 311 ends

~
........... k ..
- @
~
I
POR. SEC. 25 ,T. 6 5.,R./1£.,M.D.B.liM.

NCTL - llli, ..... ,. :....-., ,...,.. ....... ,
ltil 7'tl> M-•-..••u..-tfq,ir •
.._ . ........ .,,,91,i. ... ..-•••
""""'-.t•_.;•• • ... W"•""..,..·
-.-
7 ~ @
Livinqston ~ Co's. Add., R.M >bl. 4, f'9. 33
Lim gslon Really Co's. SUI>, R.M. Vol 4 , Pg. 32
.............. _
......................

To, Roi. Aroo 3-07 24-/5
sr
Aueuor"s Map Bk.Z4 ·Pg./5
Coun t y of Mer,ecJ, Coli/.
, __
Livingston Rex-Plex
Existing Zoning District
M-1 Limited Industrial
M-1M-1 M-1
M-1 M-1
M-1
M-1
LEGEND
Exhibit A

Page 66 of 311 ends

□
Livingston Rex-Plex
Proposed Zoning District
PF Public/Quasi-Public Facilities
PF
PF

PF PF PF
PF PF

Page 67 of 311 ends

!LEGEND
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Livingston Rec-Plex Project
General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Rezone No. RZN 2022-01, Street Closure No. SCA 2022-01, and Site Plan and Design Review No.

SPDR 2025-05
prepared by
City of Livingston
Community Development Department
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
Prepared with the assistance of
J.B. Anderson Land Use Planning
139 S. Stockton Avenue
Ripon, California 95366
August 2026
Exhibit 4

Page 68 of 311 ends

■ J.B. ANDERSON ■
- -

LAND USE PLANNING
This page intentionally left blank.

Page 69 of 311 ends

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 3
INITIAL STUDY 6

1. Project Title 6

2. Lead Agency Name and Address 6

3. Contact Person and Phone Number 6

4. Project Location 6

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address 7

6. Existing Setting 7

7. Existing General Plan Designation 10

8. Existing Zoning 10

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting 10

10. Description of the Project 11

11. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required 14

12. California Native American Tribes Consultation 14

13. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 24

14. Lead Agency Determination 25
INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST 28

1. Aesthetics 28

2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources 31

3. Air Quality 33

4. Biological Resources 38

5. Cultural Resources 41

6. Energy 43

7. Geology and Soils 44

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 48

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 52

10. Hydrology and Water Quality 57

11. Land Use and Planning 61

12. Mineral Resources 63

13. Noise 64

14. Population and Housing 70

15. Public Services 71

16. Recreation 74

17. Transportation/Traffic 76

18. Tribal Cultural Resources 80

19. Utilities and Service Systems 83

20. Wildfire 86

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance 88
REFERENCES 90

Page 70 of 311 ends

TABLES

1. Project Site Details 6

2. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting 11
8-1. Land Use Compatibility for New Development Near Transportation Sources 64 8-2. Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure – Transportation Noise Sources 67 8-3. Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure – Stationary Noise Sources 67

FIGURES

1. Vicinity Map 15

2. Project Location 15

3. Existing and Proposed Land Use Designations 16

4. Existing and Proposed Zoning 17

5. Site and Phasing Plan 18

6. Proposed Street and Alley Closure 19

7. Phase One Elevations 20

8. Phase One Utility Plan 21

9. Phase One Planting Plan 22

10. Phase One Materials Plan 23
Appendix 91
Appendix A

Page 71 of 311 ends

3 | P a g e

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Lead Agency:

City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
PROJECT NAME:

Livingston Rec-Plex (General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Rezone No. RZN 2022-01, Street Closure No. SCA 2022-01, and Site Plan and Design Review Application No. SPDR 2025-05) PROJECT PROPONENT AND LEAD AGENCY:

Project Proponent: City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
Lead Agency: City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334
PROJECT OVERVIEW AND LOCATION:

The Proposed Project is located on five parcels totaling approximately 4.58-acres and is generally bounded C Street on the north, Sixth Street on the west, D Street on the south and the Union Pacific Railroad property on the east. Surrounding land uses consist of a tax preparation and auto services to the north, single family homes and vacant land to the south, vacant land and railroad tracks to the east, and the Livingston Farmer’s Association Warehouse and auto services to the west.

The Merced County Assessor’s Office has assigned the Proposed Project parcels as APN No.’s 024-153- 003, 024-153-004, 024-153-011, 024-154-004, and 024-154-005.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The Proposed Project involves multiple discretionary entitlements, including a General Plan Amendment, a Rezone, Street and Alley Closure, and Site Plan and Design Review. Collectively, these entitlements will authorize the phased development of a City-owned recreation complex, to be implemented as funding becomes available.

The Proposed Project includes partial demolition of the existing Livingston Farmers Association warehouse building to make possible the construction of a new approximately 9,000 square foot recreation building and associated site improvements.

Page 72 of 311 ends

4 | P a g e
The remainder of the existing warehouse will be retained for a future renovation project, preserving opportunities for phased development. In addition, open areas to the north and northeast of the new recreation building are planned for future park amenities, including basketball courts, recreational gathering spaces, and on-site parking.

Additionally, the Proposed Project includes a closure of a portion of Seventh Street between C and D Street, along with the closure of part of the alley public right-of-way to vehicular traffic between Sixth and Seventh Street. Frontage improvements including sidewalks will be replaced around the Project site and new landscaping installed around the building.

The proposed site plan can be found in this Initial Study as Figure 5.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) has been prepared per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (California Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.), and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.).

The Lead Agency has prepared the following Initial Study, which considers the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Project. The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the Lead Agency, that the Proposed Project may have a potentially significant effect on the environment, provided that the following mitigation measures are included in the Proposed Project.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In accordance with Section 15064.4(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps shall be taken:
 There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
o The coroner of the County in which the remains are discovered must be contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required; o If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
 The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours.
 The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.  The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

Page 73 of 311 ends

Page 74 of 311 ends

6/( /Zf)~G
Mr. Miguel Galvez, City Planner Date
SI Page
6 | P a g e

INITIAL STUDY

1. PROJECT TITLE
Livingston Rec-Plex (General Plan Amendment No. GPA 2022-01, Rezone No. RZN 2022-01, Street Closure No. SCA 2022-01, and Site Plan and Design Review Application No. SPDR 2025-05)

2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Livingston
Community Development Department
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334

3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Mr. Miguel Galvez, Contract City Planner
(209) 394-8041 Ext. 112

4. PROJECT LOCATION
The Proposed Project is located in Central Livingston, near the downtown area and south of the 99 Freeway, as shown in Figures 1 and 2. The Project site includes five (5) parcels, as detailed in Table 1. Specifically, the Project site is bounded by existing commercial uses to the north, single family homes and vacant land to the south, vacant land and railroad tracks to the east, and the Livingston Farmer’s Association Warehouse and auto services to the west.

Table 1 – Project Site Details
Property Address Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) Lot Size Present Land Use 1 No address 024-153-003 0.26 acres Paved parking lot
2 641 Sixth Street 024-153-011 0.79 acres Warehouse facility (formerly used by
the Livingston
Farmers Association)
3 1822 C Street 024-154-005 1.0 acres Unsurfaced outside storage with a
metal building and
perimeter fencing.
4 1736 C Street 024-153-004 0.26 acres Single-family home with detached
accessory structure
5 1801 D Street 024-154-004 2.27 acres Vacant land

Page 75 of 311 ends

7 | P a g e

5. PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Livingston
1416 C Street
Livingston, CA 95334

6. EXISTING SETTING
The Project site consists of five (5) parcels, as detailed in Table 1 above. Parcel 2, 641 Sixth Street, currently contains a warehouse facility historically used by the Livingston Farmer’s Association.

Parcel 3, 1822 C Street, is currently an undeveloped lot that has historically been used for outdoor storage. Parcel 4, 1736 C Street, currently contains a single-family home with a detached accessory structure. Parcel 5, 1801 D Street, is currently a vacant parcel with some vegetation.

Parcel 1 (APN: 024-153-003) is currently used as a parking lot for the adjacent business.

Seventh Street between C Street and D Street

Page 76 of 311 ends

8 | P a g e
View of 1822 C Street, looking east
View of the paved parking lot (APN: 024-153-003), looking north

Page 77 of 311 ends

9 | P a g e
View of existing warehouse building at 641 Sixth Street, looking west View of existing warehouse building at 641 Sixth Street, looking north

Page 78 of 311 ends

10 | P a g e
Alleyway between Sixth Street and Seventh Street, looking west

7. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
The Project site is designated for Industrial land uses per the City’s General Plan, dated December 1999, as shown in Figure 3.

8. EXISTING ZONING
The Project site is located within the M-1 Limited Industrial zoning district, as shown in Figure 4.

9. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING
Table 2, below, provides the Project site’s surrounding existing uses, General Plan land use designations, and zoning district designations.

Page 79 of 311 ends

11 | P a g e
Table 2: Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Existing Use General Plan Land Use
Designation
Zoning Classification
North Tax Services, Auto
Repair, Car Dealership
Downtown Commercial
(DC)
Downtown Commercial
(DTC)
South Single Family Homes,
Coffee Shop, Vacant
Land
Downtown Commercial
(DC) and High Density
Residential (HD)
Downtown Commercial
(DTC) and High Density
Residential (HD)
East Vacant Land Limited Industrial (LI) Limited Industrial (M-1) West Livingston Farmer’s
Association Warehouse
and Car Dealership
Downtown Commercial
(DC) and Limited
Industrial (LI)
Downtown Commercial
(DTC) and Limited
Industrial (M-1)

10. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
The Proposed Project involves multiple discretionary entitlements, including a General Plan Amendment, a Rezone, Street Closure, and Site Plan and Design Review. Collectively, these entitlements will authorize the phased development of a City-owned recreation complex, to be implemented as funding becomes available, on approximately 4.58-acres located north of D Street, between Sixth and the railroad tracks and south of C Street east of Sixth Street. The Proposed Project includes five (5) parcels, as detailed in the Table 1 above.

The Proposed Project includes partial demolition of the existing Livingston Farmers Association warehouse building to make possible, the construction of a new approximately 9,000 square foot recreation building and associated site improvements.

The Proposed Project will connect to the existing City utilities.

Page 80 of 311 ends

12 | P a g e
Programming and Operations:

The proposed hours of operation for the Phase one of the Rec-Plex Project is from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Office hours will be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Community use of the gymnasium will be from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. An estimated number of three employees will be present during office hours and three other employees will be present during recreation activities between the hours of 4:00 pm to 9:00 p.m. Use of the Gymnasium may include up to 100 participants daily.

The use of recreation center would offer individual and group athletic and exercise activities. The center may offer sports classes, camps, and leagues (basketball and volleyball).

Project Phasing:

The Proposed Project is planned to be implemented in four (4) phases, as shown in Figure 5. Phase One will involve the partial demolition of the eastern portion of the existing warehouse building and the construction of a new approximately 9,000 square foot recreation building on Parcel 2 (APN 024-153-011). The building is designed to accommodate a variety of community-serving functions, including a 6,156 square foot gymnasium, 353 square foot studio classrooms, 198 square foot restrooms, a 138 square foot storage room, and a 293 square foot lobby area. Site improvements will include the reconstruction of sidewalks throughout the project area to enhance pedestrian circulation and the installation of new landscaping to improve aesthetics and create a welcoming environment.

Phase Two will consist of street and alley modifications to improve site connectivity and pedestrian safety. This phase includes the closure of 7th Street between C and D Streets and the closure of the alley between C and D Streets and 6th and 7th Streets, as illustrated in the Proposed Project site plan. These closures will allow for the integration of the five (5) parcels into a unified recreational campus and enhance safety, by limiting through-traffic in active recreational areas.

Phase Three will include the development of a new playground, community garden, and associated parking areas located between C Street and D Street, east of 7th Street up to the railroad corridor, providing accessible recreational amenities for the Livingston community. The playground will include a multi-use park space featuring a community garden, splash pad, and outdoor exercise equipment. This phase will also include the development of two basketball courts and an additional parking lot west of 7th Street, north of the alleyway. The existing structures on Parcel 4 will be demolished.

Phase Four will address the remaining western portion of the existing warehouse. This building will include a multi-purpose room, offices, teens and senior centers, and a kitchen. Landscaping improvements will be added along the frontage of the building. These improvements will be completed as funding becomes available.

Together, the four phases are intended to create a cohesive, city-owned recreational complex that provides a variety of civic, recreational, and community-serving amenities while improving pedestrian connectivity, site aesthetics, and neighborhood accessibility.

Page 81 of 311 ends

13 | P a g e
General Plan Amendment:

As described above and shown in Figure 3, the Project site is designated Limited Industrial (LI) in the City of Livingston General Plan. The LI designation is intended to accommodate a range of industrial and employment-generating uses, including fabrication, assembly, research and development, and low-intensity warehousing. Because the Proposed Project involves development of a community-serving public recreational facility, the existing land use designation is inconsistent with the intended use of the Project site. To ensure consistency with the City’s long-term land use policies, the General Plan will be amended to change the land use designation from Limited Industrial (LI) to Public Facility (PF).

Rezone:

The Project site is currently zoned Limited Industrial (M-1), consistent with its existing development, which includes the Livingston Farmers Association warehouse, as well as surrounding uses such as an automobile dealership and other warehouse and light industrial facilities. The M-1 zoning district is intended to implement industrial land use policies and primarily accommodates industrial, manufacturing, and employment-generating uses, including fabrication, assembly, warehousing, and related commercial-support activities.

4. This rezone will provide the appropriate framework for the Proposed Project and ensure that all future improvements, operations, and site modifications comply with standards applicable to public and community-serving facilities.

Street Closure:

The Proposed Project includes a street closure pursuant to Section 21101(a)(1) of the California Vehicle Code, as shown in Figure 6. The Proposed Project will close a portion of Seventh Street between C and D Streets, along with the closure of part of the alley public right-of-way to vehicular traffic between Sixth and Seventh Streets. The street closure will include the closure of the eastern half of the alley right-of-way located between Sixth and Seventh Streets and C and D Streets and the 7th Street (between C and D Streets) to vehicular traffic, along with the installation of bollards along the southern right of way at the C along the northern right-of-way of D Street.

Page 82 of 311 ends

14 | P a g e
Vehicle access to the project site will be from both C and D streets. The main pedestrian entrance to Rec Plex will be from D Street. On street parking will be available on C and D streets. A new 36-space parking lot with access from C Street is proposed. Outdoor bicycle parking is proposed at both the new gym and at the new playground.

A new outdoor park and playground is proposed south of the proposed parking lot. It will include a shade structure, picnic tables, restrooms, a splash pad, playground equipment, exercise equipment, storage facilities, and a community garden. Outdoor basketball courts are also contemplated north of the new gym.

11. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED
There are no other public agencies whose approval is required for the Proposed Project.

12. HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TRADITIONALLY AND CULTURALLY AFFILIATED

WITH THE PROJECT AREA REQUESTED CONSULTATION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.3.1?
In accordance with SB 18 and AB 52, the City, acting as the Lead Agency, distributed consultation request letters to the following Native American Tribes: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Dumna WoWah Tribal Government, Northern Valley Yokuts Tribe, Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation, Table Mountain Rancheria, Tule River Indian Tribe, and Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. The City did not receive any consultation requests in response to the letters.

Page 83 of 311 ends

15 | P a g e
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Figure 2 – Project Location

Page 84 of 311 ends

16 | P a g e
Figure 3 – Existing and Proposed Land Use Designations

Page 85 of 311 ends

Livingston Rex-Plex Livingston Rex-Plex
Existing General Plan Land Use Designation Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation

LEGEND LEGEND
□ LI • Ullitod Industrial ■ Pf • Public/Quasi Public Facllrtles 02/28/2023 02128/2023 i ~----------------------
17 | P a g e
Figure 4 – Existing and Proposed Zoning

Page 86 of 311 ends

Livingston Rex-Plex
Existing Zoning District
LEGEND
□ M-1 LitMed lnduSlrlal
.__ 02/28/2023 ____________________ _ i
Livingston Rex-Plex
Proposed Zoning District
lEGENO
PF Publ,c/Quasi-Publ,c Facoioos
02/28/2023
l
i
18 | P a g e
Figure 5 – Site and Phasing Plan

Page 87 of 311 ends

IVI
f)4Jrol..SI
LIVINGSTON, C/19W
APN 021-153:011
LIVINGSTON CA 95.134
APN 4-1~
FUTURE
DSTRE.ET
I
1822C ST
LIVINGSTON CA 9533:!
FUTURE
.... -
____ L_Y Glll.w.a:Dw:l\fl,-,,0
---
FUTURE

PARKING

MATERIALS & DETAIL REFERENCE LEGEND
SY"801.. DESCA.IP'TtON
coarn-
,,..SHro•....,..1111C1C11WOOI.CllllfO•wTU¥1.

CClrroCR£1! 1'111Wi!Q.l't
fl'il6Hto ....... f0f'C4a1 OOUJ11110•"-'""""-
Al(T'[NTIC)tl ...... ,v,rt"M:I
..J
..
u
z "'
0 " z
... 0 1/) ... " z "' " z
..J
IL 3
0 w
::IE
<(
u z
..
...
w " w z a 3:
0 "'-
I
I " J
i
I

PHASING
PlAN
19 | P a g e
Figure 6 – Proposed Street and Alley Closure

Page 88 of 311 ends

I I -
..
20 | P a g e
Figure 7– Phase One Elevations

Page 89 of 311 ends

NORTH RE!C,PlfX Ell!VATION ..-. , r 4
y'y STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING
EAST REC,PLElC ELEV.ATION ... , r 2
INFILL EXTERIOR METAL l'ANEL r ........ _.. ...-.. &mq.na-"'1-~ ........... '
141,>~---•--IIN-o
__
-l-1&111111
.......
_
... _,,.,. ... -.r.,riti,1 kn_ ... _
---
..
-
... l--~

EB ' EA
T r
WEST REC•Pl.ElC ELl!!VA110N ..-. , r 1
MP-•MatU>C.:GAUll" IIT'aDI
llIIIII] ITNIOOUI lfAII IIOOt'IJi'G MIP-"llual.W..,-C-
><
UJ
..J
Q.
<.>
UJ
z a:
0 z
... 0 VJ ... Cl VJ
z Cl
2: z t
..J > i
IL ::::; ! 0 ,ij
>- :Ii, • !::: ,,:
<.> z
ii I,
w
z 0 ;: ..
0 0..
•
A21.1

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS

ARCHITECTS
_,_ .... , ..... ,_.,,..__
,..,_.._
-·--
,-----------------------------------------------------------+-----.. - T-. -. ,-OR_ F_IN- IS- .- L-.G- ... --.----< ~~:--.:::._-~-•i-""7_-.. 21 | P a g e
Figure 8 – Phase One Utility Plan

Page 90 of 311 ends

. I
l
X31d 0311 N01SONIM1 '31M J.:l3l'Olld
N01SONIM1 JO A.1.10 '113NM0
Ill
I
:,j
\
,1
Ill
,-..-..-..
'
22 | P a g e
Figure 9 – Phase One Planting Plan

Page 91 of 311 ends

t1rstv.:,wi,019'11"11il•1191n ,nSll'IM'luo10 ~
X3ld '.)3~ NOlS!lNl/111 '3WVN .L03f01ld ~ D) ·1
NOlS!lNl/111 :lO All:) '!l3NMO
133~1S HH
(.')
0 _J
m
;;j
_J
Q.
(J
w
Cl:'.
l
,i
a ~
Ii·
•' :!
MC
li:'
@)·
.. ~ f
I,
I
• I
,:':~-~ - ~ - ~ - I • ~ I
~-- ~ .
y
j I . 1
I
I
'
...
w
w
Cl:'.
t;:;
0 0
23 | P a g e
Figure 10 – Phase One Materials Plan

Page 92 of 311 ends

::2.
- L-
□
l I •
~ t'it"V.:> '~ 1,0ll!,ll1 "1& •119 ltt :nfllOO'I' ocn,
X3ld :,3~ NOlS~Nl/111 '3WIIN 10:1ro~
NOlS~Nl/111 :10 IJ.1:) =~3NMO
I f 1
1~i
I~' ~l • l,,j ~
M' '
0 24 | P a g e

13. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project. The environmental factors checked below can be fully mitigated to less than significant with required mitigation measures and further analysis (e.g., Environmental Impact Report) is not required.

Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources X Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water
Quality
Land Use/Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation/Traffic X Tribal Cultural Resources Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance

Page 93 of 311 ends

Page 94 of 311 ends

14. LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION:

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will ~ not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the Project Proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required .

I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed .

I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Proposed Project, nothing further is required.
~~ Ac 6/ <t/Zoi0
Mr. Miguel Galvez, City Planner Date
25 I Page
26 | P a g e
SECTION 2.0 EVALUATION INSTRUCTIONS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

Page 95 of 311 ends

27 | P a g e
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

Page 96 of 311 ends

28 | P a g e

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
This section of the Initial Study incorporates the most current Appendix "G" Environmental Checklist Form, contained in the CEQA Guidelines.

1. AESTHETICS -- EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21099, WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
State scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage points.) If the
project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings along a state scenic highway? Scenic vistas are generally interpreted as long-range views, while scenic corridors are comprised of short, middle-, and long-range views. There are no officially designated scenic vistas in or near the Project Site.

A scenic road is defined as a highway, road, driveway, or street that provides for the enjoyment of natural and human-made scenic resources, in addition to its transportation function. Scenic roads direct views to areas of exceptional beauty, natural resources, or landmarks, or historic or cultural interest. The Project site is not near any of the designated State Scenic Highways per the California Department of Transportation’s Statewide Scenic Highway Map. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have No Impact.

Page 97 of 311 ends

29 | P a g e
c. Would the project, in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? As the Proposed Project is a new development on a site proposed for rezoning as P-F, it would be subject to Site Plan and Design Review by the City, which is intended to promote harmony in appearance in neighborhoods and to reduce negative aesthetic impacts. The Proposed Project would also be required to comply with applicable landscaping standards, as specified in the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
The Proposed Project will introduce typical lighting sources associated with recreational complexes such as exterior building lighting. These lighting sources are regulated by City policies to avoid excessive glare.

The Land Use Element of the 1999 General Plan contains the following policies related to lighting and glare:
 Policy 3.1(A)(10): Exterior area lighting for non-residential land uses, shall be shielded to prevent line of sight visibility of the light source from abutting property planned for single-family residential.  Policy 3.1(A)(12): Project descriptions for Site or Plot Plans shall identify:
a. Building Materials: All potentially reflective exterior building materials, location of the materials in relation to the position of the sun, and to location of motorists and other persons within sight of the project.
c. Lighting: Each exterior light source according to type, location, wattage (measured at 110 volts or the equivalent), height, direction of lighting patterns, type of shielding, when in use, and whether the light is steady or pulsating. For a lighting system, an outline of directly illuminated areas, including points of overlap) between lighting patterns, all streets within the lighting system, and all adjacent property lines must also be submitted.
d. The following conditions will normally be considered significant and subject to additional review to determine level of significance and whether mitigation measures will be needed:

1. Any light source in excess of 150 watts which directly illuminates adjacent properties.

2. Additional indirect illumination of adjacent properties in excess of 0.5 foot candles.

3. For pedestrian lighting systems, a point of overlap between light patterns is greater than seven feet.

4. Intensity of lighting within the physical limits of an area required to be lighted that is greater than seven-foot candles.

Page 98 of 311 ends

30 | P a g e
The Proposed Project will be required to adhere to the policies listed above. The project would include new building lights, pathway lights, and parking lot lighting for security and safety. All exterior lighting installed as a part of any future development of the site will be required to be designed in such a way as to minimize glare and light spillage in order to preserve existing day-time/night-time views. In addition, the Proposed Project is surrounded by urban development with existing sources of light and glare. As such, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 99 of 311 ends

31 | P a g e

2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as updated) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the Project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
section 51104 (g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non-forest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

Page 100 of 311 ends

32 | P a g e
c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? The California Important Farmland Map designates the viability of lands for farmland use, based on the physical and chemical properties of the soils. The maps categorize farmland, in decreasing order of soil quality, as “Prime Farmland,” “Farmland of Statewide Importance,” “Unique Farmland,” and “Farmland of Local Importance.” The first three (3) categories are defined as “Farmland” by CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The Williamson Act preserves agricultural land by means of a contract between the landowner and local government that keeps the contracted land in agricultural use in exchange for a lower property tax assessment.

The California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmland Map designates the Project site as urban and built-up land. The Project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance and it does not contain a Williamson Act Contract. Additionally, the Proposed Project site is not zoned for forest land or timberland, and the Proposed Project does not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. As noted previously in this Initial Study, the Proposed Project site is designated for Limited Industrial (LI) land uses per the City’s General Plan, dated December 1999.

The Project site currently consists of a paved parking lot, existing warehouse facility, and a vacant lot.

Furthermore, the site is surrounded by urban development to its north, west, and south. The Proposed Project will not involve changes in the existing environment that would result in the conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have No Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 101 of 311 ends

33 | P a g e

3. AIR QUALITY -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied on to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable Federal or State ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X

REGULATORY SETTING
The Proposed Project is located in northern Merced County which is a portion of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). Air quality management under the Federal and State Clean Air Acts is the responsibility of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD).

The Federal and State governments have adopted ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for the primary air pollutants of concern, known as “criteria” air pollutants. Air quality is managed by the SJVAPCD to attain these standards. Primary standards are established to protect the public health; secondary standards are established to protect the public welfare. The attainment statuses of the SJVAB for Merced County with respect to the applicable AAQS are shown in the table below.

The SJVAB is considered non-attainment for ozone and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), because the AAQS for the pollutants are sometimes exceeded. The SJVAB is Attainment/Unclassified for carbon monoxide, but select areas, not including the City of Livingston, are required to abide by adopted carbon monoxide maintenance plans.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) through the Air Toxics Program is responsible for the identification and control of exposure to air toxics, and notification of people that are subject to significant air toxic exposure. A principal air toxic is diesel particulate matter, which is a component of diesel engine exhaust.

Page 102 of 311 ends

34 | P a g e
The SJVAPCD has adopted regulations establishing control over air pollutant emissions associated with land development and related activities. These regulations include:

Regulation VIII (Fugitive Dust Rules)
Rule 4101 (Visible Emissions)
Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review)

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY FEDERAL AND STATE

AAQS ATTAINMENT STATUS
Pollutant Designation / Classification
Federal StandardsaState Standardsb
Ozone, 1-hour No Federal standardf Nonattainment / Severe Ozone, 8-hour Nonattainment / Extremee Nonattainment
PM10 Attainmentc Nonattainment
PM2.5 Nonattainmentd Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide Attainment / Unclassified Attainment / Unclassified Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment / Unclassified Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide Attainment / Unclassified Attainment
Lead (particulate) No designation/Classification Attainment Hydrogen Sulfide No Federal standard Unclassified
Sulfates No Federal standard Attainment
Visibility-Reducing Particles No Federal standard Unclassified Vinyl Chloride No Federal standard Attainment
a
See 40 CFR Part 81
b
See CCR Title 17 Sections 60200-60210
cOn September 25, 2008, EPA redesignated the San Joaquin Valley to Attainment for the PM10 National AAQS and approved the PM10 Maintenance Plan
d
The Valley is designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA designated the Valley as nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 on November 13, 2009 (effective December 14, 2009).
e
Though the Valley was initially classified as serious nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, EPA approved reclassification of the Valley to extreme nonattainment in the Federal Register on May 2010 (effective June 4, 2010). f
Effective June 15, 2005, the EPA revoked the Federal 1-hour ozone standard, including associated designations and classifications. EPA has previously classified the SJV as extreme nonattainment for this standard. EPA approved the 2004 Extreme Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan on March 8, 2010 (effective April 7, 2010). Many applicable requirements for extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas continue to apply to the SJVAB.

The SJVAPCD has adopted a CEQA impact analysis guideline titled Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI). The GAMAQI is utilized in the following air quality impact analysis where applicable. The GAMAQI establishes impact significance thresholds for the non-attainment pollutant PM10 and precursors to the non-attainment pollutant ozone: reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx).

Page 103 of 311 ends

35 | P a g e
Pollutant/Precursor Construction Emissions
Operational Emissions
Permitted Equipment
and Activities
Non-Permitted
Equipment and
Activities
Emissions (tpy) Emissions (tpy) Emissions (tpy)
CO 100 100 100
NOx 10 10 10
ROG 10 10 10
SOx 27 27 27
PM10 15 15 15
PM2.5 15 15 15
Projects that do not generate emissions in excess of these thresholds are considered to have less than significant air quality impacts. Furthermore, within the GAMAQI, the SJVAPCD has established AAQA analysis screening levels for development projects, in Table 4 of the GAMAQI. These screening levels determine if an AAQA should be conducted for a development project. Development projects under the screening levels are considered small development projects and below the applicability threshold for the Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review). Per Section 8.4.4 of the GAMAQI, projects below the Indirect Source Review (ISR) applicability thresholds are not expected to exceed the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants emissions. Additionally, projects below the ISR applicability thresholds are not expected to violate any air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation and will not exceed the thresholds of significance for ambient air quality. No emission calculation would be needed, and no ambient air quality analysis would be required by SJVAPCD.

The Proposed Project construction will be subject to SJVAPCD rules related to control of construction emission, including the various rules comprising Regulation VIII. The application of these rules to the Proposed Project will further limit the potential air quality effects of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project will generate small amounts of new on-road traffic and associated ROG, NOx and PM emissions during project operation.

The SJVAPCD regulations that are potentially applicable to the Proposed Project are summarized below.

Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions)
Rule 8021 is designed to reduce PM10 emissions (predominantly dust/dirt) generated by human activity, including construction and demolition activities, road construction, bulk materials storage, paved and unpaved roads, carryout and track out, landfill operations, etc.

Rule 2010 (Permits Required)
This rule requires operators of emission sources to obtain an Authority to Construct (ATC) and Permit to Operate (PTO) from the District.

Page 104 of 311 ends

36 | P a g e
Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review)
This rule requires that new and modified stationary sources of emissions mitigate their emissions using Best Available Control Technology (BACT).

Rule 4002 (National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) This rule requires a thorough inspection for asbestos to be conducted before any regulated facility is demolished or renovated. Any asbestos present must be handled in accordance with established work practice standards and disposal requirements.

Rule 4601 (Architectural Coating)
This rule sets limits on the volatile organic compounds, a component of ROG, allowed in various paints and other coatings.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard?
c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The City of Livingston is located within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. The air quality impacts for the Proposed Project have been analyzed within the 1999 General Plan EIR. The 1999 General Plan contains the following policies related to air quality:
 Natural Resources Policy 5.2(5): To assist the City in meeting the clean air quality requirements of the federal and state Clean Air Acts, the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution District will be consulted to provide community planning guidance to help reduce potential air quality impacts.  Natural Resources Policy 5.2(8): New construction activities shall comply with the PM-10 control measures as set forth by the San Joaquin Valley United Air Pollution Control District’s Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts.
 Natural Resources Policy 5.2(9): The Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts will be used to evaluate and mitigate the effects of new developments to the extent feasible.

As stated above, development projects below the ISR applicability thresholds are not expected to exceed the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants emissions and are not expected to violate any air quality standards.

Per SJVAPCD’s letter dated December 4, 2025 (Appendix A), the Proposed Project has been determined to be below the District Rule 9510 applicability threshold of 20,000 square feet of recreational space and does not require an AAQA. The Proposed Project is not expected to exceed the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants emissions. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Page 105 of 311 ends

37 | P a g e
d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
The Proposed Project will result in short-term air quality impacts resulting from construction activity.

However, projects of this nature and scope do not generally result in other emissions such as odors that will adversely affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 106 of 311 ends

38 | P a g e

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

Page 107 of 311 ends

39 | P a g e
b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native residents or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Special-status species include plant and/or wildlife that are legally protected under the federal Endangered Species Act, the California Endangered Species Act, or other laws and regulations, or are considered rare enough by the scientific community and trustee agencies to warrant special consideration. A sensitive natural community is a biological community that is regionally rare, provides important habitat opportunities for wildlife, is structurally complex, or is in other ways of special concern to local, State, or Federal agencies. Wildlife corridors refer to contiguous tracts of habitat that connect larger areas of habitat and facilitate genetic exchange within a population or between subpopulations by allowing for movement within or between habitat patches.

Waters of the U.S. include navigable waterways, their tributaries, and adjacent wetlands. More specifically, Waters of the U.S. encompass territorial seas, tidal waters, and non-tidal waters, along with perennial and intermittent creeks and drainages; lakes, seeps, and springs; emergent marshes; riparian wetlands; and seasonal wetlands. Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a permit issued by the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers must be secured prior to the discharge of dredged or fill materials into these waters. Waters of the State, subject to oversight by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and by RWQCB with jurisdiction over the affected water, include isolated wetlands not covered by federal regulations.

The Project site is partially developed with a warehouse building and paved parking lot, a single-family dwelling containing outdoor landscaping, with the remainder of the site being vacant with some vegetation. The Project site is also located in an urbanized area surrounded by commercial and residential development. Based on a review of the City’s 1999 General Plan and EIR, there are no prime wildlife habitat areas in the Project area, and the Project site has limited habitat value for wildlife species. There are no wetlands located on the Project site. There are no streams either on or adjacent to the project site, so no fish movements would be affected by the project. There are no trees on the project site that raptors and other protected migratory birds could use for nesting. The project area is not a year-round or seasonal habitat for migratory birds according to the 1999 General Plan. In addition, the Proposed Project will be required to comply with the General Plan Natural Resources Policy 5.2(10): Properties which have the potential to support listed plant and animal species will be required to have a biological investigation as a condition of development. Surveys for species shall follow both Federal and State protocols.

Based on the above analysis, the Proposed Project will have No Impact.

Page 108 of 311 ends

40 | P a g e
e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Livingston Municipal Code Section 5-4-8 seeks to protect and preserve mature trees on private property.

A permit shall be required for the removal of any mature tree measuring at least six inches in diameter, as measured four feet above grade at the base of the tree. As required by the code, any tree removal shall require the replacement of new plantings on the City’s Street Tree Master Plan. The City requires a five to one (5:1) replacement ratio for removal of any protected tree. The City has no other ordinances applicable to biological resources. A portion of the project site, east of Seventh Street, has up to twenty invasive trees (Tree of Heaven, a species of Ailanthus) growing on the property. The diameter of these trees ranges from four to twenty-four inches at the four-foot height. In addition, there is mature Mulberry tree (annually pruned) and a palm tree on the residential lot. All the trees on the project site are devoid of bird nests. The Project site currently has trees that will be removed as part of the proposed development for the park area. However, the Proposed Project includes the installation of new trees in the park area and in front of the proposed gym building. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact.
f. Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? There are no Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or similar conservation plans that apply to the project site. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have No Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 109 of 311 ends

41 | P a g e

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
'15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to '15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries? X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in §15064.5?
c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
Based on the disturbed nature of the project site, the site has a very low potential for discovering and/or disturbing human remains. However, if human remains are found. In addition, based on a review of the City’s General Plan, the Project site is not known to contain historical or archaeological resources.

Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.

Refer to Mitigation Measure CUL-1, below. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project will disturb any human remains. However, future development and construction of the Project site, human remains may be identified, particularly during activities requiring ground disturbance (i.e., grading, trench digging, etc.).

As such, the Proposed Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1, specified below, in accordance with Section 15064.5(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, to reduce any potentially significant impacts to a level of Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Mitigation Measure CUL-1, below.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

The following mitigation measure shall be incorporated into the Proposed Project:

Mitigation Measure CUL-1:

In accordance with Section 15064.4(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, in the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, the following steps shall be taken:

Page 110 of 311 ends

42 | P a g e
 There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
o The coroner of the County in which the remains are discovered must be contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required; o If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
 The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours.
 The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descended from the deceased Native American.  The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains, and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

Page 111 of 311 ends

43 | P a g e

6. ENERGY -- Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency? X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following discussion is an analysis for criteria (a) and (b):
a. Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? The Proposed Project construction would involve fuel consumption and use of other non-renewable resources. Construction equipment used for such improvements typically runs on diesel fuel or gasoline.

The same fuels typically are used for vehicles that transport equipment and workers to and from a construction site. However, construction-related fuel consumption would be finite, short-term, and consistent with construction activities of a similar character. This energy use would not be considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.

The project would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the adopted California Energy Code and CALGreen in effect at the time of project approval. The provisions of these codes are intended to increase energy efficiency of buildings, thereby reducing energy consumption. Compliance with these standards would reduce energy consumption associated with project operations. Overall, the Proposed Project construction and operations would not consume energy resources in a manner considered wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. Therefore, the Proposed Project will be Less Than Significant. b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
The City does not have adopted plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. However, the City has adopted the California Energy Code and CALGreen, both of which contain provisions that promote energy efficiency. The project would be required to comply with the applicable requirements of these two codes, which are designed to improve energy efficiency of buildings. Therefore, the Proposed Project would be Less Than Significant.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 112 of 311 ends

44 | P a g e

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

Page 113 of 311 ends

45 | P a g e
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Faults are classified as active, potentially active, or inactive. A fault rupture occurs when the surface of the earth breaks as a result of an earthquake, although this does not happen with all earthquakes.

These ruptures generally occur in a weak area of an existing fault. Ruptures can be sudden (i.e., earthquake) or slow (i.e., fault creep). According to the 1999 General Plan EIR, Livingston is considered to have a “low” maximum expectable earthquake intensity. According to the California Earthquake Hazards Zone Map, no active faults mapped and zoned under the Alquist-Priolo Zoning Act are located within the Project site. The City is located 59 miles to the east of the San Andreas Fault line and 42 miles to the west of the Mother Lode Fault line, according to the 1999 General Plan. The Proposed Project will be required to adhere to the California Building Code, which contains provisions to prevent seismic hazards.

The existing topography of the Project site is relatively flat, with little to no slope. The Proposed Project will require grading activities as part of the development and construction process, and these grading activities will be based upon a Grading Plan that will be reviewed and approved by the City prior to any grading activities. The Proposed Project will be required to comply with Chapter 6 of Title 4 of the City’s Municipal Code related to grading and erosion control. Compliance ensures that the Proposed Project will not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.

Landslides include rockfalls, deep slope failure, and shallow slope failure. Factors such as geological conditions, drainage, slope, and vegetation directly affect the potential for landslides. One of the most common causes of landslides is construction activity that is associated with road building (i.e., cut and fill). As such, it is unlikely that the construction or operation of the Proposed Project will result in a landslide.

Page 114 of 311 ends

46 | P a g e
Lateral spreading is generally where blocks of intact, non-liquefied soil move down slope on a liquefied substrate of large areal extent. Land subsidence is the gradual settling or sinking of an area with little or no horizontal motion due to changes taking place underground. It is a natural process, although it can also occur (and is greatly accelerated) as a result of human activities. Common causes of land subsidence from human activity include pumping water, oil, and gas from underground reservoirs; dissolution of limestone aquifers (sinkholes); collapse of underground mines; drainage of organic soils; and initial wetting of dry soils. Collapsible soils undergo a rearrangement of their grains and a loss of cementation, resulting in substantial and rapid settlement under relatively low loads. Collapsible soils occur predominantly at the base of mountain ranges, where Holocene-age alluvial fan and wash sediments have been deposited during rapid run-off events.

Liquefaction typically requires a significant sudden decrease of shearing resistance in cohesionless soils and a sudden increase in water pressure, which is typically associated with an earthquake of high magnitude. The potential for liquefaction is highest when groundwater levels are high, and loose, fine, sandy soils occur at depths of less than 50 feet. The California Geological Survey (CGS) has designated certain areas in California as potential liquefaction hazard zones. The Project site is not designated as a liquefaction hazard zone by the CGS. Therefore, the Proposed Project would be Less Than Significant.
d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial risks to life or property?
According to the US Department of Agriculture’s Web Soil Survey, Delhi sand is the only soil type on the Projectsite. Delhi sand is categorized as being somewhat excessively drained and a negligible runoff class.

This is not considered an expansive soil. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.
e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? The Proposed Project will connect to City services, including domestic wastewater. The Proposed Project will not utilize the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have No Impact.
f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

Page 115 of 311 ends

47 | P a g e
Based on a review of the 1999 General Plan EIR, there are no known unique geologic features within the Project site. However, geologic formations within the Project site have the potential to contain unique paleontological resources. The Proposed Project is required to comply with the federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act, which limits the collection of vertebrae fossils and other rare and scientifically significant fossils to qualified researchers who have obtained a permit from the applicable state and/or federal agency. Ground disturbance activities associated with the Proposed Project such as grading and excavating could uncover fossilized remains that have not been recorded. In these cases, implementation protocols of the Society of Vertebrae Paleontology standards will ensure the protection of unique paleontological resources during construction of the Proposed Project.

Based on the above analysis, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 116 of 311 ends

48 | P a g e

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
SETTING:

Human-generated emissions greenhouse gases (GHGs) are understood to be an important cause of global climate change, which is a subject of increasing scientific, public concern, and government action.

Atmospheric concentrations of GHGs that trap heat in the earth’s atmosphere and lead to a variety of effects, including increasing temperature, changes in patterns and intensity of weather and various secondary effects resulting from those changes, including potential effects on public health and safety.

California AB 32 identifies global climate change as a “serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources and the environment of California.” As a result, global climate change is an issue that needs to be considered under CEQA.

GHGs include carbon dioxide (CO2), the most abundant GHG, as well as methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases, each of which have GHG potential that is several times that of CO2. GHG emissions result from combustion of carbon-based fuels; major GHG sources in California include transportation (40.7%), electric power generation (20.5%), industrial (20.5%), agriculture and forestry (8.3%) and others (8.3%).

The State of California is actively engaged in developing and implementing strategies for reducing GHG emissions. State programs for GHG reduction include a regional cap-and-trade program, new industrial and emission control technologies, alternative energy generation technologies, advanced energy conservation in lighting, heating, cooling and ventilation, reduced-carbon fuels, hybrid and electric vehicles, and other methods of improving vehicle mileage reduction programs. Using these and other strategies, the State’s Global Climate Change Scoping Plan, adopted in December 2008, proposes to achieve a 29% reduction in projected business-as-usual emission levels for 2020.

The SJVAPCD adopted a Climate Change Action Plan in 2008 and issued guidance for development project compliance with the plan in 2009. The guidance adopted an approach that relies on the use of Best Performance Standards to reduce GHG emissions. Projects implementing Best Performance Standards would be determined to have a less than cumulatively significant impact. For projects not implementing Best Performance Standards, demonstration of a 29% reduction in GHG emissions from business-as-usual conditions is required to determine that a project would have a less than cumulatively significant impact.

Page 117 of 311 ends

49 | P a g e

REGULATORY SETTING
California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for the coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California. California has numerous regulations aimed at reducing the state’s GHG emissions. These initiatives are summarized below:

Assembly Bill 1943
Assembly Bill (AB) 1943 (2002), California’s Advanced Clean Cars program (referred to as “Pavley”), requires CARB to develop and adopt regulations to achieve “the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from motor vehicles.” On June 30, 2009, U.S. EPA granted the waiver of Clean Air Act preemption to California for its greenhouse gas emission standards for motor vehicles beginning with the 2009 model year. Pavley I took effect for model years starting in 2009 to 2016 and Pavley II, which is now referred to as “LEV (Low Emission Vehicle) III GHG” will cover 2017 to 2025. Fleet average emission standards would reach 22 percent reduction from 2009 levels by 2012 and 30 percent by 2016.

The Advanced Clean Cars program coordinates the goals of the Low Emission Vehicles (LEV), Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEV), and Clean Fuels Outlet programs and would provide major reductions in GHG emissions. By 2025, when rules will be fully implemented, new automobiles will emit 34 percent fewer GHGs and 75 percent fewer smog-forming emissions from their model year 2016 levels.

Executive Order S-3-05
In 2005, the governor issued Executive Order (EO) S-3-05, establishing statewide GHG emissions reduction targets. EO S-3-05 provides that by 2010, emissions shall be reduced to 2000 levels; by 2020, emissions shall be reduced to 1990 levels; and by 2050, emissions shall be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels (California Environmental Protection Agency [CalEPA]). In response to EO S-3-05, CalEPA created the Climate Action Team (CAT), which in March 2006 published the Climate Action Team Report (the “2006 CAT Report”) (CalEPA 2006). The 2006 CAT Report identified a recommended list of strategies that the state could pursue to reduce GHG emissions. These are strategies that could be implemented by various state agencies to ensure that the emission reduction targets in EO S-3-05 are met and can be met with existing authority of the state agencies. The strategies include the reduction of passenger and light duty truck emissions, the reduction of idling times for diesel trucks, an overhaul of shipping technology/infrastructure, increased use of alternative fuels, increased recycling, and landfill methane capture, etc. In April 2015, the governor issued EO B-30-15, calling for a new target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

Assembly Bill 32
California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” signed into law in 2006. AB 32 codifies the statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (essentially a 15 percent reduction below 2005 emission levels; the same requirement as under S-3-05) and requires CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main State strategies for reducing GHGs to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions.

California is on track to meet or exceed the current target of reducing GHG emission to 1990 levels by 2020, as established by AB 32.

Page 118 of 311 ends

50 | P a g e
Senate Bill 97
Senate Bill (SB) 97, signed in August 2007, acknowledges that climate change is an environmental issue that requires analysis in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. In March 2010, the California Resources Agency (Resources Agency) adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHGs and climate change impacts.

CARB Resolution 07-54
CARB Resolution 07-54 establishes 25,000 MT of GHG emissions as the threshold for identifying the largest stationary emission sources in California for purposes of requiring the annual reporting of emissions. This threshold is just over 0.005 percent of California’s total inventory of GHG emissions for 2004.

Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375, signed into law in September 2008, builds on AB 32 by requiring CARB to develop regional GHG reduction targets to be achieved from the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035; these regional targets will help achieve the goals of AB 32 and the Scoping Plan through changed land use patterns and improved transportation systems. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) adopted a Sustainable Community Strategies in July 2013 that meets greenhouse gas reduction targets. The Plan Bay Area is the SCS document for the Bay Area, which is an integrated long-range plan that discusses climate protection, housing, healthy and safe communities, open space and agricultural preservation, equitable access, economic vitality, and transportation system effectiveness within the San Francisco Bay Area. The document is updated every four years and most recently, the update, Plan Bay Area 2040, was adopted on July 26, 2017.

Executive Order S-13-08
Executive Order S-13-08 indicates that “climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of tis population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in the order, the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy (California Natural Resources Agency 2009) was adopted, which is the “…first statewide, multi-sector, region-specific, and information-based climate change adaption strategy in the United States.” Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying, and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.

Senate Bill 2X
In April 2011, the governor signed SB2X requiring California to generate 33 percent of its electricity from renewable energy by 2020.

Page 119 of 311 ends

51 | P a g e
Senate Bill 32
On September 8, 2016, the governor signed Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) into law, which requires the State to further reduce GHGs to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. SB 32 is an extension of AB 32. The other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged. CARB adopted the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update on December 14, 2017, to achieve California’s 2030 greenhouse gas target.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following discussion is an analysis for criteria (a) and (b):
a. Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b. Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As discussed in Section 3.3 of this Initial Study, the Proposed Project is not expected to exceed the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. The Proposed Project includes the construction of a 9,000 square foot recreation building, which is below the ambient air quality analysis (AAQA) screening levels for recreation projects. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) has determined that recreational projects under 20,000 square feet are considered small development projects and below the applicability threshold for the Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review). Per Section 8.4.4 of the Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts, projects below the Indirect Source Review (ISR) applicability thresholds are not expected to exceed the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants emissions.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 120 of 311 ends

52 | P a g e

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or
death involving wildland fires?
X
REGULATORY SETTING:

Federal

Page 121 of 311 ends

53 | P a g e
The Federal Toxic Substances Control Act and the Resource Conservation Recovery Act These Acts, signed in 1976, established a program administered by the United State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. The Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act (HSWA), which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes. Among other things, the use of certain techniques for the disposal of some hazardous waste was specifically prohibited by HSWA.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act This Act was enacted in 1980 and amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) in 1986. This law provides broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment.

Among other things, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) established requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites, provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites, and established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified. CERCLA also enabled revision to the National Contingency Plan (NCP), which provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List (NPL).

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) receives the authority to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials from the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA). This act administers container designs, labeling, shipper and carrier responsibilities, training requirements, and incident reporting requirements. These regulations are contained in Title 49 – Transportation, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 100 to 180 and includes all modes of transportation – air, highway, rail, and water (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMSCA) 2014).

State
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
This Department of the California Environmental Protection Agency is the primary agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, cleans up contamination, and looks for ways to reduce the hazardous waste produced in California. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code.

DTSC also administers the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) to regulate hazardous wastes.

The HWCL lists 791 chemicals and approximately 300 common materials that may be hazardous; establishes criteria for identifying packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes; prescribes management controls; establishes permit requirements for treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identifies some wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills.

Page 122 of 311 ends

54 | P a g e
Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the DTSC, the State Department of Health Services, the SWRCB, and CalRecycle to compile and annually update lists of hazardous waste sites and land designated as hazardous waste sites throughout the State. The Secretary of Environmental Protection consolidates the information submitted by these agencies and distributes it to each City and County where the sites on the lists are located. Before the lead agency accepts an application for any development project as complete, the applicant must consult these lists to determine if the site at issue is included.

If any soil is excavated from a site containing hazardous materials, it would be considered a hazardous waste if it exceeded specific criteria in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. Remediation of hazardous wastes found at a site may be required if excavation of these materials is performed; it may also be required if certain other activities are proposed. Even if soil or groundwater at a contaminated site does not have the characteristics required to be defined as hazardous waste, remediation of the site may be required by regulatory agencies subject to jurisdictional authority. Cleanup requirements are determined on a case-by-case basis by the agency taking lead jurisdiction.

California Code of Regulations
Title 26 of the CCR is a medley of State regulations pertaining to hazardous materials and waste that are presented in other regulatory sections. Title 26 mandates specific management criteria related to hazardous materials identification, packaging, and disposal. In addition, Title 26 establishes requirements for hazardous materials transport, containment, treatment, and disposal. Finally, staff training standards are set forth in Title 26.

Fire Hazards
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
The state has charged CalFire with the identification of Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) within State Responsibility Areas. In addition, CalFire must recommend Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) identified within any Local Responsibility Areas. The FHSZ maps are used by the State Fire Marshall as a basis for the adoption of applicable building code standards.

Regional
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
Central Valley RWQCB regulates discharges and releases to surface and groundwater in the project area.

The RWQCB generally oversees cases involving groundwater contamination. Within the Central Valley RWQCB, the Merced County Division of Environmental Health handles most leaking underground storage tank (UST) cases, so the RWQCB may oversee cases involving other groundwater contaminants; i.e., Spills, Leaks, Incidents, and Clean-up (SLIC) cases. In the case of spills at a project site, the responsible party would notify Merced County and then a lead regulatory (County, RWQCB, or DTSC) would be determined.

Page 123 of 311 ends

55 | P a g e
Local
City of Livingston Municipal Code
Section 8-5-3 states that “all persons, corporations or others engaged in industrial activities or activities in which hazardous or toxic materials are being utilized, handled or otherwise present, shall immediately report any accident, fire or incident that presents a danger to persons, property or the environment involving a hazardous material to the city’s Fire Department”.

Section 8-2-61 states that “it shall be unlawful for any person to commence, expand and engage in the business of owning, operating, managing or maintaining any commercial or industrial facility which has as a purpose engaging in any business which accumulates, collects, transports, stores or disposes of hazardous waste within the city unless such person has received a contract, license, franchise or permit from the City Council and complies with the provisions of this section and all other laws and regulations of the federal government, state government and city.”

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
The Project site is surrounded by existing urban uses to the north, south, and west. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project will include the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Development of the Proposed Project will be required to comply with all federal, state, and local policies and regulations, including Chapter 5 of Title 8 of the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.
c. Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? The closest school is Campus Park Elementary School located approximately 0.26-mile south of the Project site. Therefore, the project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 miles of an existing or proposed school. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. d. Would the project be located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

Page 124 of 311 ends

56 | P a g e
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a database containing information on properties in California where hazardous substances have been released, or where the potential for a release exists. This database is known as EnviroStor and is one of a number of lists that comprise the “Cortese List” (a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5). A search of the EnviroStor database did not identify any active hazardous material sites on or near the Project site. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have No Impact. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
A significant impact would be one that results in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the vicinity of a public airport or public use airport. There are no public or public use airports in the in the Livingston area. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have No Impact. f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
As stated in the Project Description, the Proposed Project includes a street closure of Seventh Street between C Street and D Street and the alleyway between Sixth Street and Seventh Street. The street closure would be accomplished with the installation of removable bollards on Seventh Street at its interface with C and D Streets. The bollards will be placed within the street right-of-way and space so as to allow emergency response vehicles to access and travel through Seventh Street on an emergency basis.

The closure of the street and alleyway will not impair or interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. g. Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
A significant impact would be one that exposes people or structures to a significant risk of wildland fires.

The Proposed Project is located within City of Livingston and is surrounded by urban development on the north, south, and west sides. As such, no wild land exists within or adjacent to the Proposed Project.

Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 125 of 311 ends

57 | P a g e

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or groundwater
quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:

X
i) Result in substantial on- or offsite erosion
or siltation; X
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or offsite;
X
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?

Page 126 of 311 ends

58 | P a g e
The Proposed Project will be required to comply with the City’s Urban Stormwater Quality Management Ordinance (Chapter 12 of Title 9 of the City’s Municipal Code). The Proposed Project will also require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and compliance with Best Management Practices (BMPs) during construction and operation of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project will require a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent feasible. Final storm drainage plans will be required to comply with City standards and will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The City’s primary source of groundwater comes from nine (9) domestic wells. According to the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City’s groundwater wells have a total capacity (flowrate) of 10,900 gallons per minute (gpm). The UWMP details the City’s current and projected water demands for these land use types. The Proposed Project would be considered an institutional use for the purposes of the UWMP. The UWMP states that the City tracks institutional and commercial uses as one, which had a water demand of 89 million gallons (mg) in 2020. The UWMP projects commercial/institutional water use to be 108 mg in 2030 and 132 mg in 2040. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project will contribute significantly to the projected water use of the City’s institutional uses.

The UWMP states that the City’s estimated available water supply will be sufficient to meet projected water demands through 2040. The Proposed Project will not substantially decrease the existing groundwater supplies in the City. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact. c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial on- or offsite erosion or siltation; ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?

Page 127 of 311 ends

59 | P a g e
There are no rivers or streams located on the Project site. The nearest river is the Merced River, which is located 1.55 miles southwest of the Project site. The Proposed Project will include the addition of impervious surfaces. However, it is not anticipated that this will substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the Project site. A portion of the Project site has already been developed with impervious surfaces and does not have any known drainage or flooding issues. The Project site is not located within a 100-year floodplain, as indicated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact. d. Would the project be located in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, or risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
The Proposed Project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area, a floodway or otherwise placed in an area that would interfere with flood flows. The project site is located 1.55 miles southeast of the Merced River and 1.4 miles from the 100-year flood boundary (located along the Merced River to the northwest).

No enclosed surface water bodies, which might be subject to potential seiches, are located in the project site vicinity. Based on its location, inland from coastal areas, the project site would not be subject to tsunami effects. The project site is not located in an area susceptible to mudflows. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The Proposed Project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control or sustainability groundwater management plan. As stated above, the Proposed Project will be required to comply with the City’s Urban Stormwater Quality Management Ordinance. The Project site also is located within the jurisdiction of the Merced Irrigation-Urban GSA and is therefore subject to the Merced Groundwater Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) adopted in 2025.

The Merced Groundwater Subbasin is currently designated as critically overdrafted by the Department of Water Resources and the GSP contains approaches to conserve and protect groundwater resources. The City’s General Plan includes policies and actions to conserve groundwater that are consistent with the GSP, including:
 Policy 5.2 (1): Protect areas of natural groundwater recharge in order to maintain the groundwater supply, including the installation of detention ponds in new growth areas.  Policy 5.2 (2): Expand programs that enhance groundwater recharge in order to maintain the groundwater supply, including the installation of detention ponds in new growth areas.  Policy 5.2 (4): Water conservation methods shall be continued.  Policy 9.1 (16): To encourage groundwater recharge, ponding basins shall be designed as detention basins.

Page 128 of 311 ends

60 | P a g e
 Policy 9.1 (22): The City of Livingston shall cooperate with local water agencies to identify and resolve long-term water supply issues.

The Proposed Project does not conflict with the policies listed above. Therefore, the Proposed Project would have No Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 129 of 311 ends

61 | P a g e

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? As stated in the Project Description, the Proposed Project is located south of the 99 Highway in central Livingston. The Project site is surrounded by existing development on the north, west, and south sides.

Therefore, the Proposed Project would not physically divide the established community and would have a Less Than Significant Impact.
b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The Proposed Project includes the development of a recreation complex with the approval of the associated General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Site Plan and Design Review, and Street Closure. Approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezone would allow for the recreation complex on the Project Site.

The Proposed Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan. Specifically, the General Plan Recreation Policies listed below:
 Policy 5.3 (A)(1): Distribute adequate park facilities throughout the City to provide organized and informal recreation opportunities and open space for City residents.  Policy 5.3 (A)(12): Provide active recreation facilities in several locations in the City to accommodate community needs.
 Policy 5.3 (A)(23): Seek State, Federal, and local grants to improve City recreation services and facilities.

Page 130 of 311 ends

62 | P a g e
The Proposed Project is also consistent with the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan (Master Plan).

The Master Plan calls for a multi-purpose recreation building that includes space for basketball games, restrooms, storage space, and recreational classroom space. As stated in the Project Description, Phase One of the Proposed Project will include the construction of a new gymnasium with basketball courts, two (2) studio classrooms, a storage closet, and two (2) restrooms. The Master Plan also calls for this recreational building to be located south of Highway 99, central to the community, be accessible from a major street, and have ample parking space, which the Proposed Project is consistent with. The Proposed Project includes a splash pad in the park component and outdoor basketball courts, which are also consistent with the recommendations for other recreation facilities in the Master Plan.

Based on the analysis above, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 131 of 311 ends

63 | P a g e

12. MINERAL RESOURCES -- WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following discussion is an analysis for criteria (a) and (b):
a. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? The mineral resource zone (MRZ) system, overseen by the California State Mining and Geology Board, characterizes both the location and known/presumed economic value of underlying mineral resources.

The mineral resource classification system uses four main MRZs: MRZ-1, MRZ-2, MRZ-3, and MRZ-4. The MRZ-2 classification is described as “areas where geologic information indicates that the presence of significant concrete aggregate resources” per the California Geological Survey Mineral Resource Zone Map for Concrete Aggregate Resources in Merced County (2021). According to this map, the Project site is not located within the MRZ-2 classification zone. Additionally, based on a review of the City’s 1999 General Plan, the Project site is not located in an area known to contain mineral resources of value to the state, region, or City of Livingston. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have No Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 132 of 311 ends

64 | P a g e

13. NOISE -- WOULD THE PROJECT RESULT IN:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or other applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
X
REGULATORY SETTING:

Background
Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired. Three components make up sound: source, path, and receiver. All three components must be present for sound to exist. Sound, traveling in the form of waves from a source, exerts a sound pressure level (referred to as sound level) which is measured in decibels (dB), with zero dB corresponding roughly to the threshold of human hearing, and 120 to 140 dB corresponding to the threshold of pain. The perception of sound and noise is determined by its effects on receptors. Examples of sensitive noise receptors are facilities or areas, including residential areas, hospitals, and schools, where excessive noise levels would be considered an annoyance. The “A-weighted” noise scale (measured in A-weighted decibels (dBa)) was developed because it corresponds closer to people’s subjective judgement of sound levels.

Community reaction to noise is assessed on a scale that averages varying noise exposures over time and quantifies the results in terms of a single value. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is an average A-weighted scale measured over a 24-hour period and adjusted to account for increased sensitivity to noise levels during evening and nighttime hours. A CNEL noise measurement is obtained from adding 5 decibels to sound levels occurring during the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and 10 decibels to sound occurring during the nighttime from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am. The major sources of noise in Manteca are roadway traffic, railroad noise, and industrial activities. The quest areas of Manteca are those removed from major transportation-related noise sources and local industrial or other stationary noise sources.

Page 133 of 311 ends

65 | P a g e
Vibration is sound radiated through the ground. Typical sources of ground-borne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, which can create vibration waves that propagate through the soil to the foundations of nearby buildings. Ground-borne vibration is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors. Although the motion of the ground may be perceived without the effects associated with the shaking of a building, the motion does not provoke the same adverse human reaction. The rumbling sound caused by the vibration of room surfaces is called groundborne noise, which is usually characterized with the A-weighted sound level. Ground-borne noise is perceived as louder than the same broadband noise because the human ear perceives sound dominated by low-frequency components as louder than broadband sounds that have the same A-weighted level.

The background vibration is not usually significant unless the vibration exceeds 70 VdB. For most people, a vibration-velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximately dividing line between perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels.1
Criteria for Acceptable Noise and Vibration Exposure
LIVINGSTON 1999 GENERAL PLAN
The Noise Element of the 1999 General Plan provides policies and implements actions to ensure that City residents are not subjected to noise beyond acceptable levels. Specific 1999 General Plan policies of relevance to the CEQA evaluation for the Proposed Project are included below:
 Noise Policy 8.1(1): Table 8-1 depicts the ranges of noise exposures from transportation noise sources which are considered to be acceptable, conditionally acceptable, or conditionally unacceptable for the development of different land uses. Table 8-1 shall be used to determine whether mitigation is needed for development of land uses near major transportation noise sources.
a. In areas where the noise environment is acceptable, new development may be permitted without requiring noise mitigation.
b. For areas where the noise environment is conditionally acceptable, new development shall be allowed only after noise mitigation has been incorporated into the design of the project to reduce noise exposure to the levels specified by the Noise Element. c. For areas where the noise environment is conditionally unacceptable, new development in compliance with the policies of the Noise Element may not be feasible.

1 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Authority, Office of Planning and Environment, 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. May 2006.

Page 134 of 311 ends

66 | P a g e
 Noise Policy 8.1(3): New development of noise-sensitive land uses shall not be permitted in areas exposed to existing or projected future levels of noise from transportation noise sources which exceed the noise levels specified in Table 8-2 for the given land uses.  Noise Policy 8.1(4): Noise created by new transportation noise sources, including roadway improvement projects, shall be mitigated so as not to exceed the noise levels specified in Table 8-

Page 135 of 311 ends

Table e-1 .

LAND 11JS& COMPATIBILITY FOR NEW DEViELO:PMENT

NEAR TRANSPORTATION AND NOISE SOURCES
Exterior 'Noise El(l)osure
Ldn or cN1EL, dB
Land US'G 5:5 65 75 • 111te relation ~R~e...,stl:-:-e-n~lia:--'I:"=;.;;..;;;..;;.;; ___ ..., .... - -r ..... --+,.,,--. ---------...;,;.;.====---.... ,{eiapl temporary dwelllngs)
Hotels &. Motels
Schools,-Preschool to
Secondary,. Colleg1es, and
UnJwrstty, Speofallzed
Education and Training,
UDranes aoo Museums
111mm ACCEPT ABLE
(Mitlgal'ioi'! not Required)
Specified land use ts acceptable
CO DITIONAU..YACCEPTABU:
(MitigaUOn Required)
Use should be pemiiitled ,only a.fler
casual study and inclusion of
mltigaUon as needed to satlSfy policies
of Noise Elemerlt ..

CONOITIONAU Y UNACCEPTABLE
(Mitigation :Required)
Use may be fnteasi:lle. Use should be
pennitted only after c.aretul study .and
fncluston of mitrgatiOn as needed 10
satisfy policies of Nol$& Element.
67 | P a g e
 Noise Policy 8.1(5): New development of noise sensitive land uses shall not be permitted where the noise level due to existing stationary noise sources will exceed the noise level standards of Table 8-3.
 Noise Policy 8.1(6): New proposed stationary noise sources, or existing stationary noise sources which undergo modifications, shall not be permitted where the noise level exceeds the standards of Table 8-3.

Page 136 of 311 ends

TABLE 8-2

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE NOISE EXPOSURE-TRANSPORTATION NOISE SOURCES :

Outdoor Activity Areas Interior Spaces
Land Use
Ldn/CNEL, dB Ldn/CNEL, dB
Residential (except temporary dwellings) 651 45
Hotels and Motels 65 1 45
Hospitals, Nursing and Personal Care 65 1 45
Churches, Meeting Halls -- 45
Schools-Preschool to Secondary, College and University, Specialized Education and Training, Libraries and Museums -- 45 1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the boundary of planned or zoned noise-sensitive uses.

TABLE 8-3

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE NOISE EXPOSURE - STATIONARY NOISE SOURCES' Daytime Nighttime
(7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.)
Hourly L eq, dB 55 50
Maximum level, dB 75 70
1 As detennined in outdoor activity areas. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the noise standard shall be applied to the boundary of planned or zoned noise-sensitive uses. 68 | P a g e
 Circulation Policy 4.9(B)(1): The circulation systems shall be designated and developed to minimize excessive noise impacts on sensitive land uses.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The City has established noise standards for residential and non-residential land uses in the City’s 1999 General Plan and Municipal Code (LMC). The Proposed Project site while conducting normal operations is not expected to generate noise levels in excess standards established in the 1999 General Plan or the Municipal Code. The standards apply to noise-sensitive land uses within the existing noise environment and to noise created by future development.

Traffic Noise
The Proposed Project will create short-term construction noise that would result from transport of construction equipment and materials to the project site. The total daily vehicle trips resulting from construction worker commutes would be minimal when compared to existing traffic volumes on the affected streets.

Project Construction Noise
Construction activities on the project site may result in varying degrees of temporary ground vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and operations involved. The site preparation and grading phase, which includes excavation and grading, tends to generate the highest noise levels because earthmoving equipment is the noisiest construction equipment. Construction noise would cease to occur once project construction is completed. The Proposed Project will also be required to comply with the grading hours of operation specified in Section 4-6-27 of the City’s Grading, Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance, which states that grading activities are limited to the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m.

Monday through Saturday, and between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on holidays. Additionally, the Proposed Project will be required to adhere to LMC Section 4-6-28 regarding grading dust and noise control. This section states that equipment and materials on the site should be used in such a manner as to avoid excessive dust and noise. Compliance with these provisions of the Livingston Municipal Code would reduce construction noise impacts on nearby residences.

Project Operation Noise
The 1999 General Plan contains policies that regulate noise-sensitive land uses that will exceed the established noise level standards. Policy 8.1(11)(f) of the General Plan defines noise-sensitive land uses as residential developments, educational institutions, hospitals, churches, hotels/motels, and bed and breakfast facilities. As stated in the Project Description, the Proposed Project includes the development of a recreation facility with both indoor and outdoor recreation. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not considered a noise-sensitive land use.

Based on the analysis above, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Page 137 of 311 ends

69 | P a g e
b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Some ground-borne vibration and noise would originate from earth movement and building activities during the project’s construction phase. Ground-borne noise and vibration from construction activity would be mostly low to moderate. The operation of typical construction equipment would generate ground-borne vibrations that would not exceed guidelines that are considered unsafe for any type of buildings. Operation of the Proposed Project would not generate ground-borne vibration. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The Proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, an airport land use plan, or within two (2) miles of a public airport. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have No Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 138 of 311 ends

70 | P a g e

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project induce substantial population in one area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
The Proposed Project includes the development of a recreational complex. The Proposed Project would primarily serve the existing Livingston community. The recreation center would employ up to three fulltime staff members and up to five part-time staff members. However, this represents a minimal number of employees that would likely be hired from the regional workforce. Although the Proposed Project would generate a limited number of short-term construction jobs, these jobs would be accommodated within the regional workforce as well. The Proposed Project does not include any residential uses or improvements to off-site infrastructure such as new roadways or extension of utilities that could induce population growth. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The Proposed Project will include the demolition of a single-family home with a detached accessory structure. This will remove one (1) residential unit from the existing housing stock. However, the demolition will not displace a substantial number of people or housing and will not necessitate the construction of replacement housing. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 139 of 311 ends

71 | P a g e

15. PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
or the need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection? The Proposed Project will be served by the Livingston Fire Department. The Project site is approximately

0.2 miles east of the city’s Police Department. The new gymnasium building constructed as part of the Proposed Project will be required to comply with the 2025 California Fire Code recently adopted by the City. In addition, the City’s Municipal Code has adopted related to fire safety in its Fire Prevention Code, contain in Chapter 2 of Title 7. The project also would be subject to the City’s adopted Building and Electrical Codes with their applicable provisions related to fire safety. The Proposed Project will be required to pay a Fire Service Mitigation Fee to the City for future construction of Fire Department facilities that may be required elsewhere in the City. Compliance with the applicable codes and City standards, along with payment of fees, would reduce project impacts on fire protection services.

Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Page 140 of 311 ends

72 | P a g e
b. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection? The Proposed Project will be served by the Livingston Police Department. The Project site is approximately

0.2 miles east of the city’s Police Department. The Proposed Project is not expected to affect the City’s population in a manner unplanned by the City and is not expected to affect the officer/population ratio such that new officers would need to be hired and facilities would need to be built or expanded to accommodate them. The Proposed Project will be required to pay a Police Service Mitigation Fee to the City for future construction of Police Department facilities that may be required elsewhere in the City.

Compliance with the applicable codes and City standards, along with payment of fees, would reduce project impacts on police protection services. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.
c. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools? The Proposed Project is not a residential development that would induce growth to the area that would impact schools. Therefore, the Project would not result in the need for new expanded school facilities and as a result, there would be No Impact.
d. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks? The Proposed Project includes the development of a park and recreation facilities. As such, the Proposed Project would add to the existing park facilities in the City and will not create an additional demand for parks. The Proposed Project is not anticipated to have significant environmental impacts as analyzed.

Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. e. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities? The Proposed Project will not result in an increase in population. Therefore, there would be no increased demand for other public services, such that would result in the need for new or expanded government facilities. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have No Impact.

Page 141 of 311 ends

73 | P a g e
MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 142 of 311 ends

74 | P a g e

16. RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following discussion is an analysis for criteria (a) and (b):
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or accelerated? The nearest publicly owned neighborhood park to the Project site is Livingston Memorial Park. Livingston Memorial Park is located southwest of the Project site on Main Street. The Proposed Project includes the development of a 2.27-acre park site with additional recreation facilities. The Proposed Project does not include the development of new homes and would not generate population growth, which typically result in the need for additional park and recreation facilities. The Proposed Project will be beneficial for the existing neighborhood recreational facilities by increasing park amenities in the area. Development of the park site will comply with all City policies and regulations related to park development, including the adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? As stated in the Project Description, the Proposed Project includes the development of a City-owned recreational complex. The Proposed Project includes a new gymnasium, playground, basketball court, and a park space with a community garden, splash pad, and outdoor exercise equipment. The Proposed Project will not result in physical environmental impacts to other recreational facilities. The construction of the Project site will not have an adverse physical effect on the environment, as discussed throughout this environmental analysis. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Page 143 of 311 ends

75 | P a g e
MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 144 of 311 ends

76 | P a g e

17. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING:

Existing Transportation Facilities
The main transportation mode in the project vicinity is motor vehicles, which use existing roads in the area. The Project site is served by the existing roadway system, including C Street, D Street, 6th Street, and 7th Street, on which the site has direct frontage. The main regional road in the project vicinity is SR

99. California State Route 99 is a major north-south highway serving the Central Valley, connecting from Interstate 5 near Wheeler Ridge to its northern end at SR 36 near Red Bluff.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? The 1999 General Plan Circulation Element contains policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider and mitigate impacts that potential future development could have on Livingston’s transportation system. The following policies would serve to reduce impacts on transportation facilities within the City’s General Plan EIR Study Area, which includes the Proposed Project:
 Policy 4.4(A)(2): The street network shall provide a quick and efficient route for emergency vehicles, including police, fire, and other vehicles, when responding to calls for service.  Policy 4.4(C)(8): Developers shall mitigate traffic impacts associated with their projects.  Policy 4.5(1): The City encourages the use of energy efficient and non-polluting modes of transportation.

Page 145 of 311 ends

77 | P a g e
 Policy 4.5(3): Promote the long-term shifting of peak hour commute trips from the single occupant automobile to ridesharing, buses, pedestrian, and bicycles.  Policy 4.5(5): Large developments shall be encouraged to incorporate transit passenger facilities, bicycle racks or lockers, shower facilities, as well as on site services as ways to encourage alternative modes for commute trips.
 Policy 4.8(B)(2): Rights-of-way considered for abandonment will be evaluated for use as bikeways and pedestrian paths and obtained when feasible.
 Policy 4.8(B)(8): The City shall promote safe, convenient, and accessible pedestrian ways within the community.

The Proposed Project is consistent with the above policies of the 1999 General Plan, as discussed below.

Roadway Facilities
The Proposed Project is bounded by C Street to the north, Sixth Street to the west, and D Street to the south, with Seventh Street going through the Project site. The Proposed Project will close Seventh Street between C Street and D Street, as well as half the length of the alleyway between Sixth Street and Seventh Street. Adequate access to the Project site will remain on C Street and D Street. Therefore, the Proposed Project will not conflict with existing nor planned roadway facilities. The Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Transit Facilities
The Proposed Project is not located along a transit route or near an existing or planned transit facility.

The nearest transit stop is located approximately 0.2 miles west of the Project site on Main Street (C Street/Livingston City Hall stop). The Proposed Project is not anticipated to significantly increase the ridership on the existing transit facilities. Therefore, the Proposed Project will not conflict with existing nor planned transit facilities. The Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The Proposed Project may result in the increased demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. However, the Project site has existing infrastructure for pedestrian travel, as the Project site has been previously developed with sidewalk infrastructure. The Proposed Project will include the incorporation of bicycle racks and lockers outside of the proposed gymnasium building for bike users. Circulation Policy 4.8(B)(3) designates streets intended for bikeways as a part of the Bike Plan of the Circulation Element. Per the Bike Plan, none of the streets in the Project site are designated as intended for bikeways. Therefore, the Proposed Project will not conflict with existing nor planned bicycle or pedestrian facilities. The Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?

Page 146 of 311 ends

78 | P a g e
Transportation impacts related to the Proposed Project were evaluated for compliance both with applicable regulatory documents and environmental significance as defined in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). California Senate Bill (SB) 743 is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and particulates, encourage infill development and a diversity of uses instead of sprawl, and promote multi-modal transportation networks.

For the City of Livingston, the Merced County Association of Governments (MCAG) 2022 VMT Guidelines were used to evaluate changes in VMT due to land use developments.

VMT Analysis
MCAG’s VMT Thresholds and Implementation Guidelines include the following screening criteria for identifying projects that can be presumed to have a less than significant impact:
 Project Located in a Transit Priority Area/High Quality Transit Corridor (within 0.5 miles of a transit stop)
 Project is Local-serving Retail of less than 50,000 square feet  Project is a redevelopment project
 Project has a High Level of Affordable Housing Units
 Project is a Low Trip Generator (Less than 1,000 average daily trips for projects consistent with the General Plan and 500 average daily trips for projects not consistent with the General Plan)  Project is an Institutional/Government and Public Service Use  Project is a public, school, day care, local park, college, or other local supporting land uses  Project is located in a Low VMT Zone
The Proposed Project meets two of the screening criteria detailed in the MCAG’s VMT standards to identify projects that can be presumed to have a less than significant impact. The Proposed Project will include the development of a small local park with supporting recreation facilities. The Project site is also located within a 0.5 of a transit stop, as noted above. Thus, the VMT impact for the Proposed Project will be less than significant. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact. c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The Proposed Project does not contain any geometric design features that would create hazards.

Implementation of the Project would not require the expansion of the roadway network serving the Project site. The site would be accessible via C Street and D Street. The Project would be required to submit a building permit application for review and approval by the City to ensure site improvements would be consistent with adopted City standards. Compliance with such standards, specifications, and plans would ensure that any traffic hazards are minimized. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.
d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?

Page 147 of 311 ends

79 | P a g e
As stated in the Project Description, the Proposed Project includes a street closure of Seventh Street between C Street and D Street and the alleyway between Sixth Street and Seventh Street. Access to the Project site will be maintained off of C Street and D Street and would not result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 148 of 311 ends

80 | P a g e

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1 (k)?
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resource Code Section 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe?
X
Effective July 1, 2015, Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) amended CEQA to mandate consultation with California Native American tribes during the CEQA process to determine whether or not the Proposed Project may have a significant impact on a Tribal Cultural Resource. Section 21073 of the Public Resources Code defines California Native American tribes as “a Native American tribe located in California that is on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission for the purposes of Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004.” This includes both federally and non-federally recognized tribes. Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines Tribal Cultural Resources for the purpose of CEQA as:
1) Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; and/or
b. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; and/or

Page 149 of 311 ends

81 | P a g e
c. a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Because criteria A and B also meet the definition of a Historical Resource under CEQA (see Section 5 of this document), a Tribal Cultural Resource may also require additional (and separate) consideration as a Historical Resource. Tribal Cultural Resources may or may not exhibit archaeological, cultural, or physical indicators.

Recognizing that California tribes are experts in their Tribal Cultural Resources and heritage, AB 52 requires that CEQA lead agencies carry out consultation with tribes at the commencement of the CEQA process to identify Tribal Cultural Resources. Furthermore, because a significant effect on a Tribal Cultural Resource is considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, consultation is required to develop appropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures. Consultation is concluded when either the lead agency and tribes agree to appropriate mitigation measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, if a significant effect exists, or when a party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached, whereby the lead agency uses its best judgement in requiring mitigation measures that avoid or minimize impact to the greatest extent feasible.

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project cause a significant adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

1. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?

2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Based on a review of City’s General Plan EIR, the Project site is not listed on the California Register of Historical Places, or a local register of resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1 (k).

In accordance with SB 18 and AB 52, the City, acting as the Lead Agency, distributed consultation request letters to the following Native American Tribes: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Dumna Wo-Wah Tribal Government, Northern Valley Yokuts Tribe, Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation, Table Mountain Rancheria, Tule River Indian Tribe, and Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. The City did not receive any consultation requests in response to the letters. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less Than Significant Impact.

Page 150 of 311 ends

82 | P a g e
MITIGATION MEASURES:

Mitigation is not required for this topic.

Page 151 of 311 ends

83 | P a g e

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- WOULD THE PROJECT:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider that serves
or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand, in addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
X
e) Comply with Federal, State, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X

IMPACT ANALYSIS
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? As stated in the Project Description, the Proposed Project will connect to the existing utilities in the City.

The Proposed Project can be accommodated by the existing utility facilities and does not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact.

Page 152 of 311 ends

84 | P a g e
b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? The City provides portable water services to residents, as well as commercial, institutional, industrial, and public facilities. The City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) details the City’s current and projected water demands for these land use types. The Proposed Project would be considered an institutional use for the purposes of the UWMP. The UWMP states that the City tracks institutional and commercial uses as one, which had a water demand of 89 million gallons (mg) in 2020. The UWMP projects commercial/institutional water use to be 108 mg in 2030 and 132 mg in 2040. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project will contribute significantly to the projected water use of the City’s institutional uses.

The UWMP states that the City’s estimated available water supply will be sufficient to meet projected water demands through 2040. The City is expected to have adequate water supplies during normal years to meet its projected demands through 2045 and it is not anticipated that a single dry year period will reduce the availability of water supply to the City. Water supplies are sufficient to meet all demands through year 2045 even under drought conditions. The Proposed Project can be adequately served by the existing water supplies in the City. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact.
c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Wastewater services within the City are provided by the City of Livingston Public Works Department. The City’s most recently prepared Wastewater Collection System Master Plan describes the City’s wastewater capacity as 2.0 million gallons per day (mgd). Current flows through the City’s wastewater system are approximately 0.9 mgd based on information provided in the City’s Municipal Services Review (MSR), leaving the City with current wastewater capacity just over 1 mgd. It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project will generate a significant amount of wastewater that would exceed the current capacity of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Proposed Project can be adequately served by the existing wastewater treatment provider in the City. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact.

The following discussion is an analysis for criteria (d) and (e):
d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e. Would the project comply with Federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Solid waste in the City is managed by Gilton Solid Waste Management. The Proposed Project is not anticipated to generate solid waste that is in excess of waste typically generated recreational projects and the capacity of local infrastructure. The Proposed Project will be required to comply with Federal, State, and Local regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, the Proposed Project will have a Less than Significant Impact.

Page 153 of 311 ends

Livingston City CouncilOctober 6, 2026

Livingston City Council
October 6, 2026