Final Program Environmental Impact Report

FOURTH EDUCATIONAL CENTER PROJECT

State Clearinghouse No. 2005101054

Clovis Unified School District

August 2008

Final Program Environmental Impact Report

FOURTH EDUCATIONAL CENTER PROJECT

State Clearinghouse No. 2005101054

Lead Agency:

Clovis Unified School District 1450 Herndon Avenue Clovis, CA 93611 (559) 327-9110

Environmental Consultant:

Paoli & Odell, Inc.
School Facility, Environmental and City Planners 925 N Street, Suite 150 Fresno, CA 93721 (559) 233-7260

August 2008

Preface

This document, together with the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, dated April 2008, constitutes the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Project. The information presented in this document has been provided in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and includes the following:

•	Chapter 1 is the summary for the Final EIR. The summary has been revised to reflect comments received on the Draft EIR.

•	Chapter 2 presents the Mitigation Reporting Program (MRP) for the project.

•	 Chapter 3 contains a list of the agencies and individuals who received a copy of the Draft EIR for review or a notice that the Draft EIR was available for review.

•	Chapter 4 presents the comments that were received on the Draft EIR, together with Clovis Unified School District’s responses to the comments.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	i

Chapter 1

Summary Introduction
This chapter presents a revised version of the Draft EIR summary description of the proposed Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Project and its environmental consequences, including the following:

•	Each significant effect of the project with proposed mitigation measures and alternatives that would reduce or avoid that effect;

•	Areas of controversy known to the lead agency including issues raised by agencies and the public; and

•	Issues to be resolved including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate the significant effects.

Additions to the text of the Draft EIR are underlined and deletions are lined out.

Summary Project Description Project Location and Description

The Clovis Unified School District (District) is proposing to undertake the Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center project, which includes acquisition of a site, and the construction and operation of a high school, intermediate school, elementary school and related athletic/recreational facilities.

The 160.46-acre project site is located between N. Leonard and N. Highland Avenues on the north and south sides of the E. Clinton Avenue alignment, Fresno County, California (see Figures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3). The site is located within Section 25, Township 13 South, Range 21 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, as shown on the Clovis, Calif. 7.5 Minute Series USGS Quadrangle (1964). The Fresno County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers for the site are 310-310-14T, 310-310-39, 310-052-10T, and 310-320-01S through 08S.

The project consists of the acquisition of 160.46 gross acres by the District and the development and operation of an educational center on the site. The educational center will include a high school (2,900-student capacity), intermediate school (1,400-student capacity), elementary school (700-student capacity) and related athletic/recreational facilities. The project will also include an 8,000-seat football stadium.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-1

The buildings to be included on the site will include classrooms, administrative offices, food service facilities, library/media facilities, gymnasiums, locker/shower facilities, shop buildings and a maintenance area. The project could potentially include a performing arts center. Adequate off-street parking for students, faculty and visitors will be provided.

In addition, to the football stadium, the outdoor recreational/athletic facilities on the site may include baseball and softball stadiums and fields, soccer fields, basketball courts, tennis courts and a swimming pool complex. All of these facilities may be lighted.

The project includes various street, water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements necessary to serve the site and eventual annexation of the site to the City of Fresno.

Construction of the facilities is expected to begin in approximately 5-7 years. The duration of construction is typically about 2 years; therefore, the facilities are anticipated to be completed and operational in approximately 7-9 years. The actual timing of construction will be dependent upon enrollment growth and funding availability.

Lead Agency

The Clovis Unified School District is the lead agency for Fourth Educational Center Project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.

Responsible Agencies/Required Permits and Approvals

Responsible agencies and approvals required for the project are described in Draft EIR Chapter 2.

Significant Impacts of the Project Impacts Presented
Listed in this section are the unavoidable and avoidable significant environmental effects of the proposed project. Impacts that were determined to be less than significant without mitigation are not listed but are discussed in the chapters of this EIR addressing specific resources and conditions.

Unavoidable Significant Environmental Impacts

The following significant environmental impacts cannot be avoided if the proposed project is implemented:

3.2	 Impact: The project will conflict with existing surrounding agricultural land uses and could conflict with nearby rural residential uses.

Mitigation Measures: The District shall implement the mitigation measures recommended in subsequent chapters of this EIR for traffic, noise, air quality, and aesthetics. (MRP see subsequent specific mitigation measures)

1-2	Summary

5.1	 Impact: The project will convert approximately 11 acres of Prime Farmland and 9 acres of Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use.

Mitigation Measures: There are no mitigation measures that would prevent the loss of agricultural land within the project site if the project is implemented.

5.2	 Impact: The project will conflict with existing agricultural operations, agricultural zoning and Williamson Act Contracts in its vicinity.

Existing Regulations

The following Fresno County Department of Agriculture conditions apply to the application of pesticides adjacent to school grounds (including the proposed project): (1) no pesticide application(s) are to occur within 1/8 mile of a school while school is in session or while the school grounds are occupied. (2) No pesticide with a worker safety re-entry interval greater than 48 hours shall be applied within 1/8 mile of a school during regular, summer, or night school sessions. In addition to the Department of Agriculture conditions, pesticide applicators must comply with any conditions/restrictions on the pesticide label that relate to applications(s) adjacent to school grounds.

Mitigation Measure:

5.2 Currently, all District campuses are closed, except for high school seniors in good standing. The District shall continue to operate closed campuses unless the Board determines that modifications to this practice will not cause significant off-campus problems. (MRP 2)

8.1	 Impact: The project will alter the existing rural and agricultural visual environment.

Discussion: Although the project site will be professionally designed and landscaped and will contain substantial open space, the alteration of the visual environment from rural to a large educational facility cannot be mitigated.

10.3	Impact: Long-term emissions of ozone precursor pollutants will result from project operations.

Mitigation Measures:

10.3(a) Trees shall be selected and located to protect the buildings from energy consuming environmental conditions and to shade paved areas. Trees shall be deciduous to allow shading of structures during the summer months and increased solar heating during the winter months. Structural soil should be used under paved	areas	to	improve	tree	growth:	for	Structural	Soil	see http://www.hort.cornell.edu/uhl/outreach/csc	and     for     Tree	Selection	see http://www.ufei.org. (MRP 1)

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-3

10.3(b) The District shall work with the City of Fresno in designing the project site to facilitate safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent neighborhoods. (MRP 1)

10.3(c) Energy-conserving features shall be included in the project sufficient to exceed Title 24 requirements by 20 percent.	Energy conservation measures include both energy conservation through design and operational energy conservation.	Examples include (but are not limited to): Increased energy efficiency (above California Title 24 Requirements) (see http://www.energy. ca.gov/title24/); energy efficient windows (double pane and/or Low-E); high-albedo (reflecting) roofing material; energy efficient lighting, appliances, heating and cooling systems; programmable thermostat(s) for all heating and cooling systems; awnings or other shading mechanism for windows; walkway overhangs; and installation of ozone-destruction catalysts on air conditioning systems (when available). (MRP 1 & 2)

10.3(d) Exits to adjoining streets should be designed to reduce time to re-enter traffic from the project site. (MRP 1)

10.3(e) If public transit is provided on roadways located adjacent to the project site, transit stop improvements shall be incorporated on streets adjacent to the site to promote the use of transit to and from the project site during normal school hours, as well as during special events held at the campus. Examples of such improvements include providing information for posting of public transit schedules, benches, shelters, and lighting. (MRP 1 & 2)

10.3(f) To reduce neighborhood vehicle travel to nearby park facilities, general-use recreational facilities at the project site shall be made available for public use during the daytime hours when school is not in session (i.e., weekends) , subject to District approval. (MRP 2)

Discussion: A majority of the project-generated emissions would be associated with the operation of mobile sources. Although measures to reduce mobile-source emissions, such as promotion of transit use to and from the site, have been included, emissions from mobile sources (including school buses) are regulated by the ARB. Measures incorporated to promote pedestrian access and transit use would reduce mobile-source emissions by approximately 1 percent (SMAQMD 2007). Area source emissions, such as the use of natural gas appliances and landscape maintenance activities would constitute less than approximately 5 percent of the total project-generated emissions. Various mitigation measures have, however, been incorporated to reduce onsite operational emissions from area sources. Such measures would reduce total operational emissions from area sources by approximately 5 percent.	However, because project-generated operational emissions would be primarily associated with on-road mobile sources, mitigated emissions would still be anticipated to exceed SJVAPCD-recommended significance thresholds of 10 tons/year. As a result, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

1-4	Summary

10.5	 Impact: The project will contribute cumulatively to regional and local air quality impacts and greenhouse gas emissions.

Mitigation Measure: With implementation of the Mitigation Measures listed under 10.1, 10.2 and 10.3, the project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts and greenhouse gas emissions would be lessened. (MRP 1 & 2)

Discussion: Even with mitigation, operational emissions of ROG would still be anticipated to exceed the SJVAPCD’s recommended significance threshold of 10 tons/year. Although localized concentrations of pollutants would not be anticipated to exceed applicable thresholds, with implementation of proposed mitigation measures, short-term construction-generated emission would still contribute, on a cumulative basis, to regional ambient concentrations of TACs, particularly diesel-PM. Given the regions existing and projected nonattainment conditions, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. With respect to greenhouse gas emissions, since there are currently no thresholds established under federal, state or local laws, this EIR takes a conservative approach and considers the cumulative contribution of the project to greenhouse gas emissions as a significant unavoidable impact.

11.2	 Impact: The project will expose noise sensitive uses to on site stationary source noise.

Mitigation Measures:

11.2(a) Mechanical building equipment shall be shielded from public exposure by locating such equipment on rooftops, in equipment buildings or by the use of other methods of shielding. (MRP 1 & 2)

11.2(b) When a site plan is prepared for the educational center, the stadium, other athletic facilities and parking areas shall be designed and oriented to minimize noise levels in relation to any existing or planned noise sensitive land uses in the area. Possible methods include (1) location on the site to maximize the distance from noise sensitive uses (within feasible and appropriate site design constraints in relation to other facilities on the site); (2) the use of intervening building or other structures between noise-sensitive receptors and onsite noise sources; and (3) for the stadium, consideration of design features including but not limited to solid berm and/or concrete seating, concrete walls, lowering of the field surface, and a state of the art PA system. (MRP 1 & 2)

11.2(c) As part of the specific planning process for the Southeast Growth Area, the City of Fresno should plan and design land uses in the vicinity of the site in recognition of the features and characteristics of the educational center to minimize any potential noise impacts. (MRP 3)

11.2(d) The hours of operation for facility maintenance activities that could be deemed to impact nearby land uses shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-5

p.m., Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday, excepting emergency conditions. (MRP 2)

Discussion: Most on-site facilities should be able to be designed and mitigated such that any noise impacts are less than significant. However, it is possible that noise impacts from the football stadium or other facilities may not be able to be completely mitigated at all adjacent locations. The stadium would potentially subject nearby residences to high noise levels on a limited basis during late summer and fall evenings and limited occasions such as graduation and large track meets. If this were to occur, the noise impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Avoidable Significant Environmental Impacts

The following significant environmental impacts can be avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance if the mitigation measures listed with each impact are incorporated into the project:

3.1	 Impact: The project is inconsistent with the Fresno County General Plan agricultural land use designation for the project site.

Mitigation Measures:

3.1(a) The City of Fresno should incorporate the project in the specific plan for the Southeast Growth Area. (MRP 3)

3.1(b) At such time as annexation is feasible, the District shall request that the City of Fresno annex the project site. “Feasible” for the purposes of this mitigation measure shall mean that the annexation will comply with applicable LAFCo policies and the City has complied with applicable requirements of the January 6, 2003 Memorandum of Understanding with the County of Fresno, including adoption of the specific plan. (MRP 2 & 3)

6.1	 Impact: Project construction may result in direct mortality of special status raptors, Loggerhead Shrike, non-listed raptors, and various other bird species.

Mitigation Measures:

6.1(a) A pre-construction survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist for nesting raptors within 30 days prior to the on-set of construction or tree removal, if tree removal is to occur during the nesting season (February through August) or construction activity occurs within 250 feet of onsite trees during the nesting season. (MRP 1)

6.1(b) If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season (February through August) locate active nests within or near construction zones, these nests, and an appropriate buffer around them (as determined by a qualified biologist) would remain off-limits to construction until the breeding season is over. Construction setbacks of 250 feet (or more) from occupied nests could be required. (MRP 1)

1-6	Summary

6.2	 Impact: Project construction may result in direct mortality of Western Burrowing Owls.

Mitigation Measures:

6.2(a) A pre-construction survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist for burrowing owls within 30 days prior to the on-set of construction. This survey will be conducted according to methods described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 1995), which is standard for all burrowing owl surveys in California. (MRP 1)

6.2(b) If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season (February through July) locate active nest burrows within or near construction zones, these nests, and an appropriate buffer around them (as determined by a qualified biologist) would remain off-limits to construction until the breeding season is over. Setbacks from occupied nest burrows of 100 meters or more could be required where construction would also result in the loss of foraging habitat. (MRP 1)

6.2(c) During the non-breeding season (August through January), resident burrowing owls may be relocated to alternative habitat. The relocation of resident owls must be according to a relocation plan prepared by a qualified biologist. Passive relocation would be the preferred method of relocation. This plan would provide for the owls relocation to nearby lands possessing available nesting and foraging habitat. Relocation only applies to burrowing owls, which may be resident in their nest burrows after the breeding season is over. (MRP 1)

6.3	 Impact: Project construction may result in direct mortality of California Horned Lark.

Mitigation Measures:

6.3(a) If construction is to occur during the nesting season (March through July), a pre-construction survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist for nesting horned larks within 30 days prior to the on-set of construction. The area of this pre-construction survey will include all areas within 250 feet of construction activity. (MRP 1)

6.3(b) If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season locate active nests within or near construction zones, these nests, and an appropriate buffer around them (as determined by a qualified biologist) will remain off-limits to construction until the breeding season is over. Construction setbacks of 250 feet (or more) from occupied nests could be required. (MRP 1)

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-7

6.4	Impact: Project construction may result in direct mortality of various bat species.

Mitigation Measures:

6.4(a) A pre-construction survey will be conducted by a qualified biologist for maternal bat roosts within 30 days prior to the on-set of construction, if construction is to occur during the maternal roosting season (March through August) and would occur within 250 feet of buildings potentially used as maternal roosting sites for bats. (MRP 1)

6.4(b) If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season (March through August) locate active maternal roosts within or near construction zones, these roosts, and an appropriate buffer around them (as determined by a qualified biologist) would remain off-limits to construction until the breeding season is over. Construction setbacks of 250 feet (or more) from occupied roosts could be required. (MRP 1)

7.1	 Impact: Project construction activities could result in the loss of subsurface cultural or paleontological resources from the project site

Mitigation Measures:

7.1(a) All contractors and subcontractors for the project shall be informed, in writing, of the possibility that cultural or paleontological resources may be discovered during project activities. If any cultural or paleontological materials are uncovered during project activities, work in the area or any area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall halt until a professional evaluation and/or data recovery excavation can be planned and implemented. Appropriate measures to protect remains from accidents, looting, and vandalism shall be implemented immediately. (MRP 1)

7.1(b) After they have been professionally recorded in their place of discovery, archaeological or paleontological materials shall be transferred to an appropriate regional repository for preservation, research, and/or use in interpretive exhibits. (MRP 1)

7.1(c) If human remains are discovered, the Fresno County Coroner must be notified immediately. The Coroner has two working days to examine the remains and 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) if the remains are Native American (Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5). Once the NAHC is notified, the procedures set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d) and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed. (MRP 1)

1-8	Summary

8.2	Impact: The project will create a potential for litter and graffiti.

Mitigation Measure:

8.2(a) The District shall properly clean and maintain the school facilities, and shall support, encourage, and facilitate programs that encourage or require students keep the campus and surrounding environs clean. (MRP 2)

8.2(b) Currently, all District campuses are closed, except for high school seniors in good standing. The District shall continue to operate closed campuses unless the Board determines that modifications to this practice will not cause significant off-campus problems. (MRP 2)

8.2(c) The District shall provide security personnel to patrol the site and adjacent parking areas before, during and after the football games to discourage littering, graffiti writing and other undesirable activities. (MRP 2)

8.3	Impact: The project will increase light and glare in the project vicinity.

Mitigation Measure:

8.3(a) Stadium field lighting shall be designed in accordance with the Illuminating Engineering Society’s Recommended Practice for Sports and Recreational Area Lighting, in effect at the time of design. (MRP 1)

8.3(b) Stadium field lighting, recreation facility lighting and security lighting for the buildings and parking areas shall be designed and oriented to minimize any impacts on adjacent property. Light spill resulting from any project lighting shall not exceed 1.5 footcandles at the property line. (MRP 1 & 2)

8.3(c) All parking area lighting shall be full cut-off type fixtures. A full cut-off type fixture is a luminaire or light fixture that, by design of the housing, does not allow any light dispersion or direct glare to shine above a 90 degree horizontal plane from the base of the fixture. Full cut-off type fixtures must be installed in a horizontal position as designed. (MRP 1)

8.3(d) All external signs and lighting shall be lit from the top and shine downward except where uplighting is required for safety or security purposes. The lighting shall be shielded to prevent direct glare and/or light trespass. The lighting shall also be, as much as physically possible, contained to the target area. (MRP 1)

8.3(e) Exterior building lighting for building or security or aesthetics shall be full cut-off or a shielded type designed to minimize any upward distribution of light. (MRP 1)

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-9

9.1	 Impact: The project will cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system.

Mitigation Measure:

9.1	The project shall be required to perform a project-specific traffic impact study prior to submitting improvement plans for each phase of development, including the proposed stadium, in accordance with City of Fresno and County of Fresno requirements in place at that time. The City of Fresno currently requires any project expected to generate 100 or more peak-hour trips to perform a traffic impact study. The County of Fresno currently requires a traffic impact study for all intersections at which a project will generate 10 or more peak-hour trips or 100 or more daily trips. In addition, Caltrans may require analysis of state facilities. CUSD shall consult with the City of Fresno, County of Fresno, City of Clovis, and Caltrans prior to any new construction project to determine the requirements for a traffic impact study. The project shall be required to mitigate traffic impacts to the level of service and queuing requirements of the affected agencies current at the time the traffic study is performed. The future traffic impact studies shall not be based on the trip generation data or traffic counts presented herein, but shall be based on the best and most recent data available at the time the study is performed. (MRP 1 & 2)

9.2	 Impact: The project may result in localized traffic, parking, safety and emergency access issues related to site driveways, loading and unloading areas, parking lot locations, internal circulation and stadium use.

Mitigation Measure:

9.2	As part of the future site planning process for the project, a traffic and parking analysis shall be prepared that (1) evaluates and addresses potential traffic congestion where driveways intersect with adjoining public streets; (2) ensures that adequate parking is provided for students, faculty, staff, visitors, and athletic facilities, in accordance with accepted standards and practices for school facilities existing at the time of site plan preparation; (3) provides for separate off-street facilities for student drop-offs by parents and bus loading and unloading; and (4) ensures that adequate emergency access is provided to the project in accordance with local fire and law enforcement requirements. The above analysis shall be prepared in coordination with City of Fresno and County of Fresno planning and traffic engineering staffs, and City and County law enforcement and fire departments. (MRP 1 & 2)

10.1	 Impact: Short-term emissions of airborne particulate matter will result from project construction activity.

Mitigation Measures:

10.1(a) Demolition and construction activities shall comply with all applicable SJVAPCD Regulation VIII for the control of fugitive dust emissions. Demolition activities would also be required to comply with SJVAPCD Rule 4002 to identify

1-10	Summary

the presence of asbestos-containing building materials to be removed prior to demolition. In accordance with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII, a Dust Control Plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO) prior to the start of construction. Written notification to the APCO shall also be provided within 10 days prior to the commencement of earthmoving activities. The Dust Control Plan shall describe all fugitive dust control measures to be implemented before, during, and after any dust generating activity. SJVAPCD-recommended dust control measures include (but are not necessarily limited to) stabilization of all disturbed areas and unpaved construction roads; covering and wetting of transported materials; removal of accumulated dirt and trackout from adjacent streets; suspension of grading and excavation activities during periods of high winds; and limitations on visible dust emissions and the maximum daily area of ground disturbance. (MRP 1)

10.2	 Impact: Short-term emissions of ozone precursor pollutants and diesel-exhaust particulates will result from project construction activity.

Mitigation Measures: The following SJVAPCD-recommended mitigation measures shall be implemented:

10.2(a) In accordance with SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review Rule (Rule 9510), exhaust emissions for construction equipment greater than fifty (50) horsepower used or associated with the development project shall be reduced by the following amounts from the statewide average as estimated by the ARB: (a) 20 percent of the total NOx emissions, and (b) 45 percent of the total PM10 exhaust emissions. For example, construction emissions may be reduced by using less-polluting construction equipment, which can be achieved by utilizing add-on controls, or by use of cleaner fuels (i.e., biodiesel, emulsified diesel), ARB-certified alternative fueled engines, or use of construction equipment that have engines that meet the current off-road engine emission standard (as certified by the ARB). Use of multiple technologies/emission reduction strategies may be required to achieve required emissions reductions. Additional information pertaining to ARB-certified emission reduction technologies can be obtained by contacting the SJVAPCD	at	(559)	230-5820	or	the	ARB’s	website	at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/offroad/ cert/cert.php. (MRP 1)

10.2(b) Prior to starting construction on the project, the District shall work with the SJVAPCD institute measures to reduce NOx emissions such that the project falls within the SJVAPCD’s significance threshold of 10 tons/year. These measures may include but are not limited to replacing fossil-fueled equipment with electrically driven equivalents; limiting the operational hours of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use at any one time; limiting the maximum daily area of ground disturbance; curtailment of construction activity during periods of high ambient pollutant concentration; and minimizing equipment idling time. (MRP 1)

10.4	Impact: The project could result in local mobile-source CO concentrations.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-11

Mitigation Measures: The following measures are recommended to reduce short-term noise impacts to nearby land uses to a less than significant level:

10.4(a) The District shall be required to perform a project-specific traffic impact study prior to submitting improvement plans for each phase of development. Based on the findings of the traffic impact study to be prepared, an analysis of localized mobile-source carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations at adversely affected intersections that are projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS E, or worse) shall be conducted. Analysis of localized mobile-source CO concentrations shall be conducted in accordance with SJVAPCD-recommended methodologies. Appropriate traffic mitigation measures shall be incorporated, as deemed necessary, to ensure that predicted localized concentrations of CO would not exceed applicable ambient air quality standards at modeled receptor locations. (MRP 1 & 2)

11.1	Impact: Short-term noise will occur during project construction phases.

Mitigation Measures: The following measures are recommended to reduce short-term noise impacts to nearby land uses to a less than significant level:

11.1(a) Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and equipped with noise-reduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation. (MRP 1)

11.1(b) When not in use, motorized construction equipment idling shall be minimized. (MRP 1)

11.1(c) Noise-generating construction activities shall comply with applicable noise ordinance requirements.	Accordingly, construction activities shall be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday.	Construction activities shall be prohibited on Federal/State-recognized holidays. (MRP 1)

11.3 Impact: Noise sensitive uses/activities on the project site may be subject to high noise levels from adjacent streets

Mitigation Measure:

11.3	Proposed noise-sensitive exterior activity areas, including but not limited to patios and exterior classrooms/interpretive areas, shall not be located within the projected cumulative 60 dBA noise contours of adjacent roadways (Table 11-12), unless noise-reduction measures are incorporated sufficient to reduce noise levels within noise-sensitive exterior activity areas to below 60 dBA CNEL/Leq. Noise-reduction measures may include use of setbacks or barriers. (MRP 1)

1-12	Summary

12.1	Impact: The project will increase local demand for water.

Mitigation Measures:

12.1(a) The availability of an adequate water supply to serve the project site shall be determined by the City of Fresno. The project site will not be developed without the City of Fresno having a water supply capable of meeting the water needs of the project. (MRP 1)

12.1(b) The District shall construct necessary City of Fresno water system improvements to ensure that the site will be adequately served in terms of water quantity and pressure. The extent of the water facilities that will need to be constructed will vary depending on the timing of the development of the Educational Center site relative to the timing of development of other land areas within the Southeast Specific Plan area. The District shall be responsible for funding its proportionate share of improvements by mutual agreement and to the extent required by law and shall be reimbursed by the City for water facilities installed by the District that have capacity to serve other developments. (MRP 1)

12.1(c) Subject to agreement by the Fresno Irrigation District and the City of Fresno, landscape irrigation water for the project shall be obtained from Fresno Irrigation District surface water supplies. The Kutner Colony Number 329 ditch currently supplies the site with irrigation water. Arrangements will need to be made with the Fresno Irrigation District to determine the quantity of water to be used for the site and the periods of delivery. (MRP 1, 2 & 3)

12.1(d) If a water supply well is determined to be needed on the project site, the District will offer a well lot to the City of Fresno for purchase, sized appropriately to allow for the inclusion of well head treatment facilities, or by mutual agreement, to participate with the City of Fresno on other viable supply options, as noted in 12.1(b). (MRP 1)

12.1(e) The water supply at the campus shall meet City of Fresno fire flow requirements. (MRP 1)

12.1(f) The District shall pay Water related charges as determined by Fresno Municipal Code. (MRP 1)

12.1(g) Prior to developing site specific improvement plans for water supply and distribution, the District shall consult with the City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities on the water source to be used for landscape irrigation and design the improvement plans accordingly.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-13

12.2	 Impact: Development of the project may damage existing Fresno Irrigation District facilities within the area of the project.

Mitigation Measure:

12.2 (a) All existing Fresno Irrigation District pipelines within the area of the project shall be removed and replaced with rubber gasket reinforced concrete pipe in accordance with FID standards and the District shall enter into an mutually acceptable agreement with FID for that purpose. (MRP 1)

12.2(b) Should the replacement pipelines be placed in a different alignment than presently exists, the District shall dedicate an easement to FID for the pipeline as required by FID. (MRP 1)

12.2(c) The District shall submit all project improvement plans to FID for review and approval relative to how such improvements may endanger the structural integrity of pipelines, easements or other facilities owned and operated by FID. (MRP 1)

12.3 Impact: Improper destruction of existing wells on the site can allow pollutants to enter the groundwater supply.

Mitigation Measure:

12.3 Upon development of the property, any existing water well(s) not intended for use by the project, shall be properly destroyed. For those wells located in the unincorporated area of Fresno County, the applicant shall apply for and obtain a permit(s) to destroy water well(s) from the Fresno County Department of Community Health, Environmental Health System prior to commencement of work. The contractor hired to destroy any existing wells shall possess a valid C-57 license. (MRP 1)

13.1	Impact: The project will result in a need for wastewater collection facilities.

Mitigation Measures:

13.1(a) The District shall extend wastewater collection facilities from the nearest City of Fresno sewer main(s) capable of accepting the wastewater flows from the project. The extent of the sewer facilities that will need to be constructed will be determined by the City of Fresno and they may vary depending on the timing, phasing and location of the educational facilities on the site and other developments in the City of Fresno’s Southeast Growth Area. The District shall be responsible for funding its proportionate share of improvements by mutual agreement and to the extent required by law and shall be reimbursed by the City for sewer collection facilities installed by the District that have capacity to serve other developments. (MRP 1)

13.1(b) The District shall pay Sewer Facility charges as determined by Fresno Municipal Code. (MRP 1)

1-14	Summary

13.2	 Impact: Wastewater generated by the project will require wastewater treatment and disposal service.

Mitigation Measures:

13.2(a) The availability of wastewater treatment facilities to serve the project site shall be determined by the City of Fresno. Such treatment capacity availability may vary depending on the timing and phasing of the educational facilities on the site and other developments in the City of Fresno’s Southeast Growth Area. The project site will not be developed without the City of Fresno having wastewater treatment capacity available to serve the site. (MRP 1)

13.2(b) The District shall pay Sewer Facility charges as determined by Fresno Municipal Code. (MRP 1)

14.1	Impact: The project will result in increased stormwater runoff.

Mitigation Measures:

14.1(a) The District shall enter into a mutually acceptable agreement with FMFCD for the development of the master-planned storm drainage facilities. The agreement would identify storm drainage fee obligations of the District for development of the site and/or fee credits and/or future reimbursements for the District’s construction of any of the master-planned storm drainage facilities. If permanent facilities are not available or feasible at the time of project construction, the District shall have the option to construct temporary on-site ponding facilities until permanent facilities are constructed or available. (MRP 1 & 3)

14.1(b) The District shall construct the FMFCD Master Plan Storm Drainage Facilities that would connect the site to the FMFCD drainage basin DS and excavate adequate storage volume within that basin to provide for the storage of the runoff generated from the Educational Center site. If the basin is not fenced at the time of school construction, the District shall fence the portion of the basin site used for drainage service. (MRP 1)

14.1(c) The District shall dedicate storm drainage easements related to the construction of any of the master-planned storm drainage pipelines that would occur on the site, outside of the street right-of-way areas, including along Clinton Avenue once abandoned by either FMFCD or the District. (MRP 1)

14.1(d) The grading of the project site shall be designed to facilitate storm water flows from Highland Avenue to Drainage Basin DS. (MRP 1)

14.1(e) The District shall submit all improvement plans for grading, street improvements and storm drainage to FMFCD for review and approval. (MRP 1)

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-15

14.2	Impact: Stormwater runoff from project construction activities may pollute natural watercourses and aquifers.

Mitigation Measures:

14.2(a) Project construction documents shall include (1) measures to prevent the disposal of wastes, effluent, chemicals, or other noxious substances on the project site during construction and (2) procedures to contain and properly clean up any accidental spillage or disposal. (MRP 1)

14.2(b) The District shall comply with Environmental Protection Agency National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements, administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), as follows: (MRP 1)

(1) File a Notice of Intent (NOI) for discharge from the project site in accordance with NPDES requirements prior to commencing construction;

(2) Require that the project contractor or District prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with guidelines adopted by the SWRCB and institute the SWPPP during construction of the project. The SWPPP shall provide a best management plan for the source control of any pollutants that may be mobilized by runoff generated on the construction site and which may enter the public drainage system; and

(3) File a Notice of Completion of Construction for the project site identifying that pollution sources were controlled during construction and implement a closure SWPPP for the site.

14.3	 Impact: Development within a flood prone area may result in a portion of the site being subject to periodic flooding.

Mitigation Measures:

14.3(a) Construction documents for the Educational Center are to include grading and drainage plans. These plans shall be prepared in a manner that specifies the filling and grading of the Zone A flood prone area such that no drainage water will be retained on the site. All grading and drainage plans shall be prepared consistent with FMFCD’s drainage master plan and shall be reviewed and approved by FMFCD. (MRP 1)

14.3(b) Based on the project’s grading and drainage plan, the District shall file a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) with FEMA. With FEMA’s approval of the LOMR, the Zone A flood prone designation will be removed from the Flood Insurance Rate Maps and the project will no longer have a portion of the site designated as flood prone. (MRP 1)

1-16	Summary

19.1	Impact: The project will consume electrical energy and natural gas.

Mitigation Measures:

19.1(a) The District shall design all on-site facilities and equipment to exceed Title 24 requirements by 20 percent. (MRP 1)

19.1(b) The District shall incorporate an energy control and management system in the project design. (MRP 1)

19.1(c) The District shall incorporate the following energy reducing measures in the design of the project as recommended in the LEED for Schools and Collaborative for High Performance Schools programs to the extent feasible and subject to financial limitations: optimum building orientation for energy efficiency, daylighting (designing the buildings to maximize the use of natural light); energy efficient lighting with automatic shutoff and dimming, the use of cool reflective roofing materials; and the landscaping and shading of parking, hardscape and building areas to keep ambient temperatures down. (MRP 1)

20.1	 Impact: Pesticide application or product disposal associated with agricultural use could have materially impacted the project site.

Mitigation Measures:

20.1	Prior to site development and in accordance with Education Code Section 17213.1, the site shall be tested for persistent agricultural chemicals, residential pesticides and other potential contaminants in accordance with the Preliminary Environmental Assessment. Should such contaminants be identified in the soil in concentrations that would be detrimental to human health, appropriate remediation of site soils, or other effective mitigation, shall take place prior to site development in accordance with Education Code Section 17213.2. (MRP 1)

Cumulative Impacts

The cumulative impacts evaluation in Chapter 22 of this EIR is based upon the cumulative impacts analysis presented in the City of Fresno’s Master Environmental Impact Report No. 10130 – 2025 Fresno General Plan (MEIR). The MEIR identified the following significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts related to implementation of the 2025 Fresno General Plan: increased traffic congestion, increased air quality degradation, increased demand for water, loss of productive agricultural resources, and increased noise generation. The analyses presented in this EIR determined that the proposed project would not change the conclusions presented in the MEIR. No significant cumulative impacts identified in the MEIR would be increased because of the project and no new significant cumulative impacts would result from the project.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-17

Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes

Implementation of the project would result in the use, or consumption, of nonrenewable resources including agricultural land and some construction materials and energy resources.

Summary of Alternatives Addressed

In accordance with CEQA, this EIR addresses two “no project” alternatives and three alternative site locations. The first “no project” alternative assumes the project study area would remain in agricultural use because this is the current site condition. The second “no project” alternative assumes the project study area would be developed as planned by the 2025 Fresno General Plan. Under the general plan, the study area is conceptually planned for medium density residential development.

The evaluation of alternative locations is based on the Fourth Educational Center Site Selection Study (revised) (December 2006), which is incorporated in this EIR as Appendix I-1. This report identified and evaluated four possible locations for the project, including the proposed project site, all of which are addressed in Chapter 24 and summarized below:.

•	The No Project/Agricultural and Rural Residential Use Alternative would achieve none of the project’s objectives because the project would not be developed. It would avoid or substantially lessen all but two of the project’s significant effects and increase one (pesticide application).

•	The No Project/Medium Density Residential Use Alternative would achieve none of the project’s objectives because the project would not be developed. It would avoid or substantially project impacts related to land use conflicts and would not result in noise and light impacts due to a stadium. This alternative would substantially increase water consumption and the generation of wastewater.

•	 Development of the project on Alternative Site B would not achieve all of the project’s objectives. Development on Site B would require the elementary school to be developed on a parcel separated from the main site by a major street. This would not meet the project objective of having an educational center on one site. In addition, this alternative would result in an increase in prime agricultural land conversion because the project contains substantially more prime agricultural land than the project site.

•	 Development of the project on Alternative Site C would not achieve all of the project objectives. Site C is too small to accommodate a stadium or elementary school. Site C is in the middle of a permanent rural residential area and the project would not be compatible in such an area. The alternative site would result in the conversion of more prime agricultural land but would have less of an impact with respect to agricultural conflicts on adjacent land.

1-18	Summary

•	Development of the project on Alternative Site E would achieve all of the project’s objectives. However, this alternative would result in an increase of the project’s effects related to land use conflicts, prime agricultural land conversion, and agricultural conflicts. This is because the project would be within an area that is adjacent to land planned to remain in agricultural use and the site contains substantially more prime agricultural land than the project site. Site E also has very limited street access, which would not be able to handle the traffic and access needs of the project. Trip length and air quality emissions would increase due to the location of the site on the eastern edge of the planned urban area.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(c)(2) requires that “if the environmentally superior alternative is the “no project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” As demonstrated by Table 24-7, the No Project/Agricultural Use alternative would avoid or substantially lessen all but one of the project’s significant environmental effects. It is, therefore, the environmentally superior alternative, although it would achieve none of the project objectives.

Based on the alternatives analysis, none of the alternatives would be environmentally superior to the project. Therefore, notwithstanding the “no project” alternatives, the project would be the environmentally superior alternative.

Areas of Controversy and Unresolved Issues

No project-related areas of controversy or unresolved issues were identified during the preparation of this EIR.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	1-19

Chapter 2

Mitigation Reporting Program

Introduction

This Mitigation Reporting Program (“MRP”) is adopted by the Clovis Unified School District for the project in accordance with the requirements of the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The purpose for the MRP is to ensure implementation of all mitigation measures that have been adopted to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment, as identified in the EIR.

Mitigation Reporting Coordinator

To effectively implement the mitigation reporting program for the project, the District Board shall designate the Assistant Superintendent, Facility Services, or his designee, as the Project Mitigation Reporting Coordinator (“Coordinator”). The Coordinator shall be responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measures incorporated into the project are complied with during project implementation and for reporting said compliance to the Board.

Mitigation Reporting Procedures

The following mitigation reporting procedures shall be used to ensure implementation of the project mitigation measures. The reporting procedures are divided into three classifications: (1) those that are applicable to project design and construction-related mitigation measures that can be directly implemented by the District, (2) those that are applicable to operational mitigation measures that can be directly implemented by the District, and (3) those that are applicable to mitigation measures that are the responsibility of other agencies. The appropriate mitigation reporting procedure (MRP) abbreviation for each mitigation measure is listed after each measure appearing in Chapter 1 of this Final EIR (i.e. MRP 1, MRP 2, MRP 3 or a combination thereof).

1. Design and Construction-Related Mitigation Measures (MRP 1)

The reporting procedures for that are applicable to project design and construction-related mitigation measures shall be as follows:

(a) The Coordinator shall submit a copy of the design and construction-related mitigation measures to the project architect, engineer, and contractor, for incorporation in the project plans, construction specifications, permits and contracts, as appropriate.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	2-1

(b) Prior to starting construction on each phase of the project, the Coordinator shall determine and report to the Board that all design and construction-related mitigation measures under the District’s control have been incorporated in the project plans, construction specifications, permits and contracts, as appropriate.

(c) During construction, the Coordinator shall inspect the project site regularly to ensure that all work complies with the design and construction-related mitigation measures. If a discrepancy is identified and is not corrected within a reasonable period, the Coordinator shall report the discrepancy to the Board for final disposition. The Coordinator may order the work to cease until the Board has addressed the discrepancy.

(d) Prior to the District accepting the improvements for each phase of the project, the Coordinator shall determine and report to the Board that the project has been designed and constructed in accordance with the mitigation measures.

2. Operational Mitigation Measures (MRP 2)

The reporting procedures for that are applicable to operational mitigation measures shall be as follows:

(a) Before each phase of the project becomes operational, Coordinator shall determine and report to the Board that all operations-related mitigation measures have been incorporated in the project operational plans and procedures.

(b) Following one year of operation of each phase of the project, the Coordinator shall submit a report to the Board documenting the status of all operational mitigation measures. The report shall address the effectiveness of the mitigation measures and any changes that should be made by the Board if a measure is less than effective.

3. OtherAgency Mitigation Measures (MRP 3)

The reporting procedures for mitigation measures that are the responsibility of other agencies shall be as follows:

(a) The Coordinator shall refer all applicable mitigation measures to the other agencies responsible for implementing the measures and coordinate with the agencies to effectuate the measures.

(b) The Coordinator shall report to the Board on the actions taken by the agencies to implement the measures.

2-2	Mitigation Reporting Program

Chapter 3

Notification

The persons, organizations, and public agencies that were sent copies of the Draft EIR or were notified of the availability of the Draft EIR for public review are listed in this chapter. Those who received the Draft EIR and Notice of Availability are indicated in bold type. All others on the list received the Notice of Availability only.

A copy of the Notice of Availability is included at the end of this chapter. The Notice of Availability appeared in the Fresno Bee on April 28, 2008 and was posted in the Fresno County Clerk’s office. A copy of the Draft EIR was made available at the Fresno County Library Reference Desk, 2420 Mariposa Street, Fresno and on the internet at www.cusd.com.

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	3-1

3-2	Notification

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	3-3

3-4	Notification

Clovis Unified Fourth Educational Center Final EIR	3-5