Agenda packet — Suisun City City Council, July 15, 2025 (part 1 of 4)

CITY COUNCIL
Alma Hernandez, Mayor
Jenalee Dawson, Mayor Pro Tem
Amit Pal, Councilmember
Parise Shepherd, Councilmember
Princess Washington, Councilmember

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

A G E N D A

REGULAR MEETING OF THE SUISUN CITY COUNCIL,

SUISUN CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY,

AND SUISUN CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
TUESDAY, JULY 15, 2025
5:00 PM

Suisun City Council Chambers - 701 Civic Center Boulevard - Suisun City, California

.
5:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION MEETING
6:30 P.M. REGULA MEETING

MEETINGS ARE HELD IN-PERSON, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS ALSO AVAILABLE VIA ZOOM

ZOOM MEETING INFORMATION:

WEBSITE: https://zoom.us/join
MEETING ID:
843 4958 0505
CALL IN PHONE NUMBER: (707) 438-1720

REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING BY EMAILING [email protected] (PRIOR TO 4 PM), VIA WEBSITE, OR ZOOM CALL IN PHONE NUMBER (707) 438-1720
(If attending the meeting via phone press *9 to raise your hand and *6 to unmute/mute for public comment.) (Next Ord. No. – 821)
(Next City Council Res. No. 2025 – 76)
Next Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency Res. No. SA2025 - 07) (Next Housing Authority Res. No. HA2025 – 05)

5:00 P.M CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez

ROLL CALL
Council / Board Members

1 1.

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR
A Closed Session will be held, Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6, to Conduct Labor Negotiations among:

Agency Negotiator: City Manager, Bret Prebula
Employee Organization:

SCEA (Suisun City Employees' Association);
SCPOA (Suisun City Police Officers Association);
SCPFA (Suisun City Professional Firefighters' Association); SCMPEA (Suisun City Management and Professional Employees' Association); Unrepresented Employees;
Temporary/Part-Time Employees.

2. City Manager Update - (Prebula: [email protected]).

CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
(Any items on the closed session agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)

PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED SESSION
(In accordance with Section 54956(a), public comments are limited to items on this closed session agenda, and to no more than 3 minutes unless allowable by the Mayor/Chair. Speaker cards are available on the table near the entry of the meeting room and should be given to the City Clerk. By law, no prolonged discussion or action may be taken on any item raised during the comment period.)

CLOSED SESSION
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 54950 the Suisun City Council will hold a Closed Session for the Purpose of:

RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
(City Manager Conference Room, City Hall)

6:30 RECONVENE OPEN SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Hernandez

ROLL CALL
Council / Board Members

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

INVOCATION

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Announcement of Actions Taken, if any in Closed Session.

APPROVAL OF REORDERING OF AGENDA

CONFLICT OF INTEREST NOTIFICATION
(Any items on the regular meeting agenda that might be a conflict of interest to any Councilmembers / Boardmembers should be identified at this time.)

REPORTS
(Informational items only.)
2 3.

City Attorney Report - (Enright).

4. Proclamation Proclaiming July 2025 as "Parks and Recreation Month" - (Hernandez:

[email protected]).

5. Presentation on Solano Economic Development Corporation (Chris Rico).

6. Presentation of Fiscal Forecast - Future Outlook of the Suisun City - (Deol:
[email protected]).

7. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Addendum to the License Agreement with ZenCity Technologies, Inc. ("Zencity") to Provide a Community Engagement Platform and Online Community Surveys for a Three-Year Term - (Prebula: [email protected]).

8. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for a Nexus Study and Development Impact Fee Update - (Bermudez: [email protected]).

9. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City’s Behalf with Sanbell for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project - (Vue: [email protected]).

10. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Accepting a Grant of Public Utility Easement from One Harbor Center, A California Limited Partnership, for a Portion of 1 Harbor Center (APN 0032-061-400) to Facilitate the Completion of the Dental Office Private Development at APN 0032-061-390 - (Vue: [email protected]).

11. Council Adoption of Resolution 2025-___: Acknowledging Receipt of a Report Made by the Fire Marshal of the Suisun City Fire Department Regarding the State Mandated Inspections of Specific Occupancies Pursuant to Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 of the California Health and Safety Code - (Colin: [email protected], Renucci: [email protected]).

12. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Approving the Debt Service Rate for the North Bay Aqueduct Bond Issue for Fiscal Year 2025-26 - (Deol: [email protected]).

13. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. to Implement Various Components of the Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan and Related Economic Development Activities - (Prebula: [email protected]).

14. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Client Services Engagement Letter with Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC for Public Management Consulting Services - (Penland: [email protected]).

15. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager on Behalf of

PUBLIC COMMENT
(Request by citizens to discuss any matter under our jurisdiction other than an item posted on this agenda per California Government Code §54954.3. Comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes unless allowable by the Mayor/Chair. Speaker cards are available on the table near the entry of the meeting room and should be given to the City Clerk. By law, no prolonged discussion or action may be taken on any item raised during the public comment period, although informational answers to questions may be given and matters may be referred for placement on a future agenda.)

PRESENTATIONS/APPOINTMENTS
(Presentations, Awards, Proclamations, Appointments).

CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent calendar items requiring little or no discussion may be acted upon with one motion. 3 the City to Execute a Quitclaim Deed for the Abandonment of Public Utility Easements within Real Property (Almond Gardens) on Assessor Parcel Numbers (A.P.N.) 0032-101-420 and 0032-102-160 - (Vue: [email protected]).

Housing Authority

16. Housing Authority
Adoption of Resolution No. HA 2025-___: Adoption of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Almond Gardens Project, and Approval of Request for Release of Funds - (Goltiao: [email protected]).

Joint City Council / Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency

17. Council/Agency Approval of June
2025 Accounts Payable and Payroll Warrants - (Deol:
[email protected]).

Joint City Council / Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency / Housing Authority

18. City Council/Successor Agency/Housing Authority Approval of the Minutes of the Meetings of the Suisun City Council, Suisun City Council Acting as Successor Agency, and Housing Authority held on June 17, June 24, July 1, and July 2 – (Skinner: [email protected]).

19. Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___; Approving Planned Unit Development Application No. PLN-00003 and Site Plan/Architectural Review Application No. PLN-00004 for a Twenty-Unit Multi-Family Residential Project at 400 Main Street (Assessors Parcel Number (APN) 0032-091-220) - (Kearns: [email protected]).

Housing Authority

20. Housing Authority Adoption of Resolution No. HA 2025-__Approving the Fourth Amendment to the November 2, 2021, Disposition and Development Agreement with Harbor Park LLC for Disposition and Development of Assessor Parcel Number's (APNs) 0032-101- 420 and 0032-102-160 (Almond Gardens), as Amended, in the City of Suisun City - (Kearns:

[email protected]).

21. Non-Discussion Items.

PUBLIC HEARING

GENERAL BUSINESS

COUNCIL COMMENTS

REPORTS:
(Informational items only)

ADJOURNMENT
Public Access To Agenda Documents
A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each item for the open session of this meeting, and provided to the City Council, are available for public review at least 72 hours prior to a Council/Agency/Authority Meeting at Suisun City Hall 701 Civic Center Blvd., Suisun City. Agenda related writings or documents provided to a majority of the Council/Board/Commissioners less than 72 hours prior to a Council/Agency/Authority meeting related to an agenda item for the open session of this meeting will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours. An agenda packet is also located at the entrance to the Council 4 Chambers during the meeting for public review. The city may charge photocopying charges for requested copies of such documents. To the extent feasible, the agenda packet is available for online public viewing on the City’s website: https://www.suisun.com/Government/City-

Council/Agendas The City Council/Agency/Authority hopes to conclude its public business by 10:00 p.m. No new items will be taken up after 10:00 p.m., unless so moved by a majority of the City Council, and any items remaining will be agendized for the next meeting. The agendas have been prepared with the hope that all items scheduled will be discussed within the time allowed.

Accommodations
If you require an accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (707) 421-7302 or [email protected]. The City’s reasonable accommodation policy is available for review on the City’s website at www.suisun.com/government/city-council/, you may request an electronic copy or have a copy mailed to you. Please note that for accommodations that are not readily available, you must make your request as soon as you can prior to the time of the meeting.

Decorum
All participants are expected to conduct themselves with mutual respect. Conduct that disrupts meetings will be addressed in accordance with Section 54957.95 of the Government Code.

Ordinances
Ordinances are city laws contained in the Suisun City Municipal Code. Enacting a new city law or changing an existing one is a two-step process. Government Code 36934 provides, except when, after reading the title, further reading is waived by regular motion adopted by majority vote all ordinances shall be read in full either at the time of introduction or passage; provided, however, that a reading of the title or ordinance shall not be required if the title is included on the published agenda and a copy of the full ordinance is made available to the public online and in print at the meeting prior to the introduction or passage.

Certification Of Posting
Agendas for regular and special meetings are posted in accordance with the Brown Act at Suisun City Hall, 701 Civic Center Boulevard, Suisun City, CA. Agendas may be posted at other Suisun City locations including:

Suisun City Fire Station, 621 Pintail Drive, Suisun City, CA; Joe Nelson Center, 611 Village Drive, Suisun City, CA;
Harbor Master Office, 800 Kellogg Street, Suisun City, CA.

I, Ashley Nash, Administrative Assistant II for the City of Suisun City, declare under penalty of perjury that the above agenda was posted and available for review, in compliance with the Brown Act. 5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
6 7

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
8 7/7/2025
1 WWW.SOLANOEDC.ORG
SOLANO EDCChris RicoPresident & CEOWE’RE IN THE BUSINESS OF PROSPERITY MSF3 KEY TAKEAWAYSBUILD A FOUNDATION TO ATTRACT BETTER JOBSSolano EDC:Moving Solano Forward (MSF) III SOLANO EDC CALIFORNIA: MOVING SOLANO FORWARD 1 2
9 7/7/2025
2 PRIORITY PRODUCTIONAREA
Solano EDC pursued and were awarded a $500,000 grant from MTC/ABAG to develop our priority production areas. Solano EDC will ensure that these sites are shovel ready and able to receive the infrastructure dollars necessary to build advanced manufacturing centers. $500K PPA GRANT
PRIORITY DEVELOPMENTAREASTA and Solano EDC received a $400,000 grant to develop transit oriented housing around the Fairfield/Suisun train station, an underutilized asset in our region.

Fairfield-Suisun City Train Station $400K PDA GRANT
3 4
10 7/7/2025
3 SOLANO BIZ-GROWREVOLVING LOAN PROGRAM
25%White
14%Other orNo Response
66%0 – 5 EmployeesAVERAGE LOAN SIZE: $71,044BUSINESS SIZE26%6 – 15 Employees3%16 – 25 Employees5%26 – 100 Employees41%Black orAfrican AmericanRACE/ETHNICITY19%Hispanic orLatino1%AsianLOANS FUNDED IN ALL SEVEN CITIES AND IN UNINCORPORATED SOLANO COUNTYTYPE OF BUSINESSES FUNDED:Child CareService BusinessesTherapyMarketing FirmsTrucking/RepairsWholesale TradeAgricultureRetail StoresMedical/Health CareHome Health CareFitnessNon-ProfitsRestaurants/Food DeliveryWaste ManagementElectrical EngineeringPhysical TherapyBoat Repairsooooooooooooooooo

SOLANO BIZ-GROWREVOLVING LOANPROGRAM
Solano EDC Biz-GrowA SMALL BUSINESS RESILIENCY FUNDA SMALL BUSINESS RESILIENCY FUND SPEAKER SERIESSPONSORED BY: KAISER PERMANENTE
SPEAKER SERIESSPONSORED BY:MAY 1ST – AFFORDABLE HOUSINGSPEAKERS: Adam Briones- CEO of California Community Builders (CCB)Carol J Galante- Professor & Faculty Director of Terner Center for Housing Innovation, University of California, Berkeley,Scott Johnson- Director at The ADU CenterJohnathan Logan- Founder of JDL StrategiesSEPTEMBER 5TH – FUTURE OF TRANSITSPEAKERS: Matt Schrap- CEO, Harbor Trucking AssociationPhil Pierce- Senior Public Policy Manager, ZooxSeamus Murphy- Executive Director, Water Emergency Transportation Authority FEBRUARY 28TH – A.I. IN BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENTSPEAKERS: Tim Flanagan- Chief Information Officer for the County of SolanoDr. Vincent Liu- Research Scientist III at Kaiser Permanente Division of ResearchJim O'Connor- Professor of Education and Founding Dean Emeritus of the College of Education and Health Sciences at Touro University CaliforniaChris Van Pelt- Co-Founder of Weights & BiasesClick Photos to View Speaker Series Now in its third year, our Kaiser sponsored digital speaker series seeks to connect andeducate our ecosystem to vital information so that we can collectively make informed policydecisions that impact the people, communities, and businesses of Solano County. 5 6
11 7/7/2025
4 MONTHLYUPDATES
POLICY UPDATESTh ro u gh it s n ewsl ett er, Sol a n o EDC h a s k ep t m emb ers i nf o rmed o f cr it i c al pol i cy a ndzon i ng up d ates t h at imp a ct lo cal b u si n es ses. Coveri ng reg ul ato ry ch ang es, i n cl ud i ngADU pol i ci es and zo ni n g adj ust m ent s, th es e u pd at es ha ve help ed mem b er s st a yco mp li a nt a n d p ro a cti v e. So l ano E DC p ro vi d es cl ari ty and timel y in sig h t s,emp ow erin g m em b er s to m ak e i nfo rmed b u si n ess d ec i si on s al ig n ed w i th S ol a noCounty’s evolving regulati on s.

RESOURCES & TOOLSSolano EDC’s newsletters have regularly provided members with access to valuable resources, such as theRevolving Loan Fund and ADU planning tools. These resources enable members to secure funding, expandoperations, and effectively manage property assets. By offering consistent access to these tools, Solano EDCsupports members’ strategic goals and reinforces its commitment to fostering economic growth in Solano County.

SOLANO EDCMONTHLY UPDATES

SOLANO ADUPROGRAM
SOLANO ACCESSORYDWELLING UNIT (ADU)PROGRAMSTEP-BY-STEP GUIDEFOR ADU DEVELOPMENTSolano EDC developed the Solano ADU website to serve as a one-stop resource for individuals interestedin Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) within Solano County. This website provides step-by-step guides thatsimplify the ADU development process, making it accessible for everyone from homeowners to potentialinvestors. Whether users want to add value to their property, create housing for family, or invest in rentalincome, Solano ADU offers easy-to-follow instructions to navigate planning, zoning, permitting, andconstruction.KEY FEATURES:Comprehensive Development Guides:Clear, structured steps that walk users through each phase ofthe ADU process, from initial planning to completion.Local Regulations and Requirements:Up-to-date information on zoning laws and building codesspecific to Solano County, helping users understand and meet local compliance.Financial Insights:Information on potential financing options, tax implications, and how ADUs canincrease property value.Customized for Different Needs:Resources tailored for various demographics, including seniorslooking to downsize and families wanting to create multi-generational living spaces.Community-Centered Support:Designed with the Solano County community in mind, this siteempowers residents to make informed decisions about ADU investments.oooooClick Photos for More Information A diverse and affordable housing stock is a vital part of a thriving community. Local employersconsistently tell us that housing young talent is one of their greatest concerns, most importantly TravisAir Force Base, the biggest driver of our regional economy. With support from the Kaiser Foundation,we’re working with our local communities to increase the supply of this important housing type. 7 8
12 7/7/2025
5 Project Costs:Yearly $ Savings:Yearly kWh Savings:# of Installations # of Qualifying Businesses:$534,231$228,827580,9074292Fairfield$474,363$191,786504,8773577Vacaville$408,054$206,604543,7081070Vallejo$66,123$29,70078,162215Benicia$103,240$27,04770,9351022Suisun$73,470$24,92365,594310DixonPendingPendingPendingPending12Rio Vista$1,659,481$708,8891,844,182102298Total SOLANO EDCBUSINESS RETENTION &EXPANSION PROGRAMEXPANDED REACH THROUGH STRATEGIC EVENTS AND FORUMSSolano EDC has hosted significant events, including an economic development forum focused on ruralcommunities, and initiated a strategic partnership with the California Manufacturers & Technology Association(CMTA). These efforts have expanded resources and networking opportunities, providing Solano Countybusinesses, particularly in rural areas, with access to expertise, advocacy, and tailored support.SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIESBenicia, Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville, Vallejo, and Winters: Each city has been activelyengaged in joint and independent business retention visits, with Solano EDC working closely with city officialsto identify key business sectors and gather insights from local enterprises. In each city, regular meetings andevent participation ensure alignment on regional economic strategies and foster a united approach toeconomic growth.Through these targeted initiatives, Solano EDC’s BRE program has positioned itself as a key support networkfor local businesses, helping them navigate challenges, leverage growth opportunities, and contribute to arobust Solano County economy.BAYREN PROJECTS BY CITY: CUMULATIVE IMPACT THROUGH Q3 2024BUSINESS RETENTION & EXPANSION PROGRAM

BAYREN PARTNERSHIP
⚬Codes and Standards -Program supports localgovernments with developing, adopting, andimplementing energy policies, including reach codesand the California Energy Code.￭33 local government staff members attendedtraining and forums.⚬Public Sector New for 2024 -The program will assistlocal governments and special districts with findingand applying for funds to help improve their publicbuildings and will also provide a service to developroadmaps for public building energy improvements.

SOLANO EDC &BAYREN PARTNERSHIP RESIDENTIAL⚬Single Family =2,077 EE measures installed - $463,196in rebates - $65,000 in recurring energy savings.⚬Multifamily =419 Georgia Street, Vallejo – ProjectCost: $212,748 - BayREN Rebates: $126,500- EnergySavings: sixty-two%.⚬Green Lab elin g =1 48 9 Ho m e Energ y Sco rescompleted - $372,250 in rebates provided.COMMERCIAL⚬Sixty-five projects / 686,660 KWH savings / $653,729 in project economic activity: $264,983.00 estimatedin recurring energy savings for our businesses.

RESULTS:CROSS CUTTINGWORKFORCE &EDUCATION⚬The program will create job trainingopportunities in the green economy.Through an existing partnership withRising Sun Center for Opportunity,BayREN has already supported youthwith training and employmentopportunities since 2019.￭15 local youth employed and 150households served.

Residential⚬Single Family Home+⚬Bay Area Multifamily Building Enhancements Program (BAMBE)⚬Green Labeling Commercial⚬BayREN Business⚬BayREN Refrigerant⚬Replacement Program (BRRR) Public Sector⚬Integrated Energy Services (IES)⚬Targeted Decarbonization Services (TDS) Cross Cutting⚬Codes & Standards⚬Climate Careers⚬Water Upgrades Save

PROGRAM OFFERINGSBAY AREA REGIONAL ENERGY NETWORK
9 10
13 7/7/2025
6 EVENTS &FORUMS
SOLANO EDCEVENTS & FORUMS Our annual breakfast is a marquee event on the Solano Calendar. We continue to elevatethe content and production to provide vital information to our community. Additionally, weproduce events like the Rural Community Economic Development Forum to connect ourcommunities to the people and resources that help them thrive.ANNUAL MEETING BREAKFASTThe Solano EDC Annual Meeting Breakfast is a highly anticipated event that brings community leaders,policymakers, and business stakeholders together to discuss critical topics impacting the future of SolanoCounty. This year’s breakfast on February 8, 2024, centered on the California Forever development plan, aproposed city in eastern Solano County, with perspectives from both the project proponents and SolanoTogether, a group opposing the development. This open dialogue provided a platform for both sides to shareinsights, engage in constructive debate, and explore the future of the county’s landscape.RURAL COMMUNITIES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FORUMAs part of Solano EDC’s commitment to fostering growth and opportunity throughout Solano County, wehosted the Rural Communities Economic Development Forum, a highly successful event that brought togetherinfluential stakeholders, industry experts, and local leaders. With presentations from the CA Department ofHousing and Community Development, the U.S. Economic Development Administration, and the SmallBusiness Development Center, this forum highlighted key strategies and challenges for economicdevelopment in rural areas. Attendees gained valuable insights into local growth opportunities and engagedin a lively open forum, where they connected directly with experts and policymakers.

NON-PROFITCAPACITY BUILDINGUPDATE
NON-PROFIT CAPACITYBUILDING UPDATESolano EDC hired We Are For Good to provide monthly training to up to 30 nonprofit partnerslooking to elevate their organization’s fundraising, organizational efficiency, and modernize theapproach to community, storytelling and authentic relationship-building. Additionally, all participantsreceive all-access to PRO providing an on-demand library of content around nonprofit leadership,marketing and fundraising. A pre-recorded class-style presentation on each monthly theme isdropped into PRO ahead of meeting time for participants to go more deeply into the topic and comeready with questions + case studies + problem-solving of current solutions. We also offer a resourcetool - major gift proposal template, stewardship matrix, etc. This is in addition to a PRO Community +private Community channel just for this co-hort of participants in We Are For Good Community.FEBRUARY: GETTING YOUR SHOP IN ORDER (VALUES, MINDSETS, STORYTELLING) + GETTING TO KNOW WAFG + PRO PLATFORMMARCH: ANNUAL GIVINGAPRIL: MAJOR GIFTSMAY: DONOR RELATIONSJULY: EVENTSJUNE: BOARDSAUGUST:CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPSSEPTEMBER:FOUNDATION + GRANTSOCTOBER:MARKETING + BRANDINGNOVEMBER: VOLUNTEERS DECEMBER:PLANNED GIVING
IMPACT OF DISPLACEMENT: There was a significant discussion about thedisplacement of people from the Bay Area toSolano County due to rising living costs. Thisissue was recognized as a major concernaffecting many individuals and communities.

BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS OVER FUNDING:A key takeaway was the importance of buildingstrong partnerships rather than solely focusingon securing funding. These partnerships canchampion causes and bring in additionalsupport and resources.STRESSORS + PAIN POINTS:Participants shared their major stressors, including raising funds, following policy changes, and balancingoperational demands. Understanding these pain points can help tailor support and resources to address thesechallenges effectively. 11 12
14 7/7/2025
7 WWW.SOLANOEDC.ORG
THANK YOUQUESTIONS?
13 15

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
16 AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

AGENDA ITEM: Presentation on General Fund Multi-Year Forecast

FISCAL IMPACT: None.

STRATEGIC PLAN: Provide Good Governance, Section 4.1 – Review and update required planning and financial documents as needed. Ensure Fiscal Solvency.

BACKGROUND: Over the course of the last several months, the City has been working with Andy Heath, an independent financial consultant, to develop a multi-year forecast for the City’s General Fund. Mr. Heath has deep extensive with California municipal finance, having a length career serving in a variety of financial roles. Mr. Heath has spent the last eight years developing financial models and financial forecasts for multiple agencies in California. Mr. Heath will be at the July 15, 2025 City Council meeting to present the results of the forecast model.

STAFF REPORT:

General Fund Multi-Year Forecast
The General Fund typically represents the most flexible or discretionary funding source from which the City can provide for both required and desired service and programs. The General Fund is the primary operating fund that accounts for most of the government’s financial resources, except for those specifically designated for other funds. Suisun City uses resources generated in both the General Fund and Measure S Special Tax Fund to fund a wide array of public safety, public works, community development, parks and recreation and administrative programs provided to the community on an ongoing basis.

The purpose of a multi-year forecast for the City’s General Fund is to develop an understanding of overall baseline funding requirements and the ultimate impact on long-term fiscal sustainability. Factors taken into consideration in development of a baseline forecast include:

 Ongoing revenue and expenditure changes over multiple years using a conservative set of assumptions
 Cost-drivers identified for different types of expenditures (i.e. personnel / materials & supplies / capital and outlay)
 Removal of one-time revenues and expenditures over time to gauge levels of ongoing revenues against ongoing expenditures

The forecast developed for the City’s General Fund encompasses both actual and anticipated fiscal activity at a given point in time. As such, given the fluidity of economic and fiscal cycles, the forecast should be updated frequently to remain a useful tool to gauge overall fiscal sustainability and aid in decision making.

17 General Fund Forecast – Key Revenue/ Expenditure Assumptions The General Fund Multi-Year Forecast will be presented at the July 15, 2025 City Council Meeting. As the forecast to be presented was developed, the following key revenue and expenditure assumptions were integrated into the forecast using the recently adopted FY 2025-26 General Fund Budget as a base:

 Moderate revenue growth for the City’s primary discretionary revenue sources – Property Tax and Sales Tax – 2.5% - 3.1% annually
 Development- and Planning-related fees and charges increase by 2.5% annually based on anticipated growth in the City
 Nominal annual increases for most other General Fund revenue sources – 0.0% - 1.5%  Continued annual transfer-in of most revenue generated by Measure S ($6.3+ million) to help fund Police, Fire and Code Enforcement
 All authorized positions wholly or partially allocated to the General Fund are filled for the entirety of the year (and all future years)
 Static salary costs based on FY 2025-26 Adopted Budget (no salary growth built into forecast)
 Nominal annual cost inflators built in for most expenditures – 0.0% - 3.0%  Future CalPERS retirement costs based on most recent CalPERS Actuary Reports received in July / August 2024
 Removal of one-time annual fiscal activity built into FY 2025-26 Adopted Budget:
o $1.4 million sale of assets revenue (removed in FY 2026-27) o $560,000 reimbursement agreement revenue (removed in FY 2028-29) o $127,300 in grant revenues (removed in FY 2026-27)
o $280,000 in pre-positioning revenues (fire) (removed in FY 2026-27) o $500,000 transfer-in from the Facilities Fund to offset one-time facility repairs built into departmental budgets (removed in FY 2026-27) o $253,000 transfer-out to the Solid Waste Fund

General Fund Forecast - Results
Taking into account the aforementioned assumptions as applied to a given revenue and expenditure base built around the recently adopted FY 2025-26 General Fund Budget, General Fund reserves will be required to deliver the defined level of services and programs in the future.

The General Fund starts to have systemic operating deficits of between $1.7 and $2.3 million each year beginning in FY 2026-27. This is shown in the chart below.

18 With no additional revenue sources and no additional one-time funding sources other than those noted above (i.e. sale of assets; transfers in; reimbursement agreements, etc.) the only funding source available to offset these projected deficits is the Stabilization Fund (i.e. reserves).

Continued use of Stabilization Fund reserves without considering changes to the ongoing fiscal framework leads to a depletion of reserves by FY 2029-30 as shown below:

19 Recognizing the unsustainability of the existing General Fund fiscal framework, staff has been actively engaged in enhancing the longer-term economic development of the City. 20 AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Addendum to the License Agreement with ZenCity Technologies, Inc. ("Zencity") to Provide a Community Engagement Platform and Online Community Surveys for a Three-Year Term.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed addendum to the license agreement with ZenCity is for a total of $50,000 over a three-year term.. Sufficient funding is available in the General Fund to cover the cost of this agreement.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

This action aligns with the City’s Strategic Plan goal: To Provide Good Governance.

BACKGROUND:

The City first entered into a 12-month license agreement with ZenCity in 2020 to implement a public survey tool designed to better understand resident priorities and concerns related to city services and overall quality of life.

In February 2021, the City approved an addendum to extend the agreement for an additional one-year term. A subsequent 12-month extension was approved in February 2022, after which the agreement entered into an automatic annual renewal cycle. Most recently, effective March 1, 2023, the City approved another one-year extension.

STAFF REPORT:

The proposed Addendum to the License Agreement will extend the existing agreement with ZenCity for a term of three years, maintaining the current scope of services.

ZenCity provides an advanced community engagement platform that helps local governments gather representative feedback and generate actionable insights. Unlike traditional engagement tools—such as in-person meetings or basic surveys—ZenCity’s platform offers broader reach, greater efficiency, and real-time analysis.

The software enables cities to better plan, strategize, and allocate resources based on data-driven insights. By leveraging ZenCity’s tools, Suisun City can continue to improve service delivery, increase community satisfaction, and enhance public trust through transparent and informed decision-making

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025- ___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Addendum to the License Agreement with ZenCity Technologies, Inc. ("Zencity") to Provide a Community Engagement Platform and Online Community Surveys for a Three-Year Term.
21 DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Addendum to the License Agreement with ZenCity Technologies, Inc. ("Zencity") to Provide a Community Engagement Platform and Online Community Surveys for a Three-Year Term.
2 .

ZenCity Order Form Addendum

PREPARED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution Authorizing License Agreement Addendum with ZenCity

2. Zencity Order Form Addendum.pdf
22 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN ADDENDUM TO THE

LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH ZENCITY TECHNOLOGIES, LTD TO PROVIDE A

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PLATFORM AND ONLINE COMMUNITY SURVEYS

FOR A TERM OF THREE-YEARS

WHEREAS, on June 18, 202 0, the City entered into a License Agreement with ZenCity Technologies, LTD (ZenCity) to provide data collection and analytics services; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2021 the City entered into an Addendum to the License Agreement with ZenCity, extending the term for an additional year; and WHEREAS, beginning in 2022, the Addendum to the License Agreement was extended for a term of 12 months, with automatic yearly renewals.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City authorizes the City Manager to execute the Addendum to the License Agreement for an additional term of three-years with a contract amount not to exceed $50,000, and to take any and all necessary and appropriate actions to implement this contract.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
23 06-18-2025

Proposal

For:

Suisun

City,

Proposal

Expiration:

07-18-2025

24 ZENCITY

ORDER

FORM

ADDENDUM

This

Addendum

(the

"Addendum"
)

Order

Form

and

between

Suisun

City,

(
"Customer"
)

and

Zencity

Technologies

Inc.

("Zencity"),

dated

02-27-2020

(the

”Order

Form"
)

entered

into

04-27-2025

(the

"Addendum

Date"
).

All

capitalized

terms

not

deﬁned

herein

shall

have

the

meaning

ascribed

such

terms

the

Order

Form.

Whereas
,

the

Parties

wish

amend

certain

terms

the

Order

Form

set

forth

herein;

Now,

therefore,

the

Parties

hereto

agree

amend

the

terms

the

Order

Form

set

forth

below.

1. Term

The

term

the

Order

Form

hereby

extended

for

36 Months

period

commencing

04-27-2025

and

ending

04-26-2028

(the

"Renewal

Term"),

after

which

the

Order

Form

shall

automatically

renew

for

successive

periods

12 months

unless

either

Party

provides

notice

non-renewal

least

90 Days

days

prior

the

end

such

applicable

term.

2. Recurring

Fees

[During

the

Renewal

Term]

The

Recurring

Fees

table

included

the

Order

Form

shall

amended

and

replaced

its

entirety

follows:

SKU

Item

Name

Description

Yearly

List

Price

Term

Discount

Year

1-2

Price

Year

3 Price

Term

Price

ZC-ECI

Zencity

360

Essentials

Renewal

Community

Engagement

SaaS

Platform

for

cities

and

counties

Organic

Processing

organic

feedback

various

channels

Engage

Community

engagement

collaboration

and

input

interface

$66,400

3 Years

74.9%

$25,000

Annually

FREE

$50,000

ZC-ENG

Zencity

Engage

Renewal

Upgrade

to:

●

Unlimited

projects

the

community

engagement

interface

essential

project

context

and

invite

resident

collaboration

and

input.

●

Includes

participatory

budgeting

public

ideation

boards

ZC-CSS

Community

Survey

Semi

Annual

Renewal

Recurring,

online

survey

measuring

resident

satisfaction,

with

ongoing

scores

always

viewable

from

live

dashboard

and

representative

results

aggregated

into

report

twice

year.

Total

Fees

$50,000

Year

1-2

Price

$25,000

25 Year

3 Price

FREE

General.

This

Addendum

shall

form

integral

part

the

Order

Form.

Unless

expressly

speciﬁed

herein,

all

other

provisions,

terms

and

conditions

the

Order

Form

shall

apply

and

shall

remain

full

force

and

eﬀect.

case

any

contradiction

discrepancy

between

the

terms

this

Addendum

those

the

Order

Form,

with

respect

matters

described

herein,

the

terms

this

Addendum

shall

prevail.

witness

whereof,

the

parties

have

executed

this

Addendum,

eﬀective

the

Addendum

Date.

__________________________________

____________________________________

Zencity

Customer

26 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for a Nexus Study and Development Impact Fee Update.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total cost of the agreement with NBS will not exceed $88,615.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

To Provide Good Governance.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Suisun City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking qualified consultants to conduct a Nexus Study for the City's Master Fee Schedule and to update its Development Impact Fees. The purpose of these efforts is to ensure the City’s fee structures are legally defensible, equitable, and aligned with the cost of providing services and infrastructure.

Following a competitive selection process, the City’s evaluation committee reviewed multiple proposals and conducted interviews. NBS was identified as the top firm based on its qualifications, experience with California municipalities, and cost-effectiveness.

NBS is a California-based firm with extensive expertise in fiscal and economic consulting services for local governments.

STAFF REPORT:

The proposed agreement with NBS includes preparation of a Nexus Study to analyze and document the justification for various fees in the City’s Master Fee Schedule, as well as an update to the Development Impact Fee program. These studies are essential tools to ensure that City fees comply with legal standards such as the Mitigation Fee Act (AB 1600), and to support the City’s ability to fund infrastructure and service needs as Suisun City grows.

The last comprehensive update to the City’s User Fee Study was completed on July 26, 2016 (Resolution No. 2016-67), and the most recent Development Impact Fee Study was adopted on January 3, 2017 (Resolution No. 2017-01). While the Finance Department has maintained annual updates to the Master Fee Schedule using inflationary factors such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and the California Construction Cost Index (CCCI), these adjustments do not replace the need for a detailed, data-driven analysis. A full Nexus Study is necessary to ensure that the City’s fee structures reflect current costs of service delivery, infrastructure needs, and legal requirements. Conducting this update at this time is essential to ensure fairness, transparency, and defensibility as Suisun City continues to evolve and attract new development.

By contracting with NBS, the City will receive a comprehensive evaluation of existing fees, comparisons with peer cities, legal documentation for all fee changes, and clear recommendations for implementation. Their proven methodology and experience with similar-sized cities position them well to deliver high-quality, defensible work products.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt:
27 a
.

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for a Nexus Study and Development Impact Fee Update.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group for a Nexus Study and Development Impact Fee Update.
2 .

Agreement

PREPARED BY:

Michael Elm, Administrative Technician
REVIEWED BY:

Jim Bermudez, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:
1 - Resolution - NBS Contract.docx
2 - Suisun City Nexus Study 6-18-25 Signed by NBS.pdf
.
28 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 –

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH NBS FOR A NEXUS STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE.

WHEREAS, the City of Suisun City desires to ensure that its Master Fee Schedule and Development Impact Fees are legally defensible, equitable, and aligned with the true cost of providing services and infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking qualified consultants to conduct a Nexus Study and update the City’s Development Impact Fee program; and WHEREAS, a selection committee reviewed proposals and interviewed qualified firms, ultimately recommending NBS as the most qualified and cost-effective consultant based on its experience and expertise in municipal finance and fee studies.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Suisun City, as follows:

1. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with NBS in a form approved by the City Attorney for the purpose of completing a Nexus Study and Development Impact Fee Update, in an amount not to exceed $88,615

2. The City Manager is further authorized to take all necessary actions to implement the agreement and complete the scope of work in coordination with City staff.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th day of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk

29 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”) is dated _________, 2025 (“Effective Date”) and is between the City of Suisun, a California muni cipal corporation with its principal place of business at 701 Civic Center Blvd., Suisun City, CA 94585 (“City”) and NBS Government Finance Group, DBA NBS , a California corporation, with its principal place of business at 32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100, Temecula, CA 92592 (“Consultant”). City and Consultant are sometimes referred to herein as the “Parties”, and individually as a “Party”.

RECITALS
A. City i ssued Request for Proposals on February 27 , 202 5, titled “Nexus Study of Master Fee Schedule”. Consultant submitted a proposal dated March 27, 2025 in response to the RFP.

B. City requires provision of financial consulting services, all as more fully set forth and described in this Agreement. Consultant is duly licensed and/or otherwise fully authorized by law, and has the necessary experience and qualifications, to provide such services. City enters this Agreement in substantial reliance on such experience and qualifications.

C. City desires to retain Consultant as an independent contractor and Consultant desires to serve City to perform these services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

D. Now, therefore, it is agreed as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Consultant’s Services.

A. Scope of Services. Consultant shall perform the services described in the Scope of Services (the “Services”) for Citywide Nexus Study of Master Fee Schedule , attached as Exhibit A. City may request, in writing, changes in the Scope of Services to be performed. Any changes mutually agreed upon by the Parties, and any increase or decrease in compensation, shall be incorporated by written amendments to this Agreement.

B. Party Representatives . For the purposes of this Agreement, the City Representative shall be the City Manager, or such other person designated in writing by the City Manager (the “City Representative”). For the purposes of this Agreement, the Consultant Representative shall be Nicole Kissam , Director (the “Consultant Representative”). The Consultant Representative shall directly manage Consultant’s Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall not change the Consultant Representative without City’s prior written consent.
30 -2-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
C. Time for Performance . Consultant shall commence the Services on the Effective Date and shall perform all Services by December 31, 2025.

D. Standard of Performance . Consultant’s Services shall be performed in accordance with the generally accepted professional standards of practice and principles and in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently per forming similar services under similar conditions.

Consultant shall, at all times herein, possess any and all State of California and/or federal professional licenses and certifications, as applicable, required to lawfully perfor m the Services.

E. Personnel. Consultant has secured, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required to perform the Services required under this Agreement. All of the Services required under this Agreement shall be performed by Consultant or under its supervision, and all personnel engaged in th e work shall be qualified to perform such Services.

F. Compliance with Laws . Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, statutes, codes and regulations of the federal, state and local government, including Cal/OSHA requirements.

G. Permits and Licenses . Consultant shall obtain and maintain during the Agreement term all necessary licenses, permits and certificates required by law for the provision of Services under this Agreement, including a business license.

2. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall be from the Effective Date and shall expire one year after Effective Date , unless extended or earlier terminated as provided in Section 12 of this Agreement. Consultant shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other established and agreed upon schedules and deadlines agreed upon in writing. The Parties may, by mutual, written consent, extend the term of this Agreement if necessary to complete the Services.

3. Compensation.

A. Compensation. As full compensation for Services satisfactorily rendered, City shall pay Consultant at the hourly rates set forth in the Approved Fee Schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B . In no event shall the total amount paid for services rendered by Consultant under this Agreement exceed the sum of $88,615 (the “Maximum Compensation”) for such Services. This amount covers and is inclusive of all labor, materials, and any and all other costs incurred by Consultant in performing the Services, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing.

B. Expenses. The amount set forth in paragraph 3.A. above includes reimbursement for all expenditures incurred in the performance of this Agreement. 31 -3-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
C. Unauthorized Services and Expenses. City will not pay for any services not specified in the Scope of Services, unless the City Council or the City Representative, if applicable, and the Consultant Representative authorize such services in writing prior to Consultant’s performance of those services or incurrence of additional expenses. Any additional services or expenses authorized by the City Council, or (where authorized) the City Manager, shall be compensated at the rates set forth in Exhibit B, or, if not specified, at a rate mutually agreed to by the Parties. City shall make payment for additional services and expenses in accordance with Section 4 of this Agreement.

4. Method of Payment.

A. Invoices. Consultant shall submit to City an invoice, on a monthly basis, for the Services performed pursuant to this Agreement. Each invoice shall itemize the Services rendered during the billing period, hourly rates charged, if applicable, and the amount due. Ci ty shall review each invoice and notify Consultant in writing within ten Business days of receipt of any disputed invoice amounts.

B. Payment. City shall pay all undisputed invoice amounts within 30 calendar days after receipt up to the Maximum Compensation set forth in Section 3 of this Agreement. City does not pay interest on past due amounts. City shall not withhold federal payroll, state payroll or other taxes, or other similar deductions, from payments made to Consultant. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, if Consultant is a nonresident of California, City will withhold the amount required by the Franchise Tax Board pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code Section 18662 and applicable regulations.

C. Audit of Records. Consultant shall make all records, invoices, time cards, cost control sheets and other records maintained by Consultant in connection with this Agreement available during Consultant’s regular working hours to City for review and audit by City during the term of this Agreement and for four (4) years from the date of final payment by the City.

5. Independent contractor. Consultant is, and shall at all times remain as to City, a wholly independent contractor. Consultant shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of City. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Consultant or any of Consultant’s employees, except as set forth in this Agreement. Consultant shall not, at any time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its officers, agents or employees are in any manner employees of City.

6. Information and Documents.

A. Consultant covenants that all data, reports, documents, discussion, or other information (collectively “Data”) developed or received by Consultant or provided for performance of this Agreement are deemed confidential and shall not be disclosed or released by Consultant without prior written authorization by City. City shall grant such authorization if applicable law requires disclosure. Consultant, its officers, employees, 32 -4-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
agents, or subcontractors shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested in writing by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or othe r information concerning the work performed under this Agreement or relating to any project or property located within the City. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered “voluntary,” provided Consultant gives City notice of such court order or subpoena.

B. Consultant shall promptly notify City should Consultant, its officers, employees, agents or subcontractors be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder or with respect to any project or property located within the City. City may, but has no obligation to, represent Consultant or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with City and to provide City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant. However, City’s right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by City to control, direct or rewrite the response.

C. All Data required to be furnished to City in connection with this Agreement shall become City’s property, and City may use all or any portion of the Data submitted by Consultant as City deems appropriate. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files containing data generated for the Services, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the Services shall become City’s sole property and may be used, reused or otherwise disposed of by City without Consultant’s permission. Consultant may take and retain copies of the written products as desired, but the written products shall not be the subject of a copyright application b y Consultant.

D. Consultant’s covenants under this Section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

7. Conflicts of Interest. Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subcontractors, if any, shall comply with all conflict of interest statutes of the State of California applicable to Consultant’s Services under this Agreement, including the Political Reform Act (Gov. Code § 81000, et seq.) and Government Code Section 1090.

During the term of this Agreement, Consultant may perform similar Services for other clients, but Consultant and its officers, employees, associates and subcontractors shall not, without the City Representative’s prior written approval, perform work for another person or entity for whom Consultant is not currently performing work that would require Consultant or one of its officers, employees, associates or subcontractors to abstain from a decision under this Agreement pursuant to a conflict of interest statute. Consultant shall incorporate a clause substantially similar to this Section into any subcontract that Consultant executes in connection with the performance of this Agreement. 33 -5-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

8. Indemnification, Hold Harmless, and Duty to Defend.

A. Indemnities.
1) To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, defend, hold harmless and indemnify City and its elected officials, officers, attorneys, agents, employees, designated volunteers, successors, assigns and those City ag ents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials (collectively “Indemnitees”), from and against any and all damages, costs, expenses, liabilities, claims, demands, causes of action, proceedings, expenses, judgments, penalties, liens, a nd losses of any nature whatsoever, including fees of accountants, attorneys, or other professionals and all costs associated therewith and the payment of all consequential damages (collectively “Liabilities”), in law or equity, whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, are claimed to arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the acts or omissions of Consultant, its officers, agents, servants, employees, subcontractors, materialmen, consultants or their officers, agents, servants or employees (or any entity or individual that Consultant shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of this Agreement, including the Indemnitees’ active or passive negligence, except for Liabilities arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduc t of the Indemnitees as determined by court decision or by the agreement of the Parties.

Consultant shall defend the Indemnitees in any action or actions filed in connection with any Liabilities with counsel of the Indemnitees’ choice, and shall pay all c osts and expenses, including all attorneys’ fees and experts’ costs actually incurred in connection with such defense. Consultant shall reimburse the Indemnitees for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by Indemnitees in connection therewith. 2) Consultant shall pay all required taxes on amounts paid to Consultant under this Agreement, and indemnify and hold City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against City by reason of the independent contractor rela tionship created by this Agreement. Consultant shall fully comply with the workers’ compensation law regarding Consultant and Consultant’s employees. Consultant shall indemnify and hold City harmless from any failure of Consultant to comply with applicab le workers’ compensation laws. City may offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant’s failure to promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this subparagraph A.2). 3) Consultant shall obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those in this Section from each and every subcontractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. If Consultant fails to obtain such indemnity obligations, Consultant shall be fully responsible and indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Indemnitees from and against any and all Liabilities at law or in equity, whether actual, alleged or threatened, which arise out of, are claimed to arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the acts or omissions of Consultant’s subcontractor, its officers, agents, servants, employees, 34 -6-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
subcontractors, materialmen, consultants or their officers, agents, servants or employees (or any entity or individual that Consultant’s subcontractor shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of this Agreement, including the Indemnitees’ active or passive negligence, except for Liabilities arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees as determined by court decision or by the agreement of the Parties.

B. Workers’ Compensation Acts not Limiting . Consultant’s indemnifications and obligations under this Section, or any other provision of this Agreement, shall not be limited by the provisions of any workers’ compensation act or similar act. Consultant expressly waives its statutory immunity under such statutes or laws as to City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

C. Insurance Requirements not Limiting . City does not, and shall not, waive any rights that it may possess against Consultant because of the acceptance by City, or the deposit with City, of any insurance policy or certificate required pursuant to this Agreement. The indemnities in this Section shall apply regardless of whether or not any insurance policies are determined to be applicable to the Liabilities, tax, assessment, penalty or interest asserted against City.

D. Survival of Terms. Consultant’s indemnifications and obligations under this Section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

9. Insurance.

A. Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance . Consultant shall not commence work for the City until it has secured all insurance required under this section and provided evidence thereof that is acceptable to the City. In addition, Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until it has secured all insurance required under this section.
1) Commercial General Liability Insurance with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage and a general aggregate limit of $2,000,000 per project or location. The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions limiting coverage for (1) contractual liability; (2) cross liability exclusion for claims or suits by one insured against another; (3) products/completed operations liability; or (4) contain any other exclusion contrary to the Agreement. The policy shall be endorsed to name the City, its e lected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents, servants, designated volunteers and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials, as additional insureds If Consultant is a limited liability company, the commercial general liability coverage shall be amended so that Consultant and its managers, affiliates, employees, agents and other persons necessary or incidental to its operation are insureds.
35 -7-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
2) Automobile Liability Insurance for any owned, non -owned or hired vehicle used in connection with the performance of this Agreement with a combined single limit of $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. If Consultant does not use any owned, non -owned or hired vehicles in the performance of Services under this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain a non -owned auto endorsement to the Commercial General Liability policy required under subparagraph A.1) of this Section. 3) Workers’ Compensation Insurance as required by the State of California and Employer’s Liability Insurance with a minimum limit of $ 1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. If Consultant has no employees while performing Services under this Agreement, workers’ compensation policy is not required, but Consultant shall execute a declaration that it has no employees. 4) Professional Liability/Errors and Omissions Insurance with minimum limits of $2,000,000 per claim and in aggregate. This insurance shall be written on a policy coverage form specifically designed to protect against acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of professional services. “Covered Professional Services” as designated in the policy must specifically include work performed under this Agreement. The policy must “pay on behalf of” the insured and must include a provision establishing the insurer's duty to defend.

B. Acceptability of Insurers . With the exception of Professional Liability. t he insurance policies required under this Section shall be issued by an insurer admitted to write insurance in the State of California with a rating of A:VII or better in the latest edition of the A.M. Best Insurance Rating Guide. Self - insurance shall not be considered to comply with the insurance requirements under this Section.

C. Additional Insured. The commercial general and automobile liability policies shall contain an endorsement naming City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.

D. Primary and Non-Contributing. With the exception of Professional Liability, the insurance policies required under this Section shall apply on a primary non - contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self -insurance available to City.

Any insurance or self -insurance maintained by City, its elected and appointed officia ls, officers, employees, agents or volunteers, shall be in excess of Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.

E. Consultant’s Waiver of Subrogation . With the exception of Professional Liability, the insurance policies required under this Section shall not prohibit Consultant and Consultant’s employees, agents or subcontractors from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives all rights of subrogation against City.
36 -8-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
F. Deductibles and Self -Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self -insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. At City’s option, Consultant shall either reduce or eliminate the deductibles or self -insured retentions with respect to City, or Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and expenses.

G. Cancellations or Modifications to Coverage . Consultant shall not cancel, reduce or otherwise modify the insurance policies required by this Section during the term of this Agreement. The commercial general and automobile liability policies required under this Agreement shall be endorsed to state that should the issuing insurer cancel the policy before the expiration date, the issuing insurer will endeavor to mail 30 days’ prior written notice to City. If any insurance policy required under this Section is canceled or reduced in coverage or limits, Consultant shall, within two Business Days of notice from the insurer, phone, fax or notify City via certified mail, return receipt requested, of the cancellation of or changes to the policy.

H. City Remedy for Noncompliance . If Consultant does not maintain the policies of insurance required under this Section in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, or in the event any of Consultant’s policies do not comply with the requirements under this Section, City m ay either immediately terminate this Agreement or, if insurance is available at a reasonable cost, City may, but has no duty to, take out the necessary insurance and pay, at Consultant’s expense, the premium thereon.

Consultant shall promptly reimburse City for any premium paid by City or City may withhold amounts sufficient to pay the premiums from payments due to Consultant.

I. Evidence of Insurance . Prior to the performance of Services under this Agreement, Consultant shall furnish City’s Risk Manager with a certificate or certificates of insurance and all original endorsements evidencing and effecting the coverages required under this Section. The endorsements are subject to City’s approval. Consultant may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies to City.

Consultant shall maintain current endorsements on file with City’s Risk Manager.

Consultant shall provide proof to City’s Risk Manager that insurance policies expiring during the term of this Agreement have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Consultant shall furnish such proof at least two weeks prior to the expiration of the coverages.

J. Indemnity Requirements not Limiting . Procurement of insurance by Consultant shall not be construed as a limitation of Consultant’s liability or as full performance of Consultant’s duty to indemnify City under Section 8 of this Agreement.

K. Broader Coverage/Higher Limits. If Consultant maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums required above, City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to City.
37 -9-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
L. Subcontractor Insurance Requirements . Consultant shall require each of its subcontractors that perform Services under this Agreement to maintain insurance coverage that meets all of the requirements of this Section.

10. Mutual Cooperation.

A. City’s Cooperation. City shall provide Consultant with all pertinent Data, documents and other requested information as is reasonably available for Consultant’s proper performance of the Services required under this Agreement.

B. Consultant’s Cooperation . In the event any claim or action is brought against City relating to Consultant’s performance of Services rendered under this Agreement, Consultant shall render any reasonable assistance that City requires.

11. Records and Inspections. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to time, costs, expenses, receipts, correspondence, and other such information required by City that relate to the performance of the Services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible. Consultant shall provide free access to City, its designees and representatives at reasonable times, and shall allow City to examine and audit the books a nd records, to make transcripts therefrom as necessary, and to inspect all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three years after receipt of final payment.

12. Termination of Agreement.

A. Right to Terminate. City has the right to terminate any portion or all of the Services under this Agreement at any time, at will, for any reason or no reason, after giving written notice to Consultant at least five (5) calendar days’ prior written notice before the termination is to be effective. Consultant may terminate this Agreement at any time, at will, for any reason or no reason, after giving written notice to City at least 30 calendar days before the termination is to be effective.

B. Obligations upon Termination . Consultant shall cease all work under this Agreement on or before the effective date of termination specified in the notice of termination. City shall be immediately given title to and possession of all Work Product and original field notes, drawings and specifications, written reports and all other documents produced or developed pursuant to this Agreement. In the event of City’s termination of this Agreement due to no fault or failure of performance by Consultant, City shall pay Consultant based on the percentage of work satisfactorily performed up to the effective date of termination. In no event shall Consultant be entitled to receive more than the amount that would be paid to Consultant for the full performance of the Services required by this Agreement. Consultant shall have no other claim against City by reason of such termination, including any claim for compensation. 38 -10-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

13. Force Majeure. Neither City nor Consultant shall be liable for any failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement if Consultant presents acceptable evidence, in City’s sole judgment, that such failure was due to acts of God, embargoes, inability to obtain labor or materials or reasonable substitutes for labor or materials, governmental restrictions, governmental regulations, governmental controls, judicial orders, enemy or hostile governmental action, civil commotion, fire or other casualty, or ot her causes beyond Consultant’s reasonable control and not due to any act by Consultant.

Consultant’s lack of financial ability, in the absence of any of the foregoing events, shall not constitute a force majeure event.

14. Default.

A. Consultant’s failure to comply with the provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a default. In the event that Consultant is in default for cause under the terms of this Agreement, City shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default.

B. In addition to the right to terminate pursuant to Section 12, if the City Manager determines that Consultant is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, City shall serve Consultant with written notice of the default. Consultant shall have ten calendar days after service upon it of the notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that Consultant fails to cure its default within such period of time, City may, notwithstand ing any other provision of this Agreement, terminate this Agreement without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this Agreement.

15. Notices. Any notice, consent, request, demand, bill, invoice, report or other communication required or permitted under this Agreement shall be in writing and conclusively deemed effective: (a) on personal delivery, (b) on confirmed delivery by courier service d uring Consultant’s and City’s regular business hours, or (c) three Business Days after deposit in the United States mail, by first class mail, postage prepaid, and addressed to the Party to be notified as set forth below:

TO CITY: TO CONSULTANT:

City of Suisun City NBS Government Finance Group
Department of Development Services Attn: Stephanie Parson, CEO 39 -11-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
Attn: [Jim Bermudez] 32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite.316
701 Civic Center Blvd. Temecula, CA 92592
Suisun City, California 94585

COPY TO CITY ATTORNEY:

City of Suisun City
Attn: City Attorney
701 Civic Center Blvd.

Suisun City, California 94585

16. Non-Discrimination and Equal Employment Opportunity. In the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee, subcontractor or applicant for employment because of race, color, religious creed, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, marital status, national ori gin, ancestry, age, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, sexual orientation or other basis prohibited by law. Consultant will take affirmative action to ensure that subcontractors and applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religious creed, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, marital status, national origin, ancestry, age, physic al disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information or sexual orientation.

17. Prohibition of Assignment and Delegation. Consultant shall not assign any of its rights or delegate any of its duties under this Agreement, either in whole or in part, without City’s prior written consent, which can be withheld for any reason. City’s consent to an assignment of rights under this Agreement shall not release Consultant from any of its obligations or alter any of its primary obligations to be performed under this Agreement.

Any attempted assignment or delegation in violation of this Section shall be void and of no effect and shall entitle City to terminate this Agreement. As used in this Section, “assignment” and “delegation” means any sale, gift, pledge, hypothecation, encumbrance or other transfer of all or any portion of the rights, obli gations, or liabilities in or arising from this Agreement to any person or entity, whether by operation of law or otherwise, and regardless of the legal form of the transaction in which the attempted transfer occurs.

18. No Third Party Beneficiaries Intended. This Agreement is made solely for the benefit of the Parties to this Agreement and their respective successors and assigns, and no other person or entity may have or acquire a right by virtue of this Agreement.

19. Waiver. No delay or omission to exercise any right, power or remedy accruing to City under this Agreement shall impair any right, power or remedy of City, nor shall it be construed as a waiver of, or consent to, any breach or default. No waiver of any breach, any failure of a condition, or any right or remedy under this Agreement shall be (1) effective unless it is in writing and signed by the Party making the waiver, (2) deemed to be a waiver of, or consent to, any other breach, failure of a condition, or right or remedy, or (3) deemed to constitute a continuing waiver unless the writing expressly so states. 40 -12-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

20. Final Payment Acceptance Constitutes Release. The acceptance by Consultant of the final payment made under this Agreement shall operate as and be a release of City from all claims and liabilities for compensation to Consultant for anything done, furnished or relating to Consultant’s work or services. Acceptance of payment shall be any negotiation of City’s check or the failure to make a written extra compensation claim within ten calendar days of the receipt of that check. However, approval or payment by City shall not constitute, nor be deemed, a release of the responsibility and liability of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and agents for the accuracy and competency of the information provided and/or work performed; nor shall such approval or p ayment be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility or liability by City for any defect or error in the work prepared by Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and agents.

21. Corrections. In addition to the above indemnification obligations, Consultant shall correct, at its expense, all errors in the work which may be disclosed during City’s review of Consultant’s report or plans. Should Consultant fail to make such correction in a reasonably timely manner, such correction may be made by City, and the cost thereof shall be charged to Consultant. In addition to all other available remedies, City may deduct the cost of such correction from any retention amount held by City or may withhold payment otherwise owed Consultant under this Agreement up to the amount of the cost of correction.

22. Non-Appropriation of Funds. Payments to be made to Consultant by City for services performed within the current fiscal year are within the current fiscal budget and within an available, unexhausted fund. In the event that City does not appropriate sufficient funds for payment of C onsultant’s services beyond the current fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover payment for Consultant’s services only to the conclusion of the last fiscal year in which City appropriates sufficient funds and shall automatically terminate at the conclusion of such fiscal year.

23. Exhibits. Exhibits A and B constitute a part of this Agreement and are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. If any inconsistency exists or arises between a provision of this Agreement and a provision of any exhibit, or between a provision of this Agreement and a pro vision of Consultant’s proposal, the provisions of this Agreement shall control.

24. Entire Agreement and Modification of Agreement. This Agreement and all exhibits referred to in this Agreement constitute the final, complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement between the Parties pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement and supersede all other prior or contemporaneous oral or written understandings and agreements of the Parties. No Party has been induced to enter into this Agreement by, nor is any Party relying on, any representation or warranty except those expressly set forth in this Agreement. This Agreement may not be amended, nor any provision or breach hereof waived, except in a writing signed by both Parties. 41 -13-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

25. Headings. The headings in this Agreement are included solely for convenience of reference and shall not affect the interpretation of any provision of this Agreement or any of the rights or obligations of the Parties to this Agreement.

26. Word Usage. Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, (a) the words “shall,” “will” and “agrees” are mandatory and “may” is permissive; (b) “or” is not exclusive; and (c) “includes” or “including” are not limiting.

27. Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in respect to all provisions of this Agreement that specify a time for performance; provided, however, that the foregoing shall not be construed to limit or deprive a Party of the benefits of any grace or use period allowed in this Agreement.

28. Business Days. “Business days” means days Suisun City Hall is open for business.

29. Governing Law and Choice of Forum. This Agreement, and any dispute arising from the relationship between the Parties to this Agreement, shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, except that any rule of construction to the effect that ambigu ities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be applied in interpreting this Agreement. Any dispute that arises under or relates to this Agreement (whether contract, tort or both) shall be resolved in a s uperior court with geographic jurisdiction over the City of Suisun City.

30. Attorneys’ Fees. In any litigation or other proceeding by which a Party seeks to enforce its rights under this Agreement (whether in contract, tort or both) or seeks a declaration of any rights or obligations under this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to recover all attorneys’ fees, experts’ fees, and other costs actually incurred in connection with such litigation or other proceeding, in addition to all other relief to which that Party may be entitled.

31. Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction holds any provision of this Agreement to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the validity of and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected and continue in full force and effect.

32. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, all of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which will constitute one and the same instrument.

33. Corporate Authority. Each person executing this Agreement on behalf of his or her Party warrants that he or she is duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of that Party and that by such execution, that Party is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.
42 -14-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

43 -15-
13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
The Parties, through their duly authorized representatives are signing this Agreement on the date stated in the introductory clause.

City:

City of Suisun City,
a California municipal corporation

By:

Name: Bret Prebula
Title: City Manager
ATTEST:

By:

Name: Anita Skinner
Title: City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:

Name: Patrick Enright
Title: City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO FISCAL IMPACT:

By:

Name: Lakhwinder Deol
Title: Finance Director
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:

By:

Name: Nouae Vue
Title: Public Works Director

Consultant:

NBS Government Finance Group,
a California corporation

By:

Name: Michael Rentner
Title: President

PROOF OF AUTHORITY TO BIND

CONTRACTING PARTY REQUIRED
44 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following outlines the scope of services for Consultant’s financial advisory services associated with the City’s Request for Nexus Study of Master Fee Schedule.

Work Plan 1: Full Cost Recovery and User Fee Study for Master Fee Schedule Update Our fee study methodology and calculations comply first and foremost with the provisions and guidance provided by Article XIIIC, Section 1, of the California Constitution. Article XIIIC defines the difference between charges that qualify as fees for services, as opposed to taxes. Fees for services (except for penalties and fees for entrance to or use of government property), qualify as such if the amount charged does not exceed the cost of providing the service.

User and/or regulatory fees represent cost recovery opportunities entirely within the City’s control:
revenues, which the City Council may, at its sole discretion upon public hearing, implement and/or modify without further public process or approval.

Based on our initial review of the City’s Master Fee Schedule, as well as questions and answers communicated with the City about the RFP to date, we understand the following fees and charges will be included within the scope of the User Fee Study:

1. Public Safety and Police Department: administrative processing fees

2. Fire Department: administrative fees, sprinkler and alarm permits, development review, fire and life safety inspections, and operational permits

3. Public Works Department: plan and review fees for encroachment permits

4. Recreation and Community Services Department: administrative fees for special event permitting and support from all City Departments

5. Building: new construction inspection / permit fees, mechanical, plumbing and electrical permits, and miscellaneous building permits

6. Planning: various permits, maps and land use entitlements

7. City Administration: miscellaneous fees for copies, administrative processing fees, etc.

We will review all City fees that can be assessed on a time-per-task basis. Scope of review excludes parking rates, all types of fines/penalties, equipment and facility rental/use rates, recreation class and program fees, business license taxes, and fees charged by other agencies such as SSWA and FSSD.

The technical approach we will follow for this study aligns with industry standard methodology that has been utilized successfully in California successfully for decades. The following is a detailed task plan for completing the scope of services, that aligns with the main areas of focus stated in the City’s RFP:

A. User Fee Study
The following tasks define the steps needed to complete the Fee Study:

TASK 1: PROJECT COMMENCEMENT AND DATA COLLECTION
45 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
Gather preliminary data as accessible through online resources and issue a consolidated data request to the City. Initial data requested will center on adopted budgets, recent financial performance (revenues and expenditures), current labor cost detail and classifications, organizational structures, existing relevant policies, existing time-tracking and workload data, and other items of a more global nature.

Conduct a project commencement meeting with City staff members who will oversee the progress, completion, and implementation of its findings. This meeting will include a discussion of expectations, process for conducting analyses, timeline, global data needs, established policies and procedures, and other topics.

TASK 2: FEE STRUCTURE REVIEW
Meet with each department responsible to review their existing fee structure and gather staff’s ideas for modifying or enhancing current practices. Identify and recommend opportunities for streamlining fee structures as well as for addition of new fees that are in line with current practices seen in other agencies. Work with City staff to determine the most effective and efficient type of fee structure based on the organization and recommend revisions to existing fee structures including any deletion of fees, potential new fees, or changes in billing practices. Based on the results of this discussion, we will incorporate the list of fees to be evaluated into the fee model template.

TASK 3: FACILITATED DATA COLLECTION
Work directly with each department to initiate review of the organizational, workload, and time on task data needed to calculate the cost of providing each fee for service. We will first communicate the steps necessary to develop data for justifying fees. Staff will be asked to provide an estimate of time spent on various activities and services performed on an annual basis, as well as on each individual fee for service activity. We will explore software tracking and reporting capabilities that may enhance and streamline data collection efforts. Develop data collection materials and track progress weekly on data submittal activities. Enter data into the fee model and ensure that the cost-of-service analysis is defensible and reasonable. The product of this task will be a modeling of the complete organizational, performance, and time requirements for the services under review in this study.

TASK 4: COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Determine the total estimated and reasonable cost of providing services on annual basis for each department studied, and segregate costs between fee-recoverable and non-fee recoverable services.

The analysis will reflect all identifiable costs, such as:
• Direct Costs: Costs directly identifiable to the provision of a service, e.g., salaries and benefits for “hands on” activities such as processing, review, field inspection, etc. 46 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
• Indirect Costs: Applicable support costs for supervision, management, and administrative support as defined by the City’s organizational structure and/or the City’s annual Cost Allocation Plan.1
Calculate fully burdened hourly rates for each department involved in the Study. Rates will consider the applicability of productive hours or direct-billed hours as the basis for calculation, depending on the department or service analyzed.

Multiply the fully burdened hourly rates by the time estimates gathered in Task 3 to compute the full cost of each individual fee for service activity. The full cost of service defined by NBS serves as the analytically justified maximum amount that may be recovered through a user fee adopted by the City Council.

Cross check all data metrics in the fee model to ensure the fee program is structured to recover 100% of costs considered.

TASK 5. DRAFT REVIEW AND REVISION
Meet with each department to review the outcomes of the analysis. Drafts will detail all the assumptions and data utilized to calculate results as well as a comparison of each fee’s cost recovery performance. Determine any necessary refinements to core assumptions, revise the fee model, and finalize the cost-of-service analysis. This task represents one planned iteration of the analytical work products. Obtain each department’s final sign off on fee models.

TASK 6. RECOMMENDED PRICING REVIEW
Discuss pricing objectives from the City’s perspective, i.e., comfort with full cost recovery or some alternative level of cost recovery. Facilitate this conversation by discussing public/private benefits or causation of each activity, potential market sensitivity, interaction with established City goals or policies, behavior modification influence, and other considerations. Collect data from the City regarding recommended fees, either at or below the 100% full cost recovery fee amount calculated by NBS.

Model the recommended cost recovery performance per fee item, and annually for the City as a whole.

TASK 7. FINAL REPORT
Prepare a written report describing the complete work and findings of the project. Conduct a review session with City staff and members of the executive team to review the findings issued in the draft report. Incorporate edits and issue the final report.

TASK 8: MEETINGS AND PRESENTATIONS
Meetings with City Staff: The detailed work plan as described above includes sufficient meetings with City staff throughout the course of the Study to assist in development of draft results. We will meet

1 City is responsible for providing a current overhead cost calculation such as a Cost Allocation Plan. If needed, NBS can perform an overhead cost analysis under a separate scope of services as listed in C. Cost Recovery Schedule. 47 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
with City staff as needed to complete the scopes of work. All meetings required to develop the final report will be managed remotely utilizing video conferencing tools as needed.

Public Presentations of Results: NBS will prepare presentation materials, conduct meetings to communicate outcomes, and facilitate an understanding of the Study’s results and its implications for the City. For presentation of the Final Report to City Council, committees, or community stakeholders, the scope of services presented herein includes one (1) remotely conducted or in-person presentation.

B. Comparative Fee Survey
The RFP’s requirement for preparation of a consolidated report that identifies present fees, recommended fees, percentage, change and cost recovery percentage, and revenue impacts is completed through work plan A. User Fee Study, above.

Policy makers often desire a comparison of fee amounts to neighboring jurisdictions. Presence of a comparison will ensure a smoother implementation process and provide a sense of the “market” rate for various services. We will utilize our expertise to compare similar user fees and charges in up to five (5) neighboring and comparable communities. A list of communities will be selected and approved by City staff. We will download the respective fee schedules from the Internet or make a reasonable attempt to contact each agency if needed for a copy of their current fee schedules. Complete a comparison of the fee categories and amounts, for the most readily comparable fee items that match the City’s fee structure.

As needed, we can perform the comparison of the City’s current fee structure and amounts during the work plan A. User Fee Study, Task 2. Fee Structure Review, to assist with identification of potential new fees and charges for services.

C. Cost Recovery Schedule
The RFP’s requirement to establish a defensible, transparent, and equitable cost recovery framework that accurately accounts for the true cost of providing municipal services is completed through work plan tasks A. and B. as described above.

The following are two optional services that could be pursued by the City to enhance the scope of services for establishment of overhead rates and identification of appropriate tax subsidy levels. These services would require separate scope of services and pricing from the objectives included in this contract.

OPTIONAL TASK 1. OVERHEAD COST ALOCATION PLAN
Within Task A.4. Cost of Service Analysis, NBS will need to input Citywide overhead costs for into the fee models as a critical cost recovery component for full cost recovery. We can either use an existing Cost Allocation Plan that the City has prepared, or, we can complete a Cost Allocation Plan for use in the fee study or other City applications.

OPTIONAL TASK 2. FORMAL COST RECOVERY POLICY
48 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
It is important for the City to have a sound and consistent cost recovery policy that will serve as a management tool for establishing, implementing, and evaluating fees and charges. This policy ensures that the City’s fees and charges are managed in a manner that will:
• Provide for the delivery of quality services
• Maintain and enhance service delivery
• Support a balanced budget through evaluation and review of the city’s total estimated and reasonable cost of providing services
• Set fee amounts in accordance with local goals as pertains to code compliance, cost recovery, economic development, and community values
• Ensure that any action to establish, increase, or impose a fee is conducted in a manner that satisfies the requirements of state law
If requested, NBS will work with the City to establish a formal cost recovery policy for fees and charges to review and adopt with City Council. This policy sets forth cost recovery targets, timelines for fee increases, annual cost inflation adjustments, and frequency of comprehensive review for all city fees and charges.

We would begin by reviewing and editing the City’s existing cost recovery policy document or drafting a new one. Once approved by City management, we are available to assist with presentation development and attendance at City Council meetings needed to adopt and implement the policy going forward.

Work Plan 2: Development Impact Fee Study
The specific scope of services offered in this contract for a Development Impact Fee Study is defined by the tasks described in the work plan that follows. That scope excludes legal, engineering, architectural, cost estimating and appraisal services.

Impact Fee Calculation Methods
Laws governing impact fees, including both court decisions and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Govt.

Code Sections 66000 et seq.) require that local agencies imposing fees as a condition of development approval demonstrate that there is a reasonable relationship or “nexus” between those fees and the impact of a development project on facilities to be funded by the fees.

The required nexus for impact fees, as set forth in relevant court decisions, can be thought of as having three elements:
• Need. The City must show that development creates a need for the improvements funded by impact fees;
49 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
• Benefit. The City must show that development derives a benefit from the provision of improvements funded by impact fees, and:
• Proportionality. The City must show that the fees charged to a development project are proportional to the impact of that project on facilities funded by the impact fees.

The “reasonable relationship” requirements contained in Section 66001 of the California Mitigation Fee Act address the same elements in different language
Any one of several methods may be used to calculate impact fees for a particular type of facility. The choice of an appropriate method may depend on the availability of information and how the impact of development is to be measured.

Important Recent Developments
Our work plan will incorporate review and discussion of requirements of several new laws enacted by the State of California as well as recent and pending court decisions affecting impact fees such as:
• SB 330 - The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 which prohibits the imposition of new approval requirements on a housing development project once a preliminary application has been submitted.
• AB 1483 – Housing Data: Collection and Reporting which requires that a city, county or special district must post on its website a current schedule of its fees and exactions, as well as associated nexus studies and annual reports. Updates must be posted within 30 days • SB 13 – Accessory Dwelling Units which prohibits the imposition of impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) smaller than 750 square feet and to require that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.
• AB 602 – Amendments to the Planning and Land Use Law and the Mitigation Fee Act which imposes several new requirements for impact fees that went into effect in 2022. Read our article here for a summary of implications:
• Recent and pending court decisions affecting impact fees, such as:
o Boatworks LLC vs. City of Alameda
o Walker v. City of San Clemente
o Hamilton and High v. City of Palo Alto
o Sheetz v. County of El Dorado
Impact Fees Covered by this Contract
The following impact fees as listed in the City’s current Master Fee Schedule will be addressed:
• Fire Facilities & Equipment
• Municipal Facilities & Equipment
• Offsite Street Improvement Program (OSSIP)
• Park Land and Park Improvements
50 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
• Police Facilities & Equipment
We are also available to discuss current or planned infrastructure with the City that could lead to identification of new fees, and the data available to support a solid nexus for new fees. The Mitigation Fee Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which impact fees may be charged. It defines public facilities very broadly as including "public improvements, public services and community amenities." Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the Mitigation Fee Act, it is clear both in case law and statute (see Government Code Section 65913.8) that impact fees may not be used to pay for ongoing maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are based on the cost of capital assets only.

Information to be Provided by the City
The work to be performed by the Consultant on this impact fee study will depend heavily on information to be provided by the City. Among the types of information that may be needed by the Consultant for this study are:
• The current General Plan, and any specific plans or other relevant planning studies • Data on the amount of existing development and planned future development in the study area, by land use type
• The Capital Improvement Program, level of service policies, facility master plans and other facility planning data, plus inventories of existing facilities, vehicles and equipment of types to be funded by impact fees2
• Cost estimates for land, capital improvements, vehicles, and/or equipment to be funded by impact fees
• Information on capital improvement funding sources and financing plans and any outstanding debt related to existing capital facilities
This contract assumes that all information needed to perform the work covered by the scope of this contract will be provided by the City or is readily available from other sources such as the U.S. Census Bureau or the California Department of Finance.

The following tasks comprise the detailed work plan for this impact fee study. These tasks represent the typical requirements of an impact fee study and may be adjusted to meet the needs of this project.

TASK 1. KICKOFF MEETING/PROJECT INITIATION
To kickoff this study, the Project Manager will attend a kickoff meeting with key City staff and carry out other activities required to initiate the study, including:
• Discuss the goals, work plan and schedule for the project • Establish coordination, communication and reporting procedures • Conduct initial interviews with key City staff members

2 A new provision in Section 66016.5, which was added by AB 602 in 2021, requires that large jurisdictions adopt a capital improvement plan as part of an impact fee study. “Large jurisdiction” means a county of 250,000 or more or any city within that county.

Large jurisdictions (counties over 250,000 and cities within those counties) must adopt a capital improvement plan as part of the nexus study.
51 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
• Evaluate available information resources
• Review the existing impact fee program and identify any issues of concern to the staff, City Council members or stakeholders
• Assess the City’s current development patterns and growth potential Also, upon project initiation, we plan to review impacts and explore methodology options relating to fee programs as a result of recent legislative changes such as AB 602 and legal decisions such as Sheetz v. County of El Dorado. We request the City involve legal counsel at this time to assist in discussion and direction setting for the study that will best serve the City’s needs.

TASK 2. COMPILE DATA ON EXISTING AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT In this task, the Consultant will collect, review, organize and analyze data on existing and future development in the City and compile it in a form useful for this study. Steps in that process may include:
• Establish boundaries of the study area to be used in the analysis (e.g., existing City vs. sphere of influence)
• Define the breakdown of land use types to be used in the study • Analyze land use data provided by the City to establish a baseline of existing development and a forecast of future development by land use type
• Identify demand variables and specify demand factors that will be used to represent the impact of development in the impact fee calculations
• Prepare development data tables to incorporate into the fee calculation model and the study report
TASK 3. FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS
Using forecasts of future development from Task 2, the Consultant will review the Capital Improvement Program and facility master plans and work with staff to identify new facilities, facility expansions, vehicles and equipment needed to serve future development. Steps in that process will include the following:
• Review adopted level-of-service standards and actual service levels for relevant facility types • Work with City staff to identify the operative level of service standard to be used in the impact fee analysis for each facility type
• Identify any existing deficiencies or available capacity relative to the selected level of service standard
• Project the additional service demand that will be created by new development, based on selected service levels
• Translate service demand into facility needs by facility type • Compile cost estimates for relevant facilities and other assets • Identify costs eligible for impact fee funding
TASK 4. IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
52 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
Using the information developed in Tasks 2 and 3, we will conduct the impact fee analysis and calculate impact fees by land use type for each type of facility addressed in the study. That process typically includes these steps:
• Review the methods used to calculate existing impact fees and consider alternative methods where appropriate
• A critical new requirement of AB 602 (Govt. Code Section 66016.5) is that residential impact fees must be calculated proportionately to the square footage of units unless another method is justified by specific findings. We will work with the City early in the study process to determine the most appropriate way to satisfy that requirement. • Construct a spreadsheet fee calculation model incorporating data on existing and future development, demand factors and costs for land, buildings and other capital assets relevant to the fee calculations.
• Specify formulas in the model to allocate facility costs in proportion to the impact of new development by land use type
• Calculate a cost per unit of service for each facility type • Convert the cost per unit of service into a schedule of impact fees per unit of development, by development type
• Project potential revenue from the proposed fees
TASK 5. FEE COMPARISON
NBS will utilize their industry expertise comparing similar impact fees in up to five (5) neighboring and comparable communities. A list of communities will be selected and approved by City staff. We will download their respective fee schedules and supporting studies from the Internet. If schedules and supporting studies are not available on the Internet, we will make a reasonable attempt to contact the agency to obtain that information. We will then compile a comparison of the fee categories and amounts, for the most readily comparable fee items that match the City’s existing and proposed impact fees.

TASK 6. DRAFT AND FINAL STUDY REPORTS
The impact fee study report will explain the data, methodology and formulas used in the fee calculations and document the nexus between the proposed fees and the impacts of development for each type of impact fee calculated in the study
As the study progresses, the Consultant will submit preliminary drafts of portions of the study report for review and comment by City staff. Once all sections are in draft form, an administrative draft of the entire study report, incorporating any previous staff comments, will be submitted for review. Then a final draft document will be prepared for the City Council and public review. If necessary, additional changes will be incorporated into the final study report.

The study report will include the following components:
• An Executive Summary including summary impact fee tables 53 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
• A chapter discussing the legal requirements for impact fees and methods used to calculate the fees
• A chapter presenting data on existing and future development in the study area and the factors used to measure the impacts of development on individual facility types. • A separate chapter for each type of fee presenting the data and methodology used in the analysis, a detailed explanation the impact fee calculations, and documentation of the nexus • A chapter on implementation recommendations, covering steps needed to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act through proper administration of the impact fees, including but not limited to:
• Findings and enactment of fees
• Collection and expenditure of fees
• Accounting and reporting requirements
• Administrative appeals, waivers, and exemptions
• Credits and reimbursements for developer-provided facilities • Updating and indexing the fees
• Recovery of administrative costs for the impact fee program Deliverables include: (1) Preliminary chapter drafts; (2) a complete draft report for staff review; (3) a final draft report for City Council and public review; (4) the final report. All drafts and the final report will be submitted electronically in .pdf format. Five bound copies and one unbound copy of the final report will be provided. All original Microsoft Word and Excel files will be provided to the City at completion of the work if requested.

TASK 7. MEETINGS
Meetings with City Staff: The detailed work plan described above includes sufficient meetings with City staff throughout the course of the Study to assist in development of draft results. We will meet with City staff as needed to complete the scopes of work. All meetings required to develop the final report will be managed remotely utilizing video conferencing tools as needed.

If tasks requested by City do not require all the above services to be provided, the specific scope of services for such tasks shall be limited to just those services required to complete the tasks.

54 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc

EXHIBIT B

APPROVED FEE SCHEDULE

Detailed Budget
Our professional fees are based on our understanding of the City’s needs and the effort we believe is necessary to complete the scope of services/task plan described. 55 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
For this effort, we propose a professional fee of $88,615. A fixed fee contract amount enables the City to have full disclosure and budget for the project. The project budget below provides estimates of hours allocated for each task and what is included in each project task.

PROJECT COST DETAIL | SUISUN CITY
Task Plan
Hourly Rate $225 $190 $150 $140
Work Plan 1: Full Cost Recovery and User Fee Study for Master Fee Schedule Update A. User Fee Study
1 - Project Commencement & Data Collection 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 3.0 555 2 - Fee Structure Review 8.0 20.0 0.0 16.0 44.0 7,840 3 - Facilitated Data Collection 2.0 28.0 0.0 24.0 54.0 9,130 4 - Cost of Service Analysis 8.0 20.0 0.0 16.0 44.0 7,840 5 - Draft Review and Revision 8.0 16.0 0.0 12.0 36.0 6,520 6 - Recommended Pricing Review 2.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 18.0 3,090 7 - Final Report 2.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 26.0 4,410 8 - Meetings and Presentations
Tasks 1 - 8
City Council / Implementation 4.0 4.0 0.0 2.0 10.0 1,940 Travel Expense (as needed, not to exceed) 1,000
B. Comparative Fee Survey
All Tasks 0.0 4.0 0.0 20.0 24.0 3,560
C. Cost Recovery Schedule (Optional Services)
See Additional Services Section
Subtotal Work Plan 1 35.0 113.0 0.0 111.0 259.0 45,885$ Work Plan 2: Development Impact Fee Study
1 - Kickoff Meeting/Project Inititation 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 8.0 1,500 2 - Compile Data 12.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 42.0 7,200 3 - Facility Needs Analysis 16.0 0.0 24.0 0.0 40.0 7,200 4 - Impact Fee Analysis 24.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 64.0 11,400 5 - Fee Comparison 2.0 0.0 20.0 4.0 26.0 4,010 6 - Draft and Final Study Reports 16.0 0.0 24.0 6.0 46.0 8,040 7 - Meetings*
Tasks 1 - 5
City Council / Implementation 4.0 0.0 8.0 2.0 14.0 2,380 Travel Expense (as needed, not to exceed) 1,000
Subtotal Work Plan 2 78.0 0.0 150.0 12.0 240.0 42,730$
TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED PROJECT COST 113.0 113.0 150.0 123.0 499.0 88,615$ NBS Director NBS Senior
Consultants NBS Analysts
Consultant
Labor
(Hours)
Impact Fee
Subject
Matter Expert
included above
included above
Consultant Labor (Hours) Grand Totals
Consultant
Costs ($)
56 13152-0001\3061210v1.doc
Rates
The following hourly rates derive the overall not-to-exceed pricing for the requested scope of services.

Rates are inclusive of all costs associated with professional time, such as document production, and incidentals. Travel expenses, if required, would be approved and charged separately. These rates will apply for the duration of our contract:

Title Hourly Rate
Director - NBS $225
Senior Consultant – NBS $190
Impact Fee Subject Matter Expert $150
Project Analyst/Consultant - NBS $140
Optional Services
For the optional services mentioned Scope of Services, to include an overhead cost allocation plan and/or a formal cost recovery policy, a separate scope and professional fee proposal can be developed if the City is interested in discussing further.

Invoicing
We invoice on a monthly basis, following recorded consultant time on the project, paralleling our completion of the work. At no time will we invoice for charges in excess of the fee to which the City and NBS mutually agree. Should the City specifically request additional services beyond those described in this document, we will discuss those requests and associated costs at that later time and only invoice for additional fees upon separate written authorization from the City. 57 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
58 AGENDA ITEM NO. 9.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City’s Behalf with Sanbell for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There will be no impact to the City’s General Fund as a result of this item. The cost proposal of $43,074, plus contingencies, for Sanbell to develop the Plans, Specifications, and Cost Estimates (PS&E) for the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project (Project No. HSIPSL-5032(041)) will be fully funded through two sources.

Specifically, the project is supported by a combination of funds from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 grant and the Off-Site Street Improvement Program (OSSIP). These funding sources have been allocated for eligible transportation safety improvements and will cover the entire cost of the design contract.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance; Ensure Public Safety; and Enhance the Environment.

BACKGROUND:

On February 21, 2025, the City was awarded a total of $349,920 in HSIP Cycle 12 grant funds to support the design and construction of the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project. The total estimated cost of the project is approximately $389,000.

As required by the HSIP grant guidelines, the City is responsible for covering any amount that exceeds the awarded grant and must provide a minimum local match of 10% of the total project cost. The City will meet these obligations using Off-Site Street Improvement Program (OSSIP) funds, which will cover any additional costs beyond the grant award and the required minimum 10% local match.

STAFF REPORT:

This Safe Routes to School Project involves two distinct safety improvements at separate locations along Pintail Drive. The goal is to enhance pedestrian and traffic safety for students and emergency personnel in areas identified as high priority by the community and the Safe Routes to School Task Force.

The Project overview is as follows:
1) Installation of Pedestrian Safety Improvements at Pintail Drive and Crane Drive This location fronts Goepp Park and Dan O. Root Elementary School. Improvements will include Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), curb extensions, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps, high-visibility crosswalks and warning signage.

Pintail Drive is a major collector road and a well-traveled route for students walking or biking to school. The intersection at Crane Drive has been identified by the Safe Routes to School Task Force as a priority location for safety enhancements due to its proximity to the school and the volume of 59 pedestrian activity. Nearby residents have also expressed concerns about safety at this crossing.

Although a formal crash analysis has not been conducted for this intersection, installing RRFBs and associated pedestrian infrastructure will significantly improve visibility and safety. The enhancements will increase sight distance and alert drivers to crossing pedestrians, reducing the likelihood of conflicts. These upgrades will also complement the recently installed RRFBs in front of Dan O. Root Elementary School on Harrier Drive, just north of Osprey Way.

2) Upgrade of Fire Station Advance Warning System on Pintail Drive The second improvement is at the Suisun City Fire Station, also located on Pintail Drive—a designated Safe Route to School for students attending nearby Suisun Elementary School. The fire station requires an upgraded emergency warning system to ensure safe and timely responses during emergencies.

Currently, the station’s warning devices activate to alert motorists when emergency vehicles are exiting onto Pintail Drive. The devices are also activated when the fire equipment return to the station and backup into the parking bays. However, recent observations indicate that some motorists and pedestrians are not yielding appropriately, posing safety risks. Several deficiencies in the existing system contribute to this problem:
a) Reliability Issues - The current system is solar-powered and has been unreliable. Frequent maintenance is required, including cleaning of solar panels and replacement of batteries. A new system will be connected to a consistent power source to improve functionality. b) Visibility Limitations - Existing devices are not sufficiently visible to motorists. Mounting new warning lights on mast arms should be considered to improve visibility and effectiveness. c) Lack of Pedestrian Alerts - The current system is focused on vehicles and does not adequately warn pedestrians. New devices should be designed to address both motorist and pedestrian safety. d) Inadequate Pavement Markings - Pavement striping associated with the warning system is minimal.

Enhancements should include improved striping to reinforce motorist awareness.

Upgrading these components will significantly improve the visibility and reliability of the fire station's warning system, helping to ensure that both motorists and pedestrians respond appropriately. This will enhance safety for emergency responders as well as the surrounding community, especially schoolchildren traveling along this designated safe route.

Sanbell previously prepared the Plans, Specifications, and Cost Estimates (PS&E), also referred to as construction documents, for the HSIP Cycle 10 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Project, which included three locations, one of which was Location #1 at Pintail Drive and Crane Drive.

However, due to budget constraints and higher-than-expected bid results, Location #1 was ultimately excluded from the final scope of the Cycle 10 project.

Given that this current project is funded through the State-administered Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), there is no requirement to solicit competitive proposals from multiple consultants.

Contracting directly with Sanbell is in the City’s best interest, as the firm is already highly familiar with the project site at Location #1 and previously developed construction documents for this location. Their prior involvement positions them well to efficiently update and modify the existing PS&E for Location #1. In addition, Sanbell will coordinate with both the Fire Department and Public Works Department to design the necessary upgrades for the advance warning system at the Suisun City Fire Station (Location #2).

The City has negotiated a design cost with Sanbell in the amount of $43,074 for preparing the construction documents for the HSIP Cycle 12 Project. To account for potential adjustments in project 60 scope or unforeseen work during the design phase, a contingency of $6,926 (approximately 15%) is recommended. This brings the total not-to-exceed contract amount to $50,000.

Of this amount, $36,000 will be funded through the HSIP Cycle 12 grant allocation designated for design services. The remaining $14,000, including the full contingency amount, will be covered using Off-Site Street Improvement Program (OSSIP) funds.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025- ___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City’s Behalf with Sanbell for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Council Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City’s Behalf with Sanbell for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project.
2 .

Location Map.

PREPARED BY:

Nick Lozano, Sr. Associate Engineer
REVIEWED BY:

Nouae Vue, Public Works Director
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. 2025 - HSIP Cycle 12 Design Contract Award Resolution Attachment 1.docx

2. 250715 HSIP Cycle Design Contract Award Location Map Attachment 2

3. Agreement - HSIP Cycle 12 RRFB & Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade.pdf .
61 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT ON THE CITY’S BEHALF WITH

SANBELL FOR THE HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (HSIP) CYCLE 12 RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON AND FIRE STATION

ADVANCE WARNING SYSTEM UPGRADE PROJECT

WHEREAS, the City applied for funds from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12 grant program to cover the design and construction costs of the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project (Project), Project No.

HSIPL-5032(041), estimated at a cost of $389,000; and
WHEREAS, the City’s grant application was approved and was awarded $349,920 in HSIP Cycle 12 grant funds with the City required to provide a minimum 10% local match to cover the amount exceeding the awarded grant allocation; and
WHEREAS, to meet the obligation to provide the required minimum local match of 10%, the Project will utilize Off-Site Street Improvement Program (OSSIP) funds; and WHEREAS, the Project is a Safe Routes to School Project that involves two distinct safety improvements at separate locations along Pintail Drive; and WHEREAS, on Pintail Drive at Crane Drive, the project improvements will include Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), c urb extensions, American with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps, high-visibility crosswalks and warning signage; and WHEREAS, on Pintail Drive fronting the fire station, the Project will upgrade the existing emergency warning system to ensure safe and timely responses during emergencies; and WHEREAS, Sanbell has previously prepared the Plans, Specifications, and Cost Estimates (PS&E) for the HSIP Cycle 10 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Project, which included three locations, one of which was at Pintail Drive at Crane Drive; and WHEREAS, the Pintail Drive at Crane Drive location was excluded from the final scope of that HSIP Cycle 10 project due to budget constraints and higher-than-expected bid results; and WHEREAS, it is in the City’s best interest to contract directly with Sanbell on the HSIP Cycle 12 project without soliciting competitive proposals from multiple other consultants as their prior involvement positions them to efficiently update and modify the PS&E they previously prepared; and
WHEREAS, City staff has negotiated a design cost of $43,074 with Sanbell which City staff deems a reasonable amount to perform the necessary engineering services for the Project and is within the available budget.
62 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City authorizes the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City’s behalf with Sanbell for the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project, Project No. HSIPL-5032(041), in the amount of $43,074, plus a contingency of $6,926 (approximately 15%) to account for potential adjustments in project scope or unforeseen work during the design phase, for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $50,000, and to take any and all necessary and appropriate actions to implement this contract.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
63 LOCATION MAP
Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Cycle 12
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons and Fire Station Advance Warning System Upgrade Project Project No. HSIPL-5032(041)

Location #1:

Pintail Drive at Crane Drive
Location #2:

Pintail Drive fronting Fire Station
64 01107.0006/958405.1 1

CITY OF SUISUN CITY

CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR
THE HIGHWAY SAFETY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (HSIP) CYCLE 12

RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON AND FIRE STATION ADVANCE

WARNING SYSTEM UPGRADE PROJECT
THIS CONTRACT SERVICES AGREEMENT (herein “Agreement”) is made and entered into on 2025, by and between the CITY OF SUISUN CITY, a municipal corporation (“City”) and SANBELL (“Consultant”). City and Consultant may be referred to, individually or collectively, as “party” or “parties.”
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. SERVICES OF CONSULTANT

1.1 Scope of Services . In compliance with all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Consultant shall perform the work or services set forth in the “Scope of Services” attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant warrants that it has the experience and ability to perform all work and services required hereunder and that it shall diligently perform such work and services in a professional and satisfactory manner.

1.2 Compliance With Law. All work and services rendered hereunder shall be provided in accordance with all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules, and regulations of the City and any Federal, State or local governmental agency of competent jurisdiction.

1.3 California Labor Law. If the Scope of Services includes any “public work” or “maintenance work,” as those terms are defined in California Labor Code section 1720 et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000 et seq., and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, Consultant shall pay prevailing wages for such work and comply with the requirements in California Labor Code section 1770 et seq. and 1810 et seq., and all other applicable laws.

1.4 Licenses, Permits, Fees and Assessments. Consultant shall obtain at its sole cost and expense such licenses, permits, and approvals as may be required by law for the performance of the services required by the Agreement.

1.5 Special Requirements. Additional terms and conditions of this Agreement, if any, which are made a part hereof are set forth in the “Special Requirements” attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by this reference. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of Exhibit “B” and any other provisions of this Agreement, the provisions of Exhibit “B” shall govern.

2. COMPENSATION

2.1 Contract Sum . For the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated in accordance with the “Schedule of Compensation” attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and incorporated herein by this reference, but not exceeding the maximum contract amount of $43,074 (Forty-Three Thousand Seventy-Four Dollars) (“Contract Sum”). 65 2
01107.0006/958405.1

2.2 Invoices. Each month Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month in a form approved by City’s Director of Finance. By submitting an invoice for payment under this Agreement, Consultant is certifying compliance with all provisions of the Agreement. The invoice shall contain all information specified in Exhibit “C”, and shall detail charges for all necessary and actual expenses by the following categories: labor (by sub -category), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, and sub-contractor contracts. Sub -contractor charges shall also be detailed by such categories.

Consultant shall not invoice City for any duplicate services performed by more than one person.

City shall independently review each invoice submitted by the Consultant to determine whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. Except as to any charges for work performed or expenses incurred by Consultant which are disputed by City, City will use its best efforts to cause Consultant to be paid within forty five (45) days of receipt of Consultant’s correct and undisputed invoice; however, Consultant acknowledges and agrees that due to City war rant run procedures, the City cannot guarantee that payment will occur within this time period. In the event any charges or expenses are disputed by City, the original invoice shall be returned by City to Consultant for correction and resubmission.

Review and payment by the City of any invoice provided by the Consultant shall not constitute a waiver of any rights or remedies provided herein or any applicable law.

2.3 Additional Services . City shall have the right at any time during the performance of the services, without invalidating this Agreement, to order extra work beyond that specified in the Scope of Services or make changes by altering, adding to or deducting from said work. No such extra work may be undertaken unless a written order is first given by the Contract Officer to the Consultant, incorporating therein any adjustment in (i) the Contract Sum for the actual cost of the extra work, and/or (ii) the time to perform this Agreement, which said adjustments are subject to the written approval of the Consultant. Any increase in compensation of up to ten percent (10%) of the Contract Sum but not exceeding a total contract amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) o r in the time to perform of up to ninety (90) days may be approved by the Contract Officer. Any greater increases, taken either separately or cumulatively, must be approved by the City Council. No claim for an increase in the Contract Sum or time for perfo rmance shall be valid unless the procedures established in this Section are followed.

3. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE

3.1 Time of Essence . Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.

3.2 Schedule of Performance . Consultant shall commence the services pursuant to this Agreement upon receipt of a written notice to proceed and shall perform all services within the time period(s) established in the “Schedule of Performance” attached hereto as Exhibit “D” and incorporated herein by this reference. When requested by the Consultant, extensions to the time period(s) specified in the Schedule of Performance may be approved in writing by the Contract Officer but not exceeding thirty (30) days cumulatively.

3.3 Force Majeure . The time period(s) specified in the Schedule of Performance for performance of the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be extended because of any delays due to unforeseeable causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Consultant, including, but not restricted to, acts of God or of the public enemy, 66 3
01107.0006/958405.1
unusually severe weather, fires, earthquakes, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, riots, strikes, freight embargoes, wars, litigation, and/or acts of any governmental agency, including the City, if the Consultant shall within ten (10) days of the c ommencement of such delay notify the Contract Officer in writing of the causes of the delay. The Contract Officer shall ascertain the facts and the extent of delay, and extend the time for performing the services for the period of the enforced delay when a nd if in the judgment of the Contract Officer such delay is justified. The Contract Officer’s determination shall be final and conclusive upon the parties to this Agreement.

In no event shall Consultant be entitled to recover damages against the City for any delay in the performance of this Agreement, however caused, Consultant’s sole remedy being extension of the Agreement pursuant to this Section.

3.4 Term. Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Article 7 of this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until completion of the services but not exceeding one year from the date hereof, except as otherwise provided in the Schedule of Performance ( Exhibit “D” ). [The City may, in its sole discretion, extend the Term for five (5) additional one-year terms.]

4. COORDINATION OF WORK

4.1 Representative of Consultant . Robert Broestl, Vice President, Anoop Admal, Principal, and Daniel Leary, Principal are hereby designated as being the representative of Consultant authorized to act on its behalf with respect to the work and services specified herein and make all decisions in connection therewith. All personnel of Consultant and any authorized agents shall be under the exclusive direction of the representative of Consultant. Consultant shall utilize only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall make every reasonable effort to maintain the stability and continuity of Consultant’s staff and subcontractors, and shall keep City informed of any changes.

4.2 Contract Officer. Aaron RothBret Prebula, City Manager, or such person as he may designate, is hereby designated as being the representative the City authorized to act in its behalf with respect to the work and services specified herein and to make all decisions in connection therewith (“Contract Officer”).

4.3 Prohibition Against Subcontracting or Assignment . Consultant shall not contract with any entity to perform in whole or in part the work or services required hereunder without the express written approval of the City. Neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned or transferred, voluntarily or by operation of law, without the prior written approval of City. Any such prohibited assignment or transfer shall be void.

4.4 Independent Consultant. Neither the City nor any of its employees shall have any control over the manner, mode or means by which Consultant, its agents or employees, perform the services required herein, except as otherwise set forth. Consultant shall perform all services required herein as an independent contractor of City with only such obligations as are consistent with that role. Consultant shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its agents or employees are agents or employees of City, or that it is a member of a joint enterprise with City.

5. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
67 4
01107.0006/958405.1

5.1 Insurance Coverages . Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of any services under this Agreement, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. (a) General liability insurance . Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.
(b) Automobile liability insurance . Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Services to be performed unde r this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident. (c) Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance . Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the services required by this Agreement. (d) Workers’ compensation insurance . Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).
(e) Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and certified endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall include all of the requirements stated herein. (f) Additional Insurance. Policies of such other insurance, as may be required in the Special Requirements in Exhibit “B”.

5.2 General Insurance Requirements.
(a) Proof of insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of al l required insurance policies, at any time.
(b) Duration of coverage . Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, 68 5
01107.0006/958405.1
which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Services hereunder by Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants. (c) Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by City shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non - contributory basis for the benefit of City before the City’s own insurance or self -insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
(d) City’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement. (e) Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or that is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A - (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Risk Manager.
(f) Waiver of subrogation . All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.
(g) Enforcement of contract provisions (non -estoppel). Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
(h) Requirements not limiting . Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultan t maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
(i) Notice of cancellation . Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to City with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for 69 6
01107.0006/958405.1
nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.
(j) Additional insured status . General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.
(k) Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations . None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing. (l) Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions. (m) Pass through clause . Consultant agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, al l agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review. (n) Agency’s right to revise specifications . The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additiona l cost to the Consultant, the City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant’s compensation.
(o) Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self -insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self -insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by City.
(p) Timely notice of claims . Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.
(q) Additional insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.

5.3 Indemnification. To the full extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) against, and will hold and save them and each of them harmless from, any and all actions, either judicial, administrative, arbitration or regulatory claims, damages to persons or property, 70 7
01107.0006/958405.1
losses, costs, penalties, obligations, errors, omissions or liabilities whether actual or threatened (herein “claims or liabilities”) that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm or entity arising out of or in connection with the negligent performance of the work, operations or activities provided herein of Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, invitees, or any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable (“indemnitors”), or arising from Consultant’s or indemnitors’ reckless or willful misconduct, or arising from Consultant’s or indemnitors’ negligent performance of or failure to perform any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement, except claims or liabilities occurring as a result of City’s sole negligence or willful acts or omissions. The indemnity obligation shall be binding on successors and assigns of Consultant and shall survive termination of this Agreement.

6. RECORDS, REPORTS, AND RELEASE OF INFORMATION

6.1 Records. Consultant shall keep, and require subcontractors to keep, such ledgers, books of accounts, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, reports, studies or other documents relating to the disbursements charged to City and services performed hereunder (the “books and records”), as shall be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement and enable the Contract Officer to evaluate the performance of such services and shall keep such records for a period of three years following completion of the service s hereunder. The Contract Officer shall have full and free access to such books and records at all times during normal business hours of City, including the right to inspect, copy, audit and make records and transcripts from such records.

6.2 Reports. Consultant shall periodically prepare and submit to the Contract Officer such reports concerning the performance of the services required by this Agreement or as the Contract Officer shall require.

6.3 Confidentiality and Release of Information.
(a) All information gained or work product produced by Consultant in performance of this Agreement shall be considered confidential, unless such information is in the public domain or already known to Consultant. Consultant shall not release or disclose any such information or work product to persons or entities other than the City without prior written authorization from the Contract Officer.
(b) Consultant shall not, without prior written authorization from the Contract Officer or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide documents, declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories or other i nformation concerning the work performed under this Agreement. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered “voluntary” provided Consultant gives the City notice of such court order or subpoena.
(c) If Consultant provides any information or work product in violation of this Agreement, then the City shall have the right to reimbursement and indemnity from Consultant for any damages, costs and fees, including attorney’s fees, caused by or incurred as a result of Consultant’s conduct.
(d) Consultant shall promptly notify the City should Consultant be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions or other discovery request, court order or subpoena from any party 71 8
01107.0006/958405.1
regarding this Agreement and the work performed thereunder. The City retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent Consultant or be present at any deposition, hearing or similar proceeding. Consultant agrees to cooperate fully with the City and to provide the City with the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by Consultant.

6.4 Ownership of Documents. All studies, surveys, data, notes, computer files, reports, records, drawings, specifications, maps, designs, photographs, documents and other materials (the “documents and materials”) prepared by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement shall be the property of the City and shall be delivered to the City upon request of the Contract Officer or upon the termination of this Agreement, and Consultant shall have no claim for further employment or additional compensation as a resu lt of the exercise by the City of its full rights of ownership use, reuse, or assignment of the documents and materials hereunder. Moreover, Consultant with respect to any documents and materials that may qualify as “works made for hire” as defined in 17 U.S.C. § 101, such documents and materials are hereby deemed “works made for hire” for the City.

7. ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT AND TERMINATION

7.1 California Law . This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and governed both as to validity and to performance of the parties in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Legal actions concerning any dispute, claim or matter arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Solano, State of California. In the event of litigation in a U.S. District Court, venue shall lie exclusively in the Eastern District of California, in the County of Solano, State of California.

7.2 Disputes; Default. In the event that Consultant is in default under the terms of this Agreement, the City shall not have any obligation or duty to continue compensating Consultant for any work performed after the date of default. Instead, the City may give notice to Consultant of the default and the reasons for the default. The notice shall include the timeframe in which Consultant may cure the default. This timeframe is presumptively thirty (30) days, but may be extended, if circumstances warrant. During the period of time that Consultant is in default, the City shall hold all invoices and shall, when the default is cured, proceed with payment on the invoices. If Consultant does not cure the default, the City may take necessary steps to terminate this Agreement under this Article.

7.3 Legal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may take legal action, in law or in equity, to cure, correct or remedy any default, to recover damages for any default, to compel specific performance of this Agreement, to obtain declaratory or inj unctive relief, or to obtain any other remedy consistent with the purposes of this Agreement.

Notwithstanding any contrary provision herein, Consultant shall file a statutory claim pursuant to Government Code Sections 905 et. seq. and 910 et. seq., in order to pursue any legal action under this Agreement.

Except with respect to rights and remedies expressly declared to be exclusive in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative and the exercise by either party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exerci se by it, at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the other party.
72 9
01107.0006/958405.1

7.4 Termination Prior to Expiration of Term . This Section shall govern any termination of this Contract except as specifically provided in the following Section for termination for cause. The City reserves the right to terminate this Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days’ written notice to Consultant, except that where termination is due to the fault of the Consultant, the period of notice may be such shorter ti me as may be determined by the Contract Officer. In addition, the Consultant reserves the right to terminate this Contract at any time, with or without cause, upon sixty (60) days’ written notice to City, except that where termination is due to the fault of the City, the period of notice may be such shorter time as the Consultant may determine. Upon receipt of any notice of termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except such as may be specifically approved by the Contract Officer.

Except where the Consultant has initiated termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for all services rendered prior to the effective date of the notice of termination and for any services authorized by the Contract Officer thereafter in accordance with the Schedule of Compensation or such as may be approved by the Contract Officer. In the event the Consultant has initiated termination, the Consultant shall be entitled to compensation only for the reasonable value of the work product actually produced hereunder, but not exceeding the compensation provided therefore in the Schedule of Compensation Exhibit “C”. In the event of termination without cause pursuant to this Section, the terminating party need not provide the non-terminating party with the opportunity to cure pursuant to Section 7.2.

7.5 Termination for Default of Consultant . If termination is due to the failure of the Consultant to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, City may, after compliance with the provisions of Section 7.2, take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise, and the Consultant shall be liable to the extent that the total cost for completion of the services required hereunder exceeds the compensation herein stipulated (provided that the City shall use reasonable efforts to mitiga te such damages), and City may withhold any payments to the Consultant for the purpose of set-off or partial payment of the amounts owed the City as previously stated.

8. MISCELLANEOUS

8.1 Covenant Against Discrimination . Consultant covenants that, by and for itself, its heirs, executors, assigns and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, re ligion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, or other protected class in the performance of this Agreement. Consultant shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treate d during employment without regard to their race, color, creed, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, or other protected class

8.2 Non-liability of City Officers and Employees . No officer or employee of the City shall be personally liable to the Consultant, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount, which may become due to the Consultant or to its successor, or for breach of any obligation of the terms of this Agreement.

8.3 Notice. Any notice, demand, request, document, consent, approval, or communication either party desires or is required to give to the other party or any other person shall be in writing and either served personally or sent by prepaid, first-class mail, in the case of the City, 73 10
01107.0006/958405.1
to the City Manager and to the attention of the Contract Officer (with her/his name and City title), City of Suisun City, 701 Civic Center Blvd. , Suisun City, CA 94585, and in the case of the Consultant, to the person(s) at the address designated on the execution page of this Agreement.

Either party may change its address by notifying the other party of the change of address in writing.

Notice shall be deemed communicated at the time personally delivered or in seventy-two (72) hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this Section.

8.4 Integration; Amendment. It is understood that there are no oral agreements between the parties hereto affecting this Agreement and this Agreement supersedes and cancels any and all previous negotiations, arrangements, agreements and understandings, if any, between the parties, and none shall be used to interpret this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended at any time by the mutual consent of the parties by an instrument in writing.

8.5 Severability. In the event that part of this Agreement shall be declared invalid or unenforceable by a valid judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this Agreement which are hereby declared as severable and shall be interpreted to carry out the intent of the parties hereunder unless the invalid provision is so material that its invalidity deprives either party of the basic benefit of their bargain or renders this Agreement meaningless.

8.6 Waiver. No delay or omission in the exercise of any right or remedy by non-defaulting party on any default shall impair such right or remedy or be construed as a waiver.

A party’s consent to or approval of any act by the other party requiring the party’s consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive or render unnecessary the other party’s consent to or approval of any subsequent act. Any waiver by either party of any default must be in writing and shall not be a waiver of any other default concerning the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

8.7 Attorneys’ Fees. If either party to this Agreement is required to initiate or defend or made a party to any action or proceeding in any way connected with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief which any be grante d, whether legal or equitable, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees, whether or not the matter proceeds to judgment.

8.8 Interpretation.

The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of this Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply.

8.9 Counterparts.

This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and such counterparts shall constitute one and the same instrument.

8.10 Warranty & Representation of Non -Collusion. No official, officer, or employee of City has any financial interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any official, officer, or employee of City participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which may affect his/her financial in terest or the financial interest of any corporation, partnership, or association in which (s)he is directly or indirectly interested, or in violation of any corporation, 74 11
01107.0006/958405.1
partnership, or association in which (s)he is directly or indirectly interested, or in violation of any State or municipal statute or regulation. The determination of “financial interest” shall be consistent with State law and shall not include interests found to be “remote” or “noninterests” pursuant to Government Code Sections 1091 or 1091.5. Consultant warrants and represents that it has not paid or given, and will not pay or give, to any third party including, but not limited to, any City official, officer, or employee, any money, consideration, or other thing of value as a result or consequence of obtaining or being awarded any agreement. Consultant further warrants and represents that (s)he/it has not engaged in any act(s), omission(s), or other conduct or collusion that would result in the payment of any money, consideration, or other thing of value to any third party including, but not limited to, any City official, officer, or employee, as a result of consequence of obtaining or being awarded any agr eement. Consultant is aware of and understands that any such act(s), omission(s) or other conduct resulting in such payment of money, consideration, or other thing of value will render this Agreement void and of no force or effect.

Consultant’s Authorized Initials _______

8.11 Corporate Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto warrant that (i) such party is duly organized and existing, (ii) they are duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of said party, (iii) by so executing this Agreement, such party is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement, and (iv) the entering into this Agreement does not violate any provision of any other Agreement to which said party is bound. This Agreement shall be binding upon th e heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties.
[Signatures On The Following Page]
75 12
01107.0006/958405.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first-above written.

CITY:

CITY OF SUISUN CITY, a municipal
corporation

Bret Prebula, City Manager
ATTEST:

Donna Pock, Deputy City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLPRICHARDS WATSON GERSHON

Elena Q. GerliPatrick L. Enright, City Attorney

CONSULTANT:

SANBELL
By:

Name: Daniel Leary
Title: Principal
By:

Name: Anoop Admal
Title: Principal
Address: 2290 Diamond Blvd., Suite 100
Concord, CA 94520

Two corporate officer signatures required when Consultant is a corporation, with one signature required from each of the following groups: 1) Chairman of the Board, President or any Vice President; and 2) Secretary, any Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer or any Assistant Treasurer. CONSULTANT’S SIGNATURES

SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED AS

MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE BYLAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO CONSULTANT’S BUSINESS ENTITY. 76 01107.0006/958405.1

CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SOLANO
On __________, 2024 before me, ________________, personally appeared ________________, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose names(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same i n his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature: _____________________________________

OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form.

CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT

INDIVIDUAL

CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________

TITLE(S)

PARTNER(S) LIMITED

GENERAL

ATTORNEY-IN-FACT

TRUSTEE(S)

GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR
OTHER_______________________________
______________________________________
SIGNER IS REPRESENTING:
(NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES))
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________

___________________________________

TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________

NUMBER OF PAGES
___________________________________

DATE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________

SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy or validity of that document. 77 01107.0006/958405.1

CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature: _____________________________________

OPTIONAL
Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form

CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT

INDIVIDUAL

CORPORATE OFFICER
_______________________________

TITLE(S)

PARTNER(S) LIMITED

GENERAL

ATTORNEY-IN-FACT

TRUSTEE(S)

___________________________________

TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________

NUMBER OF PAGES
___________________________________

DATE OF DOCUMENT
___________________________________

SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE

EXHIBIT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES
I. Consultant will provide design services for pedestrian crossing improvements on Pintail Drive at Crane Drive as well as for the upgrade of the fire station advance warning system. In general, Consultant will perform the following services:

A. Kick‐off Meeting. Consultant will meet with City staff to review the purpose of the project, define the scope of work and project goals. An initial project schedule will be developed and submitted to Staff at the meeting.

Deliverables: Kick‐off meeting minutes and updated project schedule within one week of the meeting.

B. Pre-Design Research and Preliminary Design Layout. Consultant will establish design criteria, project objectives, layout, and key components of the project. This work includes preliminary site investigation, and initial cost estimates. The project will meet Caltrans, California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and City of Suisun City design standards. Some of the design parameters to be considered are rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) systems including pedestrian pushbutton locations in relation to curb ramps, drainage improvements at curb returns, audible pedestrian systems, advance warning signs, advance yield markings, and signing and striping improvements.

Deliverables: Preliminary design, outline of intersection configuration, and initial cost estimate.

C. Design Development. Following the City’s selection of the proposed intersection layout, Design Team will incorporate recommendations and comments from review of Preliminary Design to develop 75% construction documents, and revise opinion of probable construction costs. Consultant will work closely with City staff to resolve the final site layout and pole locations during the preliminary design phase, such that there are no layout changes during the 75% design phase.

Consultant will identify and coordinate work with utility agencies for any utilities in conflict. Construction drawing layouts will be furnished in the latest released AutoCAD version using City format. Specifications will be prepared in the City’s standard format and in accordance with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Standard Specifications.

Deliverables: 75% plans, specifications, and estimates - Two hard copies.

D. Final 100% Bid Set Documents. Incorporate recommendations and comments from review of 75% design into final drawings and specifications ready for construction. Prepare an estimated cost of construction. 79 01107.0006/958405.1
Deliverables: Wet-signed Final plans, specifications, and estimates-Two hard copies.

80 01107.0006/958405.1 B-1

EXHIBIT “B”

SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS
(Superseding Contract Boilerplate)
Added text is indicated in bold italics, deleted text is indicted in strikethrough.

I. Section 2.3, Additional Services, is amended to read:

City shall have the right at any time during the performance of the services, without invalidating this Agreement, to order extra work beyond that specified in the Scope of Services or make changes by altering, adding to or deducting from said work. No suc h extra work may be undertaken unless a written order is first given by the Contract Officer to the Consultant, incorporating therein any adjustment in (i) the Contract Sum for the actual cost of the extra work, and/or (ii) the time to perform this Agreeme nt, which said adjustments are subject to the written approval of the Consultant. Any increase in compensation of up to ten percent (10%) of the Contract Sum but not exceeding a total contract amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) or in the time to perform of up to ninety (90) days may be approved by the Contract Officer. Any greater increases, taken either separately or cumulatively, must be approved by the City Council. No claim for an increase in the Contract Sum or time for perf ormance shall be valid unless the procedures established in this Section are followed.

II. Section 5.3, Indemnification, is amended to read:

To the full extent permitted by law, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) against, and will hold and save them and each of them harmless from, any and all actions, either judicial, administrative, arbitration or regulatory claims, damages to persons or property, losses, costs, penalties, obligations, errors, omissions or liabilities whether actual or threatened (herein “claims or liabilities”) that may be asserted or claimed by any person, firm or entity arising out of or in connection with to the extent caused by the negligent performance of the work, operations or activities provided herein of Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, subcontractors, invitees, or any individual or entity for which Consultant is legally liable (“indemnitors”), or arising from C onsultant’s or indemnitors’ reckless or willful misconduct, or arising from Consultant’s or indemnitors’ negligent performance of or failure to perform any term , provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement, except claims or liabilities occurring as a result of City’s sole negligence or willful acts or omissions. The indemnity obligation shall be binding on successors and assigns of Consultant and shall survive termination of this Agreement. 81 C-1
01107.0006/958405.1
EXHIBIT “C”

SCHEDULE OF COMPENSATION
I. Consultant shall perform the following Services at the following rates:

II. Within the budgeted amounts for each Task, and with the approval of the Contract Officer, funds may be shifted from one Task subbudget to another so long as the Contract Sum is not exceeded per Section 2.1, unless Additional Services are approved per Section 2.3.

III. The City will compensate Consultant for the Services performed upon submission of a valid invoice. Each invoice is to include:

A. Line items for all the work performed, the number of hours worked, and the hourly rate.

B. Line items for all materials and equipment properly charged to the Services.

C. Line items for all other approved reimbursable expenses claimed, with supporting documentation.

D. Line items for all approved subcontractor labor, supplies, equipment, materials, and travel properly charged to the Services.

IV. The total compensation for the Services shall not exceed the Contract Sum as provided in Section 2.1 of this Agreement.
82 D-1
01107.0006/958405.1
EXHIBIT “D”

SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
I. Consultant shall perform all services timely in accordance with the following schedule: Sanbell shall complete the construction documents within 90 calendar days of receiving written Notice to Proceed.

83 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
84 AGENDA ITEM NO. 10.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Accepting a Grant of Public Utility Easement from One Harbor Center, A California Limited Partnership, for a Portion of 1 Harbor Center (APN 0032-061-400) to Facilitate the Completion of the Dental Office Private Development at APN 0032-061-390.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There would be no impact to the General Fund from this item.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Develop Sustainable Economy. Ensure Public Safety. Provide Good Governance. Ensure Fiscal Solvency. Enhance Environment.

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 7050 and 66477.1, the City has the discretionary authority to accept the dedication of real property for the establishment of public utility easements (P.U.E.).

To advance a private development project — a dental office currently under construction — on Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0032-061-390, One Harbor Center, a California Limited Partnership, is proposing to grant a P.U.E. to the City on a portion of the parcel it owns at 1 Harbor Center, APN 0032-061-400. The City’s acceptance of this easement dedication will facilitate the continued progress and successful completion of the dental office project.

STAFF REPORT:

The City of Suisun City previously approved the development of a dental office at the southeast corner of Main Street and Lotz Way. One Harbor Center is proposing to grant the City a P.U.E. located immediately west of the project site. For reference, a location map, legal description, and plat map are attached. If the easement is accepted, a Grant of Easement Deed will be recorded with the County. A draft of the deed is also included for reference.

Acceptance of this P.U.E. dedication will allow for the installation of utilities essential to the dental office project, including communication infrastructure, sanitary sewer appurtenances, PG&E electrical facilities, and other related services. At this stage of the dental office’s construction, the installation of electrical service is a critical milestone necessary to maintain the project’s tight schedule.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025- ___: Accepting a Grant of Public Utility Easement from One Harbor Center, A California Limited Partnership, for a Portion of 1 Harbor Center (APN 0032-061-400) to Facilitate the Completion of the Dental Office Private Development at APN 0032-061-390.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Location Map.
3 .

Legal Description for Proposed Public Utility Easement. 4 .

Plat Map for Proposed Public Utility Easement.
5 .

Draft Grant of Easement Deed.

PREPARED BY:

Nick Lozano, Sr. Associate Engineer
REVIEWED BY:

Nouae Vue, Public Works Director
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment No. 1 Resolution Accepting Grant of Public Utility Easement.doc Attachment No. 2 Accepting Grant of Utility Easement Location Map.pdf Attachment No. 3 Exhibit A - Legal Description.pdf
Attachment No. 4 Exhibit B - Plat Map.pdf
Attachment No. 5 Draft Grant of Easement Deed.pdf
86 RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

ACCEPTING A GRANT OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT FROM ONE HARBOR CENTER, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, FOR A PORTION OF 1 HARBOR CENTER (APN 0032-061-400) TO FACILITATE THE COMPLETION OF THE DETNAL OFFICE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AT APN 0032-061-390

WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 7050 and 66477.1, the City at its discretion, has the authority to accept dedication of real property for the establishmen t of public utility easements (P.U.E); and

WHEREAS, to advance the dental office private development project (Project), previously approved for construction by the City of Suisun City, One Harbor Center, a California Limited Partnership, is proposing to grant a P.U.E. to the City on a portion of the parcel it owns at 1 Harbor Center, APN 0032-061-400; and

WHEREAS, the Project is located at the southeast corner of Main Street and Lotz Way, APN 0032-061-390; and

WHEREAS, acceptance of the easement dedication will facilitate the continued progress and successful completion of the Project by allowing for the installation of utilities essential to the Project; and

WHEREAS, the installation of electrical service is a critical milestone necessary to maintain the Project’s schedule; and

WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City to support the Project by accepting the grant of public utility easement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City accept the gran t of public utility easement on a portion of APN 0032 -061-400 from One Harbor Center in order to facilitate the successful completion of the dental office project at APN 0032-061-390.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS

WITNESS my hand and the seal of the City of Suisun City this 15th of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
87 LOCATION MAP
Grant of Public Utility Easement at One Harbor Center

Dental Office
Project
Location
of Public Utility Easement
Proposed to be Dedicated
One Harbor Center
88 89
90 APN: 0032-061-400
(Space Above this Line for Recorder's Use)

Suisun City, CA

GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,

One Harbor Center, A California Limited Partnership

hereby GRANT(s) to the

CITY OF SUISUN CITY, a Municipal Corporation,

a perpetual easement subject to the terms provided herein for the purposes of installing, constructing, using, maintaining, operating, altering, adding to, repairing, replacing, reconstructing, inspecting and/or removing public utilities, including but not limited to gas lines, telecommunication lines, electrical lines, sanitary sewer lines, water lines and their appurtenances (collectively, "Public Utilities", title to which Facilities shall remain at all times in the Grantee as Grantee's equipment and personal property), on, over, in, under and across that portion of certain real property situated in the City of Suisun City, County of Solano, State of California, described on Exhibit "A", and depicted on Exhibit "B", which are both attached hereto and made a part hereof.

GRANTEE, its successors and assigns and their respective agents and employees, shall have the right of ingress to and egress from said easement and every part thereof, at all times, for the purpose of exercising the rights herein granted. Grantee agrees to use due care in any use of the easement herein granted and in the construction, installation, repair, replacement and maintenance of the Facilities and/or easement area as provided for herein so as not to unreasonably disturb Grantor's use of its property. Without limiting the effect of the foregoing, Grantee shall not unreasonably interfere with Grantor's business operations while utilizing this easement.

CITY OF SUISUN CITY

CITY OF SUISUN CITY
c/o City Clerk
701 Civic Center Blvd.

Suisun City, CA 94585
No Recording Fee- Per Government Code §27383
No Document Transfer Tax- Per R&T Code §11922
DRAFT
91 GRANTEE will forever release Grantor and its successors and assigns from any liability or obligation in connection with the Storm Drain Facilities, and will waive and hold harmless for, and defend Grantor and its successors and assigns against, any claims, losses, causes of action, and suits which arise from Grantee’s, its agents’, employees’, invitees’ or permittees’ acts or omissions, including but not limited to the use of the easement herein granted, and will indemnify Grantor for any losses suffered due to any such claims, losses, causes of action or suits, except for that which is attributable to the negligence or willful misconduct of the Grantor, its employees, agents or contractors.

GRANTOR agrees for himself, his heirs and assign, not to erect, place or maintain, not to permit the erection, placement or maintenance any building or structure improvement such as a block wall, retaining wall, trees, and other structure improvements, shall be constructed over the easement area.

GRANTOR reserves the right to use the easement area for parking areas, drive aisles, pavement, light standards, landscaping (except for trees and deep rooting shrubbery), and any other uses that will not unreasonably interfere with Grantee's use of the easement area.

GRANTOR shall comply, and shall cause all of their respective agents, employees, and contractors to comply, with all applicable governmental laws and regulations, including but not limited to those of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, while present on the property.

"Grantor"

One Harbor Center,
A California Limited Partnership

B y :

Name: Christine Simpson,
Its: President
D a t e :

"Grantee"

CITY OF SUISUN CITY,
a Municipal Corporation

B y :

N a m e :

I t s :

D a t e :

92 STATE OF ________________________________ )

C O U N T Y O F )

On ___________________________________before me, , (insert name and title of the officer)

personally appeared
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.

S i g n a t u r e : ( S e a l )

93 GRANTEE'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE/CONSENT
(to be attached hereto)
94 AGENDA ITEM NO. 11.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution 2025-___: Acknowledging Receipt of a Report Made by the Fire Marshal of the Suisun City Fire Department Regarding the State Mandated Inspections of Specific Occupancies Pursuant to Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 of the California Health and Safety Code.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact in accepting this report

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Ensure Public Safety

BACKGROUND:

On September 27, 2018, California Senate Bill 1205 (SB1205) became effective, and added a new section to the California Health and Safety Code which affects every fire department or fire district in the State. Existing state law requires every fire department or district providing fire protection services to inspect every building used as a public or private school K-12 annually to enforce current fire and life safety provisions. This same annual inspection requirement is also applicable to hotels, motels, lodging houses, apartment buildings and residential occupancies used as care facilities.

With the signing of SB 1205, the California Health Safety and Code was amended by adding Section 13146.4, that requires that all fire departments or districts required to perform annual inspections pursuant to Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 shall report annually to its administrating authority its compliance with Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3

The Fire Department has completed all initial annual fire inspections of these facilities for the 2023- 2024 fiscal year. Pursuant to SB 1205, the Fire Department is submitting this report demonstrating compliance with California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3.

STAFF REPORT:

Annually, the Suisun City Fire Department is required to conduct inspections of all public and private schools K-12, hotels, motels, lodging houses, apartment buildings, and other residential occupancies used as residential care facilities. The purpose of annual fire prevention inspections and code enforcement is to ensure compliance with adopted codes and standards, to mitigate known hazards, and reduce risk to the community.

A
.

California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.3 mandates that the local fire department inspect all public and private schools K-12 once annually. The Fire Department has inspected 3 of 3 occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities.

B
.

California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.2 mandates that the local fire department inspect all hotels, motels, apartment buildings, lodging houses and other residential occupancies used as residential care facilities once annually. The Fire Department has inspected 34 of 34 occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities.

In total, 37 of 37 mandated annual inspections of all known buildings and structures required to be inspected within the California Health and Safety Code mandate have been completed during the 2024- 2025 fiscal year. Further, the acceptance of this compliance report and the recommended Resolution 95 fulfill the statutory requirements contained in California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.2, 13146.3 and 13146.4, as amended by Senate Bill 1205.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Council of Adopt Resolution 2025-___: Acknowledging Receipt of a Report Made by the Fire Marshal of the Suisun City Fire Department Regarding the Inspection of Certain Occupancies Pursuant to Sections 13146.2 And 13146.3 of the California Health and Safety Code.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Council Adoption of Resolution 2025-___: Acknowledging Receipt of a Report Made by the Fire Marshal of the Suisun City Fire Department Regarding the Inspection of Certain Occupancies.

PREPARED BY:

Jose Colin, Fire Marshal
REVIEWED BY:

Brad L. Lopez, Fire Chief
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution
96 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN

CITY, CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF A REPORT

MADE BY THE FIRE MARSHAL OF THE SUISUN CITY FIRE

DEPARTMENT REGARDING THE INSPECTION OF CERTAIN

OCCUPANCIES REQUIRED TO PERFORM ANNUAL INSPECTIONS IN
SUCH OCCUPANCIES PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 13146.2 AND 13146.3 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE.

WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 13146.4 was added in 2018, and became effective on September 27, 2018; and,
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 requires all fire departments, including the Suisun City Fire Department, that provide fire protection services to perform annual inspections in every building used as a publ ic or private school, hotel, motel, lodging house, and apartment building; and,
WHEREAS, California Health & Safety Code Section 13146.2 requires all fire departments, including the Suisun City Fire Department, that provide fire protection services to report annually to its administering authority on its compliance with Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Suisun City intends this Resolution to fulfill the requirements of the California Health & Safety Code regarding acknowledgment of the Suisun City Fire Department’s compliance with California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Suisun City that said Council expressly acknowledges the measure of compliance of the Suisun City Fire Department with California Health and Safety Code Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 in the area encompassed by the City of Suisun City, as follows:

A. EDUCATIONAL GROUP E OCCUPANCIES:

Educational Group E occupancies are generally those public and private schools, used by more than six persons at any one time for educational purposes through the 12th grade. Within the City of Suisun City, there lie three (3) Group E occupancies , buildings, structures and/or facilities.
97 During fiscal year 20 24/2025, the Suisun City Fire Department completed the annual inspection of three (3) Group E occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities. T his is a compliance rate of 100% for this reporting period.

Additional items of note regarding this compliance rate can be found in the accompanying staff report for this resolution.

B. RESIDENTIAL GROUP R OCCUPANCIES:

Residential Group R occupancies, for the purposes of this resolution, are generally those occupancies containing sle eping units, and include hotels, motels, lodging houses, apartment buildings and residential occupancies used as care facilities. Within the City of Suisun City, there lie 34 Group R occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities.

During fiscal yea r 20 24/2025, the Suisun City Fire Department com pleted the annual inspection of 34 Group R occupancies, buildings, structures and/or facilities. This is a compliance rate of 100% for this reporting period.

Additional items of note regarding this compliance rate can be found in the accompanying staff report for this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Suisun City Council duly noticed and held on the 15th day, July 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers: _______________________________________________ NOES: Councilmembers: _______________________________________________ ABSENT: Councilmembers: _______________________________________________ ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: _______________________________________________

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

___________________________________
Anita Skinner, CMC
City Clerk
98 AGENDA ITEM NO. 12.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Approving the Debt Service Rate for the North Bay Aqueduct Bond Issue for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed rate for FY 2025-26 to make the debt service payments for the North Bay Aqueduct (NBA) is 0.002266 per $100 of Assessed Value. As indicated in the attached table and chart, the NBA levy would go down by $0.0001840 per $100 or a decrease by about $0.92 per year on a home with an Assessed Value of $500,000.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance and Ensure Fiscal Solvency.

BACKGROUND:

On October 22, 1985, the City of Suisun City (“City”) entered into an agreement with the Solano County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (“District”) for the purpose of obtaining an additional water supply up to a maximum of 1,300 acre-feet per annum from the State’s North Bay Aqueduct project.

Under the agreement, the City is required to make annual payments to the District for the District’s costs associated with wheeling that water until the agreement matures in July 1, 2036. City is obligated to make these interest-free payments to District by levying a zone of benefit property tax.

STAFF REPORT:

Each year the City Council is required to establish the ad valorem property tax rates to be levied on the properties that benefit from the voter-approved bond issues for the acquisition of water from the North Bay Aqueduct. These tax proceeds are used to make annual debt service payment.

Staff uses the Preliminary 2025-2026 Assessed Valuations Estimates provided by Solano County to calculate the levy, because the actual assessed valuations are not available in time to meet legal deadlines for submitting the tax rate to the County. There is an inverse relationship between the assessed values and the tax rates needed to generate the funds necessary to make the annual bond payments. In other words, when assessed values (AVs) go up, the tax rate will go down while still generating the needed revenue. When AVs go down, the tax levy must go up in order to generate the amount needed for bond payments. In the fiscal year 2025-26, an increase in assessed values (AVs) initially led to a lower tax rate.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Approving the Debt Service Rate for the North Bay Aqueduct Bond Issue for Fiscal Year 2025-26.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Approving the Debt Service Rate for the North Bay Aqueduct Bond Issue for Fiscal Year 2025-26.
2 .

Calculation of Voter Approved Debt for 2025-26, including table and chart showing property tax rates for fiscal year 2017 to 2026.

PREPARED BY:

Elizabeth Luna, Accounting Services Manager
99 REVIEWED BY:

Lakhwinder Deol, Finance Director
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. July 15 2025 Ad Valorem Debt Service Rate NBA reso attachment 1

2. July 15 2025 NBA Annual Calculation 25-26.and graph.pdf .
100
RESOLUTION NO. 202 5-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

APPROVING THE DEBT SERVICE RATE FOR THE NORTH BAY AQUEDUCT BOND ISSUE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

WHEREAS, On October 22, 1985, the City of Suisun City (“City”) entered into an agreement with the Solano County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (“District”) for the purpose of obtaining an additional water supply up to a maximum of 1,300 acre -feet per annum from the State’s North Bay Aqueduct project; and

WHEREAS, Under the agreement, the City is required to make annual payments to the District for the District’s costs associated with wheeling that water until the agreement matures in July 1, 2036; and

WHEREAS, City is obligated to make these interest-free payments to District by levying a zone of benefit property tax; and

WHEREAS, City has made the necessary calculations and has determined the correct tax rate for the 2025-26 fiscal year is $0.002266 per $100.00 of assessed valuation;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Suisun City Council does hereby approve the rate of Debt Service designated in the number of cents upon each $100.00 of the full cash value of the property in the City of Suisun City, as equalized and returned to this City Council by the Auditor of Solano County, to raise the amount of money necessary to pay the FY 202 5-26 indebtedness for the North Bay Aqueduct which rate is $0.002266 per $100.00 of assessed valuation; and

BE IT ALSO RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the County Auditor as soon as possible, and to post three (3) copies thereof in the three (3) places designated by ordinance for posting in the City.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th day of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Council Members:

NOES: Council Members:

ABSENT: Council Members:

ABSTAIN: Council Members:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
101
NORTH BAY AQUEDUCT - Fund 079 Attachment 2
Calculation of Voter Approved Debt for 2025-26
(Using schedules provided by the Solano County Auditor-Controller) Unsecured Secured Total
Net Values (Less H.O.) 36,760,608 3,215,055,342 3,251,815,950 SBE Values - -
Subtotal 36,760,608 3,215,055,342 3,251,815,950 Less: 2% Delinquenc y (735,212) (735,212)
.25% Delinquency (8,037,638) (8,037,638)
Redevelopment -
- -
-
Add: Homeowners 7,000 23,347,800 23,354,800 Adjusted Net Values 36,032,396 3,230,365,504 3,266,397,89 9 Tax Rates * 0.002450% 0.002266%
Amount of Taxes 883 $
73,198$
74,081$

Amount Needed 88,125$
Current Reserves 14,044
Interest -
Secured Taxes 73,198
Unsecured Taxes 883
Total 88,125
Variance -
Payments to be Made in 2025-26
Principal 77,740
Interest -
Others- Cost Allocation new for 2025-26 2,611
Required Reserve 7,774
Total 88,125
* The Previous Years Secured Rate is the Current Years Unsecured Rat e NBA Annual Calculation 25-26.xlsx 7/8/2025
102
103

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
104
AGENDA ITEM NO. 13.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. to Implement Various Components of the Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan and Related Economic Development Activities.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total cost of the proposed agreement with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. (Kosmont) shall not exceed $50,000. The Professional Services account under City Manager Department Budget will fund the additional services required for implementation.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

To provide good governance.

BACKGROUND:

On June 18, 2024 the City Council approved an agreement with Kosmont to prepare an Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan (EDSP).

On February 18, 2025 the City
Council approved the Five-Year Strategic Plan (FY 2024-2029) which integrates Council’s policy
priorities and is the guiding document for resource allocation, capital improvements, and municipal initiatives.

As Kosmont is assisting with the Surplus Land Act (SLA) process, there are activities that are arising that require complex real estate analysis, especially around the disposition of City properties. The city is diligently working on a plan to maximize the value of some of its largest parcels. In order to extract maximum value, the city needs to engage in a variety of real estate analysis that Kosmont, through its creation of the EDSP, has the most knowledge and insight to execute.

The city may not utilize the entire $50,000 contract maximum but requires the flexibility to work on these complex strategies to continue to meet the SLA and selling timelines for development.

STAFF REPORT:

The Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan focuses on four primary goals, each supported by defined strategies: public safety, infrastructure, financial sustainability, and economic growth. Following discussions with executive staff, the City proposes to contract with Kosmont to implement various components of the EDSP and other related economic development activities.

The scope of services to be provided by Kosmont is detailed in Attachment 2 and includes the following.
1 .

Marketing and outreach
2 .

Developer request for qualifications/proposals
3 .

Pro forma evaluation / financial feasibility analysis for potential projects 4 .

Project fiscal impact and economic benefit analysis
5 .

Developer negotiation assistance
6 .

Assistance with formulation and implementation of City-owned asset strategies 7 .

Pursuit and execution of potential economic incentives, funding sources and/or financial structures
105
8 .

City Council/Planning Commission attendance and presentations

The priority of services will be mutually agreed to by Consultant and City in consideration of budget. The attached proposal serves as an Agreement when executed and signed by the City and Kosmont.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 2025-___:

Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. for Economic Development Implementation Services to Implement Various Components of the Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan and Related Economic Development Activities.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City's Behalf with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. to Implement Various Components of the Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan and Related Economic Development Activities.
2 .

Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Implementation Services

PREPARED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution Authorizing Agreement with Kosmont for Econoimic Development Implementation Services.docx

2. Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development implementation Services 6-27-2025.pdf .
106

1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT ON THE CITY’S BEHALF WITH KOSMONT &
ASSOCIATES, INC. TO IMPLEMENT VARIOUS COMPONENTS OF THE

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AND

RELATED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

WHEREAS, on June 18, 2024, the City Council approved an agreement with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. (“Kosmont”) for the preparation of an Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan (EDSP); and
WHEREAS, on February 18, 2025 the City Council approved the Five-Year Strategic Plan for Fiscal years 2024-25 through 2029-30, establishing Council’s top policy priorities and provides a framework for achieving goals and future budget priorities for the City; and WHEREAS, City staff has identified a need for continued support in implementing various components of the EDSP to advance the City’s economic development objectives; and WHEREAS, staff recommends approval of a P rofessional Services Agreement with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. to provide Economic Development Implementation Services in support of the EDSP and related activities.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City authorizes the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement on the City’s behalf with Kosmont & Associates, Inc. .for Economic Development Implementation Services for a contract amount not-to exceed $50,000, and to take any and all necessary and appropriate actions to implement this contract.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
107

Kosmont Companies
Mailing Address: 1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd., #382 (424) 297-1070 Physical Address: 2301 Rosecrans Ave, Ste. 4140 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 www.kosmont.com El Segundo, CA 90245

June 27, 2025

Bret Prebula
City Manager
City of Suisun City
701 Civic Center Boulevard
Suisun City, CA 94585

Re: Proposal for Economic Development Implementation Services

Dear Mr. Prebula:

Kosmont & Associates, Inc. doing business as Kosmont Companies (“Consultant” or “Kosmont”) is pleased to present this proposal to the City of Suisun City (“City” or “Client”) for economic development implementation services. This proposal serves as an Agreement when executed and returned by Client to Kosmont.

I. BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Kosmont was retained by the City in 2024 to prepare an Economic Development Strategy and Implementation Plan (“EDSP”), which was ultimately adopted at a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission in March 2025. The City has expressed interest in assistance from Kosmont to implement various components of the EDSP and related economic development activities on an as-needed basis. Kosmont proposes the following Scope of Services accordingly.

II. SCOPE OF SERVICES

Approach to Tasks: The prospective assignment and consulting services that Kosmont will provide will be of a relatively limited scope and duration, and advisory in nature. Kosmont will be making recommendations only, which advise the Client and jurisdictions , including their elected officials, appointed officials, and staff, which they can accept or reject. None of Kosmont's staff will act in a capacity as an elected official, nor appointed official, nor as staff, nor as serving in a "designated" position.

Task 1: Economic Development Implementation Services
At the City’s direction, Kosmont will be available to perform economic development tasks, such as the following:
108
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 2 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

• Marketing / outreach to retailers, businesses, developers, hotels, and private investment for potential opportunity sites
• Developer request for qualifications / proposals (RFQ/P) preparation / distribution, as may be appropriate
• Pro forma evaluation / financial feasibility analysis for potential projects • Project fiscal impact and economic benefit analysis
• Developer negotiation assistance, financial sources -and-uses analysis, public -private transaction structuring
• Assistance with formulation and implementation of City-owned asset strategies • Pursuit and execution of potential economic incentives, funding sources, and/or financing structures in the context of potential public-private transactions, such as DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY RESERVE ( D.O.R.)®, site specific tax revenue pledges, infrastructure financing districts, and/or other tools
• Presentations to City Council, Planning Commission, and/or other bodies as appropriate • Other economic development tasks as needed.

The priority of services/tasks will be mutually agreed to by Consultant and City in consideration of budget.

III. SCHEDULE

Consultant is prepared to commence work upon receipt of executed Agreement.

IV. COMPENSATION

Compensation for Task 1 is estimated at $ 50,000 for professional services (hourly) fees at Consultant’s billing rates as shown on Attachment A. Future increases in budget will require approval by Client in advance. Budget may be increased by Client at any time.

Consultant anticipates a single consolidated round of Client comments and revisions on draft work product before Kosmont provides a final version of work product. If necessary, additional rounds of comments and revisions can be accommodated on an hourly basis.

Services will be invoiced monthly at Consultant’s standard billing rates, as shown on Attachment A. In addition to professional services (hourly) fees, invoices will include reimbursement for out - of-pocket expenses such as travel and mileage (provided that there shall be no overnight travel without the Client’s prior approval and that mileage shall be reimbursed at the current IRS mileage reimbursement rate), professional printing, conference calls, and delivery charges for messenger and overnight packages at actual cost. Unless otherwise agreed to in advance, out-of-area travel, if any, requires advance funding of flights and hotel accommodations.

Consultant will also include in each invoice an administrative services fee to cover in-house copy, fax, telephone and postage costs equal to four percent (4.0%) of Consultant’s monthly 109
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 3 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

professional service fees incurred. Any unpaid invoices after 30 days shall accrue interest at the rate of 10% per annum.

For the convenience of Kosmont’s clients, we offer a secure credit card payment service. The credit card payment link is: https://kosmont.paidyet.com and there are two ways to make a secure credit card payment:

1. Fill in the “Make a Payment” form when you go to the link (https://kosmont.paidyet.com), or

2. Call Kosmont Companies’ accounting desk (424) 297-1072 to make a credit card payment

Consultant is prepared to commence work upon receipt of executed Agreement.

DISCLOSURE: Compensation for possible future transaction-based services or brokerage services.

The following is being provided solely as an advance disclosure of possible real estate brokerage and finance services and potential compensation for such services. This disclosure is not intended to commit the Client.

When assignments involve real estate/property brokerage services, such transaction -based services are typically provided by Kosmont Real Estate Services, Inc. dba Kosmont Realty (“KR”) is licensed by the State of California Department of Real Estate (Licen se# 02058445).

Compensation to KR is typically paid through commissions for property sale transactions, lease transactions and success/broker fees. KR also provides Broker Opinions of Value (“BOV”) services on a fixed fee basis.

When assignments involve public finance services on behalf of a public agency, such municipal advisory services are provided by Kosmont Financial Services (KFS). KFS is an independent Registered Municipal Advisor with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.

SEC registration does not constitute an endorsement of the firm by the Commission or state securities regulators.

V. OTHER PROVISIONS
A. Termination. Client or Consultant shall have the right to terminate this Agreement at any time upon written notification to the other party. Payment for fees accrued through the date of termination shall be remitted in full.

B. Arbitration. Any controversy or claim arising out of or in relation to this Agreement, or the making, performance, interpretation or breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration at JAMS in Los Angeles, California. Each of the parties to such arbitration proceeding shall be entitled to take up to five depositions with document requests. The provisions of Section 1283.05 (except subdivision (e) thereof) of the California Code of Civil Procedure are incorporated by reference herein, except to the extent they conflic t with this Agreement, in which case this Agreement is 110
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 4 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

controlling. If the matter is heard by only one arbitrator, such arbitrator shall be a member of the State Bar of California or a retired judge. If the matter is heard by an arbitration panel, at least one member of such panel shall be a member of the St ate Bar of California or a retired judge.

The arbitrator or arbitrators shall decide all questions of law, and all mixed questions of law and fact, in accordance with the substantive law of the State of California to the end that all rights and defenses which either party may have asserted in a court of competent jurisdiction shall be fully available to such party in the arbitration proceeding contemplated hereby. The arbitrator and arbitrators shall set forth and deliver their findings of fact and conclusions of law with the delivery of the arbitration award. Judgment upon the award rendered shall be final and non -appealable and may be entered in any court having jurisdiction.

C. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any legal action, arbitration, or proceeding arising out of an alleged breach of this Agreement, the party prevailing in such legal action, arbitration, or proceeding shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses and c osts, as well as all actual attorneys' fees, expenses and cost incurred in enforcing any judgment entered.

D. Authority. Each of the parties executing this Agreement warrants that persons duly authorized to bind each such party to its terms execute this Agreement.

E. Further Actions. The parties agree to execute such additional documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to carry out the provisions and intent of this Agreement.

F. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any of the rights or obligations hereunder may be assigned by either party without the prior written consent of the other party.

G. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.

H. Entire Agreement; Amendments and Waivers. This Agreement contains the final, complete and exclusive agreement between the parties relating to the transactions contemplated hereby and any and all prior discussions, negotiations, commitments and understanding, whether written or oral, related hereto are superseded hereby. No addition or modification of any term or provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing signed by both parties. No waiver of any of the provisions o f this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute a waiver of any other provision hereof (whether or not similar), nor shall such waiver constitute a continuing waiver of such provisions unless otherwise expressly provided. Each party to this Agreement has participated in its drafting and, therefore, ambiguities in this Agreement will not be construed against any party to this Agreement.

I. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement shall be deemed invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and each remaining term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid and in force to the fullest extent p ermitted by law.

J. Notices. All notices, requests, demands and other communications which may be required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been received when transmitted; if personally delivered, if transmitted by telecopier, electronic or digital 111
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 5 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

transmission method, upon transmission; if sent by next day delivery to a domestic address by a recognized overnight delivery service (e.g., Federal Express), the day after it is sent; and if sent by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, upon receipt. In each case, notice shall be sent to the principal place of business of the respective party. Either party may change its address by giving written notice thereof to the other in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph.

K. Titles and Captions. Titles and captions contained in this Agreement are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for reference and in no way define, limit, extend or describe the scope of this Agreement or the intent of any provision herein.

L. Governing Law. The statutory, administrative and judicial law of the State of California (without reference to choice of law provisions of California law) shall govern the execution and performance of this Agreement.

M. Confidentiality. Each of the parties agrees not to disclose this Agreement or any information concerning this Agreement to any persons or entities, other than to their attorneys and accountants, or as otherwise may be required by law.

N. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which constitutes an original, and all of which together constitute one and the same instrument. The signature of any person on a telecopy of this Agreement, or any notice, action or consent taken pursuant to this Agreement shall have the same full force and effect as such person's original signature.

O. Disclaimer. Consultant’s financial analysis activities and work product, which may include but is not limited to pro forma analysis and tax projections, are projections only. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed in the analysis performed by Con sultant due to the integrity of data received, market conditions, economic events and conditions, and a variety of factors that could materially affect the data and conclusions. Client’s reliance on Consultant’s analysis must consider the foregoing.

Consultant services outlined and described herein are advisory services only. Any decisions or actions taken or not taken by Client and affiliates, are deemed to be based on Client’s understanding and by execution of this Agreement, acknowledgement that Consultant’s services are advisory only and as such, cannot be relied on as to the results, performance and conclusions of any investment or project that Client may or may not undertake as related to the services provided including any verbal or written com munications by and between the Client and Consultant.

Client acknowledges that Consultant's use of work product is limited to the purposes contemplated within this Agreement. Consultant makes no representation of the work product's application to, or suitability for use in, circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work under this Agreement.

112
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 6 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

P. Limitation of Damages. In the event Consultant is found liable for any violation of duty, whether in tort or in contract, damages shall be limited to the amount Consultant has received from Client.

Q. Force Majeure. Consultant shall not be liable for failure or delay in performance of its obligations under this Agreement arising out of or caused, directly or indirectly, by significant circumstances beyond its reasonable control, including, without limitation: epidemic; acts of God; earthquakes; fires; floods; wars; civil or military disturbances; acts of terrorism; sabotage; strikes; riots; wide-spread power failures and wide-spread internet failure. Contractual performance and deadline(s) shall be extended for a period equal to the time lost by reason of the delay.

R. Expiration of Proposal for Services . If this Agreement is not fully executed by the parties within thirty (30) days from the date of this letter, this proposal shall expire.

S. Not an agreement for Legal Services or Legal Advice. This Agreement does not constitute an agreement for the performance of legal services or the provision of legal advice, or legal opinion. Client should seek independent legal counsel on matters for which Client is seeking legal advice.

113
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 7 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

VI. ACCEPTANCE AND AUTHORIZATION

If this Agreement is acceptable to Client, please execute two copies of the Agreement and return both originals to Kosmont Companies. Upon receipt of both signed contracts, we will return one fully executed original for your files. Kosmont will commence w ork upon receipt of executed Agreement.

Read, understood, and agreed to this

____ Day of _______________ 2025

City of Suisun City Kosmont & Associates, Inc.
doing business as “Kosmont Companies”

By: _________________________ By: _________________________ (Signature) (Signature)

Name: Name: Ken K. Hira
(Print Name)

Its: Its: President
(Title)

114
Suisun City
Kosmont Proposal for Economic Development Advisory
June 27, 2025

Kosmont Companies 8 | P a g e
(424) 297-1070
www.kosmont.com

ATTACHMENT A

Kosmont Companies
2025 Public Agency Fee Schedule
Professional Services

Chairman & CEO $525.00/hour
President $425.00/hour
Sr. Vice President/Sr. Advisor/Sr. Managing Director $395.00/hour Vice President/Project Advisor $295.00/hour Senior Project Analyst $205.00/hour
Project Analyst/Project Research $195.00/hour
Assistant Project Analyst/Assistant Project Manager $165.00/hour Project Promotion/Graphics/GIS Mapping Services $ 95.00/hour Clerical Support $ 80.00/hour

Additional Expenses
In addition to professional services (labor fees):
1) An administrative fee for in -house copy, fax, phone, postage costs, digital/technological support and related administrative expenses will be charged, which will be computed at four percent (4.0 %) of monthly Kosmont Companies professional service fees inc urred; plus
2) Out-of-pocket expenditures, such as travel and mileage, professional printing, and delivery charges for messenger and overnight packages will be charged at cost. 3) Project/Market data sources for support of evaluation and analysis e.g., ESRI, Placer.ai, CoStar/STR, IMPLAN, ParcelQuest and other based on quoted project cost. 4) If Kosmont retains Third Party Vendor(s) for Client (with Client’s advance approval), fees and cost will be billed to Client at 1.1X (times) fees and costs. 5) Consultant’s attendance or participation at any public meeting, whether such participation is in person, digital, video and/or telephonic (e.g., City Council, Planning Commission, Public Agency Board, other) requested by Client and are beyond those specifically identified in the Scope of Work will be billed at the professional services (hourly) fees as shown on this Attachment A.

• Charges for Court/Deposition/Expert Witness-Related Appearances Court-related (non -preparation) activities, such as court appearances, depositions, mediation, arbitration, dispute resolution and other expert witness activities, will be charged at a court rate of

1.5 times scheduled rates, with a 4-hour minimum.

Rates Effective until December 31, 2025. For and during the term of the subject Agreement, the above referenced rates in each category will be increased, effective January 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, to reflect the adjustment in the CPI (U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics) All Cities Average Consumer Price Index for the prior year. As an example, the US City Average Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) for January 2025 was 317.671, representing a change of

3.0 percent over the index for January 2024.
115

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
116
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-__: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Suisun City Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Client Services Engagement Letter with Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC for public Management Consulting Services.

FISCAL IMPACT:

As of June 15, 2025, the City has expended $47,215.00 under the current agreement with Beauchaine Consulting Group. The proposed action will authorize continued services, with the total contract amount, inclusive of the amount already spent, not to exceed $100,000.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance.

BACKGROUND:

Beauchaine Consulting Group (BCG) is a public sector management consulting firm with expertise in employee and labor relations, labor negotiations, union relations, public safety (police and fire), defense of claims (grievances, employment practice appeals, and matters before the California Public Employment Relations Board), personnel policy review, workplace investigations, and classification and compensation matters including FLSA and payroll compliance.

In Fiscal Year 2024–2025, the City entered into an agreement with BCG to support negotiations for four employee bargaining units whose contracts expired on June 30, 2025:

Suisun City Employees’ Association (SCEA/SEIU)
Suisun City Management and Professional Employees’ Association (SCMPEA) Suisun City Professional Firefighters’ Association (SCPFA/IAFF) Suisun City Police Officers’ Association (SCPOA)

STAFF REPORT:

BCG has served as a critical resource in navigating the current labor negotiations. As of June 15, 2025, the City has expended $47,215.00 under the existing agreement. With mediation pending for at least two labor groups and additional meet-and-confer discussions anticipated regarding FLSA overtime and other issues, continued consulting support is required.

This item authorizes the extension of the professional services agreement to continue utilizing BCG’s expertise into Fiscal Year 2025–2026. The new agreement will not exceed a total contract amount of $100,000, including the $47,215.00 already expended.

Continuing this partnership ensures the City retains qualified labor relations support and maintains continuity with a team already familiar with the City’s operational and bargaining context.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-__ authorizing the City Manager to 117
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025-__ authorizing the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC, in a total amount not to exceed $100,000, inclusive of funds already spent.

This action will ensure the City retains the professional expertise necessary to support successful labor negotiations and ongoing labor relations matters.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Resolution No. 2025-__: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Suisun City Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Client Services Engagement Letter with Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC for public Management Consulting Services.
a
.

BCG Engagement Letter FY 2025-26
b
.

BCG Engagement Letter FY 2024-25 Executed on 7/10/2024

PREPARED BY:

Christina Penland, Human Resources Administrator
REVIEWED BY:

Christina Penland, Human Resources Administrator
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution - Beauchaine Agreement 7 15 2025
1a. BCG Engagement Letter FY 2025-26
1b. BCG Engagement Letter FY 2024-25 SIGNED 7 10 2024
.
118

Resolution No. 2025-___
Adopted July 15, 2025

Page 1 of 2 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 20 25-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CLIENT SERVICES

ENGAGEMENT LETTER WITH BEAUCHAINE CONSULTING GROUP, LLC FOR

PUBLIC MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES

WHEREAS, the City of Suisun City requires specialized public management consulting services to support employee and labor relations and contract negotiations; and WHEREAS, Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC (BCG) is a public sector consulting firm with extensive experience in labor relations, negotiations, investigations, personnel rules development, and compliance with labor laws and regulations; and WHEREAS, in Fiscal Year 2024-2025, the City entered into an agreement with BCG to assist with negotiations for four labor groups with contracts expiring June 30, 2025: the Suisun City Employees’ Association (SCEA/SEIU), Suisun City Management and Professional Employees’ Association (SCMPEA) , Suisun City Professional Firefighters ’ Association (SCPFA/IAFF); and Suisun City Police Officers’ Association (SCPOA); and WHEREAS, BCG has provided critical support during labor negotiations, and as of June 15, 2025, the City has expended $47,215.00 under the existing agreement that expires on June 30, 2025; and
WHEREAS, negotiations and labor relations activities are expected to continue into Fiscal Year 2025 -2026, and the City wishes to extend its engagement with BCG for continuity and effective completion of these processes; and
WHEREAS, the total compensation under the existing and extended agreement shall not exceed $100,000, which includes the $47,215.00 already spent. This is for the period of July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2026.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY AS FOLLOWS:

1. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a client services engagement letter and any related documents with Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC, in 119

Resolution No. 2025-___
Adopted July 15, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

a form approved by the City Attorney, for continued public management consulting services.

2. The total compensation under the agreement shall not exceed $100,000, inclusive of all amounts previously expended.

3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th day of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers:

NOES: Councilmembers:

ABSENT: Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:

WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 15th day of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
Attachment:
a) BCG Engagement Letter FY 2025-26
b) BCG Engagement Letter FY 2024-25 Executed on 7/10/2024 120

934 S. Fortuna Blvd Ste. B, Fortuna, CA 95540 (707) 726-1079 www.beauchaineconsulting.com

Client Services Engagement Letter

We are pleased to have the opportunity to provide public management consulting services to Suisun City. This letter is intended to confirm the terms upon which Beauchaine Consulting Group, LLC will provide professional services to your organization.

1. Professional Services: Our goal is to provide your team with high quality public management consulting services, on schedule, and at a reasonable cost. Although we will do our best to serve you effectively, we cannot guarantee a specific outcome on any given project or endeavor. Nor do we guarantee that any particular result will be attained by us.

2. Reliance: In the course of providing consulting services to Suisun City, we may be reliant on your team to provide us with accurate and detailed information, from which we will base our strategy, recommendations, or calculations. We are not responsible for any adverse impacts of strategy decisions or calculations made due to the omission of information.

In some circumstances we may find that certain figures, supporting documents, or historical information that we would ordinarily rely upon are unavailable. In this circumstance, we will discuss the matter with your team and together decide upon a course of action. In such circumstances, we are not responsible for any adverse impacts that may arise from recommendations, calculations, or strategies derived without the information from which we ordinarily rely upon.

3. Hourly Fees: Generally, our fees for services are calculated based upon the applicable hourly rates for those professionals who perform the work-at-hand. Our schedule of hourly rates for such personnel is based on experience, education, training, and skill. Our FY25-26 Schedule for Suisun City has been revised to reflect a discount rate for local and current clients at the time of our rate increase July 1, 2024:

121

934 S. Fortuna Blvd Ste. B, Fortuna, CA 95540 (707) 726-1079 www.beauchaineconsulting.com

Position Billable Rate
Consultant $ 225.00
Investigator $ 225.00 Accounting Manager $ 175.00 Senior Accountant $ 150.00 Accountant $ 125.00
Analyst $ 125.00
Admin $ 100.00

*$0 per hour may be added for onsite work

4. Costs: While rendering services pursuant to this engagement, it may be necessary for us to incur expenses for items such as special delivery services, copying, and or supplies. These costs may include a 5% mark -up to cover our costs associated with prov iding the billed service or product to your team.

5. Expert Testimony: In the event of any legal or other controversy where your organization (client) requests the services of our team (consultant) in providing expert testimony, deposition, or participation in any investigation in connection with this eng agement, except to the extent such suits or claims by third parties against the client arise out of errors or omissions of the consultant, the client shall pay the hourly charges for such services provided, including costs of preparation and travel on a ti me-and-material basis. Costs associated with testimony and preparation are not subject to any compensation caps established in this or any other agreement, and this provision shall survive the suspension or termination of the engagement.

6. Invoices: Our invoices are prepared and mailed as services or expenses are incurred, on a bi - weekly, or monthly basis depending on the volume of work performed, with a net-30 term. Timely payment of invoices ensures resources remain available for your engagement.

7. Late Payments: If you fail to make payment on invoices in full on, or before the d ue date set forth on the invoice, we reserve the right to assess a monthly service charge equal to 0 % of all fees and expenses which are past due. We reserve the right to apply funds held as retainer against any past due amounts.
122

934 S. Fortuna Blvd Ste. B, Fortuna, CA 95540 (707) 726-1079 www.beauchaineconsulting.com

8. Retainer: We may require a retainer or advance payment before commencing work on your behalf. In most cases, the retainer amount is calculated to cover initial consultation fees, miscellaneous expenses, advance travel arrangements, mobilization costs for onsite work , or in- lieu of a Late Payment fee. The retainer for your project is five thousand dollars ($5,000).

9. Warranties: During our engagement, we may recommend the purchase and installation of software or hardware, or we may recommend additional professional service providers to your team. We make no assurances or guarantee of any products or services referred, aside from any warranty or guarantee that may be provided by the vendor directly.

10. Termination: You have the right to terminate our services at any time. We have the same right, subject to a professional and ethical obligation to provide reasonable notice for your team to arrange for alternative support.

11. Confidentiality: We treat all aspects of our client relationships as confidential and will gladly provide or sign appropriate non-disclosure agreements as requested.

12. Indemnity: In working with our clients, we are sometimes exposed to liability outside of our professional responsibility to perform. That liability is greater when we are working onsite with your employees, remotely accessing your network, performing turnaround management services, etc. Many of these circumstances contain elements of risk that fall outside of our professional responsibility and influence, and to meet the terms of our insurance and periodic audits, we must agree on indemnity as follows:

To the fullest extent by law, each party shall indemnify and hold harmless the other party against claims, liability, or loss from injury or death to person, destruction or damage to, or loss of use or diminution in value of property, injury to the environment, economic loss, or fines or penalties, and for associated legal costs, fees, and expenses including attorney and consultant fees, arising out of, or relating to, CONSULTANT’S services (Claims).

This duty to indemnify shall not extend to C laims to the extent caused by the willful misconduct or active negligence of either party. In such case, the obligation to indemnify shall be reduced proportionately by the percentage to which the part y’s willful misconduct or active negligence caused, or contributed to the cause of, the Claim. This duty to indemnify shall extend to C laims by any employees, subcontractors, or suppliers of either party.

In addition to and separate from, its duty to indemnify, each party shall defend the other against suits, actions, or proceedings founded upon C laims. This duty to defend arises upon the commencement of the suit, action, or proceeding founded upon Claims, and exists irrespective of any obligation of either party to indemnify.

Each party’s duty to indemnify and defend shall survive the completion of the CONSULTANT’S work and/or termination of the contract.
123
934 S. Fortuna Blvd Ste. B, Fortuna, CA 95540 (707) 726-1079 www.beauchaineconsulting.com

13. Term: The term of this engagement shall continue in full force and effect until June 30, 2026 .

14. Ot
her Matters: Unless we otherwise agree, the terms and conditions of this letter will apply to all matters for which you engage us. If you have any questions or concerns about the terms of this Standard Engagement Letter, please contact us immediately.

Please acknowledge your receipt of this Letter, and your agreement with the terms and conditions set forth by signing below.

Organization Name: _______________________________________________________ Bi
lling Address: ________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ By: __________________________________________________________________ Signature: ____________________________________________________________ Title: _______________________________________ Dated: ___________________ City of Suisun City
701 Civic Center Blvd, Suisun City, 94585
Email invoices to [email protected]
Bret Prebula
City Manager
124
125
126
127

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
128
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Council Adoption of Resolution No. 2025-___: Authorizing the City Manager on Behalf of the City to Execute a Quitclaim Deed for the Abandonment of Public Utility Easements within Real Property (Almond Gardens) on Assessor Parcel Numbers (A.P.N.) 0032-101-420 and 0032-102- 160.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Officially abandoning easements has no impact to the City’s General Fund.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Develop a Sustainable Economy. Provide Good Governance. Ensure Fiscal Solvency. Enhance Environment.

BACKGROUND:

Public Utility Easements (P.U.E.) have been officially dedicated to the City of Suisun City on the real properties identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (A.P.N.) 0032-101-420 and 0032-102-160. These easements were originally established through Subdivision Map Book 22, Pages 53 and 54, and Parcel Map Book 38, Pages 15 and 16. Copies of these maps are included as Attachments No. 3 and 4 for reference. In addition, a map depicting the full extent of these easements granted to the City is included as Attachment No. 5.

The location of these easements is situated outside the footprints of the existing buildings on the properties, collectively known as Almond Gardens. This area is currently in the process of being redeveloped. Refer to the location map included as Attachment No. 2.

STAFF REPORT:

The City of Suisun City has previously approved developer’s proposal for the comprehensive redevelopment of Almond Gardens. As part of this redevelopment, architectural, landscape, civil engineering, and other related plans are actively being developed, with the demolition of the existing buildings already slated for the near future. The proposed redevelopment includes the construction of new buildings that will have significantly larger footprints than the existing structures.

Construction of the new buildings are planned to placed directly above the existing north-south utility easements. Consequently, the north-south easements will need to be abandoned to accommodate the new development.

It is important to clarify that the existing east-west running utility easements, which are also located on the properties, will remain unaffected by the redevelopment and are not included in the proposal for abandonment. These easements will continue to serve their original purpose without interruption.

To support the ongoing redevelopment project, joint trench plans have been prepared to facilitate the relocation of utilities currently within the north-south easements. These relocation plans are currently under review and will be subject to final approval. The relocation of these utilities is necessary to ensure the continued functionality of the services that currently operate within the affected easements.

Given that the utilities within the north-south easements exclusively serve the Almond Gardens development, City staff recommends the quitclaiming of these easements. This is aligned with the overall goals of the redevelopment, as the utilities will be relocated to new easement areas due to the 129
placement of the new buildings. The abandonment of these easements will, therefore, enable the successful completion of the proposed development.

For clarity, the specific locations of the north-south easements to be abandoned can be described as follows: “Public utility easements as dedicated and shown on the Map of Crescent Estates Unit No. 1, filed September 1, 1965, in Book 22 of Subdivision Map, at Pages 53 & 54, and Parcel Map for Almond Gardens, filed June 14, 1993, in Book 38 of Parcel Map, at Page 15 & 16, Solano County Records, described as follows: The easterly 5 feet of Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 19, 23, and 25, and the westerly 5 feet of Lots 4, 5, 15, 16, and 22, as shown on the Map of Crescent Estates Unit No. 1, excluding therefrom any portion thereof lying within the northerly and southerly 5 feet of Parcel 2 and the Northerly 5 feet and Southerly 10 feet of Parcel 4 of said Parcel Map for Almond Gardens.”

Once the quitclaim deed for the abandonment of these easements is executed, the document will be recorded with the County of Solano. A sample quitclaim deed is included as Attachment No. 6 for reference.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2025- ___: Authorizing the City Manager on Behalf of the City to Execute a Quitclaim Deed for the Abandonment of Public Utility Easements within Real Property (Almond Gardens) on Assessor Parcel Numbers (A.P.N.) 0032-101-420 and 0032-102-160.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Location Map.
3 .

Subdivision Map Book 22, Pages 53 and 54.
4 .

Parcel Map Book 38, Pages 15 and 16.
5 .

Map of Easements Dedicated through Subdivision Map and Parcel Map. 6 .

Sampe Quitclaim Deed.

PREPARED BY:

Nick Lozano, Sr. Associate Engineer
REVIEWED BY:

Nouae Vue, Public Works Director
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment No. 1 Resolution_Abandoning PUEs at Almond Gardens.doc Attachment No. 2_Almond Gardens_Location Map.pdf
Attachment No. 3 Subdivision Map Book
Attachment No. 4. Parcel Map Book
Attachment No. 5_Map of Easements at Almond Gardens.pdf Attachment No. 6_Sample Easement Quitclaim Deed.pdf
.
130

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER ON BEHALF OF THE CITY TO EXECUTE A

QUITCLAIM DEED FOR THE ABANDONMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS

WITHIN REAL PROPERTY (ALMOND GARDENS) ON ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS (A.P.N.) 0032-101-420 AND 0032-102-160

WHEREAS, Public Utility Easements (P.U.E.) have been officially dedicated to the City of Suisun City on the real properties identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (A.P.N.) 0032 -101-420 and 0032-102-160; and

WHEREAS, these easements were originally established through Subdivision Map Book 22, Pages 53 and 54, and Parcel Map Book 38, Pages 15 and 16; and

WHEREAS, the location of these easements is situated outside the footprints of the existing buildings on the properties, collectively known as Almond Gardens; and

WHEREAS, the City of Suisun City has previously approved developer’s proposal for the comprehensive redevelopment of Almond Gardens; and

WHEREAS, the proposed redevelopment includes the construction of new buildings that will have significantly larger footprints than the existing structures , and are planned to be constructed directly above the existing north-south utility easements; and

WHEREAS, to support the ongoing redevelo pment project, joint trench plans have been prepared to facilitate the relocation of utilities currently within the existing north-south easements; and

WHEREAS, the relocation of these utilities is necessary to ensure the continued functionality of the services that currently operate within the affected easements; and

WHEREAS, given that the existing utilities within the north-south easements exclusively serve the Almond Gardens development, City staff recommends the quitclaiming of these easements; and

WHEREAS, quitclaiming the north-south easements aligns with the overall goals of the redevelopment, as the utilities will be relocated to new easement areas due to the placement of the new buildings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Suisun City authorizes the City Manager on behalf of the City to execute and record a Quitclaim Deed for the abandonment of the e xisting north-south public utility easements located on real properties identified as Assessor Parcel Numbers (A.P.N.) 0032-101-420 and 0032-102-160 and to take such further actions as necessary or appropriate to implement this resolution. 131

PASSED AND ADOPTED by a Regular Meeting of said City Council of the City of Suisun City duly held on Tuesday, the 15th of July 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS

WITNESS my hand and the seal of the City of Suisun City this 15th of July 2025.

Anita Skinner
City Clerk
132

LOCATION MAP
Redevelopment of Almond Gardens
Abandonment of Existing North-South Public Utility Easements

Almond Gardens
133

134

135
136

137
MAP
Public Utility Easements Dedicated to City through Subdivision Map and Parcel Map Assessor Parcel Numbers 0032-101-420 and 0032-102-160
Almond Gardens

LEGEND:

Public Utility Easements dedicated through Subdivision Map Book 22, Pages 53 & 54 Public Utility Easement dedicated to City through Parcel Map Book 38, Pages 15 & 16

East-West P .U.E. to Remain
East-West P .U.E. to Remain
North-South P .U.E. to be Quitclaimed
North-South P .U.E. to be Quitclaimed
138

SAMPLE EASEMENT QUITCLAIM DEED

139

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
140
AGENDA ITEM NO. 16.

AGENDA TRANSMITTAL

MEETING DATE:

July 15, 2025

AGENDA ITEM:

Housing Authority
Adoption of Resolution No. HA 2025-___: Adoption of
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Almond Gardens Project, and Approval of Request for Release of Funds.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adoption of this report has no fiscal impact.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Provide Good Governance; Enhance the Environment.

BACKGROUND:

Through a competitive Request for Proposal process released by the Suisun City Housing Authority, Harbor Park, LLC was awarded 96 Project-Based Vouchers (PBVs) for the proposed Almond Gardens Project (Project). The Project involves the construction of 97 units including one (1) manager’s unit.

The PBVs will serve as a rental subsidy for clients who will live in the Project, and the subsidy remains with the unit should any tenants move out.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires an environmental review process in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for all HUD-assisted projects to ensure that the proposed project does not negatively impact the surrounding environment and that the property site itself will not have an adverse environmental or health effect on end users.

STAFF REPORT:

The environmental effects of the activities carried out with PBVs derived from federal funds awarded by HUD must be assessed in accordance with NEPA and the related authorities listed in the HUD implementing regulations at 24 CFR Parts 50 and 58, for responsible entities which must assume responsibility for environmental review, decision making, and action that normally applies to HUD.

The Suisun City Housing Authority is the responsible entity for the NEPA review. The Housing Authority has completed all applicable environmental review procedures and has evaluated the potential effects of the proposed Project on the environment pursuant to NEPA regulations.

On April 17, 2025, the Housing Authority completed an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the proposed Project and concluded that the proposed activities are not actions that may affect the quality of the environment.

HUD also requires that the responsible entity for the environmental review process complete and execute the attached Request for Release of Funds (RROF) when requesting to release funds that are subject to the HUD environmental review process.

NEPA Compliance Steps or Required Mitigation
Flood Management and Insurance
141
The proposed Project is located within Special Flood Hazard Area Zone. The design team has taken necessary measures to mitigate the flood zone by elevating the finish floor level of the first floor of the building placing it above the flood zone to comply with FEMA regulations. The Project may be required to obtain flood insurance.

Environmental Assessment Factors
The EA Factors measure the potential significance of the effects of the proposed Project. After examining the EA Factors including as Land Development, Socioeconomic, Community Facilities and Services, Natural Features, and Climate and Energy, it was concluded that none of the impacts rise to the level of “significant or potentially significant impact requiring avoidance or modification which may require an Environmental Impact Statement”.

Overall, the Proposed Project would have a net positive effect. The nature of the Project is to replace condemned and inhabitable apartments with new construction. The Project is consistent with local Zoning and General Plan designations. The increase in affordable rental units would slightly increase the need for solid waste, water, and sewer services, but not at a significant level. Noise and emission studies reveal that no significant impact would occur by either the construction or operational phases of the Project. Additionally, the increased number of residents would not require an increase in public safety services. Furthermore, the Project would upgrade amenities in comparison to the existing complex, and no significant effects to wildlife or sensitive habitats would occur.

On Jun 26, 2025, the Suisun City Housing Authority notified HUD of the Notice of FONSI and Notice of Intent to RROF. The Public Notice was posted on the Housing Authority’s website on the same day.

On June 29, 2025, the Public Notice of FONSI and Notice of Intent to RROF was published in the Daily Republic pursuant to 24 CFR Section 58.43.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the Housing Authority complete the following:
1 .

Adopt the following Resolution:
a
.

Housing Authority
Adoption of Resolution No. HA 2025-___: Adoption of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Almond Gardens Project, and Approval of Request for Release of Funds; and
2 .

Affirm and execute the attached Environmental Assessment (EA) Report for the Almond Gardens Project pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 24 CFR Part 58; and 3 .

Adopt the attached Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) as the official determination for the Project; and
4 .

Authorize the submission of the attached Request for Release of Funds (RROF) for 96 Project- Based Vouchers for the Almond Gardens Project to HUD, and authorize the City Manager as the Executive Director to sign all necessary documents.

DOCUMENTS ATTACHED:
1 .

Housing Authority
Adoption of Resolution No. HA 2025-___: Adoption of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Almond Gardens Project, and Approval of Request for Release of Funds.
2 .

Suisun City Housing Authority Environmental Assessment Report for the Almond Gardens Project
142
3 .

Public Notice of Finding of No Significant Impact and Request for Release of Funds 4 .

Request for Release of Funds - Form HUD-7015-15

PREPARED BY:

Jason Goltiao, Housing Programs Manager
REVIEWED BY:

Lakhwinder Deol, Finance Director
APPROVED BY:

Bret Prebula, City Manager

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution - SCHA EA FONSI RROF 2025-07-15.docx

2. Almond Gardens EA Appendices 2025 04 19.pdf

3. Notice of FONSI RROF 2025-06-29 Confirmation.pdf

4. HUD-7015.15 - RROF Almond Gardens Project 2025-07-15.pdf .
143
RESOLUTION NO. HA 2025-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF SUISUN CITY

ADOPTING ENVIROMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT

IMPACT FOR THE ALMOND GARDENS PROJECT, AND APPROVING THE

REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS

WHEREAS, the Suisun City Housing Authority has awarded 96 Project Based Vouchers to the Almond Gardens Project [Project]; and

WHEREAS, the Suisun City Housing Authority has conducted an Environmental Assessment in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations at 24 CFR Par t 58 for the Project; and

WHEREAS, the Environmental Assessment h as been completed, and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has been determined based on the analysis, indicating that the Project will not have a significant impact on the environment; and

WHEREAS, in accordance with 24 CFR Part 58, the FONSI was m ade available to t he public for a 15-day notice period, and no significant comments or objections were received; and

WHEREAS, as the Responsible Entity under 24 CFR Part 58, the Suisun City Housing Authority must now approve and submit the Req uest for Release of Funds (RROF) to HUD in order to obtain authorization to draw down funds and proceed with project implementation;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing Authority as follows:
1) The Suisun City Housing Authority hereby affirms and executes the Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Project, in compliance with 24 CFR Part 58. 2) The Suisun City Housing Authority hereby adopts the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) as the official determination for the Project.
3) The Suisun City Housing authorizes the submission of the Request for Release of Funds (RROF) and related certifications to HUD (or the appropriate agency), and authorizes the City Manager as the Executive Director, the Mayor as the Chair, or other designated official, to sign all necessary documents.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the Housing Authority of Suisun City, duly held on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COMMISSIONERS _______________________________________________ NOES: COMMISSIONERS _______________________________________________ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS _______________________________________________ ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS _______________________________________________

WITNESS my hand and seal of said Housing Authority this 15th day of July 2025.

144

___________________________________
Anita Skinner,
City Clerk

145
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development
451 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, DC 20410
www.hud.gov
espanol.hud.gov
Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 1
DRAFT
Environmental Assessment
Determinations and Compliance Findings for HUD-assisted Projects 24 CFR Part 58
Project Information
Project Name: Almond Gardens Apartments Project
Responsible Entity: Suisun City Housing Authority
Grant Recipient (if different than Responsible Entity):

Harbor Park LLC
9700 Village Center Drive, Suite 120
Granite Bay, CA 95746
State/Local Identifier:

Preparer: Rusty Leach, Kingdom Development
Certifying Officer Name and Title:

Bret Prebula, Executive Director
701 Civic Center Blvd
Suisun City, CA 94585
Grant Recipient (if different than Responsible Entity):

Consultant:

ECORP Consulting, Inc.
55 Hanover Lane
Chico, CA 95928
Direct Comments to:

Suisun City Housing Authority
701 Civic Center Blvd
Suisun City, CA 94585
146
Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 2
Project Location: The 3.19-acre Almond Gardens Apartments Project (Project) Area is located at 707-815 Almond Street in Suisun City, Solano County, CA and is identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 0032-101-420 and 0032-102-160.

D
escription of the Proposed Project [24 CFR 50.12 & 58.32; 40 CFR 1508.25] : Currently, 10 buildings consisting of 51 units are present on the Project Site. Some of these buildings have been deemed uninhabitable and not financially feasible to cure and restore to a market -typical or habitable condition. Surrounding land uses include single -family housing to the north, multi - family housing to the south, a public park and middle school to the east, and a transit station to the west. The Project Site is bound by Mulberry Street to the east, Civic Center Boulevard to the west, Driftwood Drive to the north, and other apartment style housing to the south. The Project Site is bisected by Almond Street. Figure 1 shows the Proposed Project in conjunction with the surrounding land uses. Figure 2 includes photos of existing conditions at the Project Site.

A
t present, the Suisun City Housing Authority owns the property and utilizes a property management company to manage the day- to-day activities. The apartments were developed in 1962 and historically the property featured fifty -two units; but currently feat ures thirty -eight rentable units, with fourteen uninhabitable units.

T
he Suisun City Housing Authority Board first authorized a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the buyer/developer in 2021 and has chosen to extend the DDA a few times as the Project has evolved and the buyer has continued due diligence work. Most recently, the DDA was extended in December 2023 through the end of 2025 to allow for pursuit of tax credit financing as the Project is proposed as a completely affordable project. Further, following the release of a Request for Proposals, Harbor Park LLC responded and was awarded 96 Project-Based Housing Vouchers in November 2023.

T
he Project includes demolition of the existing multi- family housing that is currently on the lot, and then constructing a new 97-unit affordable housing facility. As mentioned above, the property has been deemed uninhabitable and not financially feasible to cure and restore to habitable condition. The Project will include 58 two- bedroom units, 30- three- bedroom units, 10-four- bedroom units, and a manager’s unit across six buildings. The site layout of the Proposed Project can be found in Figure 3.

T
he Proposed Project will consist of a net increase of 47 units and would result in five 3-story buildings, a manager’s suite, and an onsite maintenance shop. Additionally, the Proposed Project would include amenities such as 121 rear parking spaces, a community building, onsite laundry, preserved and new landscaping, picnic areas, and a play structure. The timeline for the Proposed Project would require a 1-2- month demolition period, followed by approximately 18 months of construction. The parcel is designated as Residential High -Density (RHD) and allows a range of

24.1-54 dwellings per acre, according to the Waterfront District Specific Plan . The Project is consistent with this designation.

T
he buildings will be constructed as a walk- up, open air lobby style with type -V wood construction. Outside will consist of stucco plaster with wood trim. Elevators are not anticipated in any of the buildings. Balconies and patios will have aluminum awnings, and the roof will be 147
Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 3
asphalt shingles. The foundation is a raised matt slab, and the new buildings have been designed in compliance with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood mitigation standards.

Additionally, all trees will be retained and protected throughout construction. Figure 4 provides renderings of the proposed structures.

A
s defined in the Waterfront District Specific Plan, the RHD district is applicable to parcels suited for more dense land uses such as apartment projects. Specifically, the allowable density of this district includes a range of 24.1 – 54 dwelling units per acre and are particularly appropriate in areas in close proximity to the Suisun-Fairfield Train Depot which is approximately 1/3 of a mile from the Project Site.

T
he Project will be constructed in three phases in accordance with the Davis Bacon Act. The Project phasing is designed around creating the least disruption for the existing residents and will be constructed in three independent and successive phases. The first phase will consist of one three story building that will house 20 units. The construction of this building may require the temporary relocation of three of the existing tenants. Once the building is completed, the relocated tenants will have the priority to return to Almond Gardens. The existing tenants will then be offered the chance to occupy the remaining units. The completion of this phase and the transfer of the existing tenants to the new building will clear the path for the commencement of the second phase. The completion of the second phase in the same manner as the first phase will lead to the construction of the third and last phase of the Project. The existing tenants will receive relocation assistance in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policy Act of 1970 (42 United States Code [USC] 4601- 4655) and implementing regulations at 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 24. Furthermore, this Project will observe and comply with U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations in 24 CFR part 135 that implement debarment as defined in 24 CFR Sections 5.1(c) and 24 CFR Part 24. The Relocation Plan is included as Attachment 1.
148
Project Area
Map Date: 8/21/2024
Sources: ESRI, USGSLocation: N:\2024\Proposals_2024\P24-454 Almond Garden Apartments\MAPS\Location_Vicinity\AGA LnV.aprx - AGA LnV 20240821 (kedwards - 8/21/2024) Fairfield South (1949 p.r. 1985, NAD 27)
CA 7.5-minute Topographic Quadrangle
US Geological Survey.

Solano County, California
Unsectioned Wetlands Land Grant
Latitude (NAD83): 38.240575°
Longitude (NAD83): -122.035669°
Watershed: Suisun Bay (18050001)
I
0 1,000 2,000
Scale in Feet
2024-182 Almond Gardens Apartments Project
Figure 1. Project Location and Vicinity
Project Area - 3.72 ac.
149
Por
t S
t
Civic C
en
te
r B
lvd
Dr iftwoo d Dr
Alm ond St
Jos
iah C
ir
Map Date: 8/28/2024
Sources: Esri Imagery, Maxar (2022)Location: N:\2024\Proposals_2024\P24-454 Almond Garden Apartments\MAPS\Aerial_Maps\AGA Aerial.aprx - AGA Project Aerial 20240822 (kedwards - 8/28/2024) Map Contents
Project Area - 3.72 ac.

I
0 100
Feet
2024-182 Almond Gardens Apartments Project
Figure 2. Project Aerial
150
Representative Site Photographs
2024-182 Almond Gardens Apartments Project
151

152

153

154

155

156

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 12 Statement of Purpose and Need for the Proposal [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]: Suisun City’s residential housing stock, although older with little new activity, has seen significant rent growth for multifamily products as well as steady increases in single-family home values. The current housing stock is heavily weighted towards single-family development. Access to well-paid jobs in the Bay Area’s regional employment centers, as well as local manufacturing and light industrial jobs within and around Solano County present career opportunities for younger households and residents but can also allow the City to better position itself by offering more affordable housing. The Proposed Project will target low -income families earning 30 -50 percent of area median income.

Additionally, the redevelopment of these parcels, which has been slowly falling into disrepair for years, will significantly address these objectives by not only restoring the unit count, but also nearly doubling it while also improving street appeal and image of the property.

Existing Conditions and Trends [24 CFR 58.40(a)]: The site is zoned for RHD and is subject to the Waterfront District Specific Plan.

Funding Information

Grant Number HUD Program Funding Amount
CFDA 14.871 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers $3,274,484

Estimated Total HUD Funded Amount: $3,274,484

Estimated Total Project Cost (HUD and non-HUD funds) [24 CFR 58.32(d)]: $66,126,000

157

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 13 Compliance with 24 CFR 50.4, 58.5, and 58.6 Laws and Authorities Record below the compliance or conformance determinations for each statute, executive order, or regulation. Provide credible, traceable, and supportive source documentation for each authority .

Where applicable, complete the necessary reviews or consultations and obtain or note applicable permits of approvals. Clearly note c itations, dates/names/titles of contacts, and page references .

Attach additional documentation as appropriate.

Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR 50.4 and 58.6
Airport Hazards
24 CFR Part 51 Subpart D
Yes No

Implementation of the Proposed Project
would not result in increased exposure of
people working at or residing on the Project
Site to aircraft noise beyond the acceptable
noise standard.

The Proposed Project is not within 15,000
feet of a military airport and 2,500 feet of a
civilian airport.

Please see the list of sources for a link to the
Travis Air Force Base Land Use
Compatibility Plan.

Coastal Barrier Resources
Coastal Barrier Resources
Act, as amended by the
Coastal Barrier Improvement
Act of 1990 [16 USC 3501]
Yes No

The Proposed Project is not located within a
designated Coastal Barrier Resource System
Unit according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) Coastal Barrier Resource
Systems Collection.

See list of sources for link to the USFWS
website.
158

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 14 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
Flood Insurance
Flood Disaster Protection Act
of 1973 and National Flood
Insurance Reform Act of 1994
[42 USC 4001-4128 and 42
USC 5154a]
Yes No

The Proposed Project is located within
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) Zone
AE per FEMA Insurance Rate Map panel
number: 06095C0456F Effective Date
8/3/2016. The applicants design team has
taken necessary measures to mitigate the
flood zone. As noted above the Project Site
is situated in SFHA Zone AE with a base
elevation of 10 feet NAVD88 Datum. The
existing Project Site contour elevation of
approximately 5 to 6 feet, results in a flood
depth of approximately 4 to 5 feet. To
ensure compliance with FEMA regulations
and minimize the risk of flooding, the
Project has been designed to elevate the
finish floor level of the 1
st floor of the
buildings to a minimum of 10.50 feet,
placing it above the flood zone. By
elevating the buildings to 10.50 feet, the
applicant has addressed the flood zone issue
and ensured the Project is in compliance
with FEMA regulations. See Attachment 2
for FEMA Map and letter from ACE Design
LLC regarding flood mitigation. The
Proposed Project may also be required to
obtain flood insurance as well as engage in
the 8-step process.

STATUTES, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, AND REGULATIONS LISTED AT 24 CFR 50.4 & 58.5
Clean Air
Clean Air Act, as amended,
particularly section 176(c) &
(d); 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, 93
Yes No

The Project Site is located in Solano
County, which is in the San Francsico Bay
Area Basin and is designated as a
nonattainment area for the federal ozone
(O3) standards.
159

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 15 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
Areas designated as nonattainment must
comply with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) General
Conformity rule, which ensures that the
actions taken by federal agencies do not
interfere with a state’s plans to attain and
maintain national standards for air quality.

The General Conformity process begins
with an “applicability analysis,” whereby it
must be determined how and to what degree
the Conformity Rules apply. The Proposed
Project’s region is designated as a
nonattainment area for the federal O
3 standards. Thus, air quality impacts
associated with the Project were assessed in
accordance with the thresholds set by the
USEPA Conformity Determination
Analysis.

Where criteria air pollutant quantification
was required, emissions were modeled using
the California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod), version 2022.1. CalEEMod is
a statewide land use emissions computer
model designed to quantify potential criteria
pollutant emissions associated with both
construction and operations from a variety
of land use projects. CalEEMod provides
the ability to analyze a project based on both
California and Federal air quality standards.

Per the analysis prepared in the Air Quality
& Greenhouse Gas Assessment
(Attachment 3), it was found that Project
emissions resulting from construction and
operations would not exceed the USEPA
Conformity Determination thresholds.

Coastal Zone Management
Coastal Zone Management
Act, sections 307(c) & (d)
Yes No

Suisun City is not within an area subject to
the Coastal Zone Management Act.

See the list of sources for a link to the
California Coastal Commission website.
160

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 16 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
Contamination and Toxic
Substances
24 CFR Part 50.3(i) &

58.5(i)(2)
Yes No

There are no on-site or nearby toxic,
hazardous, or radioactive substances found
that could affect the health and safety of
Project occupants or conflict with the use of
the property.

See the list of sources for a link to the
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Clean-up Sites Map.

Endangered Species
Endangered Species Act of
1973, particularly section 7;
50 CFR Part 402
Yes No

There are no special status species or
sensitive habitats onsite. A search of the
USFWS Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC) showed that several
special-status species are known to be in the
vicinity of the Project Site; however, the
Project Site does not offer any suitable
habitat for any of the special-status species
returned in the IPaC search. Currently, the
Project Site consists of ten condemned
apartment buildings. The Proposed Project
is a reconstruction of existing facilities, and
therefore would have no effect on any listed
species or designated critical habitats.

Several migratory birds were identified in
the IPaC search. The Project Site includes
numerous trees which provide opportunities
for birds to nest. ECORP Consulting, Inc.
(ECORP) biologists suggest construction
adheres to a timeline that works around the
nesting bird season, which is typically
February 1 to August 31. In the event that
the Project proponent does not wish to halt
construction during that time, a nesting bird
survey performed by a qualified biologist is
recommended to clear the Project Site prior
to any disturbance.

The USFWS IPaC search results can be
found in Attachment 4.
161

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 17 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
Explosive and Flammable
Hazards
24 CFR Part 51 Subpart C
Yes No

The Proposed Project does not include any
hazardous facilities or above ground storage
tanks. Additionally, there are no current or
planned stationary above ground storage
containers within 1 mile of the Project Site.

See the list of sources for a link to the
Suisun City General Plan.

Farmlands Protection
Farmland Protection Policy
Act of 1981, particularly
sections 1504(b) and 1541; 7
CFR Part 658
Yes No

According to the Suisun City General Plan,
agricultural land accounts for 22 acres (less
than 1 percent) of the land area of Suisun
City. These lands are dispersed throughout
the City with a majority of the land located
on the east side of the City. The land
directly east of Walters Road is under a
Williamson Act contract.

The Proposed Project would have no effect
to farmlands as it is proposed for an already
developed site.

Floodplain Management
Executive Order 11988,
particularly section 2(a); 24
CFR Part 55
Yes No

The Proposed Project is located within a
special flood hazard area, with a 1 percent
annual chance of flood. (See Attachment 2)
According to FEMA, any project with a 1
percent or higher chance is considered to
have a high risk. Those areas have at least a
one-in-four chance of flooding during a 30-
year mortgage. The Proposed Project has
been designed to mitigate for the risks of
flooding. The Project Site is located within
SFHA Zone AE with a base elevation of 10
feet NAVD88 Datum. To ensure
compliance with FEMA regulations and
minimize flood risk, the new building
designs have elevated the finish floor level
of the 1
st floor to a minimum of 10.5 feet,
placing it above the flood zone. The first
floor will be accessible by stairs. See
Attachment 2.
162

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 18 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
The Project conducted the HUD 8-Step
Process. The 8-step is required by both
Executive Order 11988 (Floodplain
Management) and Executive Order 11990
(Wetlands Protection). A copy of the 8-Step
Memo is attached to this Environmental
Assessment as Attachment 8.

Historic Preservation
National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, particularly
sections 106 and 110; 36 CFR
Part 800
Yes No

ECORP evaluated the Almond Garden
Apartments buildings along Almond Street
in Suisun City. The buildings were
constructed circa 1967. An ECORP Senior
Architectural Historian, who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards in Architectural
History, evaluated the apartment complex of
buildings against the National Register of
Historic Places (NRHP) and California
Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).

The evaluations utilized historical and
archival research, an architectural site visit
to document the current condition and
integrity of the buildings, and preparation of
appropriate historic contexts for the
apartment complex. ECORP also conducted
a records search with the California
Historical Resources Information System
Northwest Information Center, which
resulted in confirmation that the buildings
were not previously recorded or evaluated
for historical significance. Ultimately,
ECORP found the buildings not eligible for
either register. Further, the City of Suisun
does not have a local register of historical
resources and the apartment complex is not
associated with any known or potential
historic districts. Therefore, there are no
impacts to Historical Resources as a result
of the Proposed Project. See Attachment 5
for the Architectural History Evaluation
prepared by ECORP.
163

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 19 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
Noise Abatement and
Control
Noise Control Act of 1972, as
amended by the Quiet
Communities Act of 1978; 24
CFR Part 51 Subpart B
Yes No

A Noise Impact Assessment was completed
using the HUD Noise Assessment
Guidelines. The assessment found that
traffic noise from roadway traffic on Civic
Center Boulevard, Mulberry Street, and
Almond Street currently produces traffic
noise levels ranging from approximately

44.9 and 49.9 dBA day-night average sound
level (L
dn) on the Project Site, which is
below the threshold of 65 dBA Ldn.

The Caltrain and light rail commuter rail
lines are located approximately 0.30 mile
north of the Project Site. According to the
City’s General Plan, the Project Site is
located outside of the 60 dBA L
dn noise
contours for any railway noise.

Travis Air Force Base is the nearest airport
to the Project Site, approximately 4.16 miles
distant. According to Travis Air Force Base
Sustainability Study Report, the Project Site
is located outside of the 60 dBA community
noise equivalent level noise contours for the
Travis Air Force Base.

Lastly, in order to quantify existing ambient
noise levels on the Project Site, ECORP
conducted a 24-hour noise measurement
starting on August 20
th, 2024, and extending
into August 21st. As shown in the Noise
Impact Assessment, the ambient recorded
noise measurement on the Project Site was

55.2 dBA L
dn. See Attachment 6 for the
Noise Impact Assessment prepared by
ECORP.
164

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 20 Compliance Factors:

Statutes, Executive Orders,
and Regulations listed at 24
CFR §58.5 and §58.6
Are formal
compliance
steps or
mitigation
required?
Compliance determinations
Sole Source Aquifers
Safe Drinking Water Act of
1974, as amended, particularly
section 1424(e); 40 CFR Part
149
Yes No

The Project is not located within a USEPA
designated sole source aquifer area. The
Proposed Project does not have the potential
to contaminate any aquifers or create a
significant hazard to public health.

See the list of sources for a link to the
USEPA Sole Source Aquifer Mapper
website.

Wetlands Protection
Executive Order 11990,
particularly sections 2 and 5
Yes No

The Proposed Project is not located in a
wetland, will not impact a wetland, and does
not occur in proximity to wetlands as
defined in 24 CFR 55.2(b)(13). As
previously stated, the Proposed Project is
the reconstruction of previously developed
parcels.

Wild and Scenic Rivers
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of
1968, particularly section 7(b)
and (c)
Yes No

The Proposed Project is not near any
waterways designated as “wild,” “scenic,”
or “recreational” according to the National
Park Service Website. See the list of sources
for a link to the web mapper.

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898
Yes No

No adverse environmental impacts were
identified in any other compliance review
portion of this Project’s total review. The
Proposed Project would consist of
100 percent affordable housing
opportunities and a relocation plan has been
formulated to assist those who will be
affected. See Attachment 1 for the
Relocation Plan.

Environmental Assessment Factors [24 CFR 58.40; Ref. 40 CFR 1508.8 &1508.27]: Recorded below is the qualitative and quantitative significance of the effects of the proposal on the character, features and resources of the Project Site . Each factor has been evaluated and documented, as appropriate and in proportion to its relevance to the proposed action. V erifiable source documentation has been provided and described in support of each determination, as appropriate.

Credible, traceable and supportive source documentation for each authority has been provided.

Where applicable, the necessary reviews or consultations have been completed and applicable permits of approvals have been obtained or noted. Citations, dates/names/titles of contacts, and 165

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 21 page references are clear. Additional documentation is attached, as appropriate. All conditions, attenuation or mitigation measures have been clearly identified.

Impact Codes: Use an impact code from the following list to make the determination of impact for each factor.
(1) Minor beneficial impact
(2) No impact anticipated
(3) Minor Adverse Impact – May require mitigation
(4) Significant or potentially significant impact requiring avoidance or modification which may require an Environmental Impact Statement

Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation

LAND DEVELOPMENT
Conformance with
Plans/Compatible
Land Use and
Zoning/Scale and
Urban Design
1 The Proposed Project is in conformity with the Suisun City General Plan and Waterfront District Specific Plan.

Soil Suitability/
Slope/ Erosion/
Drainage/ Storm
Water Runoff 2
The Project Site is flat and will comply with all regulatory requirements for compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and the General
Construction Permit for projects that disturb more than one acre of land, requiring development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan.

Hazards and
Nuisances
including Site
Safety and Noise
3 The Proposed Project is not located within 1 mile of a current or planned stationary aboveground propane tank.

The Project’s construction noise would range from 75.6 to

79.5 dBA equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) over the course of construction. It is noted that this range of
construction noise would not exceed the 85 dBA National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health construction noise threshold during any phase of construction at the nearby noise-sensitive receptors. It is noted that
construction noise was modeled on a worst-case basis. It is very unlikely that all pieces of construction equipment would be operating at the same time for the various phases of Project construction. Nonetheless, it is acknowledged that the Project Site is surrounded by noise-sensitive
residential receptors and that substantial construction would occur directly adjacent to these receptors. Therefore, noise- reducing best management practices are recommended. See Attachment 6.

Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation
166

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 22 Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation

SOCIOECONOMIC
Employment and
Income Patterns 1
The Proposed Project will consist of 100 percent affordable rate housing opportunities for members of the community and supply additional units than what was previously
available.

Demographic
Character Changes,
Displacement 3
The Proposed Project will result in the relocation of several tenants; however, the Project proponents will implement a state and federally compliant relocation plan. See
Attachment 1.

Environmental
Justice 1
The Proposed Project will consist of 100 percent affordable rate housing opportunities for members of the community and supply additional units than what was previously
available

Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation

COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
Educational and
Cultural Facilities
2 According to the Architectural History Evaluation prepared by ECORP (Attachment 5), the Structures that are currently onsite do not meet any of the criteria for listing in the NRHP or CRHR, either individually or as part of an existing
historic district. It is unknown if the Proposed Project would bring additional school aged children to the area. There are several schools within Fairfield-Suisun Unified School
District: 19 Elementary schools, five Middle schools
including Crystal Middle School located across the street from the Project Site, and four High Schools. The Proposed Project would not pose significant strain on educational and cultural facilities in the community.

Commercial
Facilities 1
Residents of the Proposed Project are anticipated to
patronize local commercial establishments for many of their daily needs.

Health Care and
Social Services
1 The Proposed Project demolition of apartment buildings which are currently condemned and construction of a new apartment complex on the same site. The Project would
eliminate unsuitable housing and replace it with new
buildings and increase in the number of affordable rental units for low-income households which would contribute to a net positive effect for the community.
167

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 23 Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation
Solid Waste
Disposal/Recycling
2 The Proposed Project is a demolition and reconstruction project that would generate construction and demolition debris. During construction and demolition of the Proposed Project, debris diversion and disposal would remain
consistent with state and local construction waste
management requirements.

Suisun City has established a franchise agreement with
Republic Services Solano Garbage Company (SGC) to
provide weekly collection of solid waste, yard waste, and recyclable material. SGC delivers recyclables to the
Integrated Resource Recovery Facility. All commercial and residential solid waste collection by SGC is taken to the Potrero Hills Landfill. According to CalRecycle, as of
August 2024, Potrero Hills Landfill has a remaining
capacity of 13,873,000 cubic yards, a maximum permitted capacity of 83,100,000 cubic yards, and an estimated
closure date February 14, 2048. The landfill accepts 4,330 pounds of waste per day. The California Integrated Waste Management Board allocated the City of Suisun a disposal target of 4.9 pounds per person per day. It is not anticipated that the construction and operation of the Proposed Project would result in the Potrero Hills Landfill exceeding its design capacity.

Waste Water/
Sanitary Sewers
2 Sewer service is provided to Suisun City by the Fairfield- Suisun Sewer District, an independent special district
established to manage wastewater collection and treatment.

The District recently completed a treatment plant expansion which increased the average dry weather capacity to 23.7 million gallons per day and peak flow to 52.3 million
gallons per day. Additionally, the 2008 Sewer System
Master Plan recommends several projects to address
existing and future capacity needs. Increasing capacity for the Suisun Pump Station and Force main is a near term
priority. The Proposed Project would result in a minor
increase in demand for the City’s wastewater/sewer system over the current condition but will not exceed the capacity of the City’s existing wastewater/sewer system. The City will assess development impact fees when building permits are issued for construction of the Project. These fees are designed to offset any potential impacts of new development on city services.
168

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 24 Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation
Water Supply
2 The City of Suisun provides domestic water services for all properties located within its boundaries. The Proposed
Project will result in an increased demand for the City’s water supply but will not exceed the capacity of the city’s existing water supply. The City will assess development impact fees when building permits are issued from
construction of the Project. These fees are designed to offset any potential impacts of new development on city services.

Public Safety -
Police, Fire and
Emergency Medical
2 The Project involved the redevelopment of an existing apartment complex site and is not anticipated to
significantly increase demand for public safety services, including police protection services. The Project is likely to reduce the amount of service calls to police and emergency medical services by providing additional housing
opportunities for low-income households.

Additionally, the City’s police department is located on Civic Center Boulevard, less than a quarter-mile away from the Project Site. The City will assess development impact fees when building permits are issued for construction of the Project. These fees are designed to offset any potential impacts of new development on city services.

The Proposed Project involves redevelopment of an existing apartment complex site and is not anticipated to
significantly increase the demand for public safety services, including fire protection services. The Suisun City Fire Department is located approximately 2 miles northeast of the Project Site. Additionally, the Suisun City Fire
Protection District is located approximately 0.5 mile from the Project Site. The City will assess development impact fees when building permits are issued for construction of the Project. These fees are designed to offset any potential impacts of new development on city services.

Parks, Open Space
and Recreation
1 The Proposed Project involves demolition and
reconstruction of an affordable rate apartment complex. The Project is not being constructed on publicly available open space. Additionally, the new construction would provide a picnic and play areas that were not previously available as part of the Project’s design.
169

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 25 Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation
Transportation and
Accessibility
2 Transit services will be available near the Project Site and includes passenger rail, provided by Amtrak, and bus
service, provided by Greyhound, Fairfield and Suisun
Transit (FAST), and the Rio Vista Delta Breeze. The
Suisun/Fairfield Amtrak Station is located in downtown
Suisun City on Main Street between Spring Street and State Route 12. Greyhound Lines operates motorcoach buses
between Sacramento and Oakland, some of which stop at
the Suisun City Amtrak station to unload and pick up
passengers. FAST operates four local and one intercity route through Suisun City. The intercity route is line 90, which connects Suisun City to the Bay Area Rapid Transit
commuter rail system. Suisun City is served by one Rio
Vista Delta Breeze route, line 50, which travels between Fairfield, Suisun City, Rio Vista, and Isleton. There are two bus stops on Driftwood Drive, which is less than a block away from the Project Site.

Suisun City also has bike paths consisting of classes 1, 2 and 3 and plans to extend and improve bike paths via The Solano County Bicycle Plan (2004). Pedestrians are served by sidewalks on most, but not all, of the arterials, collectors and local streets in the city, including those in the vicinity of the Project Site.

The Proposed Project would increase the number of
available units for rent, and therefor may increase the number of residents driving in the area. However, this
increase is expected to be minimal and will not exceed the City’s thresholds for additional traffic volumes.

Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation

NATURAL FEATURES
Unique Natural
Features,
Water Resources 2
The Proposed Project would not impact any unique natural features or water resources. The nature of the Project is to demolish existing buildings to replace them with new and improved construction. As such, no unique natural features are present onsite or on surrounding properties.
170

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 26 Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation
Vegetation, Wildlife
3 Currently, the only vegetation onsite are mid-sized
sycamore trees and some residential-type landscaping.

Birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA) could potentially nest in the trees onsite. Project construction could result in direct permanent impacts to habitats that provide suitable nesting habitat for birds protected under the MBTA. All nongame native birds
(resident and migratory) and the nests and eggs of all birds are protected under the California Fish and Game Code (§§ 3800, 3813, and 3503) and all migratory birds are protected under the federal MBTA. Mitigation has been included to address potential impacts to nesting birds during demolition and construction.

All trees that are currently onsite will remain protected throughout construction.

Other Factors Attachment 7 provides the CEQA Notice of Exemption from the Solano County Board of Supervisors.

Environmental
Assessment Factor
Impact
Code

Impact Evaluation

CLIMATE AND ENERGY
Climate Change
Impacts
2 It is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would have significant climate change impacts due to the nature of the Project being a reconstruction project. The Project would utilize space that is otherwise occupied by condemned
buildings to construct additional affordable housing
opportunities for those in need.

Energy Efficiency
2 The sustainable elements incorporated in the Proposed Project description include energy efficiency standards in accordance with California Tax Credit Allocation
Committee regulations 10325(f)(7).

Additional Studies Performed:

Historical Structures Evaluation, ECORP, August 2024
Noise Impact Assessment, ECORP, August 2024
Air Quality and Green House Gas Emission Assessment, ECORP, August 2024

Field Inspection (Date and completed by): N/A

171

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 27 List of Sources, Agencies, and Persons Consulted [40 CFR 1508.9(b)]:

Airport Hazards
Travis Air Force Base Land Use Compatibility Plan:
https://www.solanocounty.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=34765

Travis Air Force Base Sustainability Study Report (2019):
https://viewer.joomag.com/travis-afb-sustainability-study-report-final-sustainability-study- report/0622071001528472105/p25

Coastal Barrier Resources
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Coastal Barriers Systems Collection:
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/official-coastal-barrier-resources-system- maps?$keywords=%22Suisun%20City,%20CA%22

Flood Insurance
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home

Clean Air
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project, ECORP Consulting, Inc., August 2024

Coastal Zone Management
California Coastal Commission, Coastal Zone Boundary Maps:
https://www.coastal.ca.gov/maps/czb/#:~:text=Public%20Resources%20Code%20(PRC)%20Sec tion,of%20the%201975%2D76%20Regular

Contamination and Toxic Substances
California office of environmental health hazard assessment, CalEnviroScreen Mapper:
https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/cleanup-sites

Endangered Species
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Search

Explosive and Flammable Hazards
Suisun City General Plan: https://www.suisun.com/Departments/Development- Services/Planning/General-Plan

Farmlands Protection
Suisun City General Plan: https://www.suisun.com/Departments/Development- Services/Planning/General-Plan

Floodplain Management
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home

172

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 28 Confirmation of Flood Zone Mitigation for Almond Garden, ACE Design, LLC

Noise Abatement and Control
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project, ECORP Consulting, Inc., August 2024

Sole Source Aquifers
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Sole Source Aquifers mapper:
https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9ebb047ba3ec41ada1877155fe3 1356b

Wild and Scenic Rivers
National Park Service, Interactive map of National Park Service wild and scenic rivers:
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1912/plan-your-visit.htm

Environmental Justice
Almond Gardens Relocation Plan, Laurin Associates, July 2024

Land Development
Suisun City General Plan: https://www.suisun.com/Departments/Development- Services/Planning/General-Plan

Suisun City, Waterfront District Specific Plan. 2016:
https://www.suisun.com/files/sharedassets/suisuncity/v/1/departments/development- services/documents/city_of_suisun_city_waterfront_district_sp-w.pdf

Community Facilities and Services
Suisun City General Plan: https://www.suisun.com/Departments/Development- Services/Planning/General-Plan

CalRecycle Potrero Hills Landfill Solid Waste Information System Facility/Site Activity Details:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1194?siteID=3591

Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District: https://www.fsusd.org/

Solano County Bicycle Plan (2012):
https://sta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Solano_BikeTransPlan_Final-12-14-11.pdf

173

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 29 Other Factors

List of Permits Obtained: N/A

Public Outreach [24 CFR 50.23 & 58.43]: N/A

Cumulative Impact Analysis [24 CFR 58.32]:

Overall, the Proposed Project would have a net positive effect. The nature of the Project is to replace condemned and inhabitable apartments with new construction. The Project is consistent with local Zoning and General Plan designations. The increase of available affordable rental units would slightly increase the need for solid waste, water, and sewer services, but not at a significant level. Noise and emission studies reveal that no significant impact would occur by either the construction or operational phases of the Project. Additionally, the increased number of residents would not require an increase in public safety services. Furthermore, the Project would upgrade amenities in comparison to the existing complex, and no significant effects to wildlife or sensitive habitats would occur.

Alternatives [24 CFR 58.40(e); 40 CFR 1508.9]: N/A

No Action Alternative [24 CFR 58.40(e)] : The No Action Alternative would be to leave the infrastructure in place and the site would remain in its current condition which consists of a dilapidated apartment complex that will continue to deteriorate.

174

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 30 Mitigation Measures and Conditions [40 CFR 1505.2(c)]

Summarize below all mitigation measures adopted by the Responsible Entity to reduce, avoid, or eliminate adverse environmental impacts and to avoid non- compliance or non-conformance with the above -listed authorities and factors. These measures/conditions must be incorporated into Project contracts, development agreements, and other relevant documents. The staff responsible for implementing and monitoring mitigation measures should be clearly identified in the mitigation plan.

Law,
Authority,
or Factor
Mitigation Measure
USFWS BIO-1 Nesting Birds. Various birds protected under the MBTA have the potential to nest within or in the vicinity of the Study Area. Implementation of following specific measure is recommended to avoid and/or minimize adverse effects on nesting birds:

If construction or demolition is to occur during the nesting season (generally February 1 - August 31), conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey of all suitable nesting habitat within 14 days prior to construction. The survey shall be conducted within a 500-foot radius of Project work areas for raptors and within a 100-foot radius for other nesting birds. If any active nests are observed, these nests shall be designated an environmentally sensitive area and protected by an avoidance buffer established in coordination with California Department of Fish and Wildlife until the breeding season has ended or until a qualified biologist has determined that the young have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival.

Timing/Implementation: Prior to demolition/ Construction Monitoring/Enforcement: Suisun City Development Services Department 175

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 31 Law,
Authority,
or Factor
Mitigation Measure
Noise NOI-1 Construction Noise-Reducing Best Management Practices. The Project improvement and building plans shall include the following requirements for construction activities:

• Construction contacts must specify that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other state-required noise attenuation devices. • A sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet, shall be posted at the Project construction site providing a contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. This sign shall indicate the dates and duration of construction activities. In conjunction with this required posting, a noise disturbance coordinator will be identified to address construction noise concerns received. The coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the disturbance coordinator shall notify the Suisun City Development Services Department within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint (starting too early, malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the complaint, as deemed acceptable by the Suisun City Development Services Department. All signs posted at the construction site shall include the contact name and the telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator. • Identification of construction noise reduction methods. These reduction methods may include shutting off idling equipment (5 minutes), installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and using electric air compressors and similar power tools.
• During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers.

Timing/Implementation: During Construction
Monitoring/Enforcement: Suisun City Development Services Department

Determination:

Finding of No Significant Impact [24 CFR 58.40(g)(1); 40 CFR 1508.27] The Project will not result in a significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

Finding of Significant Impact [24 CFR 58.40(g)(2); 40 CFR 1508.27] The Project may significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

176

Environmental Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project – Suisun City Housing Authority April 2025 32

Preparer Signature: __________________________________________Date:________

Name/Title/Organization: ____ECORP Consulting, Inc.______________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Certifying Officer Signature: ___________________________________Date:________

Name/Title: ______________________________________________________________

This original, signed document and related supporting material must be retained on file by the Responsible Entity in an e nvironmental review record for the activity/project (ref:
24 CFR Part 58.38) and in accordance with recordkeeping requirements for the HUD program(s). 177

List of Attachments
Attachment 1 – Almond Gardens Suisun City, Ca Relocation Plan Attachment 2 – Conceptual Grading Plan, Confirmation of Flood Zone Mitigation, and National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
Attachment 3 – Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project
Attachment 4 – IPaC Resource List
Attachment 5 – Historical Structures Evaluation
Attachment 6 – Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project Attachment 7 – Notice of Exemption
Attachment 8 – 8-Step Planning Process Memo

178

Attachment 1 – Almond Gardens Suisun City, Ca Relocation Plan

179

ALMOND GARDENS

SUISUN CITY, CA

RELOCATION PLAN

July 2024

Prepared for:

Harbor Park, LLC

Prepared by:

Laurin Associates,
a Division of Raney Planning and Management, Inc.
180

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

1 INTRODUCTION

Almond Gardens was built in the 1960s; the original project included 20 one -story fourplexes, located at 807-815 Almond Street in Suisun City, CA. In 1990, these fourplexes were acquired by the Redevelopment Agency of the city of Suisun City. Instead of demolishing all the fourplexes, they underwent major rehabilitation and reconfiguration. Seven of the 20 fourplexes were demolished to make room for off-street designated parking spaces. The units were remodeled, and the courtyards were gated to reclaim the open space for the residents.

Over the following three decades, the physical condition of the fourplexes began to deteriorate .

The Old Town Suisun, where Almond Gardens is located, is built upon bay mud. The foundations of the Almond Garden fourplexes were not designed and constructed to withstand the soil expansion that occurs in this type of soil. In 2008, the city commissioned a study to determine whether to rehab or rebuild the Almond Gardens fourplexes. The study concluded that a rehabilitation of Almond Gardens as proposed, was not economically or physically viable.

In 2021, Harbor Park, LLC. signed a DDA with the Housing Authority to rebuild Almond Gardens into a new affordable multifamily project. The current plan is to build a 61-unit project. Financing will include 4 percent tax credits with bonds, CalHFA MIP, city land donation, and Project Based Vouchers.

Project financing includes federal funds ; therefore, the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs (URA ) is applicable. This Relocation Plan was prepared in accordance with the requirements of URA.

Due to the condition of the units, the complex will need to be demolished prior to the start of construction of the new project. Therefore, the current residents will need to be permanently relocated and receive relocation assistance and payments as required by URA.

Construction is anticipated to take place March 2025 – August 2026.

This report is being prepared to provide the funding sources and the public with a preliminary report of the actions, costs, and resources that will be needed to temporarily relocate eligible tenants residing at Almond Gardens.

Harbor Park, LLC will be responsible for funding the relocation and has retained Laurin Associates, a division of Raney Planning & Management, as their relocation consultant. 181

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

2 Project Location/Description

Almond Gardens is located at 707-815 Almond Street in the City of Suisun City. The subject property currently consists of 13 single story fourplexes with 52 rental units ; 38 of which are currently occupied. Harbor Park, LLC has executed a DDA with the Housing Authority of Suisun City to demolish the existing apartments rebuild Almond Gardens into a new 61- unit affordable multifamily rental project. The new complex will consist of five three -story walk-up residential buildings and a one-story leasing office and maintenance shop.

Unit Mix # Units SQ FT
2BR / 1BA 37 825
3 BR / 2BA 18 1,025
4 BR / 2BA 6 1,350
Manager Unit 1 593

The rental units will target households with incomes at 30 and 70 percent of the Area Median Income. All units will be rental assisted with Project Based Vouchers.

Unit amenities will include central air, blinds, storage closet, walk -in closet, coat closet, patio/balcony, refrigerator, stove/oven, dishwasher, disposal , microwave, and washer/dryer .

Project amenities will include a community room, picnic area, playground, onsite manager, surveillance camera, and surface parking.

182

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

3 RELOCATION PLAN

1. Permanent Relocation Assistance Program : A comprehensive relocation assistance program, with advisory assistance, will be provided to the household being permanently displaced. The purpose of the program is to:

• Fully inform displaced households of the procedures to obtain relocation benefits and assistance.
• Determine the specific needs of each household.
• Provide current and continuously updated information concerning replacement housing opportunities.
• Provide referrals to governmental and social service agencies, if needed. • Assist households in completing applications for benefits.

In September 2024, management will hand deliver each tenant a General Information Notice, informing them of a potential project that may receive public funds and that they would be protected under Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs (URA) regulations if they are required to permanently relocate.

Once all financing has been approved, Laurin Associates will personally interview the households anticipated to be eligible for permanent relocation benefits to document the following information: household composition and ages; disabilities; location of jobs and factors limiting accessibility; ownership or rental preference; need for special services; and locational preference.

A Notice of Eligibility (NOE) for Relocation Assistance/90 -Day Notice will be provided to the households eligible for relocation assistance. The notice will include three referrals to decent, safe, and sanitary comparable housing. A permanent relocation c ost estimate will be determined using the following information:

• URA relocation requirements
• Rental rates and tenant paid utilities of comparable available housing • Current tenant paid rent and utilities
• Fixed Residential Moving Cost Schedule

183

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

4 Moving Expense
Tenants permanently relocated will be eligible to receive a payment for moving expenses. The payment will be made based upon either a fixed room count schedule or an invoice for actual reasonable moving expenses from a licensed professional mover.

a) Fixed Payment – A fixed payment for moving expenses based on the number of rooms containing furniture or other personal property to be moved. The fixed moving payment will be based upon the most recent Federal Highway Administration schedule maintained by the California Department of Transportation.

OR
b) Actual Reasonable Moving Expense Payments – Tenants may choose to retain the services of a licensed, professional mover. The cost of professional moving services will be based on the lower of at least two acceptable bids obtained from licensed, professional movers. management may also obtain bids, at its own discretion, in order to determine the most qualified competitive bidder for the move. management will make direct payment to the selected mover, if requested, or provide reimbursement upon presentation of appropriate documentation substantiating the move.

Compensable moving elements include packing, transportation, un-packing and insurance. Transportation costs beyond 50 miles are not eligible. In addition to payment for the actual move, one -time re -connection fees related to gas, water, electricity, telep hone, internet and television service, are eligible for reimbursement.

Rental Assistance/Down Payment Assistance
A tenant displaced from a dwelling may be entitled to a Replacement Housing Payment in the form of rental or downpayment assistance not -to-exceed $7,200 (prior to consideration of eligibility for Last Resort Housing benefits - see Last Resort Housing below), if the displaced household:

a. Has actually and lawfully occupied the displacement dwelling as a permanent or customary and usual place of abode for not less than 90 days immediately prior to project approval by HUD; and
b. Has rented, or purchased, and occupied a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling within 1 year (unless management extends this period for good cause) after the date he or she moves from the displacement dwelling.

184

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

5 URA Rental/Down Payment Assistance payment amounts are equal to 42 times the difference between the base monthly rental and the lesser of:

(i) The monthly rent and estimated average monthly cost of utilities for a comparable replacement dwelling; or
(ii) The monthly rent and estimated average monthly cost of utilities for the decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling actually occupied by the displaced person; or
(iii) The total of the amount designated for shelter and utilities if receiving a welfare assistance payment from a program that designated the amounts for shelter and utilities.

The base monthly rental for the displacement dwelling is the lesser of:

(i) The average monthly cost for rent and utilities at the displacement dwelling for a reasonable period prior to displacement, as determined by the Agency; or, (ii) Thirty percent (30%) of the displaced household’s average gross household income.

Payment of Benefits
A displaced household has up to one year to qualify for their benefits and another six months to provide supporting documentation for a claim to be filed with the Project Sponsor. This time begins on:

• The date the claimant moves from the acquired property; or, • The date on which final payment for the acquisition of real property is made, whichever is later.

The procedure for the preparation and filing of claims and the processing and delivery of payments will be as follows:

i. Claimant(s) will provide all necessary documentation to substantiate eligibility for assistance.

ii. Required claim forms will be prepared by relocation personnel and reviewed with claimant. Signed claims and supporting documentation will be submitted by relocation consultant to management.

iii. Project sponsor will review all claims for payment and determine whether to approve, deny, or seek additional information.

iv. Project sponsor will issue benefit checks for distribution to claimants by certified mail, or in-person.

185

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

6 v. Final payments will be issued only after confirmation that the project area premises have been completely vacated and occupancy of the replacement unit is verified. All replacement units will be inspected by management and must be deemed “decent, safe and sanitary”.

vi. All correspondence, back- up documentation, claims, receipts of payment and notices will be maintained in the relocation case file.

The project sponsor will make payments to permanently relocated residents as quickly and easily as possible. Tenants who purchase a replacement home will receive one lump sum payment. Tenants who rent a replacement home will receive all of their moving expenses and ½ of their r elocation rental assistance when their replacement home is secured and ½ within 60 days of their first payment.

Last Resort Housing
“Last Resort Housing” payments are authorized by statute if affordable comparable replacement housing is not available, i.e. housing costing not more than 30% of the household’s average monthly income. In this case, payments may be made beyond the $7,200 statutory cap for up to 42 months of rental assistance. Due to the high cost of rental housing in the Suisun City market area, tenants m ay be eligible for Last Resort Housing payments.

However, there is adequate available replacement housing in Suisun City and Fairfield based upon the housing survey conducted in July 2024.

2. Advisory Services:

Laurin Associates will work closely with the tenants to provide advisory services, which will include but not be limited to the following:

• Meeting personally with the household
• Explaining the relocation process
• Providing lists of available comparable rental housing throughout the 90- day period until suitable comparable housing is found
• Answering questions from potential landlords or real estate agents • Answering tenant questions throughout the relocation process • Assist with completing applications for payments and benefits

186

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

7 3. Citizen Participation:

Project sponsor will encourage tenants to participate in reviewing the relocation plan and monitoring the relocation assistance program.

Project sponsor will guarantee the following:

(1) Timely and full access to all non-confidential documents relevant to the relocation program.
.

(2) The provision of technical assistance necessary to interpret elements of the relocation plan and other pertinent materials.

(3) The right to submit written or oral comments and objections, including the right to submit written comments on the relocation plan and to have these comments attached to the plan when it is forwarded to the City of Suisun City for approval.

(4) Prompt, written response to any written objections or criticisms.

4. Cost Estimate and Sources:

Tenant incomes are unknown at this time. However, based upon current tenant paid rent and market rent of comparable units , permanent relocation is estimated to be $967,963.

5. Grievance Procedures – Federal Regulations:

Within 60 days of the date of relocation or receipt of final compensation (whichever is later), any person who believes themselves aggrieved in the relocation process, the amount of payment, relocation practices or replacement housing, may have their claim reviewed and reconsidered by a City of Suisun City representative, pursuant to procedures set forth in 49 CFR 24.10. “Any aggrieved person may file a written appeal with the City in any case in which the person believes that the City has failed to properly consider the person’s application for assistance under this part. Such assistance may include, but is not limited to, the person’s eligibility for, or the amount of a payment required under § 24.106 or § 24.107, or a relocation payment required under this part. The City shall consider a written appeal regardless of form”

Review will not be done by the person who made the determination in question.

6. Relocation Office Operation Procedures: All mail and telephone contact with residents will take place from Laurin Associates, a division of Raney Planning & Management, offices located at 1501 sports Drive, Sacramento, CA 95834. Office hours are Monday – Friday from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm. Correspondence should be sent to the attention of Jayne Raab, who is available at (916) 372-6100. 187

RELOCATION PLAN
Almond Gardens
July 2024

8 CONCLUSION

A copy of this Relocation Plan will be submitted to all public financing sources for review and comment.

The project will not result in different, or separate treatment of households based on race, nationality, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, familial status, disability or any other basis protected by the federal Fair Housing Amendments Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of1964, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, and the Unruh Act.

The relocation program to be implemented by the project sponsor conforms with the standards and provisions set forth in Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally Assisted Programs (URA).

The following attachments have been incorporated to the Relocation Plan:

Attachment 1 – Sample General Information Statement
Attachment 2 – Permanent Relocation Cost Estimate

188

ATTACHMENT 1

GENERAL INFORMATION NOTICE

189

ON LETTERHEAD

Date

Almond Gardens Resident
City of Suisun City

General Information Notice – Residential Tenant
Important – Do Not Destroy

Dear Tenant:

Harbor Park, LLC is interested in constructing a new affordable multifamily housing project on the property you currently occupy at 707- 815 Almond Street. Financing for the new project may include funding assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

The purpose of this notice is to inform you that you may be displaced as a result of the proposed project. This notice also serves to inform you of your potential rights as a displaced person under a federal law known as the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (URA). You m ay be eligible for relocation assistance and payments under the URA, if the proposed project receives HUD funding and if you are displaced as a result of acquisition, rehabilitation or demolition for the project.

• This is not a notice to vacate the premises.

• This is not a notice of relocation eligibility.

If you are determined to be eligible for relocation assistance in the future, you may be eligible for:
1) Relocation advisory services including help to you find another place to live; 2) At least 90 days advance written notice of the date you will be required to move; 3) Payment for your moving expenses; and 4) Replacement housing payments to enable you to rent, or if you prefer to purchase, a comparable replacement home. You will also have the right to appeal the agency’s determination, if you feel that your application for assistance was not properly considered. The enclosed HUD brochure, "Relocation Assistance To Tenants Displaced From Their Homes" provides an explanation of this assistance and other helpful information.

(NOTE: Pursuant to Public Law 105- 117, aliens not lawfully present in the United States are not eligible for relocation assistance, unless such ineligibility would result in exceptional hardship to a qualifying spouse, parent, or child. All persons seeking relocation assistance will be required to certify that they are a United States citizen or national, or an alien lawfully present in the United States.)

Please be advised that you should continue to pay your rent and meet any other obligations as specified in your lease agreement. Failure to do so may be cause for eviction. If you choose to move or if you are evicted prior to receiving a formal notice of relocation eligibility you will not be eligible to receive relocation assistance. It is important for you to contact us before making any moving plans.

Again, this is not a notice to vacate the premises and does not establish your eligibility for relocation payments or assistance at this time. If you are determined to be displaced and are required to vacate the premises in the future, you will be informed in writing. In the event the proposed project does not proceed or if you are determined not to be displaced, you will also be notified in writing.

If you have any questions about this notice or the proposed project, please contact (name)______________________, (title)____________,
(address)_________________________________, (phone)___________________.

Sincerely,

(name and title)__________________________
190

ATTACHMENT 2

PERMANENT RELOCATION COST ESTIMATE

Subject Rent Utilities
Current Rent
+ Utilities
Comp
Rent
Comp
Utilities
Comp
Rent +
Utilities
# of
Months Total RAP
Moving
Payments
Total per
Unit # Units
TOTAL
COST
Voucher $1,250 $1,250 3 $3,750
$1,100 $82 $1,182 $1,900 $82 $1,982 42 $33,600 $1,250 $34,850 2 $69,700 Voucher $0 $1,475 $1,475 10 $14,750
$1,200 $107 $1,307 $2,100 $107 $2,207 42 $37,800 $1,475 $39,275 12 $471,300 $1,251 $107 $1,358 $2,100 $107 $2,207 42 $35,658 $1,475 $37,133 11 $408,463 38 $967,963
Rental Assistance Payment
1BR
2BR

191

Attachment 2 – Conceptual Grading Plan, Confirmation of Flood Zone Mitigation, and National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette

192

193

1024 Iron Front Road
Tel: 702-396-5113. Fax: 702-446-8155

Dear Camran,

Re: Confirmation of Flood Zone Mitigation for Almond Garden

I am writing to confirm that our project design team has taken necessary measures to mitigate the flood zone for the Almond Garden located at Almond Street, Suisun City, CA. According to the FEMA Flood Hazard Rate Map number 06095C0456F, dated August 3, 2016, the project site is situated in Flood Zone AE with a base elevation of 10 feet NAVD88 Datum. The existing project site contour elevation i s approximately 5‐6 feet, resul ting in a flood depth of approximately 4‐5 feet.

To ensure compliance with FEMA regulations and minimize the risk of flooding, we have elevated the finish floor level of the 1st floor of the building t o a m i n i m u m o f 1 0 . 5 0 f e e t , placing it above the flood zone. The first floor will be accessible via stairs. However, the lobby area, which is designated for living and walking areas only, ha s a varying finish floor level of

8.20 to 8.50 feet, as it is within the flood zone.

This elevation strategy is consi stent with nearby projects, inc luding the Holiday Inn Express a n d 1 6 D U L o t z W a y p r o j e c t s . B y e l e v a t i n g t h e b u i l d i n g t o 1 0 . 5 feet, we have effectively mitigated the flood zone and ensured that the project is in compliance with FEMA regulations.

The specific elevations are as follows:
‐ Flood Zone AE base elevation: 10 feet NAVD88 Datum
‐ Finish floor elevation of the building (except lobby area): 10 feet + 0.5 feet = 10.5 feet

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require any additional information or clarification.

Sincerely yours,
ACE Design, LLC
Jaspal S. Sidhu, P.E.

Principal

194

195

Attachment 3 – Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project

196
Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment for the
Almond Gardens Apartments P roject
City of Suisun City, California

Prepared For:

Harbor Park, LLC
9700 Village Center Drive, Suite 120
Granite Bay, CA 95746

Prepared By:

55 Hanover Lane
Chico, CA 95926

August 2024
197
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. i August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartments Project 2024-182

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 AIR QUALITY .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Air Quality Setting ............................................................................................................................................... 2

2.1.1 Criteria Air Pollutants ........................................................................................................................ 3

2.1.2 Hazardous Air Pollutants ................................................................................................................. 6

2.1.3 Land Use Compatibility with Toxic Air Contaminant Emission Sources ........................ 6

2.1.4 Ambient Air Quality ........................................................................................................................... 7

2.1.5 Sensitive Receptors ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................................... 10

2.2.1 Federal ................................................................................................................................................. 10

2.2.2 State ...................................................................................................................................................... 10

2.2.3 Local ...................................................................................................................................................... 11

2.2.4 Threshold of Significance ............................................................................................................. 12

2.2.5 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 14

2.2.6 Impact Analysis................................................................................................................................. 15

3.0 GREEENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................................................ 22

3.1 Greenhouse Gas Setting ................................................................................................................................ 22

3.2 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................................... 23

3.2.1 Federal ................................................................................................................................................. 23

3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Assessment .................................................................................. 24

3.3.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 24

3.3.2 Impact Analysis................................................................................................................................. 24

4.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 30

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1. Summary of Criteria Air Pollutants Sources and Eﬀects ............................................................... 4 Table 2-2. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Near Air Pollutant Sources ..................... 7 Table 2-3. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data in Project Area ................................................................ 8 Table 2-4. Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the Solano County Portion of the SFBAAB ............... 9 Table 2-5. Federal General Conformity De Minimis Emissions Levels ......................................................... 13 Table 2-6. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Thresholds of Signiﬁcance ...................................... 14 Table 2-7. Construction-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions ............................................................... 16 198
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. ii August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-8. Operational-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions ................................................................. 17 Table 2-9. BAAQMD Cumulative Health Risk Thresholds ............................................................................ 20 Table 2-10. Stationary Sources within 1,000 Feet of the Project ................................................................ 20 Table 2-11. Calculated Health Risk at the Project Site ................................................................................ 21 Table 3-1. Summary of Greenhouse Gases ................................................................................................. 23 Table 3-2. Project Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................... 25 Table 3-3. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................... 26 Table 3-4. Social Cost of Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................... 28

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – CalEEMod Output File for Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term Description
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
CAA Clean Air Act
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CH4 Methane
City Suisun City
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalents
DPM Diesel particulate matter
GHG Greenhouse gas emissions
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
hp Horsepower
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IWG Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases μg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
N2O Nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
NOx Nitrous oxides
O3 Ozone
ppm parts per million
PM10 Coarse particulate matter
PM2.5 Fine particulate matter
PRC Public Resources Code
199
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. iii August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Term Description
Project Almond Gardens Apartments Project
TRU Transport Refrigeration Unit
ROG Reactive organic gases
SC-GHG Social Cost of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SIP State Implementation Plan
SO Secretarial Order
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
USEPA U.S. Environment Protection Agency
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

200
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 1 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartments Project 2024-182

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Assessment completed for the Almond Gardens Apartments (Project), which proposes the construction of 96 affordable housing units plus one manager unit for on-site property management in the City of Suisun City, California.

This assessment was prepared using methodologies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

Regional and local existing conditions are presented, along with pertinent emissions standards and regulations. The purpose of this assessment is to estimate the Project-generated criteria air pollutants and GHG emissions during the Project’s construction and operation and to determine the level of impact the Project would have on the environment. Project generated air pollutants are compared to the Conformity Determination thresholds established by the USEPA. GHG emissions are quantified and disclosed for informational purposes.

1.1 Project Location and Description
The Project Site is located in Suisun City (City) at 707 - 815 Almond Street on 2.53 acres. It is surrounded by residential complexes in all directions. The Project Site currently accommodates 13 condemned apartment buildings and associated parking, all of which are proposed for demolition. Specifically, there are currently 13 multi-unit apartment buildings consisting of 51 individual units total on the site. The buildings have been deemed uninhabitable or soon- to-be uninhabitable by the City and need to be demolished before new construction can commence.

The Project is proposing the construction of 96 affordable housing units for low- income families plus one manager unit for on -site property management. The Project will target low -income families earning 30 percent to 50 percent of the area median income. The unit mix includes 58 two -bedroom units, 30 three - bedroom units and 10 four - bedroom units with ample community gathering space and outdoor recreational amenities.

The Project would consist of six 3 -story walk- up open air lobby style buildings with five dedicated to residential units and one dedicated to the management office and maintenance shop. Four of the residential buildings would contain 22 units, one would contain nine units. The Project proposes 121 open parking spaces.

201
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 2 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

2.0 AIR QUALITY

2.1 Air Quality Setting

The Project Site is located in Suisun City, Solano County, which lies in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB). The SFBAAB is approximately 5,600 square miles in area and consists of nine counties that surround the San Francisco Bay, including all of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Napa Counties; the southwestern portion of Solano County; and the southern portion of Sonoma County. The topography of the SFBAAB is characterized by complex terrain, consisting of coastal mountain ranges, inland valleys and bays. This complex terrain, especially the higher elevations, distorts the normal wind flow patterns in the SFBAAB. The greatest distortions occur when low-level inversions are present and the air beneath the inversion flows independently of air above the inversion, a condit ion that is common in the summertime.

The air flowing in from the coast to the Central Valley, called the sea breeze, begins developing at or near ground level along the coast in late morning or early afternoon. As the day progresses, the sea breeze layer deepens and increases in velocity while spreading inland. The depth of the sea breeze depends in large part upon the height and strength of the inversion. If the inversion is low and strong, and hence stable, the flow of the sea breeze will be inhibited, and stagnant conditions are likely to result.

Summertime temperatures in the SFBAAB are determined by the effect of differential heating between land and water surfaces. Because land tends to heat up and cool off more quickly than water, a large-scale gradient (differential) in temperature is often cr eated between the coast and the Central Valley, and small- scale local gradients are often produced along the shorelines of the ocean and bays.

During the summer, winds flowing from the northwest are drawn inland through the Golden Gate and over the lower portions of the San Francisco Peninsula. Immediately south of Mount Tamalpais, the northwesterly winds accelerate considerably and come more dir ectly from the west as they stream through the Golden Gate. This channeling of wind through the Golden Gate produces a jet that sweeps eastward and splits off to the northwest toward Richmond and to the southwest toward San Jose when it meets the East Bay hills.

Wind speeds may be strong locally in areas where air is channeled through a narrow opening, such as the Carquinez Strait, the Golden Gate, or the San Bruno Gap.

An inversion is a layer of warmer air over a layer of cooler air. Inversions affect air quality conditions significantly because they influence the mixing depth, i.e., the vertical depth in the atmosphere available for diluting air contaminants near the ground. The highest air pollutant concentrations in the SFBAAB generally occur during inversions. The areas having the highest air pollution potential tend to be those that experience the highest temperatures in the summer and the lowest temperatures in the winter. The coastal areas are exposed to the prevailing marine air, creating cooler temperatures in the summer, warmer temperatures in winter, and stratus clouds all year. The inland valleys are sheltered from the marine air and experience hotter summers and colder winters. Thus, the topography of the inland valleys creates conditions conducive to high air pollution potential.
202
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 3 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

The federal Clean Air Act ( CAA) (and its subsequent amendments) requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as the State Implementation Program (SIP). The SIP is a living document that is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, plans , and rules and regulations of air basins as reported by the agencies with jurisdiction over them. The CAA Amendments dictate that the states containing areas violating the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) revis e their SIPs to include extra control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP includes strategies and control measures to attain the NAAQS by deadlines established by the CAA.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is designated by law to adopt and enforce regulations to achieve and maintain ambient air quality standards. The BAAQMD is required to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the air basin is in nonattainment. Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal government has established air quality standards for outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health with a determined margin of safety. In order to reduce such emissions, the local agency, BAAQMD, adopts and enforces rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issues permits for stationary sources of air pollution, monitors ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implemen ts programs and regulations required by the CAA and CAA Amendments.

2.1.1 Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal government has established air quality standards for outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health with a determined margin of safety. The USEPA focuses on the following criteria pollutants to determine air quality: ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead. O 3, PM10, and PM 2.5 are generally considered to be region al pollutants because they or their precursors affect air quality on a regional scale. Pollutants such as CO, NO 2, and SO 2 are considered to be local pollutants because they tend to accumulate in the air locally. PM is also considered a local pollutant. Health effects commonly associated with criteria pollutants are summarized in Table 2-1.

203
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 4 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-1. Summary of Criteria Air Pollutants Sources and Effects Pollutant Major Manmade Sources Human Health and Welfare Effects CO
An odorless, colorless gas formed when
carbon in fuel is not burned completely; a
component of motor vehicle exhaust.

Reduces the ability of blood to deliver oxygen to
vital tissues, affecting the cardiovascular and
nervous system. Impairs vision, causes dizziness,
and can lead to unconsciousness or death.

NO2
A reddish-brown gas formed during fuel
combustion for motor vehicles, energy
utilities and industrial sources.

Respiratory irritant; aggravates lung and heart
problems. Precursor to ozone and acid rain. Causes
brown discoloration of the atmosphere.

O3
Formed by a chemical reaction between
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the presence of
sunlight. Common sources of these
precursor pollutants include motor vehicle
exhaust, industrial emissions, solvents, paints
and landfills.

Irritates and causes inflammation of the mucous
membranes and lung airways; causes wheezing,
coughing and pain when inhaling deeply; decreases
lung capacity; aggravates lung and heart problems.

Damages plants; reduces crop yield.

PM2.5 & PM10
Power plants, steel mills, chemical plants,
unpaved roads and parking lots, wood-
burning stoves and fireplaces, automobiles
and others.

Increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation
of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing;
aggravated asthma; development of chronic
bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfatal heart
attacks; and premature death in people with heart
or lung disease. Impairs visibility (haze).

SO2
An odorless, colorless gas formed when
carbon in fuel is not burned completely; a
component of motor vehicle exhaust.

Reduces the ability of blood to deliver oxygen to
vital tissues, affecting the cardiovascular and
nervous system. Impairs vision, causes dizziness,
and can lead to unconsciousness or death.

Source: California Air Pollution Control Offices Association (CAPCOA 2013)

2.1.1.1 Carbon Monoxide
CO in the urban environment is associated primarily with the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels in motor vehicles. CO combines with hemoglobin in the bloodstream and reduces the amount of oxygen that can be circulated through the body. High CO concentra tions can cause headaches, aggravate cardiovascular disease and impair central nervous system functions. CO concentrations can vary greatly over comparatively short distances. Relatively high concentrations of CO are typically found near crowded intersecti ons and along heavy roadways with slow moving traffic. Even under the most severe meteorological and traffic conditions, high concentrations of CO are limited to locations within relatively short distances (i.e., up to 600 feet or 185 meters) of the source. Overall CO emissions are decreasing as a result of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program, which has mandated increasingly lower emission levels for vehicles manufactured since 1973.

2.1.1.2 Nitrogen Oxides
Nitrogen gas comprises about 80 percent of the air and is naturally occurring. At high temperatures and under certain conditions, nitrogen can combine with oxygen to form several different gaseous compounds collectively called nitric oxides (NO
x). Motor vehicle emissions are the main source of NO x in urban areas.

NOx is very toxic to animals and humans because of its ability to form nitric acid with water in the eyes, 204
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 5 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

lungs, mucus membrane, and skin. In animals, long -term exposure to NO x increases susceptibility to respiratory infections, and lowers resistance to such diseases as pneumonia and influenza. Laboratory studies show that susceptible humans, such as asthmatics, who are exposed to high concentrations can suffer from lung irritation or possible lung damage. Precursors of NO x, such as NO and NO2, are attributed to the formation of O 3 and PM 2.5. Epidemiological studies have also shown associations between NO 2 concentrations and daily mortality from respiratory and cardiovascular causes and with hospital admissions for respiratory conditions.

2.1.1.3 Ozone
Ozone (O3) is a secondary pollutant, meaning it is not directly emitted. It is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOCs) also known as reactive organic gases (ROG) and NOx undergo photochemical reactions that occur only in the presence of sunlight. The primary source of ROG emissions is unburned hydrocarbons in motor vehicles and other internal combustion engine exhaust. Sunlight and hot weather cause ground - level O
3 to form. Ground -level O3 is the primary constituent of smog. Because O 3 formation occurs over extended periods of time, both O 3 and its precursors are transported by wind and high O 3 concentrations can occur in areas well away from sources of its constituent pollutants.

People with lung disease, children, older adults, and people who are active can be affected when O 3 levels exceed ambient air quality standards. Numerous scientific studies have linked ground-level O3 exposure to a variety of problems including lung irritation, difficult breathing, permanent lung damage to those with repeated exposure, and respiratory illnesses.

2.1.1.4 Sulfur Dioxide
SO2 is a colorless gas with a pungent odor, however sulfur dioxide can react with other particulates in the atmosphere to for particulates which contribute to the haze effect. SO2 standards have been developed by the EPA to regulate all sulfur oxides, however SO2 is by far the most abundant sulfur oxide in the atmosphere.

Currently, SO2 is primarily a result of the burning of fossil fuels for power generation and other industrial sources. Modern regulations on diesel fuel have greatly reduced the amount of SO2 in the atmosphere and there are currently no areas in California that have nonacceptable levels of SO2, by state or federal standards.

2.1.1.5 Particulate Matter
Particulate matter includes both aerosols and solid particulates of a wide range of sizes and composition.

Of concern are those particles smaller than or equal to 10 microns in diameter size (PM10) and smaller than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter (PM 2.5). Smaller particulates are of greater concern because they can penetrate deeper into the lungs than larger particles. PM 10 is generally emitted directly as a result of mechanical processes that crush or grind larger particles or form the resuspension of dust, typically through construction activities and vehicular travel. PM 10 generally settles out of the atmosphere rapidly and is not readily transported over large distances. PM 2.5 is directly emitted in combustion exhaust and is formed in atmospheric reactions between various gaseous pollutants, including NO x, sulfur oxides (SO x) and VOCs.

PM2.5 can remain suspended in the atmosphere for days and/or weeks and can be transported long distances.
205
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 6 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

The principal health effects of airborne PM are on the respiratory system. Short-term exposure of high PM2.5 and PM10 levels are associated with premature mortality and increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits. Long -term exposure is associated with premature mortality and chronic respiratory disease.

According to the USEPA, some people are much more sensit ive than others to breathing PM 10 and PM2.5.

People with influenza, chronic respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and the elderly may su ffer worse illnesses; people with bronchitis can expect aggravated symptoms; and children may experience decline in lung function due to breathing in PM 10 and PM2.5. Other groups considered sensitive include smokers and people who cannot breathe well through their noses. Exercising athletes are also considered sensitive because many breathe through their mouths.

2.1.2 Hazardous Air Pollutants
In addition to the criteria pollutants discussed above, hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) are another group of pollutants of concern. HAPs are considered either carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic based on the nature of the health effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For regulatory purposes, carcinogenic HAPs are assumed to have no safe threshold below which health impacts would not occur, and cancer risk is expressed as excess cancer cases per one million exposed individuals. Noncarcinogenic HAPs differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur. These levels are determined on a pollutant -by-pollutant basis. Carcinogenic HAPs can also have noncarcinogenic health hazard levels.

There are many different types of HAPs, with varying degrees of toxicity. Sources of HAPs include industrial processes such as petroleum refining and chrome plating operations, commercial operations such as gasoline stations and dry cleaners, and motor vehicle exhaust. Additionally, diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants composed of gaseous and solid material. The solid emissions in diesel exhaust are known as diesel particulate matter (DPM). Public exposure to HAPs can result from emissions from normal operations, as well as from accidental releases of hazardous materials during upset conditions. The health effects of HAPs include cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, and death.

2.1.3 Land Use Compatibility with Toxic Air Contaminant Emission Sources The location of a development project is a major factor in determining whether it will result in localized air quality impacts. The potential for adverse air quality impacts increases as the distance between the source of emissions and members of the public decreases. While impacts on all members of the population should be considered, impacts on sensitive receptors, such as schools or hospitals, are of particular concern. In 2005, the California Air Resources Board ( CARB) published an informational guide entitled Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective . The purpose of this guide is to provide information to aid local jurisdictions in addressing issues and concerns related to the placement of sensitive land uses near major sources of air pollution. The handbook includes recommended separation distances for various land uses, summarized in Table 2-2. However, these recommendations are not site-specific and should not be interpreted as mandated “buffer zones.” It is also important to note that the recommendations of the handbook are advisory and need to be balanced with other state and local policies (CARB 2005). 206
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 7 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-2. Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Land Uses Near Air Pollutant Sources Source Category Advisory Recommendations
Freeways and High-Traffic Roads • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day.

Distribution Centers
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units (TRU) per day, or where TRU operations exceed 300 hours per week).
• Take into account the configuration of existing distribution centers and avoid locating residences and other new sensitive land uses near entry and exit points.

Rail Yards
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard.
• Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches.

Ports
• Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily impacted zones. Consult local air districts or the ARB on the status of pending analyses of health risks.

Refineries
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with local air districts and other local agencies to determine an appropriate separation.

Chrome Platers • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater.

Dry Cleaners Using
Perchloroethylene
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry cleaning operation. For operations with two or more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with 3 or more machines, consult with the local air district. • Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perc dry cleaning operations.

Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50-foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities.

Source: CARB 2005
Notes: Recommendations are advisory, are not site -specific, and may not fully account for future reductions in emissions, including those resulting from compliance with existing/future regulatory requirements, such as reductions in diesel-exhaust emissions anticipated to occur with continued implementation of CARB’s Diesel Risk Reduction Plan.

2.1.4 Ambient Air Quality
Ambient air quality in the Project Area can be inferred from ambient air quality measurements conducted at nearby air quality monitoring stations. The USEPA monitors ambient air quality through various air monitoring stations throughout the United States . O3, PM10 and PM 2.5 are the pollutant species most potently affecting the Project region . As described in detail below, the Project Area is designated as unclassified/attainment for all federal standards of criteria pollutants with the exception of O 3 which is classified as marginal nonattainment (CARB 2022; USEPA 2024). The Fairfield – Chadbourne Road air quality monitoring station (1010 Chadbourne Road, Fairfield) is located approximately 2.36 miles southwest of the Project Site and monitors ambient concentrations of O 3. The Vacaville – Merchant Street air quality 207
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 8 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

monitoring station (650 Merchant Street, Vacaville) is located approximately 8.21 miles northeast of the Project Site and monitors ambient concentrations of PM 10. The Vallejo – Tuolumne Street air quality monitoring station (304 Tuolomne Street , Vallejo) is located approximately 14.36 miles southwest of the Project Site and monitors ambient concentrations of PM2.5. Ambient emission concentrations will vary due to localized variations in emission sources and climate and should be considered “generally” representative of ambient concentrations in the Project Area.

Table 2-3 summarizes the published data concerning O
3, PM2.5 and PM10 since 2021 for each year that the
monitoring data is provided.

Table 2-3. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data in Project Area Pollutant Scenario 2021 2022 2023
O3 – Fairfield-Chadbourne Road
Max 1-hour concentration (ppm) (state/federal) 0.093 / 0.093 0.081 / 0.081 0.079 / 0.079 Max 8-hour concentration (ppm) (state/federal) 0.079 / 0.078 0.064 / 0.063 0.065 / 0.065 Number of days above 1-hour standard (state/federal) 0 / 0 0 / 0 0 / 0 Number of days above 8-hour standard (state/federal) 2 / 2 0 / 0 0 / 0 PM10 – Vacaville-Merchant Street
Max 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) (state/federal) 49.6 / 50 35.4 / 33.4 38.1 / 37.6 Annual Average (federal) 14.6 11.9 12.5
Number of days above 24-hour standard (state/federal) * / 0 0 / 0 * / 0 PM2.5 – Vallejo-Tuolumne Street
Max 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) (state/federal) 32 / 32 31 / 31 37 / 36.1 Number of days above federal 24-hour standard 0 0 1.1
Source: CARB 2024
Note: * = Insufficient data available
μg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ppm = parts per million The USEPA designates air basins or portions of air basins and counties as being in “attainment” or “nonattainment” for each of the criteria pollutants. Areas that do not meet the standards are classified as nonattainment areas. The NAAQS for O
3, PM10, and PM2.5 are based on statistical calculations over one - to three-year periods, depending on the pollutant. The attainment status for the Solano County portion of the SFBAAB, which encompasses the Project Site, is included in Table 2-4.

208
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 9 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-4. Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the Solano County Portion of the SFBAAB Pollutant Federal Designation
1-Hour O3 Other Nonattainment
8-Hour O3 Marginal Nonattainment
PM10 Unclassified
PM2.5 Unclassified/Attainment
CO Unclassified/Attainment
Lead Unclassified/Attainment
NO2 Unclassified/Attainment
SO2 Unclassified/Attainment
Source: CARB 2022; USEPA 2024
The determination of whether an area meets the federal standards is based on air quality monitoring data.

As shown above, sometimes areas are unclassified, which means there is insufficient monitoring data for determining attainment or nonattainment. Unclassified areas are typically treated as being in attainment.

Because the attainment/nonattainment designation is pollutant -specific, an area may be classified as nonattainment for one pollutant and attainment for another. Maintenance areas are areas that have previously been in nonattainment but now meet the air quality standards. The Solano County region is federally designated as marginal nonattainment for O
3 and is designated as unclassified/attainment for all
other all federal standards of criteria pollutants (CARB 2022; USEPA 2024).

2.1.5 Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses.

Examples of these sensitive recep tors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.

The Project Site is located in a highly developed area. The nearest existing sensitive land use to the Project Site are residences located to the north , west, and south as well as Crystal Middle School located to the east.

209
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 10 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

2.2 Regulatory Framework

2.2.1 Federal

2.2.1.1 Clean Air Act
The CAA of 1970 and the CAA Amendments of 1971 required the USEPA to establish the NAAQS, with states retaining the option to adopt more stringent standards or to include other specific pollutants.

These standards are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthma tics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed.

The USEPA has classified air basins (or portions thereof) as being in attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified for each criteria air pollutant, based on whether or not the NAAQS have been achieved. If an area is designated unclassified, it is because inadequate air quality data were available as a basis for a nonattainment or attainment designation . Table 2 -4 lists the federal attainment status es of the So lano County portion of the SFBAAB for the criteria pollutants.

2.2.2 State

2.2.2.1 State Implementation Plans
The federal CAA (and its subsequent amendments) requires each state to prepare an air quality control plan referred to as the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP is a living document that is periodically modified to reflect the latest emissions inventories, plans, and rules and regulations of air basins as reported by the agencies with jurisdiction over them. The CAA Amendments dictate that states contain ing areas violating the NAAQS revise their SIPs to include extra control measures to reduce air pollution. The SIP includes strategies and control measures to attain the NAAQS by deadlines established by the CAA. The USEPA has the responsibility to review all SIPs to determine if they conform to the requirements of the CAA.

State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP. Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. CARB then forwards SIP revisions to the USEPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register. The SFBAAB currently has four air quality plans in place, discussed below, which collectively constitute the SFBAAB SIP elements. • 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan . The 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan was developed for compliance with the NAAQS for the 1 -hour O
3 standard. In June 2005, the USEPA revoked the standard for 1 - hour O 3; however, the state standard for 1 -hour O 3 remains. Therefore, BAAQMD continues to implement the strategies outlined in the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan. 210
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 11 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

• 2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy . The 2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy served as an update to the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan and expanded on strategies to achieve compliance with the state 1 - hour O3 standard.
• 2010 Clean Air Plan . The 2010 Clean Air Plan addresses various pollutants including O 3, PM, and air toxics, as well as GHG emissions within the SFBAAB. It serves to update the Bay Area 2005 Ozone Strategy in accordance with the requirements of the CCAA to implement all feasible measures, to reduce O3, and to consider the impacts of O3 control measures on particulate matter, air toxics, and greenhouse gas emissions in a single, integrated plan and review progress in improving air quality in recent years.
• 2017 Clean Air Plan. In April 2017, BAAQMD adopted the 2017 Clean Air Plan, whose primary goals are to protect public health and to protect the climate. The 2017 Clean Air Plan updates the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan and complies with state air quality planning requirements , as codified in the California Health and Safety Code (although the 2017 plan was delayed beyond the three -year update requirement of the code). State law requires the Clean Air Plan to include all feasible measures to reduce emissions of O
3 precursors and to reduce the transport of O 3 precursors to neighboring air basins. The 2017 Clean Air Plan contains 85 measures to address reduction of several pollutants: O
3 precursors, PM, air toxics, and GHGs. Other measures focus on a single type of pollutant: super GHGs such as methane and black carbon that consists of harmful fine particles that affect public health. These control strategies are grouped into the following categories:
a. Stationary Source Measures
b. Transportation Control Measures
c. Energy Control Measures
d. Building Control Measures
e. Agricultural Control Measures
f. Natural and Working Lands Control Measures
g. Waste Management Control Measures
h. Water Control Measures
i. Super GHG Control Measures

2.2.3 Local

2.2.3.1 Bay Area Air Quality Management District
The BAAQMD is the local agency designated by law to adopt and enforce regulations to achieve and maintain ambient air quality standards. The BAAQMD responsibilities include preparing plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adopting and enforcing air pollution rules, issuing permits for 211
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 12 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

and inspecting stationary air pollution sources, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementing state and federal programs and regulations.

2.2.4 Threshold of Significance

2.2.4.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency General Conformity The impact analysis provided below is based on thresholds set by the USEPA Conformity Determination Analysis. The General Conformity process begins with an “applicability analysis,” whereby it must be determined how and to what degree the Conformity Rules apply. According to USEPA’s General Conformity Guidance: Questions and Answers (1994), before any approval is given for a Federal Action to go forward, the federal agency must apply the applicability requirements found at 40 CFR § 93.153 to the Federal Action and/or determine on a pollutant -by-pollutant basis, whether a determination of General Conformity is required. During the applicability analysis, the federal agency determines the following:
 Whether the action will occur in a nonattainment or maintenance area;  Whether one or more of the specific exemptions apply to the action;  Whether the federal agency has included the action on its list of presumed-to-conform actions;  Whether the total direct and indirect emissions are below or above the de minimis levels; and/or  Where a facility has an emissions budget approved by the State or Tribe as part of the SIP or Tribal Implementation Plan, the federal agency determines that the emissions from the proposed action are within the budget.

The General Conformity Rule allows for exemptions for emissions that are not reasonably foreseeable, will not result in an increase in emissions, are below de minimis limits, are the result of emergency actions, are included in stationary source air permit s, are for routine maintenance and repair of existing structures, or are included in a transportation conformity determination undertaken by the Federal Highway Administration or Federal Transit Administration (40 CFR 93.153(c)).

A conformity determination would be required if the annual emissions of non- attainment pollutants generated by the Proposed Project were to exceed the General Conformity de minimis thresholds. The de minimis limits represent a level of emissions that the USEPA has determined will have only de minimis impacts to the air quality of an area and are thus exempted from the General Conformity Rule. If the overall predicted increase in emissions of a criteria pollutant due to a federal action in a nonattainment ar ea exceeds the de minimis limits as shown in Table 2-5, the lead federal agency is required to make a conformity determination.

212
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 13 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-5. Federal General Conformity De Minimis Emissions Levels Air Pollutant Area Type Tons Per Year
Ozone (VOC or NOx)
Serious nonattainment 50
Severe nonattainment 25
Extreme nonattainment 10
Other areas outside of ozone
transport region 100
Ozone (NOx)
Marginal and moderate
nonattainment inside an ozone
transport region
100
Maintenance 100
Ozone (VOC)
Marginal and moderate
nonattainment inside an ozone
transport region
50 Maintenance within an ozone
transport region 50
Maintenance outside an ozone
transport region 100
CO, SO2 and NO2 All nonattainment and
maintenance 100
PM10
Serious nonattainment 70
Moderate nonattainment and
maintenance 100
PM2.5 All nonattainment and
maintenance 100
Lead All nonattainment and
maintenance 25
Source: USEPA 2023

2.2.4.2 Bay Area Air Quality Management District
To assist local jurisdictions in the evaluation of air quality impacts, the BAAQMD has published a guidance document for the preparation of the air quality portions of environmental documents that include thresholds of significance to be used in evaluating land use proposals. Thresholds of significance are based on a source’s projected impacts and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures.

The BAAQMD’s established thresholds of significance for land use development projects are shown in Table 2-6.
213
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 14 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-6. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Thresholds of Significance Pollutant
Construction Related Operational
Average Daily Emissions
(pounds per day)
Average Daily Emissions
(pounds per day)
Maximum Annual
Emissions (tons per
year)
Ozone (VOC) 54 54 10
Ozone (NOx) 54 54 10
PM10 (exhaust) 82 82 15
PM2.5 (exhaust) 82 54 10
PM10/PM2.5 (fugitive dust) Best Management
Practices None None
Local CO None 9.0 ppm (8-hour average), 20.0 ppm (1-hour average) Source: BAAQMD 2023
In addition to the USEPA General Conformity de minimis thresholds, Project emissions are compared to the BAAQMD annual significance thresholds for comparison purposes.

2.2.5 Methodology
The air quality impacts were assessed in accordance with the thresholds set by the USEPA Conformity Determination Analysis. General Conformity ensures that the actions taken by federal agencies do not interfere with a state’s plans to attain and maintain national standards for air quality. Established under the CAA (section 176(c)(4)), the General Conformity rule plays an important role in helping states improve air quality in those areas that do not meet the NAAQS. Under the General Conformity rule, federal agencies must work with state and local governments in a nonattainment or maintenance area to ensure that federal actions conform to the air quality plans established in the applicable state or tribal implementation plan.

The overall purpose of the General Conformity rule is to ensure that:
 federal activities do not cause or contribute to new violations of NAAQS;  actions do not worsen existing violations of the NAAQS; and  attainment of the NAAQS is not delayed.

The SFAAB portion of Solano County, where the Project Area is located, is designated unclassified, or in attainment, for all federal standards of criteria pollutants with the exception of O 3, which the region is
classified as marginal nonattainment (CARB 2022; USEPA 2024).

Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 20 22.1. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. CalEEMod provides the ability to analyze a 214
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 15 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

project based on both California and Federal air quality standards. Project construction generated air pollutant emissions were calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for Solano County. Operational generated air pollutant emissions calculations employed information provided by the Project Site Plan, such as the number of residential units and parking spaces.

2.2.6 Impact Analysis

2.2.6.1 Project Construction-Generated Criteria Air Quality Emissions Emissions associated with the Proposed Project’s construction would be temporary and short-term but have the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. The basic sources of short -term emissions that would be generated through the construction of the Proposed Project would be operation of the construction vehicles and equipment (i.e. cranes and forklifts ) and the creation of fugitive dust during vegetation clearing. Possible implementation activities such as clearing operations, construction ve hicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive PM emissions that affect local air quality at various times during the Project’s activities . Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activity taking place, and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summer months creates a high potential for dust generation.

Construction-generated emissions associated with the Proposed Project were calculated using the CARB - approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction requirements. See Attachment A for more information regarding the construction assumptions, including construction equipment and duration, used in this analysis.

Predicted maximum daily construction -generated emissions for the Proposed Project are summarized in Table 2-7. Construction-generated emissions are short -term and of temporary duration but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceed the Conformity Determination thresholds.

215
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 16 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-7. Construction-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Scenario
Pollutant (tons per year)
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Construction Calendar Year 1 0.80 2.11 2.82 0.00 0.29 0.15 Construction Calendar Year 2 0.19 0.41 0.62 0.00 0.04 0.02 Solano County USEPA
Conformity Determination
Thresholds (40 CFR 93.153)
100 100 100 100 100 100
Exceed USEPA Conformity
Determination Threshold? No No No No No No

Scenario
Pollutant (pounds per day - maximum)
VOC NOx PM10
(exhaust)
PM2.5
(exhaust)
PM10
(fugitive
dust)
PM2.5
(fugitive
dust)
Construction 8.26 31.7 1.37 1.26 19.8 10.1
BAAQMD Significance
Thresholds 54 54 82 54
Best
Management
Practices
Best
Management
Practices
Exceed BAAQMD
Significance Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs.

Notes: Daily emissions taken from the season, summer or winter, with the highest outputs. Construction emissions account for the demolition of the existing 51 units on the Project Site that have been or will soon be deemed uninhabitable.

According to Table 2 -7, emissions generated during Project ’s construction would not exceed the USEPA Conformity Determination thresholds for Solano County or the BAAQMD significance thresholds.

2.2.6.2 Project Operations Criteria Air Quality Emissions Implementation of the Project would result in long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants such as PM10, PM2.5, CO, and SO2 as well as O3 precursors such as VOC and NOX. Table 2-8 summarizes operational emissions from the Proposed Project. As previously stated, operational related emissions associated with the Proposed Project were calculated using the CalEEMod computer program. Operational air pollution impacts were based on model defaults and information from the Project Site Plans.

216
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 17 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-8. Operational-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Pollutant Sector
Pollutant (tons per year)
VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 0.35 0.29 2.24 0.01 0.47 0.12
Area 0.48 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.00 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.83 0.36 2.75 0.01 0.47 0.13
Solano County USEPA
Conformity Determination
Thresholds (40 CFR 93.153)
100 100 100 100 100 100
BAAQMD Significance
Thresholds 10 10 None None 15 10
Exceed Thresholds? No No No No No No

Pollutant Sector
Pollutant (pounds per day)
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 2.13 1.82 13.8 0.03 2.78 0.72
Area 2.88 0.00 5.44 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.02 0.33 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03
Total 5.03 2.15 19.3 0.03 2.81 0.75
BAAQMD Significance
Thresholds 54 54 - - 82 54
Exceed BAAQMD
Significance Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs.

Notes: Daily emissions taken from the season, summer or winter, with the highest outputs. Operational emissions account for default daily trips determined by CalEEMod defaults.

As indicated in Table 2-8, operational emissions would not exceed the USEPA Conformity Determination thresholds for Solano County or the BAAQMD significance thresholds.

2.2.6.3 Project Consistency with Air Quality Planning
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a SIP that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market -based 217
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 18 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

programs. Similarly, under state law, the CCAA requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment with regard to the federal and state ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.

The region’s SIP is constituted of the BAAQMD air quality plans: 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan, 2005 Bay Area Ozone Strategy, 2010 Clean Air Plan, and 2017 Clean Air Plan. The most recently adopted air quality plan is the BAAQMD’s 2017 Clean Air Plan, the primary goals of which are to protect public health and the climate. These air quality attainment plans are a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs (such as monitoring, modeling, permitting, etc.), district rules, state regulations, and federal controls describing how the state will attain ambient air quality standards. These SIP plans contain air pollutant reduction strategies and demonstrate that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved within the time frames required under federal law. These SIP plans and associated control measures are based on in formation derived from projected growth in the SFBAAB that is used to project future emissions and then determine strategies and regulatory controls for the reduction of emissions.

Growth projections are based on the general plans developed by the counties and the incorporated cities in the SFBAAB.

A project conforms with the BAAQMD air quality plans if it 1) complies with all applicable rules and regulations and 2) is consistent with the growth forecasts in the applicable general plan, in this instance the City of Suisun City 2035 General Plan. Projects generating air pollutants below the BAAQMD significance thresholds would comply with applicable rules and regulations. Conformity with growth forecasts can be established by demonstrating that the Project is consistent with the land use plan (i.e., Ci ty of Suisun City 2035 General Plan) that was used to generate the growth forecast. A project is nonconforming if it conflicts with or delays implementation of any applicable attainment or maintenance plan by exceeding air district thresholds of significance or prop osing a development substantially denser than that assumed in the general plan.

As previously described, the Project is proposing the construction of 96 residential units with shared community spaces for various purposes and 121 parking spaces. According to the City of Suisun City General Plan’s Downtown Waterfront Specific Plan Map, the Project Site is designated as Residential High-Density (2015). Since the Project is a redevelopment of an existing multi -family residential land use consistent with the allowable uses identified by the General Plan Residential High -Density land use designation , the land use designation remains Residential High-Density. As such, the Project would be consistent with the City of Suisun City General Plan and thereby consistent with the SFBAAB portion of the SIP. Additionally, as indicated in Table 2-7 and Table 2-8, construction and operational related emissions would not exceed the USEPA Conformity Determination or BAAQMD thresholds. Furthermore, the Project is located within the direct vicinity of numerous transit services including bus stops and the Suisun/Fairfield Amtrak stop making alternative transportation methods easily accessible for residents on the Project Site. Since the surrounding community is heavily residential, this results in decreased air quality emissions , a primary goal of regional air quality planning efforts. The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
218
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 19 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

2.2.6.4 Hazardous Air Pollutant Exposure
Operation of the Proposed Project would not result in the development of any substantial sources of air toxics. There are no stationary sources associated with the operations of the Project; nor would the Project attract mobile sources that spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. Onsite Project emissions would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. The maximum operations-related emissions of exhaust PM10, considered a surrogate for DPM, would be 2.75 pounds in a single day. Therefore, the Project would not be a substantial source of TACs. The Project will not result in a high carcinogenic or non-carcinogenic risk during operation.

This report also evaluates the potential health risks associated with the placement of residences at the Project Site. Specifically, the potential exposure of future residents at the Project Site to the DPM and VOC generated by the vehicular traffic traversing on Highway 12 and other neighboring roadways as well as from two permitted stationary source s located in close proximity to the Project Site. The BAAQMD provides a recommended methodology for assessing local risks and hazards. Specifically, the following TAC source types must be included:

1. Permitted Sources

2. Highways

3. Major Roadways
Permitted sources include any stationary source of TAC emissions which requires a permit to operate from the BAAQMD. Highways are identified by definition, and major roadways include any roadway with at least 10,000 average annual daily traffic . Consistent with BAAQMD recommendations, all such sources within 1,000 feet of the Proposed Project boundary are included in this analysis. The BAAQMD thresholds for identifying significant cumulative risk from local sources on a potential project are listed in Table 2-9.

219
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 20 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 2-9. BAAQMD Cumulative Health Risk Thresholds
Description Guidance
Receptor Thresholds Risks and Hazards
(Individual Project)
Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR Increased cancer risk of >10.0 in a million
Increased non-cancer risk of > 1.0 hazard index (chronic or acute)
Ambient PM2.5 increase: >0.3 µg/m3 annual average
Risks and Hazards (Cumulative
Threshold)
Compliance with Qualified Community Risk Reduction Plan OR Increased cancer risk of > 100 in a million
Increased non-cancer risk of > 10.0 hazard index (chronic, from all local sources)
Ambient PM2.5 increase: > 0.8 µg/m3 annual average (from all local sources)
Accidental Release of Acutely
Hazardous Air Pollutants
Storage or use of acutely hazardous materials locating near receptors or new receptors locating near stored or used hazardous materials considered significant
Odors Five confirmed complaints per year averaged over three years Source: BAAQMD 2023
The BAAQMD’s Stationary Source Screening Map was utilized to provide risk and hazard information on any permitted stationary source within 1,000 feet of the Project. Screening level risks and hazards are intentionally conservative and based on worst-case assumptions (BAAQMD 2024). The BAAQMD identified two sources within 1,000 feet of the Project Site which are both generators that belong to the Fairfield - Suisun Sewer District and the City of Suisun City. Details on these sources are presented in Table 2-10.

Table 2-10. Stationary Sources within 1,000 Feet of the Project Source Name Source Type Emissions Data
Source Activity Data Source
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer
District Generator Permitted Stationary BAAQMD BAAQMD
City of Suisun City
Generator for Fire
Protection
Permitted Stationary BAAQMD BAAQMD

The BAAQMD’s Mobile Source Screening Map was utilized to assess the cancer risk and hazards at the Project Site caused by nearby roadways (freeways and surface streets) , railways, and railyards . The Project Site is located near State Route 12 and a light rail commuter line. This screening map is intended to assist project sponsors in conducting cumulative cancer risk and hazard analyses . Developed by the BAAQMD in 2022 (for roadway sources) and 2024 (for rail sources), the map includes data on estimated cancer risk, annual fine particulate matter concentrations, and chronic hazards associated with these sources of air pollution in the Bay Area (BAAQMD 2024).
220
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 21 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Cumulative health risk is calculated for the Project Area using the various data layers for cancer risk and chronic hazard in the BAAQMD’s Mobile Source Screening Map for the mobile sources on nearby roadways and railways and the information reported for the permitted generators in the area from the Stationary Source Screening Map. The BAAQMD’s distance multiplier tool was applied to the cancer risk and chronic hazard value from the stationary source emissions to account for the distance of the Project Site to the permitted sources.

The cumulative cancer risk and hazard value are below BAAQMD thresholds as shown in Table 2-11.

Table 2-11. Calculated Health Risk at the Project Site
Description Cancer Risk Chronic Hazard
Calculated Health on the Project Site 12.9 0.0
BAAQMD Cumulative Health Risk Threshold 100 10
Exceeds Significance Threshold? No No

As shown, the calculated health risks at the Project Site are all below the BAAQMD health risk thresholds.

Furthermore, as previously described, in 2005 CARB published an informational guide entitled Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. The purpose of this guide is to provide information to aid local jurisdictions in addressing issues and concerns related to the placement of sensitive land uses near major sources of air pollution. The handbook includes recommended separation distances for various land uses, summarized in Table 2 -2 above. Of pertinence to this study, the CARB guidelines indicate that siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, such as State Route 12, should be avoided when possible. This 500-foot buffer was developed to protect sensitive receptors from exposure to diesel PM and was based on traffic-related studies that showed a 70 percent drop in PM concentrations at a distance of 500 feet from the roadway. Presumably, acute and chronic risks as well as lifetime cancer risk due to diesel PM exposure are lowered proportionately. The Project Site is located 1,360 feet from State Route 12; thus, it is located outside the CARB-recommended buffer area. The CARB guidelines indicate that siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard should be avoided when possible. Although there is no such rail yard characteristic of the CARB guideline in the Project Site vicinity, the applicable rail yard buffer is conservatively applied to the vicinity commuter railway corridor.

The Project Site is located 1,670 feet from this commuter railway corridor; thus , it is located outside the CARB-recommended buffer area for major service and maintenance rail yards. Additionally, CARB recommends a buffer for new sensitive land use siting of 300 feet for any dry -cleaning operation and 50 feet for typical gas dispensin g facilities. The closest dry -cleaning facility and gas station are located 2,780 feet and 1,860 feet away from the Project Site, respectively. The Project Site is therefore located outside of any applicable CARB buffers meant to protect new sensitive land uses from air pollutants. 221
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 22 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

3.0 GREEENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

3.1 Greenhouse Gas Setting
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as GHGs, play a critical role in determining the earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth’s atmosphere from space. A portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth’s surface and a smaller portion of this radiation is reflected back toward space. This absorbed radiation is then emitted from the earth as low -frequency infrared radiation. The frequencies at which bodies emit radiation are proportional to temperature. Because the earth has a much lower temperature than the sun, it emits lower -frequency radiation. Most solar radiation passes through GHGs; however, infrared radiation is absorbed by these gases. As a result, radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is ins tead trapped, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth. Without the greenhouse effect, the earth would not be able to support life as we know it.

Prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are CO 2, methane (CH4), and N2O. Fluorinated gases
also make up a small fraction of the GHGs that contribute to climate change. Fluorinated gases include chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, sulfur hexafluoride, and nitrogen trifluoride; however, it is noted that these gases are not associated with typical land use development. Human-caused emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are believed to be responsible for intensifying the greenhouse effect and leading to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known as global climate change or global warming. More specifically, experts agree that human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming, with global surface temperature reaching 1.1°C above 1850– 1900 in 2011–2020. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2023).

Table 3 -1 describes the primary GHGs attributed to global climate change, including their physical properties, primary sources, and contributions to the greenhouse effect.

Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. CH
4 traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO 2, and N 2O absorbs 298 times more heat per molecule than CO 2. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which weight each gas by its global warming potential. Expressing GHG emissions in CO2e takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted.

Climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and HAPs, which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about one day), GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes (one to several thousand years). GHGs persist in the atmosphere for long enough time periods to be dispersed around the globe. Although the exact lifetime of any particular GHG molecule is dependent on m ultiple variables and cannot be pinpointed, it is understood that more CO
2 is emitted into the atmosphere than is sequestered
by ocean uptake, vegetation, or other forms. Despite the sequestration of CO 2, human- caused climate change is already causing damaging effects, including weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe (IPCC 2023).
222
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 23 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 3-1. Summary of Greenhouse Gases
Greenhouse
Gas Description
CO2
Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless gas. CO2 is emitted in a number of ways, both naturally and through human activities. The largest source of CO2 emissions globally is the combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas in power plants, automobiles, industrial facilities, and other sources.

A number of specialized industrial production processes and product uses such as mineral production, metal production, and the use of petroleum-based products can also lead to CO 2 emissions. The atmospheric lifetime of CO2 is variable because it is so readily exchanged in the atmosphere.1
CH4
Methane is a colorless, odorless gas and is the major component of natural gas, about 87 percent by volume. It is also formed and released to the atmosphere by biological processes occurring in anaerobic environments. Methane is emitted from a variety of both human-related and natural sources. Human-related sources include fossil fuel production, animal husbandry (intestinal fermentation in livestock and manure management), rice cultivation, biomass burning, and waste management. These activities release significant quantities of CH 4 to the atmosphere. Natural
sources of CH4 include wetlands, gas hydrates, permafrost, termites, oceans, freshwater bodies, non-wetland soils, and other sources such as wildfires. The atmospheric lifetime of CH4 is about 12 years.2
N2O
Nitrous oxide is a clear, colorless gas with a slightly sweet odor. Nitrous oxide is produced by both natural and human-related sources. Primary human-related sources of N2O are agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuels, adipic acid production, and nitric acid production. N 2O is also produced naturally
from a wide variety of biological sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120 years.3 Sources: 1USEPA 2016a; 2USEPA 2016b; 3USEPA 2016c
The quantity of GHGs that it takes to ultimately result in climate change is not precisely known; it is sufficient to say the quantity is enormous, and no single project alone would measurably contribute to a noticeable incremental change in the global ave rage temperature or to global, local, or microclimates. As such, GHG impacts to global climate change are inherently cumulative.

3.2 Regulatory Framework

3.2.1 Federal

3.2.1.1 EPA Climate Change Guidance for National Environmental Policy Act Reviews On February 19, 2021, Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland issued Secretarial Order (SO) 3399 to prioritize action on climate change throughout the Department and to restore transparency and integrity in the Department’s decision-making processes. SO 3399 specifies that when considering the impact of GHG emissions from a proposed action, Bureaus/Offices should use appropriate tools, methodologies, and resources available to quantify GHG emissions and compare GHG quantities across alternatives. SO 3399 acknowledges that identifying the interactions between climate change and the environmental impacts of a proposed action in NEPA documents can help decision makers identify opportunities to reduce GHG emissions, improve environmental outcomes, and contribute to protecting communities from the climate crisis. On January 9, 2023, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued the NEPA Guidance on 223
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 24 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Consideration of Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change. This guidance states that NEPA reviews should quantify proposed actions' GHG emissions, convey the GHG emissions in appropriate context , disclose relevant climate and social impacts, and consider alternatives and mitigation measures to avoid or reduce GHG emissions. CEQ encourages agencies to consider mitigation of GHG emissions to the greatest reasonable extent, and ensure that all measures are consistent with national, science based GHG reduction policies established to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Assessment
Currently, there are no thresholds of significance established by the USEPA by which to evaluate p rojects under NEPA . Furthermore , at the federal level, there are no standards or regulations regarding GHG emissions. Notably, t he recent guidance issued by the CEQ encourages thorough GHG analyses, quantification of proposed GHG emissions, disclo sure of potential impacts, and consideration of any relevant GHG reduction measures. Although there are no specific standards or thresholds to compare the Proposed Project GHG emissions to, it is nevertheless imperative to provide information on the Project's GHG implications and provide careful consideration of the GHG reduction measures to facilitate informed decision-making. As such, this evaluation of the Proposed Project’s GHG emissions is provided for disclosure purposes.

3.3.1 Methodology
Emissions were modeled using CalEEMod, version 202 2.1. CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Project construction generated GHG emissions were primarily calculated using CalEEMod model defaults for Solano County. Operational GHG emissions calculations employed information provided by the Project Site Plan, such as the number of residential units and parking spaces.

3.3.2 Impact Analysis

3.3.2.1 Project-Generated Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Construction-related activities that would generate GHG emissions include worker commute trips, haul trucks carrying supplies and materials to and from the Project Site, and off -road construction equipment (e.g., cranes, excavators). Table 3 -2 illustrates the specific GHG emissions that would result from the implementation of the Project. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease.

224
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 25 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 3-2. Project Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions Description CO2e Emissions (Metric Tons/Year)
Construction – Calendar Year One 505
Construction – Calendar Year Two 108
Total 613
Sources: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs Notes: Construction emissions account for the demolition of the existing 51 units on the Project Site that have been or will soon be deemed uninhabitable.

As shown in Table 3-2, the Project would result in the generation of a total of approximately 613 metric tons of CO 2e over the course of construction . Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions will cease. Furthermore, GHG emissions generated by the construction equipment sector have been declining in recent years. For instance, construction equipment engine efficiency has continued to improve year after year. The first federal standards (Tier 1) for new off-road diesel engines were adopted in 1994 for engines over 50 horsepower (hp) and were phased in from 1996 to 2000. In 1996, a Statement of Principles pertaining to off-road diesel engines was signed between the USEPA, CARB, and engine makers (including Caterpillar, Cummins, Deere, Detroit Diesel, Deutz, Isuzu, Komatsu, Kubota, Mitsubishi, Navistar, New Holland, Wis -Con, and Yanmar). On August 27, 1998, the USEPA signed the final r ule reflecting the provisions of the Statement of Principles. The 1998 regulation introduced Tier 1 standards for equipment under 50 hp and increasingly more stringent Tier 2 and Tier 3 standards for all equipment with phase -in schedules from 2000 to 2008. As a result, all off-road, diesel-fueled construction equipment manufactured in 2006 or later has been manufactured to Tier 3 standards. Tier 3 engine standards reduce precursor and subset GHG emissions such as nitrogen oxide by as much as 60 percent. On May 11, 2004, the USEPA signed the final rule introducing Tier 4 emission standards, which were phased in over the period of 2008 -2015.

The Tier 4 standards require that emissions of nitrogen oxide be further reduced by about 90 percent. All off-road, diesel-fueled construction equipment manufactured in 2015 or later will be manufactured to Tier 4 standards. The equipment used in the Project’s implementation would likely reflect the improved engine efficiency trends.

As previously described, the Project would result in approximately 613 metric tons of CO 2e over the course
of the Project’s construction. It is important to acknowledge that GHG emissions have a cumulative impact on global climate change. Presently, climate change has already prompted damaging effects, manifested through extreme weather events and climatic anomalies across the globe, posing considerable risks to vulnerable populations. However, the Proposed Project’s contribution to global climate change is minimal, if not negligible. As such, the Project’s construction GHG emissions would not exert a significant impact on global climate change.

Long-term operational GHG emissions attributable to the Project are identified in Table 3-3. 225
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 26 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 3-3. Operational-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Description CO2e Emissions (Metric Tons/Year)
Mobile 498
Area 1
Energy 115
Water 7
Waste 22
Refrigerants 0
Total Operational Emissions 643
Sources: CalEEMod version 2022.1. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs Notes: Operational emissions account for default daily trips determined by CalEEMod defaults.

As shown in Table 3-3 Project operations would result in the increased generation of 643metric tons of CO2e per year.

As previously described, there are no thresholds of significance specific to GHG emissions established by the USEPA by which to evaluate projects under NEPA. Furthermore, at the federal level, there are no standards or regulations regarding GHG emissions. The local air quality agency regulating the SFBAAB, including the Project Site, is the BAAQMD, the regional air pollution control officer for the basin. The BAAQMD recently approved the BAAQMD 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. These guidelines present a project -level operational threshold of significance for GHG emissions based on adherence to a suite of BAAQMD performance standards for land uses projects directly related to building design, transportation and energy efficiency or compli ance with a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy.

BAAQMD has developed the BAAQMD performance standards for land uses projects based on typical residential and commercial land use projects and typical long -term communitywide planning documents such as general plans and similar long -range development plans. According to the BAAQMD, these performance standards may not be appropriate for other types of projects that do not fit into the mold of a typical residential or commercial project or general plan update (BAA QMD 2023). The BAAQMD states that lead agencies should keep this point in mind when evaluating other types of projects (BAAQMD 2023).

The Proposed Project is an affordable, multistory housing development; it is noted that such development generates less GHG emissions than conventional residential neighborhoods, a primary goal of the BAAQMD Guidelines. For instance, the Project Site is located within a half mile of the Suisun -Fairfield Amtrak stop as well as nine bus stops making alternative transportation methods easily accessible for residents on the Project Site. The Proposed Project is relatively compact, consisting of 96 affordable units and 121 parking spaces on approximately 2.5 acres. These Project factors could help minimize urban sprawl and preserve natural areas, reducing the need for extensive road networks and other infrastructure. The Project is considered “infill development” as it proposes to redevelop a built-out property and enhance the physical design of the urban environment. Under Public Resources Code (PRC) section 21061.3, an “infill site” is defined as a site that “has been previously developed for qualified urban uses.” In turn, a “qualified urban use” is defined, pursuant to PRC section 21072, as “a residential, commercial, or public institutional, transit or transportation passenger facility, or retail use, or any combination of those uses.” According to the USEPA, 226
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 27 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

infill development can reduce development pressure on outlying areas and when it occurs near existing transit infrastructure, employment centers, and other destinations, it can help reduce the amount that people drive, thus improving air quality and reduci ng GHG emissions (USEPA 2014). Redevelopments such as the Project (namely at brownfield sites) produce 32 to 57 percent less emissions per capita relative to conventional developments according to the USEPA ( USEPA no date); this is because the number of da ily vehicle trips and daily vehicle miles traveled associated with the redevelopment tend to be lower compared with development on vacant land. For these reasons, t he Proposed Project would generate less GHG emissions than conventional residential neighborhoods. As such, the Project’s GHG emissions would not exert a significant impact on global climate change.

The Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (IWG) has developed estimates of the social cost of GHGs (SC -GHG) (IWG 2021). The SC -GHG is the monetary value of the net harm to society associated with adding an amount of that GHG to the atmosphere in a given year. In principle, it includes the value of all climate change impacts, including (but not limited to) changes in net agricultural productivity, human health effects, property damage from increased flood risk natural disasters, disruption of energy systems, risk of conflict, environmental migration, and the value of ecosystem services. Discount rates are used to account for the present value of future costs. Using a low discount rate increases the present value of future costs, whereas using a high discount rate decreases the present value of future costs.

Per the recommendation of the IWG, Project GHG emission cost estimates are provided in Table 3-4 for a

2.5 percent discount rate.

227
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 28 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

Table 3-4. Social Cost of Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG Cost per Metric
Ton
Metric Tons Cost
Construction
CO2 / $83 607 $50,381
CH4 / $2,200 0.025 $55
N2O / $30,000 0.015 $450
Total Construction Cost $50,886
Operations
CO2 / $83 614 $50,962
CH4 / $2,200 0.78 $1,716
N2O / $30,000 0.03 $900
Total Annual Operations
Cost $53,578
Lifetime
CO2 19,027 $1,579,241
CH4 23.4 $51,480
N2O 0.9 $27,000
Total Project Lifetime
Cost $1,657,721
Sources: Social Cost of GHG emissions from IWG 2021
Notes: Construction and operations costs based social cost values for 2025. Lifetime costs include construction emissions and 30 years of 2025 operational emissions.

As shown, the Project would result in a SC-GHG of up to $1,657,721 over its lifetime (considered to be 30 years).

The proposed low-income housing Project aims to redevelop a site currently occupied by condemned and soon-to-be condemned housing units. This redevelopment brings several significant benefits that align with broader environmental, social, and economic goals, while also ensuring that the Project's contribution to climate change remains minimal. First, the Project addresses a critical need for affordable housing in the region. By providing 96 units of low-income housing, the Project helps alleviate housing shortages, reduce homelessness, and support economically disadvantaged families. This contributes to social equity and stability within the community. Next, redeveloping condemned housing into modern, energy-efficient units significantly improves the living conditions for residents. This can lead to better health outcomes, reduced utility costs, and an enhanced quality of life for the occupants. The constructio n and operation of the new housing complex could stimulate local economic activity, create jobs, and increase property values in the surrounding area. This revitalization of the community can have long -term positive impacts on the local 228
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 29 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

economy. The Project would transform a blighted area into an operational residential community, contributing to the reduction of urban decay. This redevelopment reduces the likelihood of illegal activities, improves public safety, and fosters a more sustainable urban environment. Modern construction practices and the California B uilding Codes emphasize energy efficiency and sustainability. The new housing units are likely to incorporate energy-efficient appliances, insulation, and HVAC systems, reducing overall energy consumption and associated GHG emissions compared to the older, condemned structures. Lastly, b y focusing on redevelopment within an existing urban area, the P roject avoids contributing to urban sprawl, which is associated with higher GHG emissions due to increased transportation needs and loss of green spaces. Compact development is more sustainable and aligns with smart growth principles.

While the Project would result in some GHG emissions during construction and operation, these emissions are not expected to be substantial when considered in the broader context of regional and global climate change. Several factors support this conclusion. Namely, the scale of the Project means that the overall GHG emissions are relatively modest compared to larger developments or industrial projects. The emissions generated are not likely to significantly contribute to global GHG levels. The benefits of p roviding sustainable, affordable housing outweigh the modest emissions associated with the P roject. By addressing social needs in an environmentally responsible manner, the Project contributes to long-term sustainability goals.

229
Almond Gardens Apartments Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment ECORP Consulting, Inc. 30 August 2024
Almond Gardens Apartment Project 2024-182

4.0 REFERENCES
BAAQMD (Bay Area Air Quality Management District). 2024. Stationary Source Screening Map. _____. 2023. 2022 CEQA Guidelines.

CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2022.1.
_____. 2013. Health Effects. http://www.capcoa.org/health-effects/.

CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2024. Air Quality Data Statistics. http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/index.html.
_____. 2022. State and Federal Area Designation Maps. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm. _____. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.

City of Suisun City. 2021. Code of Ordinances, Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places (12.03.020 – Definitions).
_____. 2015. Volume 2 of Suisun City 2035 General Plan: Chapter 12 – Land Use.

IWG (Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, United States Government). 2021.

Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive Order 13990.

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2023. Climate Change 2023 Synthesis Report – Summary for Policymakers.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2024. Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book).
_____. 2023. De Minimis Tables. https://www.epa.gov/general-conformity/de-minimis-tables _____. 2016a. Climate Change – Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Carbon Dioxide. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/co2.html.
_____. 2016b. Methane. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html. _____. 2016c. Nitrous Oxide. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/n2o.html. _____. 2014. Smart Growth and Economic Success: Investing in Infill Development. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2014-06/documents/developer-infill-paper-508b.pdf. _____. 1994. Guidance on the General Conformity Regulations. ——. No Date. Brownfields Program Economic and Environmental Program. 230

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – CalEEMod Output File for Air Quality Emissions and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

231

ATTACHMENT A
CalEEMod Output File for Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

232
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
1 / 54
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report
Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
233
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
2 / 54

3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated

3.13. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated

3.15. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated

3.17. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
234
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
3 / 54

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
235
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
4 / 54

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation
236
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
5 / 54

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
237
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
6 / 54

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data
238
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
7 / 54

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Almond Gardens Proposed
Construction Start Date 3/1/2025
Operational Y ear 2026
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 5.70
Precipitation (days) 39.2
Location 38.24064931917306, -122.03569848536112
County Solano-San Francisco
City Suisun City
Air District Bay Area AQMD
Air Basin San Francisco Bay Area
TAZ 877
EDFZ 4
Electric Utility Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Gas Utility Pacific Gas & Electric
App Version 2022.1.1.26

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Apartments Mid
Rise

96.0 Dwelling Unit 2.53 94,607 0.00 — 271 —
239
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
8 / 54
Parking Lot 121 Space 1.09 0.00 0.00 — — —
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

3.19 1000sqft 0.07 0.00 0.00 — — —
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

5.30 1000sqft 0.12 0.00 3,003 — — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 8.26 31.7 30.9 0.05 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 5,452 5,452 0.22 0.11 4.52 5,473 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 8.24 31.7 30.8 0.05 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 6,455 6,455 0.27 0.50 0.18 6,611 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.36 11.5 15.5 0.02 0.46 1.15 1.61 0.43 0.37 0.80 — 3,020 3,020 0.12 0.08 1.16 3,048 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.80 2.11 2.82 < 0.005 0.08 0.21 0.29 0.08 0.07 0.15 — 500 500 0.02 0.01 0.19 505

2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 240 Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
9 / 54
Y ear ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 8.26 31.7 30.9 0.05 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 5,452 5,452 0.22 0.11 4.52 5,473 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 8.24 31.7 30.8 0.05 1.37 19.8 21.2 1.26 10.1 11.4 — 6,455 6,455 0.27 0.50 0.18 6,611 2026 8.10 17.6 26.5 0.04 0.67 0.92 1.59 0.61 0.22 0.83 — 4,986 4,986 0.19 0.11 0.11 5,023 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 4.36 11.5 15.5 0.02 0.46 1.15 1.61 0.43 0.37 0.80 — 3,020 3,020 0.12 0.08 1.16 3,048 2026 1.05 2.27 3.41 0.01 0.09 0.12 0.20 0.08 0.03 0.11 — 645 645 0.02 0.01 0.23 650 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2025 0.80 2.11 2.82 < 0.005 0.08 0.21 0.29 0.08 0.07 0.15 — 500 500 0.02 0.01 0.19 505 2026 0.19 0.41 0.62 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.02 — 107 107 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 108

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 5.03 1.94 19.3 0.03 0.05 2.75 2.81 0.05 0.70 0.75 44.8 3,985 4,029 4.74 0.17 12.6 4,212 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.43 2.15 13.9 0.03 0.05 2.75 2.80 0.05 0.70 0.75 44.8 3,782 3,826 4.76 0.19 0.99 4,002 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
241
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
10 / 54
Unmit. 4.55 1.97 15.1 0.03 0.05 2.55 2.60 0.05 0.65 0.70 44.8 3,663 3,707 4.74 0.17 5.58 3,883 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.83 0.36 2.75 0.01 0.01 0.47 0.47 0.01 0.12 0.13 7.42 606 614 0.78 0.03 0.92 643

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.13 1.55 13.8 0.03 0.02 2.75 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 — 3,268 3,268 0.15 0.15 12.0 3,328 Area 2.88 0.05 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 14.6 14.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.6 Energy 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 690 690 0.08 0.01 — 694 Water — — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.4 19.0 0.67 0.02 — 40.6 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 5.03 1.94 19.3 0.03 0.05 2.75 2.81 0.05 0.70 0.75 44.8 3,985 4,029 4.74 0.17 12.6 4,212 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 2.01 1.82 13.7 0.03 0.02 2.75 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 — 3,079 3,079 0.18 0.17 0.31 3,133 Area 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Energy 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 690 690 0.08 0.01 — 694 Water — — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.4 19.0 0.67 0.02 — 40.6 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 4.43 2.15 13.9 0.03 0.05 2.75 2.80 0.05 0.70 0.75 44.8 3,782 3,826 4.76 0.19 0.99 4,002 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
242
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
11 / 54
Mobile 1.89 1.61 12.3 0.03 0.02 2.55 2.57 0.02 0.65 0.67 — 2,953 2,953 0.16 0.15 4.91 3,007 Area 2.64 0.03 2.68 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 7.18 7.18 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.21 Energy 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 690 690 0.08 0.01 — 694 Water — — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.4 19.0 0.67 0.02 — 40.6 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 4.55 1.97 15.1 0.03 0.05 2.55 2.60 0.05 0.65 0.70 44.8 3,663 3,707 4.74 0.17 5.58 3,883 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.35 0.29 2.24 0.01 < 0.005 0.47 0.47 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 — 489 489 0.03 0.02 0.81 498 Area 0.48 < 0.005 0.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 1.19 1.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.19 Energy < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 114 114 0.01 < 0.005 — 115 Water — — — — — — — — — — 1.08 2.06 3.14 0.11 < 0.005 — 6.72 Waste — — — — — — — — — — 6.34 0.00 6.34 0.63 0.00 — 22.2 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11 0.11
Total 0.83 0.36 2.75 0.01 0.01 0.47 0.47 0.01 0.12 0.13 7.42 606 614 0.78 0.03 0.92 643

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.40 22.2 19.9 0.03 0.92 — 0.92 0.84 — 0.84 — 3,425 3,425 0.14 0.03 — 3,437 243
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
12 / 54
Demoliti — — — — — 3.97 3.97 — 0.60 0.60 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 1.22 1.09 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 188 188 0.01 < 0.005 — 188 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 0.22 0.22 — 0.03 0.03 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.22 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 31.1 31.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 31.2 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 124 124 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 126 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.06 3.79 1.27 0.02 0.05 0.76 0.82 0.05 0.21 0.26 — 2,906 2,906 0.13 0.47 0.17 3,049 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.88 6.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.99 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.20 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 159 159 0.01 0.03 0.15 167 244
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
13 / 54
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.14 1.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.16 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 0.04 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 26.4 26.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 27.7

3.3. Site Preparation (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

3.31 31.6 30.2 0.05 1.37 — 1.37 1.26 — 1.26 — 5,295 5,295 0.21 0.04 — 5,314 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 19.7 19.7 — 10.1 10.1 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
245
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
14 / 54

72.8—< 0.005< 0.00572.572.5—0.02—0.020.02—0.02< 0.0050.410.430.05Off-Road Equipment
Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.27 0.27 — 0.14 0.14 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.08 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 12.0 12.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.1 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.05 0.05 — 0.03 0.03 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.04 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 157 157 < 0.005 0.01 0.64 159 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 145 145 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 147 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.01 2.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.04 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 246
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
15 / 54
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.33 0.33 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.34 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.5. Grading (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.74 16.3 17.9 0.03 0.72 — 0.72 0.66 — 0.66 — 2,959 2,959 0.12 0.02 — 2,970 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 7.08 7.08 — 3.42 3.42 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.36 0.39 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.01 — 0.01 — 64.9 64.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 65.1 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.16 0.16 — 0.08 0.08 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 247
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
16 / 54
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.07 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 10.7 10.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.8 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.03 0.03 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.04 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 134 134 < 0.005 0.01 0.55 136 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.75 2.75 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 2.79 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.46 0.46 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e248 Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
17 / 54
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.13 10.4 13.0 0.02 0.43 — 0.43 0.40 — 0.40 — 2,398 2,398 0.10 0.02 — 2,406 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.57 5.25 6.56 0.01 0.22 — 0.22 0.20 — 0.20 — 1,206 1,206 0.05 0.01 — 1,210 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.10 0.96 1.20 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.04 — 0.04 — 200 200 0.01 < 0.005 — 200 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.27 0.17 2.80 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 619 619 0.01 0.02 2.54 629 Vendor 0.01 0.36 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 274 274 0.01 0.04 0.74 287 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 249
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
18 / 54
—————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.26 0.24 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 572 572 0.02 0.02 0.07 580 Vendor 0.01 0.38 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 274 274 0.01 0.04 0.02 287 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.13 0.11 1.21 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.07 0.07 — 291 291 0.01 0.01 0.55 296 Vendor < 0.005 0.19 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 138 138 < 0.005 0.02 0.16 144 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 48.2 48.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 48.9 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 22.8 22.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 23.9 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.07 9.85 13.0 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
250
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
19 / 54
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 1.27 1.67 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.04 — 0.04 — 310 310 0.01 < 0.005 — 311 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.23 0.31 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 51.3 51.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 51.4 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.23 0.22 2.34 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.13 0.13 — 561 561 0.02 0.02 0.06 569 Vendor 0.01 0.36 0.14 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 0.08 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 — 270 270 0.01 0.04 0.02 282 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.03 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 73.3 73.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.13 74.4 Vendor < 0.005 0.05 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.8 34.8 < 0.005 0.01 0.04 36.4 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12.1 12.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 12.3 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.77 5.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.03 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.11. Paving (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) 251
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
20 / 54
Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.71 6.52 8.84 0.01 0.29 — 0.29 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,351 1,351 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.71 6.52 8.84 0.01 0.29 — 0.29 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,351 1,351 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.36 3.28 4.45 0.01 0.14 — 0.14 0.13 — 0.13 — 679 679 0.03 0.01 — 682 Paving 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.07 0.60 0.81 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.02 — 0.02 — 112 112 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 113 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
252
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
21 / 54
—————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Worker 0.08 0.05 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 179 179 < 0.005 0.01 0.74 182 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.07 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 166 166 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 168 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 84.3 84.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.16 85.5 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 13.9 13.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.2 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.13. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
253
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
22 / 54
—————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Off-Road
Equipment

0.68 6.23 8.81 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 1,350 1,350 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving 0.01 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.09 0.81 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 174 174 0.01 < 0.005 — 175 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.15 0.21 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 28.9 28.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.0 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.06 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.04 0.04 — 162 162 < 0.005 0.01 0.02 165 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 21.2 21.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 21.5254 Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
23 / 54
Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.51 3.51 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.57 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.15. Architectural Coating (2025) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings

5.86 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.13 0.88 1.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings

5.86 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
255
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
24 / 54
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.44 0.57 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 67.2 67.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 67.4 Architect
ural
Coatings

2.95 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.08 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 11.1 11.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.2 Architect
ural
Coatings

0.54 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.03 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 124 124 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.51 126 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.05 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 114 114 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 116 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.02 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 58.2 58.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 59.1 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 256
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
25 / 54
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.64 9.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 9.78 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.17. Architectural Coating (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.12 0.86 1.13 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings

5.86 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.02 0.11 0.15 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 17.2 17.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.3 Architect
ural
Coatings

0.76 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
257
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
26 / 54

2.86—< 0.005< 0.0052.852.85—< 0.005—< 0.005< 0.005—< 0.005< 0.0050.030.02< 0.005Off-Road Equipment
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.14 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 112 112 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 114 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.7 14.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 14.9 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.43 2.43 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 2.47 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
258
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
27 / 54
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

2.13 1.55 13.8 0.03 0.02 2.75 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 — 3,268 3,268 0.15 0.15 12.0 3,328 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 2.13 1.55 13.8 0.03 0.02 2.75 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 — 3,268 3,268 0.15 0.15 12.0 3,328 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

2.01 1.82 13.7 0.03 0.02 2.75 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 — 3,079 3,079 0.18 0.17 0.31 3,133 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 2.01 1.82 13.7 0.03 0.02 2.75 2.78 0.02 0.70 0.72 — 3,079 3,079 0.18 0.17 0.31 3,133 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
259
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
28 / 54
4980.810.020.03489489—0.120.12< 0.0050.470.47< 0.0050.012.240.290.35Apartme nts
Mid Rise
Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.35 0.29 2.24 0.01 < 0.005 0.47 0.47 < 0.005 0.12 0.12 — 489 489 0.03 0.02 0.81 498

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 242 242 0.04 < 0.005 — 245
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 23.2 23.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 266 266 0.04 0.01 — 268
260
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
29 / 54
—————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 242 242 0.04 < 0.005 — 245
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 23.2 23.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.5
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 266 266 0.04 0.01 — 268
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — 40.1 40.1 0.01 < 0.005 — 40.5
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.84 3.84 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.88
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 44.0 44.0 0.01 < 0.005 — 44.4

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 261
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
30 / 54
—————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 424 424 0.04 < 0.005 — 426 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 424 424 0.04 < 0.005 — 426 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise

0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 424 424 0.04 < 0.005 — 426 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.02 0.33 0.14 < 0.005 0.03 — 0.03 0.03 — 0.03 — 424 424 0.04 < 0.005 — 426 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
< 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 70.3 70.3 0.01 < 0.005 — 70.5 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 262
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
31 / 54
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 0.06 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 70.3 70.3 0.01 < 0.005 — 70.5

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consum
er
Products

2.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.37 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.48 0.05 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 14.6 14.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.6 Total 2.88 0.05 5.44 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 14.6 14.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 14.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consum
er
Products

2.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
263
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
32 / 54
Architect
Coatings

0.37 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Hearths 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Consum
er
Products

0.37 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.07 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.04 < 0.005 0.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.19 1.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.19 Total 0.48 < 0.005 0.49 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 0.00 1.19 1.19 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.19

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.3 18.9 0.67 0.02 — 40.5
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
264
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
33 / 54
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.4 19.0 0.67 0.02 — 40.6 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.3 18.9 0.67 0.02 — 40.5
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.10 0.10 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.10 Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.53 12.4 19.0 0.67 0.02 — 40.6 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 1.08 2.04 3.12 0.11 < 0.005 — 6.70
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.02 Total — — — — — — — — — — 1.08 2.06 3.14 0.11 < 0.005 — 6.72

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
265
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
34 / 54

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 38.3 0.00 38.3 3.83 0.00 — 134 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
266
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
35 / 54
Apartme
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — 6.34 0.00 6.34 0.63 0.00 — 22.2
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Other
Non-Asphalt
Surfaces
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 6.34 0.00 6.34 0.63 0.00 — 22.2

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Apartme
nts
Mid Rise
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
267
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
36 / 54

0.110.11———————————————Apartme
nts
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11 0.11

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 268
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
37 / 54
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e 269
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
38 / 54
—————————————————Daily,
Summer
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
270
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
39 / 54
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
271
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
40 / 54

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 3/1/2025 3/29/2025 5.00 20.0 —
Site Preparation Site Preparation 3/30/2025 4/6/2025 5.00 5.00 — Grading Grading 4/7/2025 4/18/2025 5.00 8.00 —
Building Construction Building Construction 4/19/2025 3/7/2026 5.00 230 — Paving Paving 4/19/2025 3/7/2026 5.00 230 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 4/19/2025 3/7/2026 5.00 230 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 36.0 0.38 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 367 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 4.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 36.0 0.38
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.00 8.00 82.0 0.20 272 Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
41 / 54
Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 14.0 0.74 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 46.0 0.45 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 81.0 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 89.0 0.36 Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 36.0 0.38
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 1.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 37.0 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 41.3 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Site Preparation — — — —
Site Preparation Worker 17.5 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Site Preparation Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Site Preparation Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Site Preparation Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 15.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
273
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
42 / 54
Grading Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 69.1 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 10.3 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving — — — —
Paving Worker 20.0 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating — — — —
Architectural Coating Worker 13.8 11.7 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Architectural Coating Vendor — 8.40 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 191,579 63,860 0.00 0.00 3,356
274
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
43 / 54

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic
Y ards)
Material Exported (Cubic
Y ards)
Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of
Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,300 —
Site Preparation — — 7.50 0.00 —
Grading — — 8.00 0.00 —
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.28

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Apartments Mid Rise — 0%
Parking Lot 1.09 100%
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.07 100%
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.12 0%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2025 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005
2026 0.00 204 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
275
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
44 / 54

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear Apartments Mid
Rise
522 471 393 181,207 3,910 3,529 2,939 1,356,558
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt
Surfaces

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
Hearth Type Unmitigated (number)
Apartments Mid Rise —
Wood Fireplaces 0
Gas Fireplaces 0
Propane Fireplaces 0
Electric Fireplaces 0
No Fireplaces 0
Conventional Wood Stoves 0
Catalytic Wood Stoves 0
Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0
Pellet Wood Stoves 0

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
276
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
45 / 54
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq
ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
191579.175 63,860 0.00 0.00 3,356

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 180

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Apartments Mid Rise 433,710 204 0.0330 0.0040 1,324,079 Parking Lot 41,555 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 204 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Apartments Mid Rise 3,409,042 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 36,721
277
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
46 / 54

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Apartments Mid Rise 71.1 —
Parking Lot 0.00 —
Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 —

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Apartments Mid Rise Average room A/C &
Other residential A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 2.50 2.50 10.0
Apartments Mid Rise Household
refrigerators and/or
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.12 0.60 0.00 1.00

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor 278
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
47 / 54

5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)

5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100. 279
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
48 / 54
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 19.0 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 4.95 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.72 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 0 0 N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
280
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
49 / 54

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Precipitation 1 1 1 2
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 22.3
AQ-PM 16.1
AQ-DPM 5.03
Drinking Water 58.6
Lead Risk Housing 26.6
281
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
50 / 54
Pesticides 22.4
Toxic Releases 62.6
Traffic 38.0
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 73.4
Groundwater 90.2
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 98.5
Impaired Water Bodies 96.3
Solid Waste 97.8
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 95.5
Cardio-vascular 88.0
Low Birth Weights 32.3
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 54.1
Housing 26.2
Linguistic 14.9
Poverty 41.2
Unemployment 35.0

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 65.35352239
Employed 24.27819838
Median HI 66.68805338
Education —
282
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
51 / 54
Bachelor's or higher 54.3308097
High school enrollment 25.92069806
Preschool enrollment 7.686385218
Transportation —
Auto Access 41.51161299
Active commuting 39.58680867
Social —
2-parent households 19.20954703
Voting 51.59758758
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 65.36635442
Park access 59.93840626
Retail density 6.685486975
Supermarket access 37.4566919
Tree canopy 60.69549596
Housing —
Homeownership 47.45284229
Housing habitability 59.66893366
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 65.31502631 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 51.67457975
Uncrowded housing 44.45014757
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 57.24368023
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 7.7
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
283
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
52 / 54
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 65.7
Cognitively Disabled 72.6
Physically Disabled 96.1
Heart Attack ER Admissions 17.8
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 61.6
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 12.3
Children 58.1
Elderly 66.9
English Speaking 78.5
Foreign-born 55.4
Outdoor Workers 47.4
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 39.8
Traffic Density 34.4
284
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
53 / 54
Traffic Access 46.2
Other Indices —
Hardship 47.8
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 48.4

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 67.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 48.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Land Use Building square footage updated to match site plan. Other asphalt surfaces account for the two picnic areas, sidewalks, and the play area. Other non-asphalt surfaces account for the bio retention areas and landscaping for the whole project site. 285
Almond Gardens Proposed Detailed Report, 8/19/2024
54 / 54
Operations: Hearths Site plans of units do not include fireplaces or wood burning stoves.

Construction: Construction Phases Reasonable to assume that paving and architectural coating overlap with building construction and happen simultaneously.
286

Attachment 4 – IPaC Resource List

287
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly aected by activities in the project area.

However, determining the likelihood and extent of eects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional site-specic (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-specic (e.g., magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.

Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS oce(s) with jurisdiction in the dened project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.

Location
Solano County, California
Local oce
Sacramento Fish And Wildlife Oce
 (916) 414-6600
 (916) 414-6713
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 1/20288 Federal Building
2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605
Sacramento, CA 95825-1846
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 2/20289 Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level impacts.

The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional areas of inuence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if the species could be indirectly aected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a sh population even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential eects to species, additional site-specic and project-specic information is often required.

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from the local oce and a species list which fullls this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an ocial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld oce directly.

For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request an ocial species list by doing the following:

1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.

2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.

3. Log in (if directed to do so).

4. Provide a name and description for your project.

5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.

Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries).

Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.

1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ). 1 2
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 3/20290

2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an oce of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.

The following species are potentially aected by activities in this location:

Mammals
Birds
Reptiles
Amphibians

NAME STATUS
Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse Reithrodontomys raviventris
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/613
Endangered

NAME STATUS
California Least Tern Sternula antillarum browni
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8104
Endangered
California Ridgway''s Rail Rallus obsoletus obsoletus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4240
Endangered

NAME STATUS
Northwestern Pond Turtle Actinemys marmorata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1111
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
California Red-legged Frog Rana draytonii
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2891
Threatened
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 4/20291 Insects
Crustaceans
Flowering Plants
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
Western Spadefoot Spea hammondii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5425
Proposed Threatened

NAME STATUS
Monarch Buttery Danaus plexippus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9743
Candidate

NAME STATUS
Conservancy Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta conservatio
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8246
Endangered
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened

NAME STATUS
Contra Costa Goldelds Lasthenia conjugens
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7058
Endangered
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 5/20292 Critical habitats
Potential eects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species themselves.

There are no critical habitats at this location.

You are still required to determine if your project(s) may have eects on all above listed species.

Bald & Golden Eagles
Santa Cruz Tarplant Holocarpha macradenia
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6832
Threatened
Soft Bird's-beak Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8541
Endangered
Suisun Thistle Cirsium hydrophilum var. hydrophilum
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species.Your location does not overlap the critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2369
Endangered
Bald and golden eagles are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to bald or golden eagles, or their habitats, should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below.

Specically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".

Additional information can be found using the following links:
1 2
3 8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 6/20293 There are likely bald eagles present in your project area. For additional information on bald eagles, refer to Bald Eagle Nesting and Sensitivity to Human Activity For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING SEASON
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ()
Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take- migratory-birds
Nationwide conservation measures for birds
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/les/documents/nationwide-standard-conservation- measures.pdf
Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and- golden-eagles-may-occur-project-action
NAME
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 7/20294 no data survey eort breeding season probability of presence Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4- week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey eort (see below) can be used to establish a level of condence in the presence score. One can have higher condence in the presence score if the corresponding survey eort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.

3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.

Survey Eort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.

To see a bar's survey eort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The exception to this is areas o the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse. 8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 8/20295

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
What does IPaC use to generate the potential presence of bald and golden eagles in my specied location?
The potential for eagle presence is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply). To see a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs of bald and golden eagles in my specied location?
The M igratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project intersects, and that have been identied as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to oshore activities or development.

Again, the M igratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.

It is not representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your project area, please visit the Rapid Avian Information Locator (RAIL) Tool.

What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur. Please contact your local Fish and Wildlife Service Field Oce if you have questions.

Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
1 2
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 9/20296 The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of every bird you may nd in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found below.

For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, see the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY below to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.

BREEDING SEASON
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate conservation measures, as described in the links below.

Specically, please review the "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles".

1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.

2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.

Additional information can be found using the following links:

Eagle Management https://www.fws.gov/program/eagle-management Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-and-minimizing-incidental-take- migratory-birds
Nationwide conservation measures for birds https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/les/ documents/nationwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf Supplemental Information for Migratory Birds and Eagles in IPaC https://www.fws.gov/media/supplemental-information-migratory-birds-and-bald-and- golden-eagles-may-occur-project-action
3 NAME
Allen's Hummingbird Selasphorus sasin
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9637
Breeds Feb 1 to Jul 15
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 10/20297 Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Belding's Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis
beldingi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8
Breeds Apr 1 to Aug 15
Bullock's Oriole Icterus bullockii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Breeds Mar 21 to Jul 25
California Gull Larus californicus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 1 to Jul 31
California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jan 1 to Jul 31
Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 11/20298 Northern Harrier Circus hudsonius
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8350
Breeds Apr 1 to Sep 15
Nuttall's Woodpecker Dryobates nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Olive-sided Flycatcher Contopus cooperi
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3914
Breeds May 20 to Aug 31
Santa Barbara Song Sparrow M elospiza melodia graminea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5513
Breeds Mar 1 to Sep 5
Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Breeds elsewhere
Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Western Grebe aechmophorus occidentalis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6743
Breeds Jun 1 to Aug 31
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 12/20299 Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read "Supplemental Information on Migratory Birds and Eagles", specically the FAQ section titled "Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.

Probability of Presence ()
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4- week months.) A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey eort (see below) can be used to establish a level of condence in the presence score. One can have higher condence in the presence score if the corresponding survey eort is also high.

How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:

1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Western Gull Larus occidentalis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Apr 21 to Aug 25
Western Screech-owl M egascops kennicottii cardonensis
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA Breeds Mar 1 to Jun 30
Willet Tringa semipalmata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds elsewhere
Wrentit Chamaea fasciata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.

Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Yellow-billed Magpie Pica nuttalli
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9726
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 13/20300 no data survey eort breeding season probability of presence Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.

To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

To see a bar's survey eort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.

No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Allen's
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Belding's
Savannah
Sparrow

BCC - BCR
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 14/20301 Bullock's Oriole

BCC - BCR
California Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
California
Thrasher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Clark's Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Common
Yellowthroat

BCC - BCR
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable
Northern
Harrier

BCC - BCR
Nuttall's
Woodpecker

BCC - BCR
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON)

SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Olive-sided
Flycatcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Santa Barbara
Song Sparrow

BCC - BCR
Short-billed
Dowitcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Tricolored
Blackbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Western Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 15/20302 Western Gull
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Western
Screech-owl

BCC - BCR
Willet
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Wrentit
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Yellow-billed
Magpie
BCC Rangewide
(CON)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Nationwide Conservation M easures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure.

To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.

What does IPaC use to generate the list of migratory birds that potentially occur in my specied location?
The M igratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may warrant special attention in your project location.

Again, the M igratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area.

What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location?
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 16/20303 The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets.

Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.

How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering or migrating in my area? To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round), you may query your location using the RAIL Tool and look at the range maps provided for birds in your area at the bottom of the proles provided for each bird in your results. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe specied. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.

What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
M igratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:

1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacic Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);

2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA; and

3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in oshore areas from certain types of development or activities (e.g. oshore energy development or longline shing).

Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, eorts should be made, in particular, to avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.

Details about birds that are potentially aected by oshore projects For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also oers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical M odeling and Predictive M apping of M arine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.

Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including migration. M odels relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring.

What if I have eagles on my list?
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 17/20304 If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should such impacts occur.

Proper Interpretation and Use of Your M igratory Bird Report The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specied location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint.

On the graphs provided, please also look carefully at the survey eort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey eort is the key component. If the survey eort is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey eort bar or no data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there, and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to conrm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be conrmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.

Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or concerns.

There are no refuge lands at this location.

Fish hatcheries
There are no sh hatcheries at this location.
8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 18/20305 Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI)
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.

For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

This location did not intersect any wetlands mapped by NWI.

NOTE: This initial screening does not replace an on-site delineation to determine whether wetlands occur. Additional information on the NWI data is provided below.

Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are identied based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classication established through image analysis.

The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verication work conducted. M etadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.

Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be occasional dierences in polygon boundaries or classications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on site.

Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tubercid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.

Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may dene and describe wetlands in a dierent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to dene the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. 8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 19/20306 Persons intending to engage in activities involving modications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate Federal, state, or local agencies concerning specied agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may aect such activities. 8/16/24, 11:58 AM IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/location/D3PXUPLN4JERBDDK2RBDJQQBHE/resources#migratory-birds 20/20307 Attachment 5 – Historical Structures Evaluation
This report is confidential and is not included for pub lic distribution.. 308

Attachment 6 – Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project

309
Noise Impact Assessment
for the
Almond Gardens Apartments Project
Suisun City, California

Prepared For:

Harbor Park, LLC
9700 Village Center Drive, Suite 120
Granite Bay, CA 95746

Prepared By:

55 Hanover Lane, Suite A
Chico, CA 95973
August 2024
310
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project i August 2024
2024-182

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Location and Description.................................................................................................................. 1

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION ANALYSIS ..................................................... 2

2.1 Fundamentals of Noise and Environmental Sound ............................................................................... 2

2.1.1 Addition of Decibels .......................................................................................................................... 2

2.1.2 Sound Propagation and Attenuation ......................................................................................... 4

2.1.3 Noise Descriptors ............................................................................................................................... 5

2.1.4 Human Response to Noise ............................................................................................................. 7

2.1.5 Effects of Noise on People .............................................................................................................. 8

2.1.5.1 Hearing Loss ......................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.5.2 Annoyance ............................................................................................................................................ 8

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE SETTING .......................................................................................................... 9

3.1 Noise Sensitive Land Uses ............................................................................................................................... 9

3.1.1 Existing Ambient Noise Environment ......................................................................................... 9

3.1.2 Existing Ambient Noise Measurements..................................................................................... 9

4.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ......................................................................................................................................... 11

4.1 Federal .................................................................................................................................................................. 11

4.1.1 HUD Noise Standards .................................................................................................................... 11

4.1. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health ...................................................... 11

5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 13

5.1 Thresholds of Significance and Methodology ...................................................................................... 13

5.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 13

5.2.1 Are There Potential Noise Generators in the Vicinity of the Project Site? ................ 13

6.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................................ 18

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1. Common Acoustical Descriptors............................................................................................................................... 6 Table 3-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements ............................................................................................................ 10 Table 4-1. HUD Site Acceptability Standards ......................................................................................................................... 11 Table 5-1. Modeled Roadway Noise .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Table 5-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels at Nearest Receptors ............................................................ 166

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Common Noise Levels ................................................................................................................................................. 3 311
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project ii August 2024
2024-182

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Baseline (Existing) Noise Measurements – Project Site and Vicinity Attachment B- Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) Outputs –Traffic Noise Attachment C- Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model Outputs – Project Construction

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
City Suisun City
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
dB Decibel
dBA Decibel is A-weighted
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HUD Housing and Urban Development
Hz Hertz
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
Ldn Day-night average sound level
Leq Measure of ambient noise
Lmax The maximum A-weighted noise level during the
measurement period.

Lmin The minimum A-weighted noise level during the
measurement period.

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Project Almond Gardens Apartments Project
RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model
SR State Route
STC Sound Transmission Class

312
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 1 August 2024
2024-182

1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of a Noise Impact Assessment completed for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project (Project), which proposes the construction of 96 affordable family apartments in Suisun City, California. The purpose of this report is to estimate the noise exposure on the Project S ite and determine if noise levels fall within the acceptable noise zone as defined by the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) noise standards (Quiet Communities Act of 1978; 24 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 51 Subpart B).

1.1 Project Location and Description
The Project Site is located in Suisun City (City) at 707 - 815 Almond Street on 2.53 acres. It is surrounded by residential complexes in all directions. The Project Site currently accommodates 13 condemned apartment buildings and associated parking, all of which are proposed for demolition. Specifically, there are currently 13 multi-unit apartment buildings consisting of 51 individual units total on the site. The buildings have been deemed uninhabitable or soon-to-be uninhabitable by the City and need to be demolished before new construction can commence.

The Project is proposing the construction of 96 affordable housing units for low- income families plus one manager unit for on- site property management. The Project will target low -income families earning 30 percent to 50 percent of the area median income. The unit mix includes 58 two -bedroom units, 30 three - bedroom units and 10 four -bedroom units with ample community gathering space and outdoor recreational amenities.

313
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 2 August 2024
2024-182

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE AND GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION ANALYSIS

2.1 Fundamentals of Noise and Environmental Sound

2.1.1 Addition of Decibels
The decibel (dB) scale is logarithmic, not linear, and therefore sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. Two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A -weighted (dBA), an increase of 10 dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70 -dBA sound is half as loud as an 80 -dBA sound and twice as loud as a 60 -dBA sound. When two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudne ss, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be three dB higher than one source under the same conditions (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018). For example, a 65 -dB source of sound, such as a truck, when joined by another 65 dB source results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB (i.e., doubling the source strength increases the sound pressure by three dB). Under the decibel scale, three sources of equal loudness together would produce an increase of five dB.

Typical noise levels associated with common noise sources are depicted in Figure 2 -1. Common Noise Levels.

314
Source: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2020a Figure 2-1. Common Noise Levels
2024-182 Almond Gardens Apartments Project
315
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 4 August 2024
2024-182

2.1.2 Sound Propagation and Attenuation
Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks and airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a sp herical pattern, and the sound level decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB (dBA) for each doubling of distance from a stationary or point source (FHWA 2017). Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of approximately 3 dBA for each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway, depending on ground surface characteristics (Federal Highway Administration [F HWA] 2017). No excess attenuation is assumed for hard surfaces like a parking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such as soft dirt or grass, can absorb sound, so an excess ground-attenuation value of 1.5 dBA per doubling of distance is normally assumed . For line sources, an overall attenuation rate of three dB per doubling of distance is assumed (FHWA 2011).

Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; generally, a single row of detached buildings between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about five dBA (FHWA 2006), while a solid wall or berm generally reduces noise levels by 10 to 20 dBA (FHWA 2011). However, noise barriers or enclosures specifically designed to reduce site-specific construction noise can provide a sound reduction of 35 dBA or greater (Western Electro -Acoustic Laboratory, Inc. 20 21). To achieve the most potent noise - reducing effect, a noise enclosure/barrier must physically fit in the available space, must completely break the “line of sight” between the noise source and the receptors, must be free of degrading holes or gaps, and must not be flanked by nearby reflective surfaces. Noise barriers must be sizable enough to cover the entire noise source and extend lengthwise and vertically as far as feasibly possible to be most effective. The limiting factor for a noise barrier is not the component of noise transmitted through the material, but rather the amount of noise flanking around and over the barrier. In general, barriers contribute to decreasing noise levels only when the structure breaks the "line of sight" between the source and the receiver.

The manner in which older homes in California were constructed generally provides a reduction of exterior- to-interior noise levels of about 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows (Caltrans 2002). The exterior -to-interior reduction of newer residential units is g enerally 30 dBA or more ( Harris Miller, Miller & Hanson Inc. 2006).

Generally, in exterior noise environments ranging from 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) to 65 dBA CNEL, interior noise levels can typically be maintained below 45 dBA, a typical residential interior noise standard, with the incorporation of an adequate forced air mechanical ventilation system in each residential building, and standard thermal-pane residential windows/doors with a minimum rating of Sound Transmission Class (STC) 28. (STC is an integer rating of how well a building partition attenuates airborne sound. In the U.S., it is widely used to rate interior partitions, ceilings, floors, doors, windows, and exterior wall configurations). In exterior noise environments of 65 dBA CNEL or greater, a combination of forced-air mechanical ventilation and sound-rated construction methods is often required to meet the interior noise level limit. Attaining the necessary noise reduction from exterior to interior spaces is readily ach ievable in noise environments less than 75 dBA CNEL with proper wall construction techniques following California Building Code methods, the selections of proper windows and doors, and the incorporation of forced -air mechanical ventilation systems.
316
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 5 August 2024
2024-182

2.1.3 Noise Descriptors
The decibel scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community noise on people. Because environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. The noise descriptors most often encountered when dealing with traffic, community, and environmental noise include the average hourly noise level (in L
eq) and the average daily noise levels/community noise equivalent level (in Ldn/CNEL). The L eq is a measure of ambient noise, while the L dn and CNEL are measures of community noise. Each is applicable to this analysis and defined as follows:
 Equivalent Noise Level (Leq) is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the L eq of a time -varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.  Day-Night Average (Ldn) is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10-dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24 -hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn.
 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a 24 -hour average L eq with a 5 -dBA weighting during the hours of 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and a 10-dBA weighting added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively.

Table 2-1 provides a list of other common acoustical descriptors.

317
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 6 August 2024
2024-182

Table 2-1. Common Acoustical Descriptors
Descriptor Definition
Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.

Sound Pressure
Level
Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micropascals (or 20 micronewtons per square meter), where 1 pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 micropascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.

Frequency, Hertz
(Hz)
The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sounds are below 20 Hz and ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.

A-Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A- weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high- frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.

Equivalent Noise
Level, Leq
The average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.

Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.

Day/Night Noise
Level, Ldn or DNL
A 24-hour average Leq with a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ldn.

Community Noise
Equivalent Level,
CNEL
A 24-hour average Leq with a 5 dBA “weighting” during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.

Ambient Noise
Level
The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Intrusive That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends on its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content, as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.

Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.
318
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 7 August 2024
2024-182

The A-weighted decibel sound level scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events.

The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about ±1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends on the distance between the receptor and the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about ±1 to 2 dBA.

2.1.4 Human Response to Noise
The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well- being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest noise intensity levels.

Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by median noise levels during the day or night or over a 24-hour period. Environmental noise levels are generally considered low when the CNEL or L
dn is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA.

Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings with noise levels as low as 20 dBA and quiet, suburban, residential streets with noise levels around 40 dBA. Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep. Examples of moderate -level noise environments are urban residential or semi -commercial areas (typically 55 to 60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with noisier urban residential or residential-commercial areas (60 to 75 dBA) or dense urban or industrial areas (65 to 80 dBA). Regarding increases in A -weighted noise levels (dBA), the following relationships should be noted in understanding this analysis:
 Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dBA cannot be perceived by humans.
 Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference.  A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. An increase of 5 dBA is typically considered substantial.  A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response. 319
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 8 August 2024
2024-182

2.1.5 Effects of Noise on People

2.1.5.1 Hearing Loss
While physical damage to the ear from an intense noise impulse is rare, a degradation of auditory acuity can occur even within a community noise environment. Hearing loss occurs mainly due to chronic exposure to excessive noise but may be due to a single e vent such as an explosion. Natural hearing loss associated with aging may also be accelerated from chronic exposure to loud noise.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has a noise exposure standard that is set at the noise threshold where hearing loss may occur from long -term exposures. The maximum allowable level is 90 dBA averaged over eight hours. If the noise i s above 90 dBA, the allowable exposure time is correspondingly shorter.

2.1.5.2 Annoyance
Attitude surveys are used for measuring the annoyance felt in a community for noises intruding into homes or affecting outdoor activity areas. In these surveys, it was determined that causes for annoyance include interference with speech, radio and televis ion, house vibrations, and interference with sleep and rest. The L
dn as a measure of noise has been found to provide a valid correlation of noise level and the percentage of people annoyed. People have been asked to judge the annoyance caused by aircraft n oise and ground transportation noise. There continues to be disagreement about the relative annoyance of these different sources.

320
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 9 August 2024
2024-182

3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE SETTING

3.1 Noise Sensitive Land Uses
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as hospitals, historic sites, and certain recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels.

Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise-sensitive land uses.

The Project Site is located in a highly developed area. The nearest existing noise -sensitive land uses to the Project Site are residences bordering the north and southern edges of the Project, and a middle school located to the east of the Project Site.

3.1.1 Existing Ambient Noise Environment
The Project Site presently houses 13 buildings with a total of 51 units, all of which are planned for demolition. The Site is surrounded by apartment comple xes located to the north and south, and a middle school located to the east . The Project Site is traversed by Almond Street, with Mulberry Street located to the east and Civic Center Boulevard located to the west. The most common and significant source of noise in the Project Area is traffic noise generated from vehicles traveling on both of these streets.

3.1.2 Existing Ambient Noise Measurements
In order to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project Area, ECORP Consulting, Inc. conducted a 24-hour noise measurement starting on August 20th, 2024, and extending into August 21st. This 24 -hour noise measurement site is representative of typical existing noise exposure on the Project Site during a typical 24 -hour day (see Attachment A). Additionally, ECORP conducted four short-term noise measurements on the morning of August 20 th, 2024. These short -term noise measurements are representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the Project Site during the daytime (see Attachment A). The 15 -minute measurements were taken between 9:54 a.m. and 10:54 a.m. The average noise levels and location of each noise measurement are listed in Table 3-1.

321
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 10 August 2024
2024-182

Table 3-1. Existing (Baseline) Noise Measurements
15-Minute Noise Measurements
Location
Number Location Ldn dBA Leq dBA Lmin dBA Lmax dBA Time
1 On Mulberry Street
adjacent to Crystal
Middle School
N/A 56.6 48.9 83.1 9:54 a.m. – 10:09 a.m.
2 On 727 Harbor Park
Drive N/A 48.6 37.5 81.0 10:14 a.m. – 10:29 a.m.
3 In Mike Day Memorial
Park adjacent to play
structure
N/A 52.4 43.3 71.4 10:34 a.m. – 10:49 a.m.
4 Intersection of Josiah
Circle and Driftwood
Drive, adjacent to bus
stop
N/A 55.2 39.9 92.8 10:54 a.m. – 11:09 a.m.
24-Hour Noise Measurements
Location
Number Location Ldn dBA Leq dBA Lmin dBA Lmax dBA Time
1 Northern edge of
Project Site 55.2 49.7 35.1 90.2 11:20 a.m. – 11:20 a.m.

Source: Measurements were taken by ECORP with a Larson Davis SoundExpert 821 precision sound level meter, which satisfies the American National Standards Institute for general environmental noise measurement instrumentation. Prior to the measurements, the SoundExpert 821 sound level meter was calibrated according to manufacturer specifications with a Larson Davis CAL200 Class I Calibrator. See Attachment A for noise measurement outputs and a visual representation of the noise measurement locations.

Notes: Leq is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time. Thus, the L eq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. Lmin is the minimum noise level during the measurement period and L max is the maximum noise level during the measurement period. Ldn is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10-dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the nighttime.

As shown in Table 3-1, the ambient recorded noise level during the span of the 24-hour noise measurement was 55.2 dBA Ldn. The ambient recorded noise levels range from 48.6 dBA Leq to 56.6 dBA Leq over the course of the four short-term noise measurements taken in the Project vicinity. The most common noise in the Project vicinity is produced by automotive vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles) on area roadways.

322
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 11 August 2024
2024-182

4.0 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

4.1 Federal

4.1.1 HUD Noise Standards
HUD’s noise standards can be found in 24 CFR Part 51, Subpart B. It is the purpose of this subpart B to call attention to the threat of noise pollution and protect new construction of noise sensitive uses on sites having unacceptable noise exposure. Table 4 -1 presents the acceptable, normally unacceptable and unacceptable HUD noise level standards.

Table 4-1. HUD Site Acceptability Standards
Noise Zone Day/Night (Ldn) Average Sound Level
(in decibels) Special Approvals and Requirements
Acceptable Not exceeding 65 dB None
Normally Unacceptable Above 65 dB but not exceeding 75
dB
• Environmental assessment and
attenuation required for new
construction.
• Attenuation strongly encouraged
for major rehabilitation.

Note: An environmental impact statement
is required if the project site is largely
undeveloped or will encourage
incompatible development.

Unacceptable Above 75 dB
• Environmental impact statement
required.
• Attenuation required for new
construction with approval by the
Assistant Secretary of Certifying
Officer.

Source: CFR Part 51 Subpart B 2013

4.1.2 National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health A division of the US Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has established a construction -related noise level threshold as identified in the Criteria for a Recommended Standard: Occupatio nal Noise Exposure prepared in 1998. NIOSH identifies a noise level threshold based on the duration of exposure to the source. The NIOSH construction -related noise level threshold starts at 85 dBA for more than 8 hours per day; for every 3-dBA increase, the exposure time is cut in half. This reduction results in noise level thresholds of 88 dBA for more than 4 hours per day, 92 dBA for more than 1 hour per day, 96 dBA for more than 30 minutes per day, and up to 100 dBA for 323
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 12 August 2024
2024-182

more than 15 minutes per day. The intention of these thresholds is to protect people from hearing losses resulting from occupational noise exposure.

324
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 13 August 2024
2024-182

5.0 Impact Assessment

5.1 Thresholds of Significance and Methodology
The impact analysis provided below focuses on the three main sources of noise that will impact the Project Site; aircraft, roadways and railways, and is compared to the specific noise standards established by HUD that are presented in Table 4-1. Additionally, since the Project is proposing the development of new noise- sensitive land uses, the Project Site is analyzed for its compatibility within the existing noise environment.

As the Project Site is surrounded by residential land uses and will generate noise during construction and operations, the evaluation of the Project’s contribution to noise increases over existing conditions is addressed. Predicted construction noise levels were calculated utilizing the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Roadway Construction Noise Model (2006). Project onsite and offsite (vehicle traffic) operational noise are discussed qualitatively. Noise levels generated from the construction and operations are not compared to a specific standard but are included for disclosure purposes.

5.2 Impact Analysis

5.2.1 Are There Potential Noise Generators in the Vicinity of the Project Site? Aircraft Noise:

There are five airports within 15 miles of the Project Site as follows:
• Travis Air Force Base, located approximately 4.16 miles northeast of the Project Site • Vaca Valley Hospital Heliport located approximately 9.17 miles northeast of the Project Site. • Nut Tree Airport located approximately 10.05 miles northeast of the Project Site. • Kaiser Medical Center Vacaville Heliport located approximately 11.45 miles northeast of the Project Site.
• Napa County Airport located approximately 12.87 miles west of the Project Site.

Travis Air Force Base is the nearest airport to the Project Site, approximately 4.16 miles distant. According to the Travis Air Force Base Sustainability Study Report (2019), the Project Site is located outside the 60 dBA noise contours. Similarly, the Project Site is located outside of any of the noise contours for all other airports within 15 miles. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in increased exposure of people working at or residing on the Project Site to aircraft noise beyond the acceptable noise standard.

Roadway Noise:

The Project Site would be accessible via Civic Center Boulevard and Mulberry Street , which is surrounded mainly by single -family homes, 1 -2 unit apartments, a middle school, a utilities service center, a police department and a yacht club. Using aerial imagery and the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) 10 th
Edition Trip Generation Manual’s (2017) daily trip rates, existing average daily trips were estimated for the segment of Civic Center Boulevard between Driftwood Drive and Almond Street, as well as the segment of 325
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 14 August 2024
2024-182

Mulberry Street between Driftwood Drive and Almond Street . These two roadway segments generally traverse in north -south directions in proximity to the Project Site and are predominate noise sources affecting the Project Site. Existing traffic noise generated on these roadway segments are calculated using the estimated daily trips coupled with the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA -RD-77- 108). Table 5-1 provides the estimated number of trips on each roadway segment, as well as noise generated by each segment (Attachment B).

Table 5-1. Modeled Roadway Noise
Segment Existing Average
Daily Trips
Existing Roadway
Noise Level at the
Project Site
(Ldn)
Almond Street Between Civic Center Boulevard and Mulberry Street 109 44.9
Civic Center Boulevard between Driftwood Drive and Almond Street 1,083 45.0 Mulberry Street between Driftwood Drive and Almond Street 2,190 49.9 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) 10 th Edition Trip Generation Manual (2017) ; FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) (See Attachment B).

As shown, t he Project Area, as a result of roadway traffic on Civic Center Boulevard and Mulberry Street , currently experiences traffic noise levels ranging from approximately 44.9 and 49.9 dBA Ldn. These traffic noise calculations in the Project vicinity are generally verified by information contained in the City General Plan. According to Exhibit NOI-2, Traffic and Railroad Noise Contours, of the Suisun City General Plan (2015), the Project is located outside of any roadway noise contours. Thus, roadway noise in the Project vicinity would not exceed noise levels beyond the normally acceptable noise standard of less tha n 65 dBA.

Railway Noise:

The Caltrain and light rail commuter rail lines are located approximately 0. 30 mile north of the Project Site.

According to Exhibit NOI-2, Traffic and Railroad Noise Contours, of the Suisun City General Plan (2015), the Project is located outside of the 60 dBA noise contours for activity on the rail lines. Therefore, railway noise at the Project Site would not exceed noise levels beyond the acceptable noise standard.

Land Use Compatibility:

As previously discussed, the Project is proposing the construction of 96 residential units. As the Project is proposing the development of new noise -sensitive land uses within the existing noise environment, a discussion of land use compatibility is needed. The most basic planning strategy to minimize adverse impacts on new land uses due to noi se is to avoid designating certain land uses at locations that would negatively affect noise -sensitive land uses. The Project would locate residences in an area surro unded by other residential land uses and is therefore consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use existing in the Project Area . The predominate source of noise affecting the Project Site is traffic noise generated by vehicles on Mulberry Street, Driftwood Drive and surrounding roadways , as well as typical 326
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 15 August 2024
2024-182

sources specific to residential neighborhoods, such as barking dogs, power tools and landscaping equipment, radios, and people talking.

In order to quantify existing ambient noise levels on the Project Site, ECORP conducted a 24 -hour noise measurement starting on August 20th, 2024, and extending into August 21st. As shown in Table 3 -1, the ambient recorded noise measurement on the Project Site was 55.2 dBA Ldn. The predominate source of noise affecting the Project Site is traffic on Mulberry Street. The ambient recorded noise level (55.2 dBA Ldn) would not exceed the HUD Site Acceptability Standards found in Table 4-1.

Project Construction Noise:

Construction noise associated with the Proposed Project would be temporary and would vary depending on the specific nature of the activities being performed. Noise generated would primarily be associated with the operation of off-road equipment for onsite construction activities as well as construction vehicle traffic on area roadways. Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., site preparation , excavation, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, pile drivers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). During construction, exterior noise levels could negatively affect sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the construction site.

The Project Site is directly adjacent to noise-sensitive receptors to the north and south. It is acknowledged that the majority of construction equipment is not situated at any one location during construction activities, but rather spread throughout the Project Site and at various distances from receptors. Therefore, this analysis employs FTA g uidance for calculating construction noise, which recommends measuring construction noise produced by all construction equipment operating simultaneously from the ce nter of the Project Site (FTA 2018), which in this case is approximately 175 feet from the nearest noise-sensitive receptor. The anticipated short -term construction noise levels generated for the necessary equipment for each phase of construction are presented in Table 5-2.

327
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 16 August 2024
2024-182

Table 5-2. Construction Average (dBA) Noise Levels at Nearest Receptors Construction Phase Estimated Exterior Construction Noise Level @ Closest Receptor (dBA Leq)
Demolition 75.6
Site Preparation 76.7
Grading 76.4
Building Construction, Paving & Architectural Coating 79.5 Source: Construction noise levels were calculated by ECORP Consulting using the FHWA Roadway Noise Construction Model (FHWA 2006). Refer to Attachment C for Model Data Outputs.

Notes: Construction equipment used during construction provided by the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod 2022.1.1.14). The California Emissions Estimator Model is designed to calculate air pollutant emissions from construction activity and contains default construction equipment and usage parameters for typical construction projects based on several construction surveys conducted in order to identify such parameters. Consistent with FTA recommendations for calculating construction noise, construction noise was measured from the center of the Project Site (FTA 2018), which is 175 feet from the nearest receptor. Building construction, paving & architectural coating are assumed to occur spontaneously.

Leq = The equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of noise for a stated period of time.

Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure. For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether the noise occurs during the day or the night.

As shown in Table 5 -2, the Project’s construction noise would range from 75.6 to 79.5 dBA L eq over the course of construction. It is noted that this range of construction noise would not exceed the 85 dBA NIOSH construction noise threshold during any phase of construction at the nearby noise -sensitive receptors. It is noted that construction noise was modeled on a worst -case basis. It is very unlikely that all pieces of construction equipment would be operating at the same time for the various phases of Project construction.

Nonetheless, it is acknowledged that the Project Site is surrounded by noise-sensitive residential receptors and that substantial construction would occur directly adjacent to these receptors. Therefore, the following noise-reducing best management practices are recommended.

Recommended Conditions

NOI-1: Construction Noise-Reducing Best Management Practices

The Project improvement and building plans shall include the following requirements for construction activities:
 Construction contacts must specify that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other state - required noise attenuation devices.
 A sign, legible at a distance of 50 feet, shall be posted at the Project construction site providing a contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. This sign shall indicate the dates and 328
Noise Impact Assessment for the Almond Gardens Apartments Project ECORP Consulting Inc.

Almond Gardens Apartments Project 17 August 2024
2024-182

duration of construction activities. In conjunction with this required posting, a noise disturbance coordinator will be identified to address construction noise concerns received. The coordinator shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. When a complaint is received, the disturbance coordinator shall notify the Suisun City Development Services Department within 24 hours of the complaint and determine the cause of the noise complaint (starting too early, malfunctioning muffler, etc.) and shall implement reasonable measures to resolve the complaint, as deemed acceptable by the Suisun City Development Services Department. All signs posted at the construction site shall include the contact name and the telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator.  Identification of construction noise reduction methods. These reduction methods may include shutting off idling equipment (5 minutes), installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and using electric air compressors and similar power tools.
 During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers.

Suisun City City CouncilJuly 15, 2025

Suisun City City Council
July 15, 2025