Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-10-20 Council Agenda PacketThursday, October 20, 2016 9:00 AM City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov Council Chambers City Council President - Paul Caprioglio Vice President - Sal Quintero Councilmembers: Oliver L. Baines, III, Lee Brand, Steve Brandau, Clinton J. Olivier, Esmeralda Z. Soria City Manager - Bruce Rudd City Attorney - Douglas T. Sloan City Clerk - Yvonne Spence, CMC Meeting Agenda - Final Regular Session October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final The Fresno City Council welcomes you to City Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. The City of Fresno’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. The meeting room is physically accessible. If, as an attendee or participant at the meeting, you need additional accommodations such as interpreters, signers, assistive listening devices, or the services of a translator, please contact the Office of the City Clerk at (559) 621-7650 or clerk@fresno.gov. To ensure availability, you are advised to make your request at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. The agenda and related staff reports are available at www.fresno.gov, as well as in the Office of the City Clerk. The Council meeting can be viewed live on Comcast Channel 96 and AT&T Channel 99 from 9:00 a.m. and is re-played beginning at 8:00 p.m.. The meeting can also be viewed online at https://fresno.legistar.com. PROCESS: For each matter considered by the Council there will first be a staff presentation followed by a presentation from the involved individuals, if present. Testimony from those in attendance will then be taken. All testimony will be limited to three minutes per person. If you would like to speak fill out a Speaker Request Form available from the City Clerk’s Office and in the Council Chambers. The three lights on the podium next to the microphone will indicate the amount of time remaining for the speaker. The green light on the podium will be turned on when the speaker begins. The yellow light will come on with one minute remaining. The speaker should be completing the testimony by the time the red light comes on and tones sound, indicating that time has expired. A countdown of time remaining to speak is also displayed on the large screen behind the Council dais. No documents shall be accepted for Council review unless they are submitted to the City Clerk at least 24 hours prior to the Council Agenda item being heard. Following is a general schedule of items for Council consideration and action. The City Council may consider and act on an agenda item in any order it deems appropriate. Actual timed items may be heard later but not before the time set on agenda. Persons interested in an item listed on the agenda are advised to be present throughout the meeting to ensure their presence when the item is called. AGENDA ITEMS MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK (***) ARE SUBJECT TO MAYORAL VETO OR RECONSIDERATION Page 2 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final El Consejo de la Ciudad de Fresno da la bienvenida al City Council Chambers, ubicado en la Alcaldía (City Hall), do piso, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. El objetivo de la Ciudad de Fresno es cumplir con la Ley de Americanos con Discapacidades (ADA) en todo aspecto. La sala para juntas es físicamente accesible. Si usted, como asistente o participante de la junta, necesita acomodaciones adicionales coma intérpretes, lenguaje de señas, aparatos auditivos, o los servicios de un traductor, por favor comuníquese con la Oficina del Secretario Municipal llamando al (559) 621-7650 o al clerk@fresno.gov. Para asegurarse de la disponibilidad, se le recomienda llamar y hacer su petición por lo menos 48 horas antes de la junta. La agenda y los reportes de personal correspondientes están disponibles en el www.fresno.gov, o en la Oficina del Secretario Municipal. Las juntas del Municipio se pueden ver en el Canal 96 de Comcast y el Canal 99 de AT&T a las 9:00 a.m. y otra vez empezando a las 8:00 p.m. La junta también se puede ver en el internet en el https://fresno.legistar.com PROCESO: Por cada asunto que escuche el Consejo Municipal, habrá una presentación del personal seguida por una presentación de los individuos involucrados, si están presentes. El testimonio de los presentes se escuchará entonces. Todo testimonio se limitará a tres minutos por persona. Si usted desea hablar, Ilene la hoja para pedir hablar disponibles en la oficina del Secretario Municipal y en la Sala Consistorial. Las tres luces en el atril junto al micrófono indicarán cuanto tiempo le queda al orador. La luz verde en el atril se prenderá cuando el orador comience. La luz amarilia se prenderá cuando quede un minuto. El orador debería estar concluyendo su testimonio cuando la luz roja prenda y ci sonido indique que se acabo su tiempo. La cantidad del tiempo que queda también aparecerá en la pantalla grande atrás del Consejo Municipal. No se aceptarán documentos para que repase el Consejo Municipal a menos que se sometan al Secretario Municipal por lo menos 24 horas antes de que se escuche la Agenda del Consejo Municipal. Este es el horario general de temas para la consideración y acción del Consejo Municipal. El consejo Municipal pudiera considerar y tomar acción en un artículo de la Agenda en el orden que considere adecuado. Artículos con una hora fijada se pueden escuchar después de la hora indicada pero no antes de la hora indicada en la agenda. Se les recomienda a las personas que estén interesadas en un artículo de la agenda, que estén presentes durante toda la junta para asegurar su presencia cuando se presente ese artículo. Page 3 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final LOS ARTICULOS MARCADOS CON TRES ASTERISCOS (***) ESTAN SUJETOS A UN VETO POR PARTE DEL ALCALDE O UNA RECONSIDERACION Tso Fresno City Council tos txais koj rau City Council Chambers, nyob rau hauv City Hall, 2nd Floor, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721. Lub hom phiaj ntawm nroog Fresno yuav ua kom tau txhua yam raw li txoj cai American with Disabilities Act (ADA) kom fwm txhua tus. Lub rooj sab laj txhua tus yuav tsum muaj feem koom kom tau, txawm yog cov tuaj koom, cov muaj feem rau lub rooj sab laj, yuav tsum kom muaj kev pab rau sawv daws xws li txhais lus, piav tes, tej twj mloog pob ntseg los yog ib tug txhais lus, thov hu rau Office of the City Clerk ntawm (559) 621-7650 los sis clerk@fresno.gov. Yuav kom paub tseeb tias npaj tau rau koj, koj yuav tsum tau hais ua ntej 48 xuab moos ntawm lub rooj sab laj. Daim ntawv kom tswj thiab tej ntaub ntawv cov ua dej num yuav coj los ceeb tshaj muaj nyob rau ntawm www.fresno.gov, los sis ntawm Office of the City Clerk. Council lub rooj sab laj saib pom rau hauv Comcast tshooj 96 thiab AT&T tshooj 99 thaum 9:00 teev sauv ntxoov thiab rov tso tawm thaum 8:00 teev tsaus ntuj. Lub rooj sab Iaj kuj saib tau online at https://fresno.legistar.com. TXUAS NTXIV: Txhua nqe laj txheej yuav tau pom zoo los ntawm cov council ua ntej thiab yuav tau muaj ib tug staff los cej luam dhau ntawd cov uas muaj feem cuam mam los cej luam ib tug zuj zus, yog tuaj nyob rau ntawd. Dhau ntawd yuav tso rau sawv daw los tawrn suab, ib leeg twg yuav los tawm suab tsuas pub peb(3) nas this xwb. Yog koj xav los tawm suab, mus sau rau daim ntawv (Speaker Request Form) muaj nyob rau hauv City Clerk's Office thiab nyob rau huav Council Chambers. muaj peb(3) lub teeb nyob rau ntawm lub podium uas puab rau ntawm lub (microphone) qhia tias tus neeg hais lus muaj sij haum ntev Ii cas xwb. Lub teeb ntsuab ntawm lub podium yuav cig thaum tus hais lus pib hais. Lub teeb daj yuav cig thaum tshuav ib(1) nas this. Tus hais lus yuav tsum hais kom tas rau thaum lub teeb liab cig thiab lub tswb nrov, qhia tias sij haum tas lawm. lb qhov ntxiv nyob rau saum daim (screen) loj loj dai rau tom cov council nrob qaurn yuav pom lub sij hawm dhia qis zuj zus los mus. Page 4 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Cov council yuav tsis txais ib yam ntaub ntawv los saib ntxiv tshwj tsis yog twb muab xa rau City Clerk 24 teev thiab muab tso rau hauv daim kom tswj ua ntej council yuav los mloog tej xwm txheej. Dhau ntawd yuav muab sij hawm rau cov council los soj ntsuam thiab ua tes dej num, Coy tswv zos (City Council) yuav los ntsuam xyuas thiab leg raws tej nqe hauv daim kom tswj yog pom tias yam twg yuav tsim nyog. Mam muab lub sij hawm los xyuas raws tej txheej txheem tom qab tiam si yuav tsis yog ua ntej raws Ii daim kom tswj tau teev tseg. Cov uas txaus siab rau tei laj txheej uas tau teev tseg rau hauv daim kom tswj, xav kom nyob kom dhau lub rooj sab laj kom thaum hu txog nws thiaj nyob rau ntawd YOG QHOV MUAJ PEB LUB HNUB QUB (***) NYOB RAU HAUV DAIM KOM TSWJ YUAV RAUG MAYORAL VETO LOS SIS ROV SOJ NTSUAM DUA Page 5 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 9:02 A.M. ROLL CALL Invocation by Councilmember Clinton J. Olivier Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag APPROVE AGENDA APPROVE MINUTES ID16-1241 Approval of amended minutes of September 1, 2016 ID16-161 Approval of minutes from October 13, 2016 COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS 1. CONSENT CALENDAR All Consent Calendar items are considered to be routine and will be treated as one agenda item. The Consent Calendar will be enacted by one motion. Public comment on the Consent Calendar is limited to three (3) minutes per speaker. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a Councilmember, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Calendar and will be considered as time allows. 1-A ID16-1141 Actions pertaining to the Traffic Signal Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street - Project Bid File No . 3397 (Council District 3) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301(c) (existing facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for the Traffic Signal Protected Left-Turn Phasing Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street 2.Award a construction contract to A -C Electric Company, Inc. of Fresno, California, in the amount of $406,300 for the Traffic Signal Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street Sponsors:Public Works Department 1-B ID16-1164 Adopt Resolution of Intention No. 1111-D to vacate the Broadway Diagonal between “H” Street and Broadway Plaza and the Broadway Plaza - “H” Street alley between Merced Street and the Page 6 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Broadway Diagonal. (Council District 3.) Sponsors:Public Works Department 1-C ID16-1165 RESOLUTION - Approving, authorizing and directing the execution and delivery of the Agreement to terminate the Central California Joint Powers Health Financing Authority between the City of Fresno and the City of Clovis Sponsors:Finance Department 1-D ID16-1184 Actions Pertaining to the Engineering Services to Evaluate Solids Digestion and High Strength Waste Handling Systems at the Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Council District 3) 1.***RESOLUTION - 19th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2016-118 appropriating $366,600 for engineering services to evaluate solids digestion and high strength waste systems (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 2.Award a professional engineering services contract for $351,600, with $10,000 contingency, to Black & Veatch Corporation, of Rancho Cordova, California Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities 1-E ID16-1187 Actions pertaining to Resolution of Intention No. 1110-D to vacate the “F” - “G” alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and a portion of Tuolumne Street. (Council District 3). 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination, pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Environmental Assessment No. EA-16-022-HSR. 2.Adopt Resolution of Intention No. 1110-D to vacate the “F” - “G” alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and a portion of Tuolumne Street. Sponsors:Public Works Department 1-F ID16-1190 A.Approve the First Amendment to the SunGard Public Sector, Inc ., Application Service Provider Agreement and Ratify Extension to Agreement between the City of Fresno and SunGard Public Sector, Inc., increasing the contract amount by $6,280 annually. Sponsors:Information Services Department Page 7 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 1-G ID16-1177 B. Actions Related to Retaining of Consultant for Automated Billing Paying Services: 1. Approve the City Manager’s determination that Consultant is uniquely qualified 2. Approve a consultant services agreement with First Billing Services for a total fee of $13,000 per month for Electronic Billing Payment Presentation Services and up to$14,630 per month for Optional Print Services for City of Fresno utility customers (Citywide). Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities 1-H ID16-1192 Consideration of Policy and Procedure TR 1.3.1, Titled “Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right -Of-Way” (Citywide) 1.Consider the Finding of No Possibility that the project will have impacts on the environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines 2.RESOLUTION - Approving Policy and Procedure No. TR 1.3.1, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within Public Right-of-Way Sponsors:Public Works Department 1-I ID16-1206 Actions pertaining to a Lease Agreement at Manchester Center for temporary space for Manchester Transit Center the Utility Billing and Collections Division: 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption Class 1 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (existing facilities) 2.Approve a lease between the City of Fresno and Omninet Properties Manchester Center, LLC ., for lease of space at Manchester Center for use by the Departments of Transportation and Public Utilities Sponsors:Office of Mayor & City Manager 1-J ID16-1225 Actions pertaining to a lease agreement for a new property/evidence warehouse: 1. ***RESOLUTION 25th amendment to the Annual Authorizing Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 appropriating $250,000 for the purpose of purchasing shelving and racking for evidence storage; a Page 8 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final large walk-in cold box; relocating a back-up generator; necessary technology equipment and services for computer connectivity; and moving expenses for relocating all of our property/evidence to the new warehouse. (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 2. Approve a lease agreement with CARLULU, LLC., for office and warehouse space to be used for the storage of property/evidence and Police Department specialty vehicles. Sponsors:Police Department 1-K ID16-1215 ***BILL NO. B-39 - (Intro. 10/13/2016) (For adoption) - Repealing and adding Section 6-301 of the Fresno Municipal Code related to General Provisions; Purpose and Policy of Sewage and Water Disposal (Citywide). Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities 1-L ID16-1217 ***BILL NO. B-40 - (Intro. 10/13/2016) (For adoption) - Council Approval of First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation, and Betts Company, a California corporation, recorded with the Fresno County Recorder dated April 28, 2008, including incentives; and, authorizing the City Manager to sign the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. Sponsors:Office of Mayor & City Manager JOINT CITY AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY CONSENT CALENDAR ID16-1239 Actions pertaining to a lease of space at the Convention Center for use by the Successor Agency: 1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption of Class 1pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (existing facilities) 2. Approve a lease with SMG, a Pennsylvania general partnership Sponsors:Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Fresno and Office of Mayor & City Manager 2. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 2-A ID16-1090 Award a construction contract in the amount of $18,204,180 to Floyd Johnston Construction Company, Inc. for the City of Fresno Phase 2 Regional Transmission Mains Segment A 2 Project (Bid File 3450) (Council District 1, 3, and 7). Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities Page 9 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 2-B ID16-1195 Actions pertaining to Sewer Rehabilitation /Replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Downtown Alleys (Bid File 3429) (Council District 3) 1.Adopt findings of Categorical Exemption Class 1, pursuant to Section 15301(d) (Existing facilities) and Categorical Exemption Class 2, pursuant to Section 15302(c) (Replacement or reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.***RESOLUTION - 18th amendment to Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 appropriating $770,000 for Sewer Rehabilitation/Replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Downtown Alleys (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 3.Award a $609,270 contract to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc., of Fresno, California Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities 2-C ID16-1176 ***RESOLUTION - 17th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 to appropriate $2,490,200 for new and existing capital projects in the Public Works Department (Citywide) (Requires 5 affirmative votes) Sponsors:Public Works Department 2-D ID16-1181 RESOLUTION - Approving assignment of Annadale Housing Partners’ $2,996,720 loan to DHI King’s View Associates, L.P., a California limited partnership and conversion of the loan to a fifty -five-year residual receipts loan at 0% interest Sponsors:Planning and Development Department 2-E ID16-1196 Actions pertaining to Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition and Programmable Logic Control Software Installation and Integration for the City of Fresno ’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Kings River Pipeline Project (All Districts): 1.Reject all bids for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition, and Programmable Logic Control Software Installation and Integration services for the City of Fresno ’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Kings River Pipeline Project. (Bid File 3472). 2.Approve Project Change Order No. 5 to WM Lyles Company in the amount of $2,493,750 for Supervisory Control and Data Page 10 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Acquisition and Programmable Logic Control Software Installation and Integration Services for the City of Fresno ’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Kings River Pipeline Project. 3.Approve a one-time extension of the current limits of Construction Contract Change Order Authority for the City of Fresno’s Chief Administrative Officer to $3,500,000 as related to the Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility. Sponsors:Department of Public Utilities 2-F ID16-1162 Actions pertaining to FY 2015 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant 1.Approve application for and acceptance of FY 2015 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant award for $2,069,400 through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and authorize the Fire Chief to complete all required documents during the grant period. 2.RESOLUTION - Authorizing the application for and acceptance of FY 2015 Cycle Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) funding issued by the U .S. Department of Homeland Security Grant Program and authorizing completion of all required documents. Sponsors:Fire Department 2-G ID16-1236 BILL - (For introduction and adoption) - An emergency ordinance of the City of Fresno, California, amending Section 1-308(g) of the Fresno Municipal Code, relating to Administrative Citations and Penalties and amending and adding Subsections to Section 11-307 of the Fresno Municipal Code, relating to Code Violations (Requires five affirmative votes). Sponsors:Office of Mayor & City Manager 3. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS 10:00 A.M. ID16-1194 HEARING to consider Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003, Rezone Application No. R-16-009, Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16-046, and related Environmental Page 11 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Assessment No. ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046, filed by The Vincent Company Architects, on behalf of Louis Brosi. These applications pertain to approximately 18.52 acres of property located on the northwest corner of East Alluvial and North Chestnut Avenues. 1.Adopt the Finding of Conformity to the Fresno General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR SCH#2012111012), EA No. ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16- 046, dated September 2, 2016. 2.BILL - (For introduction and adoption) - Approving Rezone Application No. R-16-009 to pre-zone the property from Fresno County RA-20 (Residential Agricultural, 20 acres) zone district to the City of Fresno RS -5/UGM (Residential Single Family, Medium Density/Urban Growth Management) zone district. 3.***RESOLUTION - Approving Annexation Application No . ANX-16-003 to initiate annexation proceedings for incorporation of the subject property to the City of Fresno and detachment from the Fresno County Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District. 4.Approve Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046, to allow for a planned development that includes a 30-lot single family residential subdivision (tentative map to be submitted at a later date) and a 176-unit multiple family residential complex with a density transfer, subject to the conditions of approval dated September 21, 2016. 5.***RESOLUTION - Approving the certification to the Fresno County Auditor the amount of the cancellation valuation fee for the cancellation of Agricultural Land Conservation Contract No. AP-1366, as required by Section 51283(b) of the California Government Code. Sponsors:Planning and Development Department 1:30 P.M.#1 CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 1:30 P.M.#2 CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS ID16-1222 Presentation of the SPCA Pet of the Month Sponsors:Vice President Quintero Page 12 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final ID16-459 Proclamation of “NATIONAL BREAST CANCER MONTH” Sponsors:Councilmember Soria ID16-461 Proclamation of “ARTS AND HUMANITIES MONTH” Sponsors:Councilmember Soria ID16-1139 Resolution of Commendation to Airport Operations Specialists Team Sponsors:Mayor's Office and Office of Mayor & City Manager ID16-1111 Proclamation of “DISABILITY AWARENESS MONTH” Sponsors:Mayor's Office and City Council ID16-1220 [Type the title of the ceremonial presentation here, as you wish it to appear on the agenda. Delete this text and the brackets as they only serve as instructions.] Sponsors:Mayor's Office ID16-1221 Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Outstanding Achievement Awards - Third Quarter Award Winner - Lourdes Zavala Sponsors:Baines III ID16-1207 Proclamation to honor the Veterans Memorial Museum for 25 years of Service. “Home of the Legion of Valor”. Sponsors:Vice President Quintero 2:15 P.M. ID16-1158 HEARING - To consider adoption of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, the Downtown Development Code and related Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR), State Clearinghouse (SCH) # 2012041009. The following applications have been filed by the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department Director and pertain to approximately 7,290 acres in the Downtown Planning Area: 1.RESOLUTION - Certifying Final Program EIR (SCH No. 2012041009), for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Page 13 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Downtown Development Code. a.ADOPT Findings of Fact as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a) and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091; and, b.APPROVE a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097; and, c.ADOPT the Statement of Overriding Considerations as required by Public Resources Code, Section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093. 2.RESOLUTION - Approving Plan Amendment Application No A-16-009 which proposes to repeal the Central Area Community Plan, pertaining to approximately 1,701 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 3.BILL (For introduction and adoption) - Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-010 which proposes to repeal the Fulton -Lowell Specific Plan, pertaining to approximately 495 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 4.***RESOLUTION - Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-011 which proposes to adopt the July 27, 2016 draft as amended by the October 2016 changes of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, pertaining to approximately 7,290 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 5.***RESOLUTION - Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-012, which proposes to adopt the July 27, 2016 draft as amended by the October 2016 changes of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, pertaining to approximately 655 acres and located within the boundaries of the Downtown Planning Area. 6.RESOLUTION - Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-008, which proposes to update the text and Land Use Map (Figure LU-1) of the Fresno General Plan to incorporate the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan as well as to correspondingly amend the Edison, Roosevelt and West Area Community Plans and the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and the Fresno -Chandler Downtown Airport Master and Environs Specific Plan. Page 14 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final 7.***BILL - (For introduction) Approving Text Amendment Application No. TA-16-002 which proposes amendments to the Citywide Development to incorporate the updated October 2016 draft of the Downtown Development Code. This code includes form-based zoning requirements for development within the DNCP and FCSP plan areas. New sections proposed to be added to the Citywide Development Code include standards for three new Downtown zones : Downtown Core, Downtown General and Downtown Neighborhood (Article 15 of Chapter 15 of the FMC) along with provisions related to Parking and Loading (Section 15-2407-A). In addition, an Urban Campus Overlay District is added in Section 15-1610 and a Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay District is added in Section 15-1611. Amended sections include Determining Frontage Coverage (Section 15-317), Fences, Walls and Hedges (Section 15-2006), Summary of Primary Planning Permits and Actions (Table 15-4907), Zone Clearance Applicability (Section 15-5102), Apartment Overlay District, (Section15-1609), Signs (Sections 15-2608 and 15-2610), and Terms and Definitions (Sections 15-5501 and 15-5502). 8.BILL - (For Introduction and Adoption) Approving Rezone Application No. R-16-011, which proposes to rezone all of the property within the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan areas to be consistent with the planned land use. The rezone covers approximately 7.290 acres. This action would necessitate repealing Resolution 2016-28, which created interim zoning in the Downtown Planning Area until such time as the final proposed zoning could be adopted. 9.RESOLUTION - Repealing Resolution No. 2016-28, adopted on February 25, 2016, to amend the zoning designation translation table for the Downtown Planning Area. This resolution created interim zone districts in the Downtown Planning Area until such time as the final proposed zoning could be adopted. It will no longer be necessary with approval of Rezone Application No. R- 16-011, proposed with these applications. 10.RESOLUTION - Authorizing the Development and Resource Management Director or her designee to correct any typographical errors and update the text, policies, maps, tables, and exhibits contained in the Page 15 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, the Fresno General Plan and the Downtown Development Code to reflect the final action taken by the Council, to the extent that such updates are necessary to maintain consistency. Sponsors:Planning and Development Department 4. CITY COUNCIL 5. CLOSED SESSION PLEASE NOTE: UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION IS NOT SCHEDULED FOR A SPECIFIC TIME AND MAY BE HEARD ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION ADJOURNMENT UPCOMING SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS October 27, 2016 - NO MEETING November 3, 2016 10:00 A.M. - TEFRA HEARING - To hear and consider information concerning the proposed issuance of Revenue Bonds by California Affordable Housing Agency (the “Agency”) for the purpose of financing the acquisition, rehabilitation, improvement and equipping of King’s View Manor and Estates by DHI King’s View Associates, LLC November 3, 2016 10:00 A.M. - HEARING to consider adoption of resolutions related to the designation of properties to the Local Register of Historic Resources 1.*** RESOLUTION - Designating the Wilbur and Edna Marie Chandler Home located at 520 N. Yosemite Avenue, Fresno, California to the Local Register of Historic Resources (Council District 3) 2.*** RESOLUTION – Designating the Henry A. Allen Home located at 548 N. Yosemite Avenue, Fresno, California to the Local Register of Historic Resources (Council District 3). November 10, 2016 - NO MEETING Page 16 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto October 20, 2016City Council Meeting Agenda - Final November 17, 2016 2:00 P.M. - WORKSHOP on the Recharge Fresno Program Update November 17, 2016 4:30 P.M. - Draft Preferred Alternative for the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan UPCOMING EMPLOYEE CEREMONIES November 16, 2016 - 2:00 P.M. - Employee Service Awards Ceremony 2016 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE October 27, 2016 - NO MEETING November 3, 2016 - 9:00 A.M. MEETING November 10, 2016 - NO MEETING November 17, 2016 - 1:30 P.M. MEETING November 24, 2016 - NO MEETING Page 17 City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1241 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:Yvonne Spence, CMC CITY CLERK BY:Todd Stermer, CMC ASSISTANT CITY CLERK SUBJECT Approval of amended minutes of September 1, 2016 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the amended minutes of September 1, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed amendment only affects File ID 16-1002 concerning the General Plan Clean-Up and makes it clear the item was approved with a 180 day extension for property owners to request their properties revert back to previous land use designation. BACKGROUND The General Plan Clean-Up item (File ID 16-1002) was approved by Council during the September 1, 2016 hearing. The item included an additional 180 day extension to allow property owners to request their properties revert back to previous land use designations. The extension was previously discussed by Council at a Workshop (File ID 16-908) on August 18, 2016 and was briefly discussed during the subsequent hearing in which it was approved. The September 1, 2016 minutes made no special mention of the extension. Development and Resources Management staff has requested the September 1, 2016 minutes be amended to make reference to the additional 180 day extension. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Environmental findings are not applicable to this item. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable to this item. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1241 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: FISCAL IMPACT There would be no fiscal impact from the approval of this item. Attachment:Draft Amendments to September 1, 2016 Minutes City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ September 1, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Final 3. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS CONTINUED 3:00 P.M. CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR No items were moved to the Contested Consent Calendar. Councilmember Brand exited the Council Chamber at 5:13 P.M. and returned at 7:54 P.M. 5:00 P.M. ID16-1002 CONTINUED HEARING to consider Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-006, Rezone Application No. R-16-007, Development Code Text Amendment Application No. TA-16-001 and related environmental finding filed by the Development and Resource Management Department Director pertaining to 316.09 acres of property as follows: 1.ADOPT Environmental Assessment No. A-16-006, R-16-007, TA-16-001, an Addendum to Final Master Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2012111015 (MEIR) certified by the Fresno City Council on December 18, 2014 for the Fresno General Plan and Development Code, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164; 2.RESOLUTION - Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-006, pertaining to 249.06 acres, to amend the Fresno General Plan (Figure LU-1: Land Use and Circulation Map, and Figure LU-2: Dual Designation Diagram), the Bullard, Fresno High, McLane, Roosevelt, West Area, and Woodward Park Community Plans, the Tower District Specific Plan, the Fresno Yosemite Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and the Sierra Sky Park Land Use Policy Plan, as described in Exhibit A (with Errata); 3.BILL - (For introduction and adoption) Approving Rezone Application No. R-16-007, to amend the City of Fresno Zoning Map to effect technical changes to zoning on properties that were inadvertently omitted from the zoning map update. The rezones are requested to attain consistency with the approved general plan land use designation, and are further described in Exhibit A (with Errata); 4.BILL - (For introduction) - Approving Text Amendment Application No. TA-16-001 for minor changes to the City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 17 September 1, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Final Development Code in order to improve functionality, clarity, and internal consistency. Proposed amendments affect the following standards and/or procedures: rear setbacks, private open space, fencing, signage, hours of operation for establishments serving alcohol, design standards within mixed use districts, the apartment house overlay, intersection visibility; the addition of produce stands, urban farms and large family day care to certain zone districts; the deletion of the airport environs and planned development overlay districts (due to redundancy); and posting requirements, among others (see Exhibit B for complete text amendment). The affected sections are 15-404-F, 15-904 -A, 15-1004-C-1, 15-1004-D-1-a, 15-1104-D-1, 15-2006-F, 15- 2305-C-2, 15-2609-B, 15-2610-E-2, 15-2611-G, 15-2735-G, 15- 2741-A-7-a, Table 15-2744-A , 15-2744-C-1, 15-2747, Table 15- 751-G, 15-4906-D-1, 15-4906-H, 15-5003-A, 15-5302-D, 15- 5602-A, 15-6703, 15-104-A, Table 15-107-B, 15-313, Table 15- 902, Table 15-1002, Table 15-1102, 15-1104-G.1, Table 15- 1202, Table 15-1302, Table 15-1402, 15-1601, 15-1602, 15- 1609-B, 15-2006-F, Table 15-2015-B.4, 15-2018, 15-2102-A, 15 -2707, 15-2754, 15-5007-C, 15-5810-A. The above hearing was called to order at 5:00 P.M. The item was introduced to Council by Development and Resources Management, Assistant Director Zack. [Assistant Director Zack clarified that the items for approval included an additional 180 day extension for property owners to have their properties revert back to previous land use designations, as discussed at the previous workshop.] Upon call for public comment, the following people addressed Council: Laura P. Kalchik - spoke in support of the staff recommendation. Mark Kalchik - requested Council approve the staff recommendation. George Goehing - stated that apartments were not a good fit for his parcels on the Southwest corner of Shaw and Bryan Avenues. Assistant Director Zack clarified that the proposed zoning was for mixed use which would allow commercial, residential or a combination of the two. Dirk Poeschel - represented the owners of the property on the Southwest corner of Fruit and Shields Avenues and supported the staff recommendation. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 18 September 1, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Final Tom Thomas - stated he was a resident of Clovis and wanted to laud Assistant Director Zack for the professional manner in which he dealt with an issue in the Shaw and Bryan area. George Beal - asked that his property on the Southwest corner of Van Ness and Belmont be removed from the current action. Patience Milrod - spoke in support of the staff recommendation and discussed agreements made in January. Ashley Werner of the Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability - requested that densities not be reduced or the city comply with Government Code section 65863(b). She said many of the sites to be re-zoned were included in the city's Housing Element Sites Inventory. Government Code section 65863(b) required the City to make specific findings before reducing the density of sites in the sites inventory or before changing sites to non-residential. Ms. Werner noted the staff materials did not include the findings required by the Government Code. She also noted the Fresno Bee notice stating the related material were ready for public viewing was posted early because when she arrived to view them, she was told they were not ready. Sarah Pilibos of Stephen Investments - spoke in support of the staff recommendation to keep the zoning consistent for all contiguous properties at Cedar and Gettysburg. Public comment was closed at 5:21 P.M. The hearing was closed at 5:45 P.M. Councilmember Brandau motioned to approve the staff recommendation with an amendment to remove site three from the action and to remove the Beal property (Southwest corner of Van Ness and Belmont) from the action. RESOLUTION 2016-166 ADOPTED BILL B-34 INTRODUCED AS AMENDED AND ADOPTED AS ORDINANCE 2016-31 BILL B-35 INTRODUCED AS AMENDED AND LAID OVER City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 19 September 1, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Final On motion of Councilmember Brandau, seconded by Councilmember Baines III, the above item was approved as amended [including an additional 180 days for owners to request previous land use designations.] The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brandau, Olivier and Soria6 - Absent:Brand1 - RECESSED 5:45 P.M. to 6:17 P.M. 6:00 P.M. ID16-1007 ***RESOLUTION - Recognizing the November 1984 Anti-Sikh Violence in India as Genocide The above item was introduced to Council by Councilmember Olivier. At the request of Councilmember Soria, Deputy City Attorney Badesha provided summarized translations of Punjabi to English and English to Punjabi for the duration of the meeting. President Caprioglio took an informal survey by a show of hands and determined that nearly every member of the public in the overflowing council chamber was in support of the resolution and no one opposed it. Upon call for public comment, the following people addressed Council in support of the resolution: Bill Nijjer; Raj Beasla; Doctor Kanwar Gill; Mangal Kaur; Naindeep Singh; Gurdeep Shergill; Tadeh Iskhanian; Mayor Pro Tem Ruby Dhaliwal, and; Mohinder S. Kahlon. President Caprioglio announced the meeting would be recessed for several minutes to allow time for Councilmember Brand to return for the vote on this item. RECESSED 7:26 P.M. to 7:54 P.M. RESOLUTION 2016-167 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Olivier, seconded by Councilmember Baines III, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria5 - Abstain:Caprioglio and Quintero2 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 20 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-161 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: MINUTES FOR APPROVAL Approval of minutes from October 13, 2016 City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov City of Fresno Meeting Minutes - Draft City Council President - Paul Caprioglio Vice President - Sal Quintero Councilmembers: Oliver L. Baines, III, Lee Brand, Steve Brandau, Clinton J. Olivier, Esmeralda Z. Soria City Manager - Bruce Rudd City Attorney - Douglas T. Sloan City Clerk - Yvonne Spence, CMC 9:00 AM Council ChambersThursday, October 13, 2016 Regular Session The City Council met in regular session in the Council Chamber, City Hall, on the date and time written above. 9:05 A.M. ROLL CALL President Paul Caprioglio Vice President Sal Quintero Councilmember Oliver L. Baines III Councilmember Lee Brand Councilmember Steve Brandau Councilmember Clinton Olivier Councilmember Esmeralda Soria Present:7 - Invocation by Pastor Tirso Gonzalez Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag APPROVE AGENDA City Clerk Spence announced the following changes to the agenda: Innvocation was by Pastor Tirso Gonzalez and; the 10:10 A.M. #3 Scheduled Matter (File ID# 16-1189) was removed from the agenda by the requestor. APPROVED AS AMENDED On motion of Councilmember Soria, seconded by Councilmember Baines III, the Agenda was approved as amended. The motion carried City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 1 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - APPROVE MINUTES ID16-160 Approval of minutes from September 22, 2016 APPROVED On motion of Vice President Quintero, seconded by President Caprioglio, the above Minutes were approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS AND COMMENTS Vice President Quintero asked that the meeting be adjourned in the memory of his brother John Quintero. He recalled that his brother was the second longest serving Planning Commissioner in the City of Fresno. Vice President Quintero asked that the meeting also be adjourned in the memory of Ricardo Duran. Mr. Duran was the Director of Human Relations Commission when it was originally formed in the 1990's. He was also one of the leaders that started the Cesar Chavez celebrations. Vice President Quintero asked that the meeting also be adjourned in the memory of Ron Garabedian. Mr. Garabedian was an Eligibility Worker / Director at the Economic Opportunities Commission and had run for City Council in the 1980's. Vice President Quintero stated that Mr. Garabedian and his family have contributed a lot to the City of Fresno. Vice President Quintero thanked the Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Service ("PARCS") Department for the annual Carnival event at the Mosqueda Center. He announced that 3,500 people were in attendance and helped to salute the Police and Fire Departments. The PARCS Department went above and beyond in organizing the event. Vice President Quintero thanked Del Estabrooke and his team and the Police Department for helping with the CenCalVia event on Ventura Avenue. More than a thousand people attended this first ever event in Fresno. There were information tables, Zumba events, chalk drawing in the streets and City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 2 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft everyone had a great time. Vice President Quintero thanked Assistant City Manager Smith for helping to procure funding from the State for the City of Fresno. He noted that a majority of the money would be focused on Southeast Fresno. Assistant City Manager Smith explained that the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program was administered by the State Strategic Growth Counsel, Department of Housing and Community Development and the California Air Resources Board. Of the 25 awarded projects, the largest of the valley awards was the 15.6 million dollars awarded to the Cesar Chavez Foundation in District 5. It was a 31.7 million dollar project with an anticipated 135 units along the Bus Rapid Transit corridor. The project had been coordinated by City Departments for more than four years. The second award was 5.7 million dollars for phase one of the South Stadium project on the Fulton mall. That project is a five story mixed use building at Fulton and Inyo and would include 10,000 square feet of office space and 51 residential units. Assistant City Manager Smith stated that Danielle Bergstrom and Claudia Ruiz were instrumental in getting both applications packaged and through state lobbying. City Manager Rudd noted the Cesar Chavez property was acquired years ago as a result of a trade in exchange for traffic signal fees in hopes that there would be some kind of Bus Rapid Transit in the future. Vice President Quintero read the following statement into the record: "Due to recent property acquisitions by Sanger Unified School District, in the vicinity of Jensen and Church, I am requesting that the DARM Department re-evaluate the General Plan land use dual designations in the quarter section bounded by Fowler, Jensen, Armstrong and Church. If any updates are need to the dual designation due to the school district activity, I am requesting that the DARM Director initiate and process an appropriate General Plan amendment and a re-zone, if necessary." Councilmember Brandau discussed "Make A Difference Day" held at Chukchansi Park on October 8, 2016. Kids from all over the community showed up to play soccer. The day included bounces houses, the Fire and Police Departments, lunch for 2,000 people plus team photos medals. He noted that volunteers made it all possible. The event encouraged children to do healthy activities and encouraged people to volunteer. Councilmember Brandau also discussed his day at Ms. Vannata's Government class at Bullard High School. The class had questions for him City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 3 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft about litter and homelessness. He enjoyed the dialogue with the students and was impressed that they were concerned with the same issues discussed at Council. Councilmember Brandau displayed photographs of his Make a Difference Day and Ms. Vannata's Class. The photographs have been attached to file ID 16-1250 and are available in the City Clerk's Office. Councilmember Baines III announced he was at the Global Cities Initiative event in Washington D.C. with President Caprioglio and Economic Development Director Westerlund. The team worked on a Direct Foreign Investment project and previously completed an Export Plan project. Councilmember Baines III reported he was in Washington D.C with President Caprioglio and Lee Ann Eager of the Fresno County Economic Development Corporation to discuss workforce development in Fresno. He noted there were many opportunities heading to Fresno and said the City needed to be prepared with a strong workforce. The team argued for investment and training dollars in Fresno with the Department of Labor, the Department of Education and the Economic Development Association in Washington D.C. He also announced the City was awarded $862,000 to replicate the Cyprus Mandela Training Center here in Fresno. It would be called the Central Valley Mandela Training Center. Councilmember Baines III announced he was in Sacramento with Councilmember Soria to present the city's resolution of support for High Speed Rail. He also stated he was very happy about the 70 million dollar minimum investment promised to the city by the state. He said that he testified at the Strategic Growth Council along with Councilmember Soria, President Caprioglio, Mayor Swearengin, Lee Ann Eager and others. Councilmember Baines III reported that he made a second argument for investment and training dollars in Fresno with President Caprioglio and Lee Ann Eager. The second argument was made in Sacramento while meeting with the California Department of Labor, CalTrans and the California Workforce Investment Board. Councilmember Soria reported her attendance at the California League of Cities the previous week. She was appointed as the Vice Chair of the Transportation, Communication and Public Works Policy Committee and was appointed to the General Resolutions Committee. She stated she was City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 4 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft also on the executive board of the Latino Caucus and the San Joaquin Valley Division that represents many cities in the valley. While at the League of Cities, she had the opportunity to listen to various experts and economists. She learned about different policy issues and how other cities were addressing them. Councilmember Soria announced there would be a follow up meeting to the Homan Elementary School community meeting regarding recycling issues. The meeting was tentatively scheduled for October 24, 2016. Councilmember Soria stated that people in her district were starting to report trash containers left in the street after pick up. City Manager Rudd noted the visible trash container ordinance was still not being enforced but patrol staff would be looking for people rummaging through containers. Councilmember Olivier asked the Council to adjourn in the memory of Bill Edholm. Mr. Edholm was remembered as a fantastic person and a community activist that did a lot of work on political campaigns. Councilmember Olivier recalled that Mr. Edholm would spend all day on neighborhood walks for a campaign and always had a kind word and a smile, no matter a person's political views. He was also part of a volunteer group at Valley Children's Hospital that would volunteer time to hold and rock babies. Councilmember Olivier announced he received a letter from Harris Construction dated September 8, 2016. The letter stated the Zoo Authority owed Harris Construction millions of dollars for work it had performed. Councilmember Olivier wanted to know if the City had authority to tell the Zoo Authority to pay its bills. City Manager Rudd said the City did not have authority over the Zoo Authority in that manner and said it appeared to be a standard construction dispute. City Manager Rudd noted both parties had retained Council. President Caprioglio announced the third annual Sierra Madre Neighborhood Picnic was a success. He thanked Fresno State Associated Students Incorporated, the Mosque, the Fresno Police Department, the Fresno State Police Department, and the Fresno Fire Department for participating. He noted the children love the safety vehicles that show up at the event. He also said the event gets larger every year and allowed neighbors to get out and meet neighbors. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 5 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft President Caprioglio invited everyone to Hoover High School for an afternoon of activities, food and games on Saturday, October 15, 2016 from noon to 4:00 P.M. President Caprioglio reported his attendance at the California League of Cities. He enjoyed the conferences, which were designed to help attendees better understand the policy making process. He noted the conferences were effective because participants from all over California were able to exchange ideas. President Caprioglio announced that it was a pleasure to be a part of the three member team to argue for investment and training dollars while in Sacramento and Washington D.C. He applauded Lee Ann Eager for her efforts and noted the team was so busy they didn't even stop for lunch. President Caprioglio reported that the Global Cities Initiative was a worldwide event sponsored by JP Morgan Chase and the Brookings Institute. He thanked Lee Ann Eager, Larry Westerlund and the Mayor's Office for their hard work on the matter. He said the team made its way to individual Congressional Offices to urge support for the development of the Central Valley Mandela Training Center. Councilmember Baines III noted that Congressman Costa, Valadao and Nunes were very supportive of the Fresno delegations efforts. President Caprioglio also thanked the Mayor and the Fresno citizens that showed up to support the 70 million dollars minimum investment from the state for the City of Fresno. ID16-1250 Councilmember Reports and Comment attachments Councilmember Brand exited the Council Chamber at 9:38 A.M. and returned at 9:41 A.M. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR On motion of Councilmember Olivier, seconded by President Caprioglio, the CONSENT CALENDAR was hereby adopted by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brandau, Olivier and Soria6 - Absent:Brand1 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 6 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 1-A ID16-1121 Actions pertaining to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program 1.Approve application for and acceptance of grant award for $36,581 from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and authorize the Fire Chief to complete all required documents 2.RESOLUTION - Authorizing the application for and acceptance of FY15 Cycle U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and authorizing completion of documents 3.***RESOLUTION - 16th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118, appropriating $33,300 from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program to the Fire Department to provide personal protective equipment (helmets) (Requires 5 affirmative votes) RESOLUTION 2016-192 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2016-193 ADOPTED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-B ID16-1133 Approve first amendment to the agreement for forensic interview services with Family Healing Center, Inc., to extend the term of the agreement for one year and increase the total contract dollar amount to $70,000. APPROVED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-C ID16-1140 Approve a Non-Exclusive License Agreement to Conduct Commercial Aviation Ground Handling and Support Services between Flight Services and Systems, Inc. and the City of Fresno to provide ground handling services at Fresno Yosemite International Airport, for a term of five years. APPROVED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-D ID16-1142 RESOLUTION - Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 6097 and accepting dedicated public uses offered therein - northeast corner of N. Fowler Avenue and E. Clinton Avenue (Council District 4) City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 7 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft RESOLUTION 2016-194 The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-E ID16-1143 RESOLUTION - Approving the Final Map of Tract No. 6079 and accepting dedicated public uses offered therein - northeast corner of N. Fowler Avenue and E. Clinton Avenue (Council District 4) RESOLUTION 2016-195 ADOPTED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-F ID16-1145 Award a contract for an amount not to exceed $139,500 to California CAD Solutions for professional consulting services to convert Geographical Information System (GIS) data from Oracle Spatial Extension (OSE) organization to Feature Data Object (FDO) organization for the Department of Public Utilities (DPU). APPROVED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-G ID16-1154 Actions Pertaining to Lift Station 4 Improvements at W. Riverview Drive and W. Bluff Avenue (Bid File 3487) (Council District 2) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption of Class 1, pursuant to Section 15301(d) (Existing facilities) and Class 2, pursuant to Section 15302(c) (Replacement or reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.Award a construction contract in the amount of $205,890.95 to JT2, Inc., dba Todd Companies of Visalia, California APPROVED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-H ID16-1155 RESOLUTION - Authorizing the Director of Aviation or other authorized representative to: execute all implicated documentation for pre-application and application to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants for federal fiscal years 2017 and 2018 for both Fresno Yosemite International Airport (FAT) and Fresno Chandler Executive Airport (FCH), as shown in the City’s fiscal year (FY) 2017 budget capital improvement plan; accept FAA City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 8 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft AIP grant(s) for FY 2017 and FY 2018 projects at both airports including all subsequent amendments thereto offered by the FAA; and apply for and accept of grants and all subsequent amendments thereto offered by the California Department of Transportation Aeronautics Division for matching funds for FY 2017 and 2018 FAA grants for the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport RESOLUTION 2016-196 ADOPTED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-I ID16-1156 Actions pertaining to the Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility consultant contract to revise and update a Request for Proposal for a design-build contract for a new 2-Megawatt Solar Energy Facility (Council District 3) 1. *** RESOLUTION - 15th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 to appropriate $256,000 for engineering services for the preparation of an RFP for a design-build contract for a 2-Megawatt Solar Energy Facility (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 2.Uphold City Manager’s determination that Parsons Water and Infrastructure, Inc. is uniquely qualified. 3.Award a $250,560 consultant contract (including a $25,000 contingency) to Parsons Water and Infrastructure, Inc., a Delaware corporation, for the preparation of an RFP for a design-build contract for a 2-Megawatt Solar Energy Facility The above item was moved to the Contested Consent Calendar by Councilmember Brandau for further discussion. 1-J ID16-1166 Approve the appointment of Ron McNary to the Historic Preservation Commission; and the reappointments of Kendall Groom and Jennette Williams to the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District. APPROVED The above item was approved on the Consent Calendar. 1-K ID16-1160 Actions pertaining to the amendment of the Developer Agreement between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation, and Betts Company, Inc., a California corporation. 1.BILL - (For Introduction) Council Approval of First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 9 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Fresno, a municipal corporation, and Betts Company, a California corporation, recorded with the Fresno County Recorder dated April 28, 2008, including incentives; and, authorizing the City Manager to sign the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. The above item was moved to the Contested Consent Calendar by Councilmember Soria for further discussion. 2. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 2-A ID16-793 RESOLUTION - Establishing Fire Station Service Areas 10R, 12, 19, 24, 25 and 26 within the Urban Growth Management Boundary (Council Districts 2, 3, 4 and 5). The above item was introduced to Council by Public Works Director Mozier. RESOLUTION 2016-197 ADOPTED On motion of Vice President Quintero, seconded by Councilmember Baines III, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - 2-B ID16-1169 Actions pertaining to the City of Fresno and the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 753 for Unit 10 1. ***Adopt a successor Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Fresno and the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 753 for Unit 10 - Fire Management, effective October 17, 2016 2. ***RESOLUTION - 8th amendment to FY 2017 Salary Resolution No. 2016-120, amending salaries in Exhibit 10, Unit 10, Fire Management, as required by adoption of the successor Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Fresno and the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 753 for Unit 10 The above item was introduced to Council by Labor Relations Manager Phillips. RESOLUTION 2016-198 ADOPTED On motion of Vice President Quintero, seconded by Councilmember City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 10 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Baines III, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - 2-C ID16-1086 Actions pertaining to sewer rehabilitation and replacement in North Central Downtown (Council District 3) 1.Adopt findings of Categorical Exemption of Class 1, pursuant to Section 15301(b) (Existing facilities of both investor and publicly-owned utilities) and Class 2, pursuant to Section 15302(c) (Replacement or reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and 2.Award a construction contract in the amount of $1,526,786 to Bill Nelson GEC., Inc. of Fresno California The above item was introduced to Council by Supervising Professional Engineer Norgaard. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Vice President Quintero, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - Councilmember Olivier exited the Council Chamber at 9:46 A.M. and returned at 9:59 A.M. Councilmember Soria exited the Council Chamber at 9:50 A.M. and returned at 9:55 A.M. 2-D ID16-1157 Approve an agreement establishing and joining the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, a Joint Powers Authority. The above item was introduced to Council by Public Utilities Director Esqueda. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Brandau, seconded by Councilmember Brand, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand and Brandau5 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 11 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Absent:Olivier and Soria2 - Councilmember Brandau exited the Council Chamber at 10:07 A.M. and returned at 10:10 A.M. 2-E ID16-1159 Actions pertaining to the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration (EDA) Grant for the City of Fresno’s South Van Ness Industrial Area Roadway and Utilities Infrastructure Project (Project) 1.Adopt a finding of Class 1 Categorical Exemption per staff determination, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301. 2.***RESOLUTION - 20th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 appropriating $3,044,200 in grant funds for the US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration Grant for the City of Fresno’s South Van Ness Industrial Area Roadway and Utilities Infrastructure Improvement Project (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 3.RESOLUTION - Authorizing the City Manager or Designee to execute a Financial Aid Award Agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration for the City of Fresno’s South Van Ness Industrial Area Roadway and Utilities Infrastructure Improvement Project. The above item was introduced to Council by Economic Development Director Westerlund. RESOLUTION 2016-199 ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2016-200 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Vice President Quintero, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Olivier and Soria6 - Absent:Brandau1 - Councilmember Soria exited the Council Chamber at 10:09 A.M. and returned at 10:15 A.M. Councilmember Brand exited the Council Chamber at 10:10 A.M. and returned at 10:15:A.M. 3. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 12 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 10:00 A.M. ID16-1033 HEARING - Regarding the vacation of a portion of San Benito Street between the “F”-“G” alley and “G” Street, and the “F”-“G” alley between Santa Clara and San Benito Streets. (Council District 3). 1. ***RESOLUTION - Ordering the vacation of a portion of San Benito Street between the “F”-“G” alley and “G” Street, and the “F”-“G” alley between Santa Clara and San Benito Streets. The above hearing was called to order at 10:09 A.M. The item was introduced to Council by Chief Surveyor Camit with the Public Works Department. Upon call for public comment, no members of the public chose to address Council and public comment was closed. The hearing was closed at 10:12 A.M. RESOLUTION 2016-201 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by President Caprioglio, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III and Olivier4 - Absent:Brand, Brandau and Soria3 - 10:10 A.M.#1 ID16-1175 Appearance by Andy Chhikara, President of the Fresno Chapter of APCA (American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association) to discuss the illegal signs and banners at convenient store locations (Speaker resides in District 5) Prior to the presentation by Mr. Chhikara, Vice President Quintero announced his office had been meeting with the American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association ("APCA") for three years to develop an ordinance to regulate the number of signs allowed on convenience store windows and landscaping. During his presentation, Mr. Chhikara played a slide show depicting convenience stores with bad sign practices. The photographs from the slide show are attached to file ID 16-1175 and are available in the City Clerk's Office. As request to appear items are not City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 13 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft subject to public comment, President Caprioglio asked the people that strongly agreed with Mr. Chhikara's comments to stand. Once standing, President Caprioglio noted that "a lot of people" agreed with Mr. Chhikara. Council discussion ensued on the topic. Vice President Quintero called Bill Bunnell of APCA to the dais to speak on the topic. Councilmember Baines III called youth advocates Janet Salcedo and Karina Reyes to the dais to speak on store front advertising. City Manager Rudd stated he would work with Vice President Quintero to follow up with APCA on the issue but noted that code enforcement was already stretched very thin. President Caprioglio called Mr. Shehadey to the dais to speak on the topic. APPEARED 10:10 A.M.#2 ID16-1178 Appearance by George Boyadjian to present a business proposal to allow for medical canibus retail and cultivation business in the City of Fresno (Speaker resides in District 7) Mr. Boyadjian addressed Council regarding medical canibus and cultivation in the City of Fresno. As request to appear items are not subject to public comment, President Caprioglio asked the people that agreed with Mr. Boyadjian to stand. Once standing, President Caprioglio noted that "quite a few people" agreed with Mr. Boyadjian. Council discussion ensued on the topic. APPEARED 10:10 A.M.#3 ID16-1186 Appearance by Jeffrey Roberts of Granville Homes to discuss the “Property Development Standards” The above item was removed from the agenda by the requestor. 2. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CONTINUED 2-I ID16-945 Action pertaining to the sale of the parking lot located at the northwest corner of Fresno Street and H Street 1.Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute a grant deed for the sale of the parking lot located at the northwest corner of Fresno Street and H Street (Boxcar Lot, APN 465-040- City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 14 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 33ST & 467-030-35ST) in the amount of $1,392,200 to the State of California High Speed Rail Authority (Council District 3) The above item was introduced to Council by Supervising Real Estate Agent Hansen with the Public Works Department. Councilmember Soria suggested the administration release budget notices earlier than the ten days required by the Charter so the public could provide meaningful input. While discussing unanticipated revenue, City Manager Rudd stated he would re-circulate the descriptions of Tier 1 and Tier 2 defered maintance projects to Council. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by President Caprioglio, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - Councilmember Brand exited the Council Chamber at 11:08 A.M. and returned at 11:09 A.M. 2-K ID16-1185 Approve a consulting services agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to prepare an Airport Master Plan Update for Fresno Yosemite International Airport for an amount not to exceed $1,167,103 (Council District 4) The above item was introduced to Council by Aviation Director Meikle. APPROVED On motion of President Caprioglio, seconded by Councilmember Olivier, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brandau, Olivier and Soria6 - Absent:Brand1 - 2-M ID16-1147 BILL - (For Introduction) - Repealing and adding Section 6-301 of the Fresno Municipal Code related to General Provisions; Purpose and Policy of Sewage and Water Disposal (Citywide). City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 15 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft The above item was introduced to Council by Wastewater Manager Lau-Staggs from the Department of Public Utilities. Economic Development Director Westerlund also spoke on this item. Councilmember Soria requested a separate meeting with staff to discuss this item. BILL B-39 INTRODUCED AND LAID OVER On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Councilmember Olivier, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - 2-L ID16-1197 Actions pertaining to the proposed Fresno High Speed Rail Heavy Maintenance Facility footprint 1.Authorize the City Manager to enter into conditional purchase and sales agreements to acquire properties within the proposed Fresno High Speed Rail Heavy Maintenance Facility footprint which will allow the City to control the property for 12 months through non-refundable deposit(s) for a total amount not to exceed $250,000. 2.Authorize the City Manager to work with other community stakeholders in seeking a reimbursement for these agreements from funding previously allocated by the Fresno County Transportation Authority in support of a Heavy Maintenance Facility in Fresno County. The above item was introduced to Council by Economic Development Director Westerlund. City Manager Rudd also spoke on this item. Coucnilmember Brand asked Lee Ann Eager, Fresno County Economic Development Corporation ("EDC") President, to speak on this item. The following members of the public spoke on this item: Nathan Alonzo, Government Affiars Manager with the the Fresno Chamber of Commerce, and; Lee Ann Eager, President of the Fresno County EDC. APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Vice President Quintero, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 16 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand and Soria5 - No:Brandau and Olivier2 - 3. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS CONTINUED 11:30 A.M. CLOSED SESSION City Council met in Closed Session in Room 2125 from 11:47 A.M. to 12:15 P.M. to discuss the following: ID16-1117 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION - Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) 1.Angel Keith Toscano, et al. v. Fresno Police Department, et al.; United States District Court Case No. 13-CV-01987 SAB The above item was discussed during closed session. No open session announcements were made regarding this item. ID16-1144 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-EXISTING LITIGATION - Government Code Section 54956.9, subdivision (d)(1) 1.Jaime Reyes, Jr., et al. v. City of Fresno, et al.; United States District Court Case No.: 13-CV-00418 LJO/SKO The above item was discussed during closed session. No open session announcements were made regarding this item. RECESSED 12:15 P.M. TO 1:34 P.M. 3. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS CONTINUED 1:30 P.M.#2 CEREMONIAL PRESENTATIONS ID16-1183 Presentation of the P.R.I.D.E. Team Certificates for the Fall Quarter (Reception immediately following - 2nd floor foyer) The following employees have provided outstanding public service to the people of the City of Fresno and have set the standard of excellence in City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 17 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft performance. They were selected by their departments for exemplifying the principles of the acronym PRIDE: Professionalism, Responiveness, Innovation, Direction and Excellence. The recipients of the 2016 Employee of the Quarter certificates were: Amanda Freeman with the City Attorney's Office; Christine Rein with the Development and Resources Management Department; Bradley J. Dandrige, Jeffry V. Guynn and Kenneth W. Morris with the Fresno Fire Department; Mark Stevens with the Information Services Department; Cheryl Burns with the Mayor's Office; Kayla Shields with the Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services Department; Heidi Briggs with the Personnel Services Department; Rudy Montoya, Catalina Rodriguez, Vincent Zavala and Ron Flowers with the Police Department; Tamara McCloud, Michael Del Carlo and Eddie Costa with the Department of Public Utilities; Tony Freitas, Martin Perry, Shaun Cain and Viridiana Llanos with the Public Works Department, and; Maria Cantu, Robert Hogg, Olustee Smith, Ron Tickel and Mike Zwolenski with the Transportation Department. PRESENTED RECESSED 2:02 P.M. TO 2:14 P.M. 2. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CONTINUED 2-F ID16-1161 RESOLUTION - Authorizing the submittal of grant applications to the Department of Parks and Recreation and acceptance of Youth Soccer and Recreation Development Program grant funds in the amount of $1,050,000, and authorizing execution of documents by the Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services (PARCS) Director, or designee (Districts 3 and 7). The above item was introduced to Council by PARCS Director Mollinedo. RESOLUTION 2016-202 ADOPTED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Vice President Quintero, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 18 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft 3. SCHEDULED COUNCIL HEARINGS AND MATTERS CONTINUED 1:30 P.M.#1 CONTESTED CONSENT CALENDAR 1-I ID16-1156 Actions pertaining to the Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility consultant contract to revise and update a Request for Proposal for a design-build contract for a new 2-Megawatt Solar Energy Facility (Council District 3) 1. *** RESOLUTION - 15th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 to appropriate $256,000 for engineering services for the preparation of an RFP for a design-build contract for a 2-Megawatt Solar Energy Facility (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 2.Uphold City Manager’s determination that Parsons Water and Infrastructure, Inc. is uniquely qualified. 3.Award a $250,560 consultant contract (including a $25,000 contingency) to Parsons Water and Infrastructure, Inc., a Delaware corporation, for the preparation of an RFP for a design-build contract for a 2-Megawatt Solar Energy Facility The above item was introduced to Council by Supervising Professional Engineer Norgaard with the Department of Public Utilities. Councilmember Brandau motioned to approve the item. Councilmember Brand second the motion to approve. Councilmember Baines had questions about costs and services and motioned to continue the item. Councilmember Olivier seconded the motion to continue. Upon approval of the motion to continue, the initial motion by Councilmember Brandau was not considered. CONTINUED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Councilmember Olivier, the above item was continued. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - 1-K ID16-1160 Actions pertaining to the amendment of the Developer Agreement between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation, City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 19 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft and Betts Company, Inc., a California corporation. 1.BILL - (For Introduction) Council Approval of First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation, and Betts Company, a California corporation, recorded with the Fresno County Recorder dated April 28, 2008, including incentives; and, authorizing the City Manager to sign the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. The above item was introduced to Council by Economic Development Director Westerlund. Director Westerlund clarified that the contract included a provision for yearly updates to the Council. BILL B-40 INTRODUCED AND LAID OVER On motion of Councilmember Soria, seconded by Vice President Quintero, the above Bill was introduced and laid over. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III, Brand, Brandau, Olivier and Soria 7 - 2. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CONTINUED 2-J ID16-1171 Approve a consultant services agreement with Bertz-Rosa Strategy & Creative for an amount not to exceed $172,757 for community engagement for parks and trails within the City of Fresno. The above item was introduced to Council by Special Policy Advisor Bergstrom from the Office of the Mayor. Mayor Swearengin and City Manager Rudd also spoke on this item. Suzanne Bertz-Rosa, Cary Catalano and Sandra Celedon-Castro also spoke on this item when Vice President Quintero invited members of the Bertz-Rosa team to the dais. Councilmember Baines III motioned to approve the item. Vice President Quintero seconded the motion to approve the item. Councilmember Olivier motioned to amend Councilmember Baines III's motion by directing the $172, 757 to the PARCS Department for the creation of a Park Ranger program and two Park Ranger positions. Councilmember Soria seconded the motion. City Attorney Sloan clarified that a motion to amend the original motion can be made and voted on before the orignal motion, so long as City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 20 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft there was a second. The motion to amend the original motion failed by a vote of 3 to 4 with Councilmembers Caprioglio, Baines III, Brand and Quintero voting "No." APPROVED On motion of Councilmember Baines III, seconded by Vice President Quintero, the above item was approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Aye:Caprioglio, Quintero, Baines III and Brand4 - No:Brandau, Olivier and Soria3 - UNSCHEDULED COMMUNICATION Upon call, the following members of public addressed Council during Unscheduled Communication: Lee Ventresca - discussed issues with Van Ness Boulevard trees and street lights. He also suggested using low level inmates to clean up trash in city parks. 2. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION CONTINUED 2-H ID16-1172 WORKSHOP - Weekend Recreation and Fitness Program Six-Month Overview The above workshop was conducted by PARCS Director Mollinedo. City Manager Rudd and Recreation Manager Schaefer also spoke on this item. Following the staff presentation, Council discussed the item and touched on the following topics: community outreach; increasing levels of participation; the possibility of adding programs for baby boomers; senior aquatics and ceramics programs; funding cycles and program updates; the staff assessment of the program; frisbee golf; utilizing free Public Service Announcements, and; providing outreach in multiple languages. President Caprioglio announced there would be a fifth installment of the weekend recreation program at Hoover High School on Saturday, October 15, 2016 and invited all to attend. WORKSHOP HELD 2-G ID16-1170 Workshop and Study Session: Long Range Planning Project City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 21 October 13, 2016City Council Meeting Minutes - Draft Status for the Downtown Area and the Housing Element 1.Streamlined Approach to Downtown residential projects-new proposed code changes 2.Housing Element Update: a.Review of HCD’s recommendations on the Housing Element b.Outreach schedule for Housing Element Amendment The above workshop was conducted by Assistant Direct Zack and Planning Manager Pagoulatos from the Development and Resources Management Department. City Manager Rudd also spoke on this item. The following members of the public spoke on this item: Cherylyn Smith, and; Ashley Werner of Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability representing Familias Adams Para un Mejor Futuro. Ms. Smith provided two handouts which have been attached to file ID 16-1170 and are available in the City Clerk's Office. Following the staff presentation, Council discussed the item and touched on the following topics: how the City plans to address the shortcoming noted by the State; the Equitable Communities Policy; penalties for non-compliance; impacts to funding sources; the inclusion of the Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability in the stakeholder meetings; housing for the homeless; creating opportunities outside of high poverty areas; increasing the number of affordable housing developers; incentives for developers, and; vacant sites in high opportunity areas. WORKSHOP HELD 4. CITY COUNCIL There were no City Council items on the agenda. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 5:21 P.M. in memory of John Quintero, Ricardo Duran, Ron Garabedian and Bill Edholm. City of Fresno ***Subject to Mayoral Veto Page 22 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1141 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department THROUGH:ROBERT N. ANDERSEN, PE, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Capital Management Division RANDY BELL, PE, Capital Projects Manager Public Works Department, Capital Management Division BY:MARK VESTER, PE, Professional Engineer Public Works Department, Capital Management Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to the Traffic Signal Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street - Project Bid File No. 3397 (Council District 3) 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301(c)(existing facilities)of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines for the Traffic Signal Protected Left-Turn Phasing Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street 2.Award a construction contract to A-C Electric Company,Inc.of Fresno,California,in the amount of $406,300 for the Traffic Signal Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a finding of Class 1 Categorical Exemption,pursuant to Section 15301(c)of the CEQA Guidelines;award a construction contract in the amount of $406,300 to A-C Electric Company of Fresno,California,as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder for the Traffic Signal Improvements at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street and authorize the Public Works Director or designee to sign the contract on the City’s behalf. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposed traffic signal improvements project at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street will provide protected left turn movement of vehicles through the intersection.These improvements will City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1141 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-A provide more efficient vehicle and pedestrian movement through the intersection. BACKGROUND The proposed traffic signal project at the intersection of Tulare Street and R Street will provide for protected left-turn movement of vehicles through the intersection.These improvements will provide significant improvement for efficient vehicle and pedestrian movement through the intersection.The project includes protected left-turn phasing improvements to the existing traffic signals,sidewalk modifications, three upgraded curb ramps, and new signing and pavement striping. Public Works Department staff prepared project plans and specifications and a Notice Inviting Bids was published in the Business Journal on June 27,2016,posted on the City’s website and faxed to 13 building exchanges.The specifications were distributed to six prospective bidders.Two sealed bid proposals were received and opened in a public bid opening on August 2,2016,with bids of $406,300 and $457,265 received.A-C Electric Company of Fresno was deemed the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.Bids will expire within 64 days as of the bid opening date,i.e.,as of October 5, 2016. Staff recommends awarding a construction contract to A-C Electric Company for $406,300 to construct the Traffic Signal Protected Left-Turn Phasing Improvements at the Intersection of Tulare Street and R Street and authorize the Public Works Director or his designee to sign and execute the standardized contract on behalf of the City of Fresno. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and has determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(c)(existing facilities),which exempts the repair,maintenance or minor alteration of existing structures or facilities,which includes existing streets,sidewalk and gutters,and no further expansion of existing use,because the project includes installation of traffic signal facilities,crosswalks,signage and pavement striping.Furthermore,staff has determined that none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not used based on conditions of State and Federal grant funding. FISCAL IMPACT This $621,900 traffic signal project at Tulare Street and R Street is located in District 3.Funding for the project comes from $363,900 in Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)grant funds (state and federal)and $258,000 in Citywide Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact Fees as the local matching funds.The project will not have any impact to the General Fund.Of the overall cost of the project, $406,300 will be used for the construction contract award. Attachments: Bid Evaluation Fiscal Impact Statement City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1141 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-A Vicinity Map Contract City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1164 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department THROUGH:ANDREW J. BENELLI, PE, City Engineer/Assistant Director Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division JILL GORMLEY, TE, City Traffic Engineer/Division Manager Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division BY:JASON A. CAMIT, PLS, Chief Surveyor Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division SUBJECT Adopt Resolution of Intention No.1111-D to vacate the Broadway Diagonal between “H”Street and Broadway Plaza and the Broadway Plaza -“H”Street alley between Merced Street and the Broadway Diagonal. (Council District 3.) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City of Fresno to adopt Resolution of Intention No.1111-D to vacate the Broadway Diagonal between “H”Street and Broadway Plaza and the Broadway Plaza -“H”Street alley between Merced Street and the Broadway Diagonal,and set the required hearing at 2:05 p.m. on November 17, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APEC International,is requesting the vacation of the Broadway Diagonal between “H”Street and Broadway Plaza and the Broadway Plaza -“H”Street alley between Merced Street and the Broadway Diagonal,as shown on Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intention.The proposed vacation is to accommodate development proposed by Site Plan No. S-14-076. BACKGROUND The proposed vacation is to accommodate development proposed by Site Plan No.S-14-076.This development includes the rehabilitation of the historic Hotel Fresno with 10,005 square feet of retail City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1164 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-B development includes the rehabilitation of the historic Hotel Fresno with 10,005 square feet of retail space and the construction of a multi-story parking structure with 4,000 square feet of retail space. The public street and alley right-of-way being vacated is shown on Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intention.A portion of the Broadway Diagonal right-of-way was dedicated in fee simple title by grant deed recorded May 9,1967 in Book 5437,at Page 79,Official Records Fresno County. The remaining portion of the Broadway Diagonal right-of-way was dedicated in easement by deed recorded June 29,1981 in Book 7754,at Page 797,Official Record Fresno County.The Broadway Plaza -“H”Street alley between Merced Street and the Broadway Diagonal is a 20-foot alley in Block 63 of the map of the Town of Fresno in Book 1 of Plats at Page 2, Fresno County Records. The Traffic and Engineering Services Division,other City departments and utility agencies have reviewed the proposed vacation and determined that the portion right-of-way easement proposed for vacation is unnecessary for present or prospective public street purposes as shown in Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intent,subject to the reservation of a public utility easement over the entire area proposed for vacation and the conditions listed on Exhibit “B”of the attached Resolution of Intention. City Attorney has approved the attached Resolution of Intention as to form. The vacation,if approved by the Council at the public hearing,will become effective when the vacating resolution is recorded in the office of the Fresno County Recorder,but not until the City Engineer determines that the conditions listed in the attached resolution have been satisfied and accepted by the City. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The adoption of a Resolution of Intention is not a “project”pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Not applicable because the vacation of public right-of-way does not involve bidding or contracting. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no City funds involved with this vacation.The adjacent property owners have paid all processing fees to cover staff cost in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule. Attachment: Exhibit “A” Resolution of Intent No. 1111-D City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ I-'°-0 g 3$ � c ! ::> t g ::::1 �I �8B� in 8 'B� i c: � n. '6 � g � II � I! I! // !/ '/ I :\"'­�"' I '.\-"'-" I � � /§@ [!THIS AREA INDICATES / I w\ I ALL EX UTILITIES TO I I I BE RELOCATED II II ill / rr 11 I lI I PROPOSED STREET­VACATION (E) WATER MAIN TOBE RECONSTRUCTED (E) SEWER MAINTO REMAIN i ll!ff? EX ALLEY, W/ EX HOTEL FRESNOFi PROPOSED 20' p]Enf1GHT =""9-o-'1 (E) ELEC MHTO REMAIN APN: 466-21-401 �$' "'-" �"\, � IF!Rl!E�!M@ f}{f@7r!EIL EX R;W l¢cl I .., EXHIBIT "A" - PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION �11 •..111111• LORE ENGINEERING, INCi ... . C ... 620 DEWITT AVENUE, SUITE 101 (559} 297-6200-TEL -CLOVIS. CA 93612 (559} 297-6205-FAX . Yi -ii.--- 1 I � $SS)( SS30 ""- I � 9� q� /' d �"2._ � t ,1I� 11: I I /"' If--- R 1-· � I II I I I I II 11� :r PROJECT LOCATlml ·+ VICINITY MAP (NOT TO SCALE) SCALE: --- 0 LEGEND 4 40 AREA TO BE VACATED, I 1, I 1 111 I l11 ll I� � ALL EX UTILITIES TO REMAIN,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. I-'°-0 g 3$ � c ! ::> t g ::::1 �I �8B� in 8 'B� i c: � n. '6 � g � II � I! I! // !/ '/ I :\"'­�"' I '.\-"'-" I � � /§@ [!THIS AREA INDICATES / I w\ I ALL EX UTILITIES TO I I I BE RELOCATED II II ill / rr 11 I lI I PROPOSED STREET­VACATION (E) WATER MAIN TOBE RECONSTRUCTED (E) SEWER MAINTO REMAIN i ll!ff? EX ALLEY, W/ EX HOTEL FRESNOFi PROPOSED 20' p]Enf1GHT =""9-o-'1 (E) ELEC MHTO REMAIN APN: 466-21-401 �$' "'-" �"\, � IF!Rl!E�!M@ f}{f@7r!EIL EX R;W l¢cl I .., EXHIBIT "A" - PROPOSED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION �11 •..111111• LORE ENGINEERING, INCi ... . C ... 620 DEWITT AVENUE, SUITE 101 (559} 297-6200-TEL -CLOVIS. CA 93612 (559} 297-6205-FAX . Yi -ii.--- 1 I � $SS)( SS30 ""- I � 9� q� /' d �"2._ � t ,1I� 11: I I /"' If--- R 1-· � I II I I I I II 11� :r PROJECT LOCATlml ·+ VICINITY MAP (NOT TO SCALE) SCALE: --- 0 LEGEND 4 40 AREA TO BE VACATED, I 1, I 1 111 I l11 ll I� � ALL EX UTILITIES TO REMAIN,UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. EXHIBIT “B” VACATION CONDITIONS The following conditions must be met before the vacation resolution can be recorded: 1. Several utility companies and the City of Fresno have facilities in the alley, and in Tuolumne Street, therefore it is a requirement that a public utility easement (PUE) be reserved over the entire area being vacated. This will occur through the vacation process and requires no separate action by the Applicant. No structures will be allowed in the PUE. 2. The Broadway Diagonal Street will need to be closed to all public vehicular traffic. The method of this street closer will need to be approved and coordinated with the City of Fresno Public Works Traffic Division. For specific information please contact Andrew Benelli at (559) 621-8723. 3. “H” Street will need to be constructed for through traffic. The construction and removal of all street improvements to accommodate this condition will need to be coordinated with Brian Russell, City of Fresno Public Works manager. Brian can be reached at (559) 621-1309. PW File 12066 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1165 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-C REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:MICHAEL LIMA, Finance Director/City Controller Finance Department BY:PHILLIP HARDCASTLE, Principal Accountant - Debt Administration Finance Department SUBJECT RESOLUTION - Approving, authorizing and directing the execution and delivery of the Agreement to terminate the Central California Joint Powers Health Financing Authority between the City of Fresno and the City of Clovis RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Council approve the termination of the Central California Joint Powers Health Financing Authority. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 1993,the Cities of Fresno and Clovis established the Central California Joint Powers Health Financing Authority (the “Authority”)for the purpose of facilitating and financing projects for Community Hospital of Central California,Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center,and Sierra Hospital Foundation.The Authority has since become obsolete due to the availability of funds from the California Municipal Finance Authority (the “CFMA”)and the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (the “CSCDA”),which are now used by hospitals for financing projects.As a housekeeping matter,City staff would like to dissolve the Authority because there are no outstanding or anticipated projects where the Authority may be necessary. BACKGROUND The Authority was created in 1993 by a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement entered into between the City of Fresno and the City of Clovis.The purpose of the Authority was to facilitate financing the acquisition,construction,improvement,renovation,expansion and/or equipping of health care facilities owned and operated by the member organizations of Community Hospitals of Central California,Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Centers,and Sierra Hospital Foundation City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1165 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-C California,Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Centers,and Sierra Hospital Foundation (“Community Medical Centers”).Community Medical Centers no longer use the Authority for financing.Instead they utilize either the CMFA,established in 2004 or the CSCDA,established in 1988. The Authority has fulfilled the purposes for which it was formed and is no longer necessary.There are no Certificates of Participation outstanding under the terms of any indenture,resolution,trust agreement or other instrument entered into or executed pursuant to the Authority Agreement,and the Authority has no assets.Therefore under Section 3 of the Authority Agreement,the Authority Agreement may be terminated.A copy of the Termination Agreement and the Council Resolution approving the Termination Agreement is included.Clovis’City Council approved a resolution authorizing the dissolution of the Authority at their 10/3/16 meeting. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This item is not a project of the City of Fresno and as such,for purposes of this hearing,the California Environmental Quality Act requirements are not applicable. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this resolution does not include a bid or award of a construction or service contract. FISCAL IMPACT None Attachments: Resolution Termination Agreement Original Agreement First Amendment to the Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1184 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-D REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:THOMAS C. ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:KEVIN L. NORGAARD, PE, Supervising Professional Engineer Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division SUBJECT Actions Pertaining to the Engineering Services to Evaluate Solids Digestion and High Strength Waste Handling Systems at the Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Council District 3) 1.***RESOLUTION -19th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution No.2016-118 appropriating $366,600 for engineering services to evaluate solids digestion and high strength waste systems (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 2.Award a professional engineering services contract for $351,600,with $10,000 contingency,to Black & Veatch Corporation, of Rancho Cordova, California RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Council appropriate the project funding and approve the agreement award to Black &Veatch Corporation,for the Evaluation of solids digestion and handling of high strength waste (Waste) at the Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Facility). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fresno has successfully operated the anaerobic digestion processes at the Facility for approximately sixty years.The purpose of this project is to ensure the Facility is optimizing three different interrelated processes; the digester gas production, solids destruction and Waste handling. BACKGROUND The Facility has successfully operated an anaerobic digestion process for approximately sixty years and power generation facility for many years.The gas generated by the anaerobic digestion process is currently conditioned to near pipeline quality and made available for use in the Facility power generating turbines,hot water boiler,or both.Under normal operating conditions at the Facility,the gas consumed far exceed the gas production.The excess gas consumed must be purchased from the PG&E pipeline.The purpose of this contract has four main parts.The first piece is a review of City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1184 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-D the PG&E pipeline.The purpose of this contract has four main parts.The first piece is a review of physical processes for efficiencies,second is the evaluation of regulations and trends for digestion, third,is the review of Waste handling and finally the development of projected quantities and characteristics of the waste streams.The consultant will then develop a report to include recommendations to increase gas production,reduce sludge hauling costs and keep up with regulatory trends.These projects will be prioritized and have preliminary budgetary cost estimates. This contract provides for several joint meetings with the two other consultants working on the overall project as detailed below. Following Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 4,Article 1 and Administrative Order 6-19,the Department of Public Utilities notified in excess of one hundred consulting firms requesting a statement of qualification and project proposals.The Department received eight qualifications.Five separate consultants were interviewed on February 29,2016.After reviewing the qualifications and information presented in the interview process it was decided to divide the overall project into three separate distinct pieces.These pieces were:the diversion of digester gas into the natural gas pipeline,the analysis of the most financially efficient technology of generating onsite electrical power, and finally the review and last the analysis of digester efficiencies and condition assessment.After reviewing all of the statement of qualifications and cost proposals,it was determined that Black and Veatch was the most qualified provide the most benefit for the City for the evaluation of solids digestion and Waste handling.A consultant services agreement has been negotiated in the amount of $351,600 and $10,000 contingency. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA)Guidelines Section 15378 the award of these contracts does not qualify as a “project” for the purposes of CEQA. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because staff believes the number of local businesses is less than three. FISCAL IMPACT This consultant services contract has no impact to the General Fund and is located in Council District 3.This project was anticipated to be part of the larger “Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facilities Master Plan Update”originally budgeted in FY14.The planned outcome of this contract will be to develop a long term plan to optimize energy costs for the Facility.Funds in the amount of $366,600 are available in the Sewer Enterprise Fund 40501;the AAR is necessary to allocate the funds for the contract. Attachments: 19th AAR No. 2016-118 Consultant Agreement Fiscal Impact Statement Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Date Adopted: 1 of 2 Date Approved: Effective Date: Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO ADOPTING THE 19th AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-118 TO APPROPRIATE $366,600 FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES TO EVALUATE SOLIDS DIGESTION AND HIGH STRENGTH WASTE SYSTEMS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2016-118 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES Wastewater Operating $ 366,600 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: Wastewater Operating Retained Earnings: Account: 25300 Unreserved/Undesignated $ 366,600 Fund: 40501 Org Unit: 414501 Total Retained Earnings $ 366,600 Appropriations: Account: 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside $ 361,600 59105 Purchasing – Variable Charge 5,000 Fund: 40501 Org Unit: 414501 Project: TC00156 Total Appropriations $ 366,600 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $366,600 for engineering services to evaluate solids digestion and handling of high strength waste systems at the Fresno/Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility. 2 of 2 CLERK’S CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF FRESNO } ss. CITY OF FRESNO } I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, California, at a re gular meeting thereof, held on the Day of , 2016 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2016 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2016 Mayor Veto: , 2016 Council Override Veto: , 2016 YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk BY: ____________________________ Deputy FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROGRAM: EVALUATE SOLIDS DIGESTION AND HIGH STRENGTH WASTE TOTAL OR ANNUALIZED RECOMMENDATION CURRENT COST Direct Cost $361,600.00 *Indirect Cost $15,000.00 TOTAL COST $366,600.00 Additional Revenue or Savings Generated $0.00 Net City Cost $366,600.00 Amount Budgeted (If none budgeted, identify source) $366,600.00** *Indirect Costs Administration _ $10,000.00 Other _ $ 5,000.00 **Budgeted by AAR 2016-118 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1187 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-E REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department THROUGH:ANDREW J. BENELLI, PE, City Engineer/Assistant Director Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division JILL GORMLEY, TE, City Traffic Engineer/Division Manager Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division BY:JASON A. CAMIT, PLS, Chief Surveyor Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Resolution of Intention No.1110-D to vacate the “F”-“G”alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and a portion of Tuolumne Street. (Council District 3). 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption per staff determination,pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines,Environmental Assessment No. EA-16-022-HSR. 2.Adopt Resolution of Intention No.1110-D to vacate the “F”-“G”alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and a portion of Tuolumne Street. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City of Fresno to adopt Resolution of Intention No.1110-D for the proposed vacation of a portion the “F”-“G”alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and a portion of Tuolumne Street, and set the required hearing at 10:00 a.m. on November 17, 2016. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Ellis Family Partnership,is requesting the vacation of the “F”-“G”alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and a portion of Tuolumne Street as shown on Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intention.The proposed vacation will mitigate construction impacts due to High Speed Rail construction. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1187 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-E BACKGROUND The proposed vacation will mitigate impacts to the adjacent properties northerly of the Tuolumne Street overpass,which is being reconstructed.This reconstruction will eliminate the Tuolumne Street overpass frontage road and also eliminate access to the “F” - “G” alley creating a dead end alley. The public street and alley right-of-way easement being vacated is shown on Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intention.The right-of-way is described as that portion a 20-foot “F”-“G”alley in Block 16 of the map of the Town of Fresno in Book 1 of Plats at Page 2,Fresno County Records, and a portion of Tuolumne Street as dedicated per said map. The Traffic and Engineering Services Division,other City departments and utility agencies have reviewed the proposed vacation and determined that the portion right-of-way easement proposed for vacation is unnecessary for present or prospective public street purposes as shown in Exhibit “A”of the attached Resolution of Intent,subject to the reservation of a public utility easement over the entire area proposed for vacation and the conditions listed on Exhibit “B”of the attached Resolution of Intention. City Attorney has approved the attached Resolution of Intention as to form. The vacation,if approved by the Council at the public hearing,will become effective when the vacating resolution is recorded in the office of the Fresno County Recorder,but not until the City Engineer determines that the conditions listed in the attached resolution have been satisfied and accepted by the City. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This project is exempt under Sections 15301/Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines,Environmental Assessment No.EA-16-105.Under the Section 15301/Class 1 exemption,the minor alteration of existing public facilities,such as streets,sidewalks,etc.,involving no expansion of use beyond that existing at this time,are exempt from CEQA requirements.The vacation will remove unusable sidewalks and return the property's maintenance over to the adjoining private property owners.The proposed vacation of the above-described land meets the criteria noted above.No significant effects would occur as a result of the proposed project.Therefore,the above described project complies with the conditions described in Section 15301/Class 1 of the CEQA Guidelines.None of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Not applicable because the vacation of public right-of-way does not involve bidding or contracting. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no City funds involved with this vacation.The adjacent property owners have paid all processing fees to cover staff cost in accordance with the Master Fee Schedule. Attachment: City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1187 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-E Vicinity Map EA-16-022-HSR Resolution of Intent No. 1110-D City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ VICINITY MAP CITY OF FRESNOREF. & REV. NO SCALE N City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1190 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-F REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:BRYON HORN, Chief Information Officer Information Services Department SUBJECT A.Approve the First Amendment to the SunGard Public Sector,Inc.,Application Service Provider Agreement and Ratify Extension to Agreement between the City of Fresno and SunGard Public Sector, Inc., increasing the contract amount by $6,280 annually. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the First Amendment to Agreement (“Amendment”)to the SunGard Public Sector Inc.Application Service Provider Agreement dated March 31,2009,between SunGard Public Sector Inc.(“SunGard”)and City of Fresno (“City”)in the amount of $6,280 annually to implement SunGard’s Fusion Web-based interface product. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 31,2009,City entered into a five-year Services Agreement (“Agreement”)with SunGard Public Sector,Inc.,for application hosting services of the SunGard Naviline suite of applications.The Agreement was extended April 1,2014 for an additional five-year term.The current yearly amount of this contract is $273,772. This Amendment will expand the scope of service to include SunGard’s Fusion web-based interface product thereby increasing the annual amount by $6,280 to the new yearly total of $280,052. BACKGROUND In order to provide a higher level of service to our utility customers,the City (Public Utilities)is partnering with a vendor (First Billing)to provide an advanced online payment website.This partnership will use SunGard’s Fusion interface product to lookup customer account information and provide customer payments in real time thereby improving the customer payment process. The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed and approved the amendment as to form. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS SunGard Fusion software implementation is not a “project”pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1190 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-F (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15378. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because this item is an amendment of an existing contract. FISCAL IMPACT The Department of Public Utilities has identified funding within existing.No additional funding is required to expand this project as defined in the proposed amendment. Attachments: Schedule A - Order Form First Amendment to Agreement Application Service Provider Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Add-On Quote Quote Prepared By: 1000 Business Center Dr Lake Mary, FL 32746 Phone:407-304-3125 Fax: Email:joshua.bisienere@sungardps.com Josh Bisienere Quote Prepared For: (559) 621-7117 Fresno, CA 93721 City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Dennis Jones, Systems & Applications Manager Quote Date Valid Until 11/12/201608/14/2016Q-00022048 2.00 3.00 4.00Cloud Product Code Product Name Quantity SunGard Public Sector Fusion Proprietary 1FUSION-P SunGard Public Sector Fusion APIs 1K1-3-F Third Party Hosted Annual Accessed Products Product Code Product Name Quantity NaviLine Web EnablementWB 1 Professional Services Product Name Proj Mgmt Training DevelopmentConsulting Total ServicesImpl SvcsProduct Code Services Tech SvcsInstallation 2,680.00FUSION-SVC SunGard Public Sector Fusion Professional Services Ext Price: 640.00 640.00 - - - - 1,400.00 - - Totals:$640.00 $640.00 - $2,680.00 - $1,400.00 Product & Services Annual Subscription Fees:$3,500.00 Cloud Annual Access Fees:$1,500.00 Contract Startup Fees: 2,000.00 Professional Services:$2,680.00 Third Party Cloud Annual Access Fees:$1,280.00 Subtotal:$10,960.00 Total:$10,960.00 Page 1 of 3SunGard Public Sector License, Project Planning, Project Management, Consulting, Technical Services, Conversion, Third Party Product Software and Hardware Fees are due upon execution of this Quote. Training fees and Travel & Living expenses are due as incurred monthly. Installation is due upon completion. Custom Modifications, System Change Requests or SOW's for customization, and Third Party Product Implementation Services fees are due 50% on execution of this Quote and 50% due upon invoice, upon completion. Unless otherwise provided, other Professional Services are due monthly, as such services are delivered. Additional services, if requested, will be invoiced at then-current rates. Any shipping charges shown are estimated only and actual shipping charges will be due upon invoice, upon delivery. Annual Subscription Fee(s): Initial annual subscription fees are due 100% on the Execution Date. The initial annual subscription term for any subscription product(s) listed above shall commence on the Execution Date of this Agreement and extend for a period of one (1) year. Thereafter, the subscription terms shall automatically renew for successive one (1) year terms, unless either party gives the other party written notice of non-renewal at least sixty (60) days prior to expiration of the then-current term. The then-current fee will be specified by SunGard Public Sector in an annual invoice to Customer thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of then-current annual period. SunGard Public Sector Application Annual Support: Customer is committed to the initial term of Maintenance and Support Services for which the support fee is included in the License fee(s) and begins upon execution of this Quote and extends for a twelve (12) month period. Subsequent terms of support will be for twelve (12) month periods, commencing at the end of the prior support period. Support fees shown are for the second term of support for which SunGard Public Sector is committed and which shall be due prior to the start of that term. Fees for subsequent terms of support will be due prior to the start of each term at the then-prevailing rate. Subsequent terms will renew automatically until such time SunGard Public Sector receives written notice from the Customer thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the then current term. Notification of non-renewal is required prior to the start of the renewal term. Customer will be invoiced, and payment is due, upon renewal. Third Party Product Annual Support Fees: The support fee for the initial annual period is included in the applicable Third Party Product License fees(s) unless otherwise stated. Subsequent terms invoiced by SunGard Public Sector will renew automatically at then-prevailing rates until such time SunGard Public Sector receives written notice of non-renewal from the Customer ninety (90) days in advance of the expiration of the then-current term. Notification of non-renewal is required prior to the start of the renewal term. Customer will be invoiced, and payment is due, upon renewal. As applicable for certain Third Party Products that are invoiced directly by the third party to Customer, payment terms for any renewal term(s) of support shall be as provided by the third party to Customer. Applicable Start-up Fees are due upon execution of this Quote. Initial Annual Access Fees are due upon execution of this Quote and will be invoiced pro-rata to coincide with Customer's Annual Renewal Date. Subsequent Annual Access Fees will be invoiced each year thereafter on the anniversary of Customer's Annual Renewal Date. Payment terms as follows, unless otherwise notated below for Special Payment Terms by Product: This Add-On Quote constitutes a supplemental Schedule A-Order Form amendment to the existing Agreement (the "Agreement") by and between SunGard Public Sector and Customer which pertains to Application Service Provider (ASP) services. Unless otherwise stated below, all terms and conditions as stated in the Agreement shall remain in effect. Applicable taxes are not included, and, if applicable, will be added to the amount in the payment of invoice(s) being sent separately. Travel and living expenses are in addition to the prices quoted above and shall be governed by the SunGard Public Sector Travel Policy. Preprinted conditions and all other terms not included in this Quote or in the Contract and Agreement, stated on any purchase order or other document submitted hereafter by Customer are of no force or effect, and the terms and conditions of the Contract and Agreement and any amendments thereto shall control unless expressly accepted in writing by SunGard Public Sector to Customer. SunGard Public Sector's "Cloud" Products identified above are application Modules to be hosted by SunGard Public Sector. Third party hardware/software maintenance and/or warranty will be provided by the third party hardware and software manufacturer(s). SunGard Public Sector makes no representations as to expected performance, suitability, or the satisfaction of Customer's requirements with respect to the hardware or other third party products specified in this Quote. The return and refund policy of each individual third party hardware/software supplier shall apply. Additional Terms: Page 2 of 3SunGard Public Sector This Agreement is based on the current licensing policies of each third party software manufacturer as well as all hardware manufacturers. In the event that a manufacturer changes any of these respective policies or prices, SunGard Public Sector reserves the right to adjust this proposal to reflect those changes. Pricing for professional services provided under this quote is a good faith estimate based on the information available to SunGard Public Sector at the time of execution of this Quote. The total amount that Customer will pay for these services will vary based on the actual number of hours of services required to complete the services. If required, additional services will be provided on a time and materials basis at hourly rates equal to SunGard Public Sector's then-current rates for the services at issue. For training and on-site project management sessions which are cancelled at the request of Customer within fourteen (14) days of the scheduled start date, Customer is responsible for entire price of the training or on-site project management plus incurred expenses. Authorized Signature: City of Fresno Date:Printed Name: Page 3 of 3 SunGard Public Sector City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1177 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-G REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:THOMAS C. ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:JERRY L. SCHUBER, SR., Assistant Director Department of Public Utilities, Water Division BY:BRIAN REAMS, Revenue Manager Department of Public Utilities - Utilities, Billing and Collection SUBJECT B. Actions Related to Retaining of Consultant for Automated Billing Paying Services: 1. Approve the City Manager’s determination that Consultant is uniquely qualified 2. Approve a consultant services agreement with First Billing Services for a total fee of $13,000 per month for Electronic Billing Payment Presentation Services and up to$14,630 per month for Optional Print Services for City of Fresno utility customers (Citywide). RECOMMENDATIONS 1.Approve an agreement with First Billings Services to provide electronic utility payment services and optional print services for the City of Fresno. 2.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee to sign agreement on behalf of the City of Fresno. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Public Utilities seeks Council approval of a professional consultant services agreement with First Billing Services to provide ongoing support and maintenance of all the Electronic Billing Payment Presentation (EBPP)services including presentation of bills on the agent and customer computer portals. BACKGROUND The City of Fresno wants to expand its electronic payment processing capabilities and to control, minimize or eliminate costs associated with these services,particularly the costs associated with the City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1177 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-G minimize or eliminate costs associated with these services,particularly the costs associated with the acceptance of credit or credit/debit cards.In October 2014,as part of Phase I of this process,the City entered into an exclusive Agreement with Heartland Payment,Systems,Inc.(Heartland)to process all City of Fresno credit card payments and to enable the use of the service fee model.This model provides for the card processor (Heartland)to charge the customers a fee for the convenience of using a credit card and allows the City to retain the full amount of the City payment being processed (gross amount of the bill).The service fee is retained by Heartland as a charge for processing the payment.Over the next 12 to 18 months all City departments accepting credit card payments were converted to Heartland and in addition,departments who previously did not accept credit cards were brought on line.As a result,nearly $4 million in credit card fees were eliminated and are no longer being included in the Department’s operating budget which are ultimately passed on to the rate paying customers. The overall plan,once credit card processing was addressed was to move on to Phase II to begin the process of providing more and enhanced payment solutions and services to the customers of Fresno. As part of the Contract with Heartland,new EBPP services are available.Heartland offers multiple payment solutions including payment via phone,web,mobile,or in person.The benefits include additional customer convenience of being able to establish auto-payment options based on criteria established by the customer,cost savings of processing fewer paper bills,reduced late and delinquent payments,comprehensive and flexible reporting,and 24 hour access convenience to the customers of Fresno.Customers will be able to pay online,by phone,or via text messages and do so securely from anywhere,anytime using a computer,smart phone or tablet.For those customers who still prefer to receive a paper bill or pay in person, those options will continue to be available. Heartland partners with numerous companies for electronic payment solutions;however,they work exclusively with First Billing Services,LLC.,a single source vendor for eBilling solutions that require integration with the SunGard Utility Software utilized by the City of Fresno Utilities,Billing and Collection Department.Heartland confirmed in writing (attached)the single source arrangement with First Billing Services. After meeting with the First Billing Team and going through a comprehensive demonstration of their product,a proposal was requested.In addition,information was obtained with respect to First Billing’s experience with implementing their payment solution product with/on the same SunGard system currently in use by the City of Fresno.They have been through a complete implementation on the same SunGard version that the City is currently using and they have experience working with SunGard’s new “Fusion”product that allows for live time data exchange between the SunGard customer data base and their remote payment system. The Department of Public Utilities,Utilities,Billing and Collection Division,(working with the Finance Department and Information Services as part of the review team),recommends the approval for a professional consulting services agreement with First Billing Services,LLC.,to provide ongoing support and maintenance of all EBPP services,including presentation of bills on the agent and customer computer portals. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378 this item does not qualify as a project for the purposes of CEQA. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1177 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-G LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because First Billing Services, LLC., is uniquely qualified. FISCAL IMPACT No General Fund dollars will be used to fund these services.Additional costs associated with automated bill paying services in FY 2017 are anticipated to be $93,100 and will be covered with existing appropriations within the Department of Public Utilities Water,Wastewater and Solid Waste Enterprise Funds. Attachments: Sole Source Memo Consultant Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1192 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-H REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:ANDREW J. BENELLI, PE, City Engineer/Assistant Director Public Works Department, Traffic and Engineering Services Division SUBJECT Consideration of Policy and Procedure TR 1.3.1,Titled “Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way” (Citywide) 1.Consider the Finding of No Possibility that the project will have impacts on the environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines 2.RESOLUTION -Approving Policy and Procedure No.TR 1.3.1,Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within Public Right-of-Way RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council take the following action: 1.Adopt the environmental finding prepared for Policy and Procedure TR 1.3.1, approving a Finding of No Possibility pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines 2.Adopt a Resolution approving Policy and Procedure No.TR 1.3.1,Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within Public Right-of-Way EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Fresno Public Works Department,with the assistance of the Development and Resource Management Department,is proposing a new policy on Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the public right-of-way.The policy addresses technical requirements for installing wireless facilities (including cell towers and antenna poles) in City right-of-way. Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-2759 provides that “Telecommunications and Wireless Facilities shall comply with the City’s policy pertaining to said uses.”The City’s current Wireless City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1192 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-H shall comply with the City’s policy pertaining to said uses.”The City’s current Wireless Telecommunications Policy does not specifically address facilities within the street right-of-way. Many providers are now seeking to install wireless telecommunications facilities within City right-of- way,creating the need for a specific policy.The proposed policy does not change the current policy for telecommunications on private property. BACKGROUND With the recent rise in wireless telecommunications facilities nationwide,the City has begun receiving applications for facilities in City right-of-way.While the City cannot legally prohibit telecommunications companies from installing cell towers,antenna poles and related wireless telecommunications facilities within its right-of-way,the City may regulate the time,place and manner of installation.A wireless telecommunications policy helps safeguard the rights of adjacent property owners,for instance where a facility is proposed directly in front of a home or business,and protects the health and safety of citizens.The policy also makes the process easier and more predictable for applicants by providing standards and procedural guidelines for proposed facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The City of Fresno has determined that a Finding of No Possibility that the project will have impacts on the environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3)of the CEQA Guidelines is appropriate for the proposed policy revision.Given that the revisions proposed only serve to clarify existing policies,the revisions will not result in a change to the physical environment.Individual wireless telecommunication facilities are subject to CEQA review at the time of application submittal. LOCAL PREFERENCE Not applicable because this is not a competitive bid. FISCAL IMPACT There will be no impact to the General Fund as a result of the recommended action. Attachment: Policy on Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within Public Right-of-Way Resolution City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 1 of 15 Subject: Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Number: TR 1.3.1 Date: October 20, 2016 Issue/Revised: Responsible Department: Public Works Department Approved: Purpose: This document sets forth the policies and procedures required to promote quality, clarity and consistency in applying the requirements and guidelines for the acceptance, processing and approval of new and modifications to existing wireless telecommunications facilities within the public right-of-way. The Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-of-Way Policy (―Wireless ROW Policy‖) applies to all new Wireless Telecommunications Facilities and all modifications to existing facilities proposed within the public right-of-way. Policy: This policy is enacted pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code Section 15-2759 subject to federal limitations pursuant to 47 U.S.C. Section 332(c)(7). It is intended that such facilities be located, installed and operated in a manner consistent with all of the articulated health, safety, and aesthetic objectives of this policy, while recognizing the benefit of these facilities to the community. This policy applies to all Wireless Telecommunications Facilities located within the public right-of-way. A. SITE PREFERENCES AND CRITERIA 1. Applicants seeking to install wireless telecommunications facilities within the public rights-of-way shall propose to collocate with other existing wireless telecommunications facilities within the public rights-of-way whenever feasible. 2. In the event that an applicant demonstrates that collocation with other existing wireless telecommunications facilities is not feasible, applicants shall propose to install wireless telecommunications facilities on existing poles and other potential support structures in the public rights-of-way whenever feasible. The City strongly discourages new poles and other encroachments into the public rights-of-way for wireless telecommunications facilities and will consider such requests as a last resort when the applicant has demonstrated that installations on existing support structures in the vicinity is not technically feasible or that such structures are not potentially available to them. 3. The centerline of any new pole must be aligned with the centerlin es of existing poles on the same sidewalk segment. After the Public Works Department approves a proposed new pole location, but before the TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 2 of 15 permittee commences construction, the permittee must verify the correct pole alignment in the field. 4. Any new pole and/or equipment and other improvements associated with a new pole or an existing pole must be setback from intersections, alleyways and driveways and placed in locations where it will not obstruct motorists’ sightlines or pedestrian access. Any new pole and/or equipment and other improvements associated with a new pole or existing pole must not reduce the passable clearance of any sidewalk to less than five feet. 5. Any new pole and/or equipment associated with a new wireless facility in the right-of-way shall not be located in front of a single-family or multi- family home unless in front of an existing block wall on a major street. 6. The City, in its proprietary capacity, retains sole and absolute discretion over whether and on what terms it may allow wireless facilities on its poles and other structures in the public right-of-way. Applicants may not submit any applications in connection with City-owned poles or other structures without a valid and fully executed agreement to use the specific pole or other structure. The City shall not authorize any attachments to City- owned infrastructure that negatively impacts the structural integrity of the support structure. 7. In the event that the City determines that an approved siting location is needed for public purposes, which include without limitation any street widening, street realignment or sidewalk improvements, the permittee shall relocate the wireless telecommunications facility at its sole cost and expense within a reasonable time after notice from the City. B. DESIGN PREFERENCES AND CRITERIA 1. All new poles shall be metal. The Director of the Public Works Departmenta (Director), or his or her designee, shall not approve any new wood poles as support structures for wireless telecommunications facilities in the public rights-of-way. 2. The Director shall not approve any new pole or installation on any existing pole that exceeds 45 feet in overall height above finished grade, unless the Director determines that the project qualifies for an exception to the overall height limitation. The Director may grant an exception when: a. No other technically feasible or potentially available locations or designs, including without limitation the use of multiple lower a Among others, the Director may choose to designate, as his or her designee, the Director of the Development and Resource Management Department (“DARM”), any assistant director or any planning manager within DARM. Any reference to the Director under this Wireless ROW Policy includes the Director’s designee. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 3 of 15 facilities rather than a single taller facility, would allow the applicant to achieve its technical objective; or b. The proposed new pole or installation on an existing pole would not exceed the height of any similar existing pole within a 300-foot radius from the proposed location. 3. Any new pole or replacement pole shall not exceed 24 inches in diameter from base to top; provided, however, that the radome installed to conceal the antenna and any associated equipment may be up to 36 inches in diameter. 4. The antenna(s) associated with the first installation must be top -mounted and concealed within a radome that also conceals the cable connections, antenna mount and other hardware. The Director may approve a side- mounted antenna with the initial installation if, in the Director’s discretion, the side-mounted antenna would be more appropriate given the built environment, neighborhood character, overall site appearance and would promote the purposes in this Wireless ROW Policy. Antennas for fixed site-to-fixed site communications (including but not limited to microwave backhaul) shall also be concealed in a radome or other similar enclosure. GPS antennas must be placed within the radome or directly above the radome not to exceed six inches. 5. All non-antenna equipment must be placed underground to the extent feasible. In the event that the applicant demonstrates that undergrounding is not technically feasible, then the applicant shall install all non-antenna equipment within a shroud or cabinet to be placed either on the ground or on the pole. To the extent undergrounding is not feasible, the City prefers all non-antenna equipment to be installed in a single ground mounted cabinet that incorporates appropriate concealment elements described below. The Director shall require the applicant to incorporate concealment elements into the proposed design. Concealment may include, but shall not be limited to, public art displayed on the cabinet, strategic placement in less obtrusive locations and placement within existing or replacement street furniture. Any pole-mounted equipment must be mounted as flush to the pole as possible and contained within the radome. The Director may also require the applicant to incorporate ambient noise suppression measures and/or require the applicant to place the equipment in locations less likely to impact adjacent residences or businesses to ensure compliance with all applicable noise regulations. 6. Utility service lines must be undergrounded whenever feasible to avoid additional overhead lines. For non-wood poles, undergrounded cables and wires must transition directly into the pole base without any external doghouse. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 4 of 15 7. Multiple operators on a shared pole should share a single electric meter. Site operators should use the smallest and least intrusive electric meter available. In the event that a smaller or less intrusive meter becomes available after the site operator installs its equipment, the site operator must remove the current meter and install the new one within a reasonable time. The Director strongly encourages site operators to use flat-rate electric service when it would eliminate the need for a meter. Whenever permitted by the electric service provider, the electric meter should be painted to match the pole. 8. Cabinets for telephone and/or fiber optic utilities may not extend more than six inches beyond the pole width on either side, and must be painted, wrapped or otherwise colored to match the pole. 9. To reduce clutter and deter vandalism, excess fiber optic or coaxial cables shall not be spooled, coiled or otherwise stored on the pole whether in a cabinet or not. 10. On all new poles and all installations on existing metal poles, all above - ground conduits shall be routed directly through the interior of the pole. On all installations on existing wood poles, all above -ground wires, cables and connections shall be encased in the smallest-diameter PVC conduit or shroud feasible, and painted to match the pole. 11. Unless otherwise required for compliance with FAA or FCC regulations, the facility shall not include any permanently installed lights. Any lights associated with the electronic equipment shall be appropriately shielded from public view. The provisions in this subsection shall not be interpreted to prohibit installations on streetlights or the installation of luminaires on new poles when required by the Director. 12. All above-ground or pole-mounted equipment in the rights-of-way must be finished with non-reflective materials unless approved by the Director. C. MINOR TECHNICAL EXCEPTIONS TO DESIGN PREFERENCES AND CRITERIA 1. The City recognizes that in some circumstances strict compliance with the Design Preferences and Criteria may result in undesirable aesthetic outcomes, and that minor deviations should be granted when the need for such deviation arises from circumstances outside the applicant’s control. To provide reasonable flexibility in the administration and implementation of this Policy, this section describes the required findings for a minor technical exception from the Design Preferences and Criteria for wireless telecommunications facilities in the public rights-of-way. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 5 of 15 2. The Director may, in its sole discretion, grant a minor technical exception from strict compliance with the Design Preferences and Criteria for wireless telecommunications facilities in the public rights-of-way when the Director finds that: a. the applicant has requested an exception in writing; b. the need for the exception arises from an external factor outside the applicant’s control that impact public health, safety or welfare, including without limitation soil compaction, existing congestion or clutter within the rights-of-way or other location-specific phenomenon; c. the proposed deviation from the applicable requirement is less than 10% larger than the generally applicable standard; and d. The granting of a minor technical exception would not create any obvious hazard or unreasonable obstruction in the public right-of-way. D. PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES 1. Applicants proposing to install and operate a new wireless telecommunications facility in the public right-of-way within the City of Fresno will be subject to this Wireless ROW Policy and must obtain a Street Work Permit issued through the City of Fresno Public Works Department and a Conditional Use Permit issued through the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department. 2. Applicants with an approved Conditional Use Permit proposing to add an additional carrier to a wireless telecommunications facility in the City of Fresno will be subject to these guidelines and required to amend the Conditional Use Permit by submitting an Amend ed Permit application to the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management, for processing. 3. Modifications to an existing wireless telecommunications facility related to replacement of equipment, antennas, cabinets, which do not materially change the operations of the facility may be accomplished through amending the Conditional Use Permit by submitting a Revised Exhibit (minor) application to the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management, for processing. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 6 of 15 4. Modifications to an existing wireless telecommunications facility within the right-of-way will be subject to the policies contained in this Wireless ROW Policy unless determined by the Director to be inappropriate. 5. In addition to any Conditional Use Permit, amended permit or revised exhibit required under this Wireless ROW Policy, any applicant proposing to install, operate, collocate or modify a wireless telecommunications facility in the public rights-of-way shall obtain a Street Work permit from the Public Works Department. 6. Submittal of a Conditional Use Permit or Street Work Permit application may cause a review of permit activity for the subject property to ensure compliance with the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) and this Wireless ROW Policy. An identified code or policy violation may require the property owner or permit holder to make necessary corrections prior to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit or Street Work Permit. 7. Prior to application submittal, the City strongly encourages , but does not require, a pre-submittal conference for all proposed ROW facilities. Such pre-application meeting is intended to streamline the application review through discussions including, but not limited to, the appropriate project classification, including whether the project may qualify for approval pursuant to Section 6409(a); potential concealment issues (if applicable); coordination with other City departments responsible for application review; and application completeness issues. Applicants may, but shall not be required, to bring any particular materials to a pre-submittal conference. City staff will endeavor to provide applicants with an appointment within approximately five (5) business days after receipt of a written or email request. For any applicant that schedules, attends and fully participates in a pre-application conference, the Director may grant a written exemption from a specific application requirement or requirements when the applicant shows that the information requested is duplicative of information contained in other materials to be submitted with the application or otherwise unnecessary for the City’s review under the facts and circumstances in that particular case. Any such written waiver shall be limited to the project discussed at the pre-application conference and shall not extend to any other projects. 8. Applicants must submit an application at a pre -scheduled appointment. Applicants may generally submit only one (1) application per appointment, but may schedule successive appointments for multiple applications whenever feasible and not prejudicial to other applicants. City staff will endeavor to provide applicants with an appointment within five (5) business days after staff receives a written request for an appointment. Any applications received without an appointment, whether delivered in- person or any other means, shall not be considered duly filed unless the TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 7 of 15 applicant received a written exemption at a pre -submittal conference. The Director will begin to review the application once it is duly filed. 9. To promote efficient review and timely decisions, an application will be automatically deemed withdrawn by the applicant when the applicant fails to tender a substantive response to the City within ninety (90) calendar days after the City deems the application incomplete in a writ ten notice to the applicant. The Director may, in the Director’s sole discretion, grant a written extension for up to an additional thirty (30) calendar days when the applicant submits a written request prior to the 90th day that shows good cause to grant the extension. Delays due to circumstances outside the applicant’s reasonable control will be considered good cause to grant the extension. 10. Within a reasonable time after the Director approves or denies an application for a permit under this Policy, the Director shall provide written notice to the applicant. All denial notice must contain the reasons for the denial. E. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS; SUBMITTAL AND REVIEW 1. The City shall not grant any application for any wireless telecommunications facility permit except upon a duly filed application consistent with the provisions in Policy and any written rules or regulations the Director may publish in any publicly stated format. The City Council authorizes the Director to develop and publish permit application fo rms, checklists, informational handouts and other related materials. Without further authorization from the City Council, the Director may from time -to- time update and alter the permit application forms, checklists, informational handouts and other related materials as the Director deems necessary or appropriate to respond to regulatory, technological or other changes. 2. General Application Requirements: a. Applicants must tender to the City the fee required in the City’s Master Fee Schedule. In the event that the City’s Master Fee Schedule does not contain a specific fee for wireless applications, the highest fee applicable to Conditional Use Permits will be required. b. Applicants must submit evidence sufficient to show that either (1) the applicant will own the wireless telecommunications equipment being proposed or (2) the applicant has obtained authorization from the owner to file the application. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 8 of 15 c. To the extent that the applicant claims any regulatory authorization or other right to use the public rights-of-way, the applicant must provide a true and correct copy of the certificate, license, notice to proceed or other regulatory authorization that supports the applicant’s claim. d. A fully dimensioned site plan and elevation drawings prepared and sealed by a California-licensed engineer showing any existing wireless facilities with all existing transmission equipment and other improvements, the proposed facility with all transmission equipment and other improvements and the legal boundaries of the city right- of-way surrounding the proposed facility and any associated access or utility easements. The plans must contain all other elements and details required for site plans submitted with a Conditional Use Permit. e. Photographs and photo simulations that show the propo sed facility in context of the site from reasonable line-of-sight locations from public streets or other adjacent viewpoints, together with a map that shows the photo location of each view angle. f. A written statement that includes: (a) a description of the technical objectives to be achieved; (b) an annotated topographical map that identifies the targeted service area to be benefitted; (c) the estimated number of potentially affected users in the targeted service area; and (d) full-color signal propagation maps with objective units of signal strength measurement that show the applicant’s current service coverage levels from all adjacent sites without the proposed site, predicted service coverage levels from all adjacent sites with the proposed site, and predicted service coverage levels from the proposed site without all adjacent sites. g. The applicant must list all existing structures considered as alternatives to the proposed location, together with a general description of the site design considered at each location. The applicant must also provide a written explanation for why the alternatives considered were unacceptable or infeasible, unavailable or not as consistent with the development standards in this Article as the proposed location and design. This explanation must include a meaningful comparative analysis and such technical information and other factual justification as are necessary to document the reasons why each alternative is unacceptable, infeasible, unavailable or not as consistent with the de velopment standards in this Article as the proposed location. If an existing facility is listed among the alternatives, the applicant must TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 9 of 15 specifically address why the modification of such wireless communication facility is not a viable option. 3. Exceptions for Section 6409 Requests a. In accordance with federal regulations, an applicant who requests approval pursuant to Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 shall not be required to submit the materials required for a complete application described in Section E2.f and E2.g of this Policy. b. In addition to the requirements for a complete application described in Sections E.2.a through E.2.e of this Policy, applicants who request approval pursuant to Section 6409(a) must submit the following materials: i. The plans must specifically depict and call out the original overall height of the structure and the overall height that existed on February 22, 2012 (if the structure was constructed prior to February 22, 2012). ii. Evidence that the applicant holds all current licenses and registrations from the FCC and any other applicable regulatory bodies where such license(s) or registration(s) are necessary to provide wireless services utilizing the proposed wireless facility. For any prior local regulatory approval(s) associated with the wireless facility, the applicant must submit copies of all such approvals with any corresponding conditions of approval. Alternatively, the applicant may submit a written justification that sets forth reasons why prior regulatory approvals were not required for the wireless facility at the time it was constructed or modified. iii. A written statement that explains in plain factual detail whether and why Section 6409(a) and the related FCC regulations at 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001 et seq. require approval for the specific project. A complete written narrative analysis will state the applicable standard and all the facts that allow the City to conclude the standard has been met—bare conclusions not factually supported do not constitute a complete written analysis. As part of this written statement the applicant must also include (i) whether and why the support structure qualifies as an existing TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 10 of 15 tower or existing base station; and (ii) whether and why the proposed collocation or modification does not cause a substantial change in height, width, excavation, equipment cabinets, concealment or permit compliance. 4. Limited Exemption for Design and Siting Criteria. a. If strict compliance with the siting and design criteria as applie d to a specific proposed personal wireless services facility would effectively prohibit the provision of personal wireless services, the City may grant a limited, one-time exemption from strict compliance if the applicant demonstrates with clear and convin cing evidence all the following findings: i. The proposed wireless facility qualifies as a ―personal wireless services facility‖ as defined in U.S.C 47 § 332(c)(7)(C)(ii); ii. The applicant has provided the City with a clearly defined technical service objective and a clearly defined potential site search area; iii. The applicant has provided the City with a meaningful comparative analysis that includes the factual reasons why an alternative location(s) or design(s) suggested by the City or otherwise identified in the administrative record, including by not limited to potential alternatives identified at any public meeting or hearing, are not technically feasible or potentially available; and iv. The applicant has provided the City with a meaningful comparative analysis that includes the factual reasons why the proposed location and design deviation is the least noncompliant location and design necessary to reasonably achieve the applicant’s reasonable technical service objectives. 5. Independent Consultants a. The City Council authorizes the Director to, in the Director’s discretion, and at any time in the review process, select and retain an independent consultant with qualifications and expertise satisfactory to the Director. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 11 of 15 b. The Director may request independent consultant review on any issue that involves specialized or expert knowledge in connection with the permit application. Such issues may include, but are not limited to: (i) permit application completeness or accuracy; (ii) planned compliance with applicable RF exposure standards; (iii) whether and where a significant gap exists or may exist, and whether such a gap relates to service coverage or service capacity; (iv) whether technically feasible and potentially available alternative locations and designs exist; (v) the applicability, reliability and sufficiency of analyses or methodologies used by the applicant to reach conclusions about any issue within this scope; and (vi) any other issue that requires expert or specialized knowledge identified by the Director. c. The Director shall send written notice to the applicant when it elects to retain an independent consultant. The applicant shall have two (2) business days to withdraw the application without any liability for any costs or expenses in connection with the independent consultant’s review. d. The applicant must pay for the cost and expense in connection with the independent consultant’s review and participation in any meeting. Before the City incurs any costs or expenses, the Director shall require the applicant to tender a reasonable deposit, at the Director’s sole discretion. In the event that the deposit is insufficient to cover all costs and expenses, the Director may either (a) require an additional deposit or (b) invoice the applicant. Any required deposit or invoice must be paid in full within ten (10) days. The City shall not issue any permit to an applicant who has not paid any applicable fee, deposit or invoice as required in this Policy. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 12 of 15 F. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL All applications for a permit under this Policy shall be subject to the standard conditions of approval provided in this section and the Fresno Municipal Code as applicable (i.e. the procedures related to conditional use permits). The Director may add, remove or modify any conditions of approval as necessary or appropriate to protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare. 1. The permit will automatically expire 10 years from the issuance date, except when California Government Code section 65964(b), as may be amended, authorizes the City to issue a permit with a shorter term. 2. Any application to renew this permit must be tendered to the City between 365 days and 180 days prior to its expiration, and must be accompanied by all required application materials, fees and deposits for a new application as then in effect. The City shall review an application for permit renewal in accordance with the standards for new facilities as then in effect. The [approval authority] may, but is not obligated to, grant a written temporary extension on the permit term to allow sufficient time to review a timely submitted permit renewal application. 3. Permittee shall at all times maintain compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, ordinance or other rules. 4. The City or its designee may enter onto the facility area to inspect the facility upon reasonable notice to the permittee. The permittee shall cooperate with all inspections. The City reserves the right to enter or direct its designee to enter the facility to support, re pair, disable or remove any elements of the facility in emergencies or when the facility threatens imminent harm to persons or property. 5. The site and the facility, and related transmission equipment, must be maintained in a neat and clean manner and in accordance with all approved plans and conditions of approval. 6. Permittee acknowledges and agrees that each and every aspect and/or element of the wireless facility, including without limitation its coloring, finishes, placement, orientation and proportionality with the structures in the immediate vicinity, that, by its sense and context, aids, contributes or otherwise furthers the concealment of the facility, in whole or in part, shall be deemed to be a concealment element of the support structure. 7. Permittee shall promptly remove any graffiti on the wireless facility at permittee’s sole cost and expense, and in no instance more than forty- eight (48) hours from the time of notification by the City or after discovery by the permittee. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 13 of 15 8. The permittee and, if applicable, the non-government owner of the private property upon which the tower/and or base station is installed shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, officials and employees (i) from any and all damages, liabilities, in juries, losses, costs and expenses and from any and all claims, demands, law suits, writs of mandamus and other actions or proceedings brought against the City or its agents, officers, officials or employees to challenge, attack, seek to modify, set aside, void or annul the City’s approval of the permit, and (ii) from any and all damages, liabilities, injuries, losses, costs and expenses and any and all claims, demands, law suits or causes of action and other actions or proceedings of any kind or form, whether for personal injury, death or property damage, arising out of or in connection with the activities or performance of the permittee or, if applicable, the private property owner or any of each one’s agents, employees, licensees, contractors, subcontractors or independent contractors. In the event the City becomes aware of any such actions or claims the City shall promptly notify the permittee and the private property owner and shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and the property owner and/or permittee (as applicable) shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. 9. Permittee shall take all reasonable efforts to avoid undue adverse impacts to adjacent properties and/or uses that may arise from the construction, operation, maintenance, modification and removal of the facility. 10. Permittee shall not use any backup or standby power generator except (1) when necessary due to a primary power source failure or (2) for routine maintenance/cycling. Permittee shall not operate the generator for maintenance/cycling more f requently than twice per month and then only for no longer than 30 minutes at a time Monday-Friday between 7am and 6pm. G. DEFINITIONS 1. ―Wireless Telecommunications Facility‖ – A combination of ground mounted equipment (often in cabinets or shelters), ne cessary utilities, and a slim line monopole with supporting antennas and cabling required to provide communications services. 2. ―Antenna‖ means any system of wires, poles, rods, reflecting discs, dishes, whips, or other similar devices used for the transmi ssion or reception of electromagnetic waves. TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 14 of 15 3. ―Radome‖ – Cylindrical, external sheath covers the antenna arrays mounted to a mast. The purpose of the radome is to conceal the antennas mounted to the telecommunication mast. The radome is constructed of an RF transparent material and painted to match the pole a condition of approval. H. REFERENCES Section 15-2759. TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND WIRELESS FACILITIES Telecommunications and Wireless Facilities shall comply with the City's policy pertaining to said uses. Said policy shall establish standards and procedures to regulate the development, siting, installation, and operation of wireless telecommunications antennas and related facilities consistent with the applicable requirements of federal law. The regulations are intended to provide for the appropriate development of wireless telecommunication facilities within the city to meet the needs of residents, business - owners, and visitors while protecting public health and safety and preventing visual blight and degradation of the community's aesthetic character. Section 15-5302. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS; APPLICABILITY A Conditional Use Permit is required for any use specifically identified in any other section of this Code which requires a Conditional Use Permit. Section 15.5306. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS; REQUIRED FINDINGS Finding 1: The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Code and all other chapters of the Municipal Code (Section 15-5306-A). Finding 2: The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable plan and design guideline the City has adopted (Section 15-5306-B). Finding 3: The proposed use will not be substantially adverse to the public health, safety , or general welfare of the community, nor be detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements (Section 15-5306-C). Finding 4: The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity (Section 15-5306-D). Finding 5: The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, emergency access, utilities, and services re quired (Section 15-5306-E). Section 15-5307. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TR-1.3.1 Wireless Telecommunications Facilities within the Public Right-Of-Way Page 15 of 15 In approving a Conditional Use Permit, the decision -maker may impose reasonable conditions or restrictions deemed necessary to: A. Ensure that the proposal conforms in all significant respects with the General Plan and with any other applicable plans or policies and design guidelines adopted by the City Council; B. Achieve the general purposes of this Code or the specific purpose of the zoning district in which the project is located; C. Achieve the findings for a Conditional Use Permit listed in https://www.municode.com/library/ca/fresno/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId= MUCOCHFRCA_CH15CIDECOINRE_PTVADPE_ART53COUSPE_S15 - 5306REFI, Required Findings; or D. Mitigate any potential impacts identified as a result of environmental review conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1206 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-I REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 THROUGH:BRUCE RUDD, City Manager FROM:BRIAN MARSHALL, Director Transportation Department THOMAS ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:CLAUDIA RUIZ, Economic Development Coordinator SUBJECT Actions pertaining to a Lease Agreement at Manchester Center for temporary space for Manchester Transit Center the Utility Billing and Collections Division: 1.Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption Class 1 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (existing facilities) 2.Approve a lease between the City of Fresno and Omninet Properties Manchester Center, LLC.,for lease of space at Manchester Center for use by the Departments of Transportation and Public Utilities RECOMMENDATION It is recommended Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a lease agreement with Omninet Properties Manchester Center,LLC,(Omninet)for office space within Manchester Center located at 1901 E.Shields Avenue,Fresno,to be used as a temporary customer service outlet for both Fresno Area Express and the City’s Utility Billing and Collections Division. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Departments of Transportation (FAX)and Public Utilities (DPU)have located space within Manchester Center which would provide a satellite customer service outlet for Fresno Area Express (FAX)and the Department of Public Utilities (DPU)Utilities,Billing &Collection (UB&C)Division.The term of the lease is 12 months and the rented space is approximately 2,165 square feet.The lease has been negotiated at $2.43 per square foot for a total of approximately $63,131.40 for the year. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1206 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-I The cost will be shared by FAX and DPU who will be co-tenants in the space. BACKGROUND On December 31st,2016,UB&C will be required to vacant its current space at Manchester Center due to the reorganization of mall tenants.DPU is evaluating the feasibility of transferring its UB&C services to multiple locations in Fresno which would result in more accessibility for residents.This evaluation will take months to vet and a final determination will not be made until end of the lease term. At that time, a long term lease may be negotiated if necessary. Starting on January 31st 2017,the Manchester Transit Center (MTC)will be undergoing façade improvements and will be closed for approximately 10 months.Both UB&C and MTC will need temporary space for most of calendar year 2017.During that time,FAX customer service operations will be relocate to the temporary space and return to the MTC after the façade improvements have been completed. The office will house approximately seven employees who will conduct transactions pertaining to the sale of bus passes,payments of utility bills,route information,etc.The term of the lease is 12 months and the rented space is approximately 2,165 square feet.The lease has been negotiated at $2.43 per square foot,including common area maintenance charges,for a total of approximately $63,131.40 for the year.The cost will be shared by FAX and DPU who will be co-tenants in the space. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment of this project and has determined that it falls within the Categorical Exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines 15301 which exempts projects where there is no change in existing use because the space being leased has historically been used for commercial office space.Furthermore,Staff has determined that none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference is not applicable because this is not a contract for goods,services,or public work of improvement. FISCAL IMPACT The cost of this lease will be shared by both FAX and DPU Enterprise Funds with existing appropriation authority. Attachment: Lease Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE (“Lease”) is made effective ____________________, 2016 by and between OMNINET PROPERTIES MANCHESTER CENTER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Lessor”), and the CITY OF FRESNO, a municipal corporation (“Lessee”). 1. LEASED PREMISES. The “Leased Premises” consists of approximately 2,165 square feet, in a location to be reasonably designated by Lessor and acceptable to Lessee, situated within a 640,858 square foot shopping center (the “Property”) located at 1901 E. Shields, Fresno, California 93726. Lessor and Lessee shall confirm the square footage and location of the Leased Premises in the Commencement Letter (defined below). 2. AUTHORITY. Lessor represents and warrants that it is the owner of the Property, or has the legal interest and authority, to lease the Leased Premises to Lessee. 3. TERM. Lessor leases to Lessee the Leased Premises for a twelve month term (“Term”), commencing on the earlier of (i) the date of substantial completion to the satisfaction of the Lessee of the Tenant Improvements (as set forth in Section 7 below) or (ii) the date that Lessee commences business from the Leased Premises (“Commencement Date”), and ending the date immediately preceding the twelfth monthly anniversary of the Commencement Date (“Expiration Date”); provided, however, if the Commencement Date is not the first (1st) day of a month, then the Expiration Date shall be the last day of the twelfth full calendar month after the month in which the Commencement Date falls. Upon the substantial completion of the Tenant Improvements, Lessee shall execute and deliver to Lessor a Commencement Letter (“Commencement Letter”) substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “A” which will specify, among other things, the Commencement Date, the Expiration Date, the location and square footage of the Leased Premises and Lessee’s proportionate share of operating expenses for the Property as set forth below. 4. RENT. Lessor shall pay $2.00 per square foot base rent, plus its proportionate share of operating expenses for the Property (“Rent”), as set forth below, for a total monthly payment of $5,260.95 per month. All monthly Rent payments shall be payable in advance, on or before the first day of each calendar month occurring during the Term, at the Lessor’s address as shown on the signature page of this Lease. Expense Estimated Rate per Square Foot of the Leased Premises per Month CAM $0.25 TAX $0.03 INSURANCE $0.02 HVAC $0.04 JANITORIAL $0.09 2 5. UTILITIES. Lessee is responsible for the cost of all utilities including all electricity, gas, water, telephone, cable and data charges supplied to the Leased Premises during the Term. HVAC shall be provided by Lessor to the Leased Premises 8:00 a.m., until 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday and 8:00 a.m., until 6:00 p.m., on Sunday. Lessee shall pay to Lessor, as part of Rent, its proportionate share of HVAC and electricity consumed at the Leased Premises, as reasonably determined by Lessor via an engineer’s estimate. 6. USE. Lessee shall use the Leased Premises only for the purposes of office and administrative space by Fresno Area Express and Utility Billing and Collection Departments. 7. TENANT IMPROVEMENTS. The Tenant Improvements shall consist of those improvements to be reasonably agreed upon by Lessor and Lessee, Lessee shall contribute towards the actual costs of the Tenant Improvements an amount not to exceed $50,000 (the “Allowance”). Lessor shall use its commercially reasonable efforts to complete the Tenant Improvements by December 31, 2016. Lessor agrees it will not terminate Lessee’s tenancy at 1901 E. Shields, Suite B114, prior to the Commencement Date of this Lease. Lessor shall construct improvements per a mutually agreeable space plan using Lessor’s building standards and materials. Lessor shall comply with all applicable laws including applicable laws related to ADA accessibility and prevailing wage. Upon completion of the Tenant Improvements, Lessor shall provide Lessee an invoice for the costs of the Tenant Improvements, which Lessee shall pay within thirty days of receipt. Notwithstanding any contrary provision contained in this Lease, in no event shall the Tenant Improvements include Tenant’s personal property including, without limitation, Tenant’s furniture, fixtures, equipment, lockers, cubicles and other furnishings. Lessor shall not provide any communication or data cabling beyond telephone and CAT 6 cabling. Following Lessor’s construction of the Tenant Improvements, Lessee shall make no alterations to the Leased Premises without Lessor’s prior written consent. Lessor shall allow Lessee access to install conduit and/or fiber cable for Lessee’s data use. 8. PARKING. Lessee shall have access to parking spaces in the parking lots on the Property, on a first come first serve basis, at no cost. 9. MAINTENANCE. All exterior, interior and roof maintenance, including, but not limited to leak damage, if any, shall be the responsibility of the Lessor, unless such damage was caused by the wrongful acts of Lessee or its employees, agents or invitees. The Lessor is also responsible for the structural condition of the Leased Premises and the condition of the parking surfaces and agrees that the Leased Premises will always be maintained in the good working order and condition. Lessor will also maintain all fixtures, doors, and gates in good working condition. Lessee shall repair and maintain the Leased Premises in good working condition, except for such portions of the Leased Premises which are Lessor’s responsibility as described above. 10. MAINTENANCE - NON PERFORMANCE. In the event the Lessor neglects, fails or refuses to maintain the portion of the Leased Premises which Lessor is obligated to maintain as afore stated within thirty (30) days after written notice by Lessee, Lessee may, at Lessee’s sole option, cure any such default by performance of any act, including payment of money. Lessor shall reimburse Lessee the reasonable costs incurred by Lessee in performing the obligation Lessor failed to perform, expressly excluding any administrative fee, mark-up or profit. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Lessee shall not 3 exercise the right to perform Lessor’s obligations as long as Lessor has commenced the maintenance of the Leased Premises and is diligently pursuing such maintenance to completion. If the repair to be performed by Lessee relates to the roof of the Leased Premises, then Lessee shall only use Lessor’s designated roof contractor. Lessee shall perform any such work using only licensed contractors and otherwise in a manner so as to not void Lessor’s roof warranty. 11. LIABILITY. Lessor, its officers, managers, employees, agents and authorized volunteers and their affiliates, successor and assigns shall be free from any and all liabilities, losses, costs, damages, and claims of any kind for loss or damage to property of Lessee or any other person, including, without limitation, any invitee or guest of Lessee, or for any injury to or death of any person, arising out of or resulting from: (1) Lessee’s use and occupancy of the Leased Premises, or any work, activity or other things allowed or suffered by Lessee to be done in, on or about the Leased Premises; (2) any breach or default by Lessee of any of Lessee’s obligations under this Lease; or (3) any act or omission of Lessee, its officers, officials, employees, agents, invitees or contractors. Except to the extent arising out of or resulting from the negligence or willful misconduct of Lessee or any of Lessee’s contractors, agents, employees or guests, Lessee, its officers, officials, employees, agents and authorized volunteers shall be free from any and all liability and claims of any kind for loss or damage to property of Lessor or any other person, or for any injury to or death of any person, arising out of: (1) Lessor or any other lessee’s use and occupancy of the common areas of the Property, maintenance or repair of the common areas of the Property, or any work, activity or other things allowed or suffered by Lessor or any other Lessee to be done in, on or about the common areas of the Property; (2) any breach or default by Lessor of any of Lessor’s obligations under this Lease; (3) any negligent act or omission of Lessor, its partners, officers, directors, employees, agents, invitees or contractors and any other lessee, its officers, directors, employees, agents, employees, invitees or contractors; or (4) structural failures of walls, roof and floor. The parties acknowledge that as between Lessor and Lessee, each is responsible for the negligence of its own officers, officials, partners, directors, employees, agents, invitees and contractors. Notwithstanding any contrary provision contained herein, neither party shall be liable to the other for incident, exemplary or consequential damages, however occurring, including, without limitation, loss of income, loss of use, loss of opportunity or loss of goodwill, loss of data, or loss due to interruption of service. No officer, director, manager, shareholder, contractor, agent or employee shall be personally liable for Lessor’s obligations under this Lease. This Section 11 shall survive termination or expiration of this Lease. 12. SURRENDER OF POSSESSION. It is mutually understood that upon any termination of the Lease, Lessee will surrender the Leased Premises to Lessor in as good order and condition as when received, except for reasonable wear and tear and any maintenance or repair that is the express obligation of Lessor pursuant to any of the provisions hereof. Any needed repairs will be completed within 15 days of termination, subject to extension as may be reasonably necessary to complete such work. If any needed repairs that are the express obligation of Lessee hereunder are not completed within 15 days, or such other reasonable period if cannot be completed within such 4 duration, the Lessor may take action needed to make said repairs and Lessee agrees to pay the cost for those repairs within 30 days of receipt of invoice by Lessor. 13. FIXTURES. It is further mutually understood and agreed that any equipment fixtures or apparatus installed in or on the Leased Premises by the Lessee, as permitted herein, shall continue to be the property of Lessee, and shall be removed by the Lessee without recourse at the expiration of this Lease; provided, however, Lessee shall, at its cost, repair any damage to the Leased Premises or Property caused by such removal. Said fixtures include communications and computer equipment, security systems, office furniture, shelving and cabinets. Lessee shall be solely responsible for all maintenance and repairs of its furniture, fixtures, shelving, security systems, cabinets and computer and communications equipment. Lessee is solely responsible for the installation and cost of all IT equipment, cabling, phone/data, security system, and all furniture. 14. RIGHT OF ENTRY. Lessor or its representative, upon reasonable advance notice to Lessee (except in the event of an emergency, in which case no notice shall be required) and subject to Lessee’s right to accompany Lessor, may enter the Leased Premises during business hours at any time during the term of this Lease to protect, inspect, exercise or investigate any rights of Lessor herein reserved. Subject to the foregoing, Lessor may enter the Leased Premises for the purpose of making any alteration, repair or improvement to said building, or the Leased Premises, when it deems convenient for the maintenance or preservation thereof provided always that the normal business of Lessee or its invitees shall not be unnecessarily inconvenienced. 15. TERMINATION BY LESSEE FOR NON-APPROPRIATION. The Lessee obligation to pay the rental payments and any other payment obligations under this Lease shall constitute a current expense to Lessee for Lessee's beneficial use and occupancy of the Leased Premises. The rental payments shall be payable only from current funds, budgeted and appropriated, on deposit in a reserve fund, or otherwise legally available for the rental payments or other Leased Premises costs. This Lease does not create an immediate debt for aggregate rental payments, and is not a pledge of the City's full faith and credit. During its annual budgeting process, Lessee shall consider, and will use best efforts to appropriate funding to meet its rental payments, maintenance, and other estimated Leased Premises costs under this Lease for the fiscal year under consideration. In the sole event of non-appropriation relating to this Lease, Lessee shall have the right to terminate this Lease at the end of any fiscal year of Lessee, in the manner and subject to the terms specified in this paragraph. Lessee shall give Lessor written notice of such termination not less than thirty days prior to the proposed date of termination. For purposes of this paragraph, “fiscal year” shall mean the twelve month fiscal period of Lessee which commences on July 1 in every year and ends on the following June 30. For purposes of this paragraph, “non-appropriation” shall mean the failure of Lessee or Lessee's governing body to appropriate money for any fiscal year of Lessee sufficient for the continued performance of this Lease by Lessee. 16. ASSIGNMENT. Lessee shall not assign this Lease without Lessor’s prior written consent. 17. QUIET CONDUCT AND POSSESSION. So long as Lessee is not in default under this Lease, Lessor shall not negligently or intentionally commit, or suffer to be committed, any nuisance, or negligently or intentionally do any other act or thing which may or does disturb the quiet enjoyment of Lessee of its occupancy of the Leased Premises. 5 18. CONDEMNATION. In the event that at any time during the Term of this Lease, the Leased Premises or any part thereof shall be taken by eminent domain or condemnation by any public or quasi public authority (or in the event a voluntary conveyance is made by Lessor to such public or quasi public authority by reason of or by threat or imminence of the exercise of said power of eminent domain or condemnation by said authority), Lessee’s right of possession shall terminate as of the date of taking and rent and other charges provided for in this Lease shall be adjusted as of said date. The entire damage award of the condemnation proceedings shall be paid to Lessor. 19. DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION. If the Leased Premises shall be damaged by fire, the elements, unavoidable accident, or other casualty, but is not thereby rendered untenantable in whole or in part, Lessor shall, at Lessor’s own expense and within thirty (30) days of Lessee’s written notification to Lessor of the damage (or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter), cause such damage to be repaired, but only to the extent on insurance proceeds received by Lessor, and the Rent shall not be abated. Repairs shall be done in a manner acceptable to Lessee such that Lessee has full use of the Tenant Improvements. If the repairs are insufficient for full use of the Tenant Improvements, Lessee may at its election terminate this Lease. If by reason of such occurrence, the Leased Premises shall be rendered untenantable only in part, Lessor shall, at Lessor’s own expense and within thirty (30) days of Lessee’s written notification of Lessor of the damage (or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter), commence to cause such damage to be repaired, but only to the extent of insurance proceeds received by Lessor, and the Rent meanwhile shall be abated proportionately as to the portion of the Leased Premises rendered untenantable from the time of such occurrence until such repairs are completed; provided, however, Lessor shall be obligated to perform such repairs only if it is repairing the spaces of similarly affected tenants (and if Lessor has elected to not repair the space of similarly affected tenants, this Lease shall terminate upon written notice from Lessor, retroactive to the date of the damage). Repairs shall be done in a manner acceptable to Lessee such that Lessee has full use of the Tenant Improvements. If the repairs are insufficient for full use of the Tenant Improvements, Lessee may at its election terminate this Lease. If the Leased Premises shall be rendered wholly untenantable by reason of such occurrence, Lessor shall, at Lessor’s cost, within sixty (60) days after Lessee’s written notice of the damage, cause such damage to be repaired, but only to the extent of insurance proceeds received, and the Rent shall abate completely from the date of the damage until the repairs are completed; provided, however, if Lessor determines that the repairs cannot be complete within sixty (60) days after the date of the damage, then, then either party shall have the right, to be exercised by notice in writing to the other within thirty (30) days from and after the date of the damage and destruction, to elect to terminate this Lease, and in such event, this Lease and the tenancy hereby created hereby shall cease as of the date of such notice, and the Rent shall be adjusted as of such date. 20. TAXES AND INSURANCE. Lessor will pay all real estate taxes, bonds and assessments when due on the Leased Premises and will maintain property and hazard insurance on the Leased Premises. Lessee, its officials, officers, employees, agents or authorized volunteers shall not be liable to Lessor or its insurer for any damage caused by fire or any of the risks insured against under the property and hazard insurance, unless such fire or other damage is caused by Lessee, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or authorized volunteers. Nothing herein is intended to require Lessee to maintain property and hazard insurance covering the Leased Premises for whatever cause.; 6 provided, however, Lessee shall maintain a commercial general liability insurance (either through a third party or a self-insurance program) providing coverage of not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence and $3,000,000 in the annual aggregate. Lessee shall pay its proportionate share of Lessor’s insurance premiums as Rent, upon the terms described in Section 4 above. Lessee shall maintain, at Lessee’s sole cost, a policy of standard fire, extended coverage and special extended coverage insurance (all risks), including a vandalism and malicious mischief endorsement, sprinkler leakage coverag e where sprinklers are provided in an amount equal to the full replacement value new without deduction for depreciation of all Tenant Improvements and trade fixtures, furniture, equipment and other personal property installed by or at the expense of Lessee. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Lessee does not obtain sprinkler leakage coverage, then Lessee shall be deemed to have self-insured such risk (and, accordingly, such risk shall be treated as if Lessee actually carried a policy containing sprinkler leakage coverage). 21. DEFAULT. If either party defaults in the performance of any condition or covenant in this Lease, the other party, at its option, may terminate this Lease, but only if the defaulting party fails to rectify said default within thirty (30) days (except for nonpayment of rent, which shall be ten (10) days) after written notice thereof is served upon the defaulting party by the other party. In the event, however, that any default (except nonpayment of rent) complained of hereunder is of such nature that the same cannot be rectified in such thirty (30) day period as aforesaid, then such default shall be deemed to be rectified if the defaulting party shall have commenced the compliance of the provisions hereof breached by it and in the performance of which it is claimed to be in default within such thirty (30) day period and shall with all diligence prosecute work or perform the particular provisions until the same shall have been fully rectified or performed. Any amount due from Lessee to Lessor hereunder which is not paid when due shall bear interest at the lower of ten percent (10%) per annum or the maximum lawful rate of interest from the due date until paid, unless otherwise specifically provided herein, but the payment of such interest shall not excuse or cure any default by Lessee under this Lease. In addition to such interest: (i) if any rent or operating expense payment is not paid on or before the fifth (5th) day of the calendar month for which the same is due, a late charge equal to ten percent (10%) of the amount overdue or $100, whichever is greater, shall be immediately due and owing and shall accrue for each calendar month or part thereof until such rental, including the late charge, is paid in full, which late charge Lessee hereby agrees is a reasonable estimate of the damages Lessor shall suffer as a result of Lessee’s late payment and (ii) an additional charge of $25 shall be assessed for any check given to Lessor by or on behalf of Lessee which is not honored by the drawee thereof; which damages include Lessor’s additional administrative and other costs associated with such late payment and unsatisfied checks and the parties agree that it would be impracticable or extremely difficult to fix Lessor’s actual damage in such event. 22. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. 23. MISCELLANEOUS. 23.1 NOTICES. Notices hereunder to the respective parties shall be deemed delivered if given in writing, mailed with postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the respective party at the address given on the signature page of this Lease or at such other address as the parties may, from time to time, designate by written notice. 23.2 ATTORNEY FEES. In the event of a claim by either party for breach of, or failure to perform, or any inaccuracy in, any of the representations, warranties, covenants, or agreements contained in this Lease, then in any action or proceeding the prevailing 7 party shall be entitled to be reimbursed for all costs, fees, and expenses incurred in connection with prosecuting or defending such claim, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. 23.3 OTHER AGREEMENTS SUPERSEDED WAIVER AND MODIFICATION. This Lease constitutes the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter contained in and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations, and understandings of the parties. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Lease shall be binding unless executed in writing by all of the parties. No waiver of any condition or provision shall be enforceable unless made in writing. Nothing in this Lease shall be construed to give any person or entity other than the parties hereto any rights or remedies. 23.4 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. This Lease shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with and governed and enforced in all respects by the laws of the State of California, except that this Lease shall be given a fair and reasonable construction in accordance with the intention of the parties and without regard to, or aid of, Section 1654 of the California Civil Code. Venue for purposes of the filing of any action regarding the enforcement or interpretation of this Lease and rights and duties hereunder shall be Fresno County, California. 23.5 HEADINGS. The article and section headings throughout this Lease are provided for convenience only and the words contained therein shall in no way be held to expand, amplify, modify, or aid in the interpretation or construction thereof. 23.6 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. This Lease shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, and successors of the parties hereto, but no right or liability or obligation arising hereunder may be assigned by Lessee. 23.7 COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. As to the Leased Premises, Lessee shall, at Lessee’s sole cost, comply with, and shall require compliance by all contractors and subcontractors, with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations applicable to Lessee’s use of the Leased Premises and any alterations performed by or on behalf of Lessee. Lessor shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations applicable to Lessor’s use of the common areas of the Propert y and repair work performed by Lessor at the Property. 23.8 SUBORDINATION, NONDISTURBANCE AND ATTORNMENT. This Lease is subject and subordinate to all ground or underlying leases, mortgages and deeds of trust which affect the Property. If any future mortgagee or beneficiary requires this Lease be subordinate to its lien, this Lease shall be subordinate to that lien provided Lessor and any mortgagee or beneficiary enters into a Subordination, Nondisturbance and Attornment Agreement with Lessee. 23.9 SEVERABILITY. In the event any of the provisions of this Lease shall be declared by a court to be void or unenforceable, then such provision shall be severed from this Lease without affecting the validity and enforceability of any of the other provisions hereof, and the parties shall negotiate in good faith to replace such unenforceable or void provisions with a similar clause to achieve to the extent permitted under law, the purpose and intent of the provisions declared void and unenforceable. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease as of the day and year first above written. LESSOR: LESSEE: Omninet Properties Manchester Center, LLC City of Fresno, a municipal corporation By: California Mall Ventures, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its Member By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Benjamin Nazarian, Manager Bruce Rudd, City Manager Address for Notices: Address For Lessee: 9420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400 2600 Fresno Street Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Fresno, CA 93721 Attention: Benjamin Nazarian Attention: City Manager With a copy to: 9420 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 400 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Attention: Andrea Costantini Address for Payment of Rent: Omninet Property Manchester Center, LLC 1901 E. Shields Avenue Suite 203 Fresno, California 93726 Attention: Controller ATTEST: Yvonne Spence, CMC City Clerk By: _____________________ Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: Douglas T. Sloan City Attorney By: __________________________ Exhibit “A” Commencement Letter TO: City of Fresno DATE: ______________________________________ ______________________________________ RE: Lease Agreement dated __________________, 2016 (the “Lease”), between OMNINET PROPERTIES MANCHESTER CENTER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Lessor”), and the CITY OF FRESNO, a municipal corporation (“Lessee”), concerning Suite ________, located at 1901 E. Shields, Fresno, California, 93726 (the “Property”). Ladies and Gentlemen: In accordance with the Lease, Lessor wishes to advise and/or confirm the following: 1. That the Leased Premises is outlined and attached hereto as Exhibit A and is located on the __________ floor of the Property. 2. The Leased Premises have been accepted herewith by the Lessee as being substantially complete in accordance with the Lease and that there is no deficiency in construction in any of the Tenant Improvements (as defined in Section 7 of the Lease). 3. That the Lessee has taken possession of the Leased Premises and acknowledges that under the provisions of the Lease the term of said Lease shall commence as of ____________ for a term of approximately twelve (12) months ending on ________________________. 4. That in accordance with the Lease, Lessee shall begin the payment of its proportionate share of operating expenses, on ________________________. 5. If the Commencement Date of the Lease is other than the first day of the month, the first billing will contain a prorata adjustment. Each billing thereafter shall be for the full amount of the monthly installment as provided for in said Lease. 6. Rent is due and payable in advance on the first day of each and every month during the Term of said Lease. Your rent checks should be made payable to Omninet Properties Manchester Center, LLC at 1901 E. Shields Avenue, Suite 203, Fresno, CA 93726, Attn: Controller. 7. The exact number of rentable square feet within the Leased Premises is __________ square feet. 8. Lessee’s proportionate share, as adjusted based upon the exact number of rentable square feet within the Leased Premises is _______%. AGREED AND ACCEPTED: “TENANT” City of Fresno A municipal corporation By: _______________________ Name: _______________________ Title: ________________________ KBD:ns [72404ns/kbd] Document comparison by Workshare Professional on Thursday, October 13, 2016 12:12:08 PM Input: Document 1 ID file://M:\Properties\Commercial\CALIFORNIA\Manchester Center\Operations\Leasing\Tenants\3. Prospective Tenants\Fresno Area Express\Fresno Area Express Lease.docx Description Fresno Area Express Lease Document 2 ID file://M:\Properties\Commercial\CALIFORNIA\Manchester Center\Operations\Leasing\Tenants\3. Prospective Tenants\Fresno Area Express\Fresno Area Express Leasev2.docx Description Fresno Area Express Leasev2 Rendering set Standard Legend: Insertion Deletion Moved from Moved to Style change Format change Moved deletion Inserted cell Deleted cell Moved cell Split/Merged cell Padding cell Statistics: Count Insertions 8 Deletions 6 Moved from 0 Moved to 0 Style change 0 Format changed 0 Total changes 14 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1225 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-J REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:JERRY P. DYER, Chief of Police Police Department BY:RICHARD TUCKER, Lieutenant Traffic Safety / Special Response Section SUBJECT: Actions pertaining to a lease agreement for a new property/evidence warehouse: 1. ***RESOLUTION 25th amendment to the Annual Authorizing Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 appropriating $250,000 for the purpose of purchasing shelving and racking for evidence storage; a large walk-in cold box; relocating a back-up generator; necessary technology equipment and services for computer connectivity; and moving expenses for relocating all of our property/evidence to the new warehouse. (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 2. Approve a lease agreement with CARLULU, LLC., for office and warehouse space to be used for the storage of property/evidence and Police Department specialty vehicles. RECOMMENDATION Approve 25th Amendment to the AAR No. 2016-118 appropriating $250,000 for the purpose of purchasing shelving and racking for evidence storage; a large walk-in cold box; relocating a back-up generator; necessary technology equipment and services for computer connectivity; and moving expenses for relocating all of our property/evidence to the new warehouse. Authorize the Chief of Police to enter into a lease agreement with CARLULU, LLC., for office and warehouse space to be used for the storage of property/evidence and Police Department specialty vehicles. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1225 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-J The Police Department’s main facility located at 940 N. Broadway has had serious maintenance issues associated with the roof. These issues have resulted in several water leaks which has caused the building’s ceiling to crumble and fall-in. It was determined through professional testing that the ceiling material contained asbestos and thus contaminated the warehouse. Due to the growing need for a larger, more efficient warehouse, staff recommends that Council approve the AAR and allow the Chief of Police to enter into a lease agreement for a 25,000 square foot warehouse with CARLULU, LLC. The lease agreement consists of two five year terms with the first five year term at .50 cents per square foot per month and .55 cents a square foot per month for the second term. At the commencement of the 10th year, the City of Fresno will have the option to purchase the warehouse. The new warehouse will allow the Department to house and store all property/evidence and specialty vehicles under one roof. This will also allow for the Department to stop paying rental and lease payments for several other storage spaces throughout the City. BACKGROUND The Police Department currently stores over 300,000 evidence items at several locations throughout the City. For the past 30 years, the Police Department has used an old fire station at 940 N. Broadway that was built in the 1940’s for the purpose of a Central Policing Station and to store evidence. During the recession, the Central Policing Station was closed and the entire facility was utilized for evidence storage. We quickly outgrew this location and have been using other locations throughout the City. Many of these locations are leased or rented. There are currently 11 storage garages and two rented cold boxes at off-site locations. In February 2016, the Department’s primary storage facility located at 940 N. Broadway experienced a partial ceiling collapse due to a water leak in the roof. The ceiling material was discovered to contain asbestos. Professional testing determined that the building was contaminated with asbestos. It was also discovered that the asbestos material had fragmented and was present on most of our evidence packages. The facility was immediately closed to normal access until professional asbestos training and equipment could be provided to our Property Evidence Technicians. The facility was reopened to allow access to stored evidence on a very limited basis as required for court and investigations. This process requires a professional asbestos specialist to enter the facility along with a Property Evidence Technician to retrieve items of evidence. The items have to be professionally cleaned and passed through a decontamination chamber before any items leave the facility. Once these items have been removed we store them at another location so as to not place evidence back into the contaminated facility. Roof repair estimates, asbestos removal and cleaning was found to be cost prohibitive. It was City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1225 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-J determined that the building would have to be razed when the Police Department vacates the facility. The City Manager has directed Facilities to oversee this portion of the project. Police Department staff met with Supervising Real Estate Agent Craig Hansen and preformed an exhaustive search of available warehouses throughout the City. The only facility that met all of the needs of the Fresno Police Department was located at 5499 E. Hedges. City staff entered into negotiations for an agreement with the landlord. We received a signed agreement from the landlord, CARLULU, LLC. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because local preference is not required for non-professional service contracts. FISCAL IMPACT The $250,000 for this project will be paid by UGM Police Facility Fees and have no impact on the General Fund. However, the on-going lease payments will be paid by the General Fund, but will be partially off-set by savings from the cancellation of other current storage leases. An Annual Appropriations Resolution is attached to appropriate funds for this project. Attachments: Lease Agreement AAR# 2016-118 City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Date Adopted: 1 of 2 Date Approved: Effective Date: Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO ADOPTING THE 25TH AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-118 APPROPRIATING $250,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASING SHELVING AND RACKING FOR EVIDENCE STORAGE; A LARGE WALK-IN COLD BOX; RELOCATING A BACK-UP GENERATOR; NECESSARY TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES FOR COMPUTER CONNECTIVITY; AND MOVING EXPENSES FOR RELOCATING ALL OF OUR PROPERTY EVIDENCE TO THE NEW WAREHOUSE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2016-118 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: POLICE DEPARTMENT UGM Police Citywide Facil Fees $ 250,000 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: UGM Police Citywide Facil Fees Revenues: Account: 33827 Police c/w Facility Impact Fee $ 250,000 Fund: 31586 Org Unit: 185001 Total Revenues $ 250,000 Appropriations: Account: 54305 O/S Repair & Maint.--Equipment $ 30,000 54421 Equipment Rentals--Ex Office 9,100 57411 New Machinery & Equipment 175,000 59303 Info Systems Equip Charge 34,500 59307 Charges For Telephone Service 1,400 Fund: 31586 Org Unit: 152005 Total Appropriations $ 250,000 2 of 2 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $250,000 for funding various operational needs in correspondence to establishing the new Property and Evidence facility. CLERK’S CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF FRESNO } ss. CITY OF FRESNO } I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that t he foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, California, at a regular meeting thereof, held on the Day of , 2016 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2016 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2016 Mayor Veto: , 2016 Council Override Veto: , 2016 YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk BY: ______________________ Deputy City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1215 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-K REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:THOMAS C. ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:ROSA LAU-STAGGS, Wastewater Manager-Environmental Services Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division SUBJECT ***BILL NO.B-39 -(Intro.10/13/2016)(For adoption)-Repealing and adding Section 6-301 of the Fresno Municipal Code related to General Provisions;Purpose and Policy of Sewage and Water Disposal (Citywide). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council consider for introduction and adoption an Ordinance repealing section 6-301 of the Fresno Municipal Code and adding a revised section 6-301 to allow the City Manager or designee to approve transfer of sewer capacity for businesses in Fresno when the business is relocating to another Fresno location at which there is no or insufficient sewer capacity, the business has previously purchase sewer capacity at a location,and an agreed-upon amount of sewer capacity is left at the donating location. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Sewer capacity purchased upfront or acquired through a deferred payment program pays for the right to connect to the sewer conveyance system and for sewer treatment at the Fresno Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF).Currently,sewer capacity paid upfront or through a deferred payment program remains in the property and cannot be transferred to another location. The proposed ordinance repeals section 6-301 of the Fresno Municipal Code and adds an updated section 6-301 allowing the City Manager or designee to authorize transfers of limited sewer capacity for businesses using the RWRF and relocating to other areas in Fresno.The transfer would be permissibly only where there is insufficient or no sewer capacity at the location to which the business is relocating.Business in Fresno planning to expand by relocating in other areas of Fresno will benefit from the ability to transfer a limited amount of capacity already acquired at the existing location saving in connection costs if relocating in an area that has insufficient capacity or none. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1215 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-K BACKGROUND New residential,commercial and industrial developments pay capacity charges for the right to connect to the sanitary sewer system and to treat their wastewater discharge at the RWRF.These charges are the Wastewater Facilities Charge and the Trunk Sewer Charge and pay for the capital costs associated with the design and construction of wastewater facilities needed to convey and process the wastewater discharged by the users of the system.Residential development pays these charges upfront at time of permit or when safe to occupy.After 1999,businesses pay these fees as “Sewer Facility Charges” through a deferred, non-interest program. Sewer capacity for businesses paid up-front,grandfathered by customer use or expansion,or acquired through the deferred payment program stays in the property.Currently,a business in Fresno relocating within the City cannot use the sewer capacity they previously acquired at the existing location.The proposed Ordinance will permit such transfers upon the City Manager or designee’s approval. The proposed Ordinance allows the City Manager or designee to enter into an agreement with the customer to transfer acquired sewer capacity from one location (“donating property”)to another location (“receiving property”)for existing businesses relocating within the City.Transfers can only occur if:1)the receiving property is in Fresno;2)the receiving property has insufficient or no sewer capacity; and 3) capacity is left at the donating property. In addition,customers utilizing greater capacity than is allocated at the donating or receiving property will incur sewer capacity charges as set forth in the Master Fee Resolution. Existing business relocating to another area in Fresno will benefit from the ability to transfer sewer capacity to a new location,thus cutting expenses that could be substantial if the location has insufficient or no capacity. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because the Ordinance does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact.Sewer capacity acquired at the donating location will be moved to the receiving location with no impact to the Regional Sanitary System or the RWRF.The system will not be overuse by doing these transfers. Attachments: Ordinance for Adoption City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1215 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-K City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Ordinance No. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING SECTION 6-301 OF THE FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING SECTION 6-301 OF THE FRESNO MUNICPAL CODE RELATED TO GENERAL PROVISIONS; PURPOSE AND POLICY OF SEWAGE AND WATER DISPOSAL WHEREAS, the City of Fresno has in place a program permitting deferred collection of Sewer Facility Charges for sewer capacity and trunkline capacity where applicable for businesses connecting to the sanitary sewer system; and WHEREAS, the sewer capacity acquired by a business through the deferred program currently remains at the location where the account resides, regardless of whether such capacity will ever be used, unless the capacity is allowed to be transferred; and WHEREAS, a business moving to a different location within the City has been allowed to transfer its unused purchased or grandfathered sewer capacity from one location (“donating property”) to a new business location (“receiving property”), in limited situations when a receiving property has none or insufficient sewer capacity; and WHEREAS, the Code as currently written does not set forth clear factors for evaluating such a transfer of sewer capacity from a donating property to a receiving property; and WHEREAS, the City of Fresno may provide an incentive for businesses to stay within the city, without subjecting the sewer system to overuse, by allowing the City Date Adopted: Page 1 of 5 Date Approved Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: ________ Manager or designee to authorize transfer of sewer capacity, in the limited circumstances of a permitted business acquiring sewer capacity on an existing location and later relocating within the City of Fresno to a site with insufficient or no sewer capacity. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 6-301 of Article 3, Chapter 6 of the Fresno Municipal Code is repealed. SECTION 2. Section 6-301 of Article 3, Chapter 6 is added to the Fresno Municipal Code to read: SECTION 6-301. - GENERAL PROVISIONS; PURPOSE AND POLICY. (a) This article sets forth uniform requirements for direct and indirect contributions into the City of Fresno POTW, and enables the city to comply with all applicable State and federal laws required by the Clean Water Act of 1977, the General Pretreatment Regulations (40 C.F.R., Part 403) and the Construction Grants Regulations (40 C.F.R., Part 35), as they are now constituted, or as they may hereafter be amended or recodified. The objectives of this article are: (1) To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the POTW, which would interfere with the operation of the system or contaminate the resulting sludge; (2) To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the POTW, which would pass through the system inadequately treated or be incompatible with the system; Page 2 of 5 (3) To improve the opportunity to recycle and reclaim wastewater and sludge from the system; and (4) To provide for equitable distribution of the cost of the POTW . (b) This article provides for the regulation of direct and indirect contributors to the POTW through the issuance of permits to certain non- domestic users and through enforcement of general requirements for the other users, authorizes monitoring and enforcement activities, requires user reporting, provides for the setting of fees for the equitable distribution of costs resulting from the program established herein, and assumes that sewer capacity will remain with the parcel at which the customer has operated while paying for the sewer capacity, unless the customer is authorized to transfer sewer capacity to a receiving property as set forth in subsection (c) below. (c) The City Manager or designee may, by entering into a sewer capacity transfer agreement with the customer, approve transfer of sewer capacity from a donating property to a receiving property, provided: (1) the receiving property is located within the City of Fresno; (2) absent such approval, the receiving property lacks or has insufficient sewer capacity to accommodate the relocated customer’s needs; and Page 3 of 5 (3) an agreed-upon capacity is left at the donating property. (d) Customers utilizing greater sewer capacity than is allocated to a property shall incur charges as set forth in the Master Fee Resolution. (e) This article shall apply to the City of Fresno and to persons outside the city who are, by contract, permit, or agreement with the city, users of the city's POTW. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective and in full force and effect at 12:01 a.m. on the thirty-first day after its final passage. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Page 4 of 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing ordinance was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the _________ day of ______________, 2016. AYES : NOES : ABSENT : ABSTAIN : Mayor Approval: , 2016 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2016 Mayor Veto: , 2016 Council Override Vote: , 2016 YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE BY: Amanda B. Freeman Date Deputy Page 5 of 5 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1217 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-L REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:BRUCE RUDD, City Manager BY:LARRY WESTERLUND, Director Economic Development SUBJECT ***BILL NO. B-40 - (Intro. 10/13/2016) (For adoption) - Council Approval of First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Fresno, a municipal corporation, and Betts Company, a California corporation, recorded with the Fresno County Recorder dated April 28, 2008, including incentives; and, authorizing the City Manager to sign the First Amendment to the Development Agreement. RECOMMENDATION The Administration recommends that Council accept for introduction the attached ordinance that extends the Development Agreement between the City of Fresno (“City”) and the Betts Company (“Betts”), for ten years from the date of the Amendment to retain the company headquarters and job base in southeast Fresno. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On November 27, 2007, the Fresno City Council approved a financial based development agreement between Betts and the City wherein the City agreed to provide financial assistance to Betts to relocate their headquarters from the San Francisco Bay Area to southeast Fresno, in addition to, expanding their local manufacturing facility with a $10 million investment, retaining 90 jobs, creating an additional 75 jobs and remain in Fresno through the duration of the agreement. The ten-year performance based financial incentives agreement included sharing property tax growth, sales tax growth, business tax abeyance, payment for related off-site improvements and plan-check rebates. Over the last eight years, Betts has substantially complied with all of the development agreement requirements. However, with the unexpected onset of the Great Recession starting in 2008, Betts property tax and sales tax values fell precipitously. As a result, the anticipated performance based incentives failed to materialize. Betts has thus far received less than 20% of the projected incentives in the first eight years of the ten-year agreement. As a result, Betts asked the City to consider City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1217 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-L extending the agreement. After extensive discussion, the Administration has negotiated an extension of the agreement. In exchange for extending the current property and sales tax incentives, Betts has agreed to maintain its headquarters in Fresno and retain its work force for the next ten years. As proposed, the agreement will extend the Development Agreement through December 31, 2026. This extension is on a net gain basis and has no negative impact on the General Fund. The incentives are only payable based upon growth of property and sales tax generated by Betts business activities over the next ten years. BACKGROUND Betts is a 160+ year old California-based and family-owned manufacturer, who has operated a manufacturing facility in Fresno for the last 30 years. Betts, as part of the economic development agreement with the City, moved its headquarters and executives from the Bay Area to Fresno eight years ago. The company operates ten locations in California, Oregon, Arizona and Ohio. Six of the locations in California are truck parts and service locations. The company operates manufacturing facilities in Ohio and California. Betts Company is made up of three divisions: Betts Spring Manufacturing, Betts Truck Parts & Service and Betts HD. Betts Spring Manufacturing is a leading maker of leaf, wire and industrial hot wound coil springs. Their springs are used in cars, trucks, trailers, rail cars and a host of other applications. Betts Truck Parts and Service offers state-of-the-art technology truck services to owner- operators, as well as, local, regional and national fleets. Betts HD manufactures bar type hangers, spring loaded hangers, mud flaps and a full line of truck fenders. In 2006, Betts was looking to move their headquarters from the San Francisco Bay Area. As part of their search, they evaluated several sites outside of the State of California, as well as, Fresno. In an effort to assist Betts in locating their headquarters, retaining their current facility and expanding their operations in Fresno, the City negotiated the current Development Agreement in 2007. The original 2007 Development Agreement set forth obligations and duties of both Betts and the City. The obligations are as follows: City obligations: 1.Reimburse Betts up to $50,000 in development fees. 2.Reimburse Betts up to $42,000 in cost for off-site improvements. 3.Share sales tax in the amount of 50% of the City’s portion of increased sales tax for 10 years. 4.Abate business tax for five years. 5.Reimburse 70% of property tax increased increment for 10 years. All of the City’s obligations under the agreement have been completed and all ongoing obligations are up to date. The only ongoing obligations under the current Development Agreement are the sales tax sharing and property tax incentive. Both incentives have two more years to run on the agreement. Betts obligations: 1.Keep the Betts manufacturing facility and operations in Fresno. 2.Move Betts corporate headquarters to Fresno. 3.Retain the 75 jobs at that time located in Fresno. 4.Create 90 additional new jobs in Fresno. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1217 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-L 5.Make at least $10 million investment in the Fresno facility. 6.Legally restructure sales tax point of sales through Fresno. 7.Build a new 120,000 square foot manufacturing facility. Since the execution of the original Development Agreement, Betts has relocated their corporate headquarters to Fresno as planned. Additionally, they have retained and expanded their original Fresno operation from $9.1 million in revenues and 75 employees in 2008, to approximately $13.44 million in revenues and 165 employees in 2015. They have also made Fresno based capital investment of over $18 million, almost twice their required commitment of $10 million. Finally, Betts has also completed development of approximately 110,000 square feet of gross buildable area and constructed all required on- and off-site improvements. The total estimated value of the City incentives offered to induce the investment in the retention and expansion of Betts in Fresno over the ten years came to $1,497,653. The primary incentive payments came from shared sales tax and property tax. In 2008, the nation and the world fell into the Great Recession. The housing bubble and the bond market collapse devastated the national, state and local economies. Property values and sales tax fell drastically in the United States, California and Fresno. The lingering effects of the Great Recession have resulted in a slow and long recover for both property tax and sales tax. As a result, the property tax and sales tax incentive, until recently, failed to materialize. From the original amount estimated in the Development Agreement, and through no fault of their own, Betts in the eight years of the agreement has taken in less than 20% of the total projected incentives. Given the foregoing, the Administration believes that it is fair, right and to the benefit of the City to extend the Development Agreement ten years from the execution of the Amendment. In return for extending the sales tax and property tax provisions, the City receives assurances that Betts will retain their headquarters, workforce and manufacturing facility in Fresno at least until 2027. In return, it is estimated that, if Betts is able to continue to grow at a 2% growth rate per quarter per year and a 2% growth of assessed property value per year, they will receive in the form of sales tax and property sharing a total of $816,331 over the extension. Betts and the City understand that the foregoing is just an estimate and is contingent on Betts continued growth rate, property valuation and other factors. It is not in any way a guarantee and could very well not fully materialize. As part of the City’s due diligence, the Director of Economic Development has twice toured the company’s Fresno headquarters and manufacturing facility. The City Controller and his finance team have reviewed the company’s annual sales tax as reported by the State Franchise Tax Board and the property assessment values as reported by the County Assessor for at least the last eight years. Betts has provided data on their staffing levels, capital investment amounts and revenue growth. Staff believes the requirements of the Better Business Act have been fulfilled with staff investigation and disclosed company information. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Amendment of the Development Agreement is not a “project” for purposes of CEQA pursuant to Section 15348(b)(4), which exempts government fiscal activities from the definition of project. LOCAL PREFERENCE City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1217 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:1-L Local preference was not considered because this is not a competitive bid. FISCAL IMPACT The First Amendment to the Development Agreement is based upon a “Net Gain” strategy through rebating sales and property tax increment the City would not otherwise realize without this development. The agreement does not attach any sort of liability to the General Fund or any other City account. Attachments: Attachment A - Ordinance Exhibit A - First Amendment to the Development Agreement Attachment B - Original Development dated April 28, 2008. Attachment C - City Controller’s Analysis and Estimated Project of Incentive Value for Property and Sales Tax from 2017 to 2026 City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1239 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF FRESNO October 20, 2016 FROM:MARLENE MURPHEY, Executive Director Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Fresno SUBJECT Actions pertaining to a lease of space at the Convention Center for use by the Successor Agency: 1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption of Class 1pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (existing facilities) 2. Approve a lease with SMG, a Pennsylvania general partnership RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Successor Agency and City Council approve a lease between SMG, a Pennsylvania general partnership and the Successor Agency. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Agency’s space needs have diminished and at the recommendation of the Council the Agency has sought alternative space with the City of Fresno.The Convention Center facility at 848 M Street has vacant space on the third floor that has been recommended as appropriate to serve the mutual needs of the City and Agency. The Agency presently leases from a private party and pays $1.00 per square foot for approximately 5,000 square feet of space all inclusive including parking.The space is not easily divisible thus alternative space has been sought to reduce the expense.The City expressed a desire to have the Agency consider a location within a city owned facility.The Convention Center third floor space is currently vacant and available. The draft lease agreement between the Agency and SMG is attached.The agreement provides for a three year term at $1.00 per square foot all inclusive for 2,000 square feet. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary evaluation and determined that the project is subject to a Class 1 Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 because it involves little to no City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1239 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: Categorical Exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 because it involves little to no expansion of existing facilities.In addition,none of the exceptions to exemptions set forth in CEQA Guidelines 15300.2 apply to this project. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A FISCAL IMPACT Lease payments are included in the existing budget.No additional appropriations are necessary to fulfill this transaction. Attachment:Draft Lease Agreement City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1090 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-A REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:THOMAS C. ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities BY:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Planning Manager Department of Public Utilities - Water Division SUBJECT Award a construction contract in the amount of $18,204,180 to Floyd Johnston Construction Company,Inc.for the City of Fresno Phase 2 Regional Transmission Mains Segment A2 Project (Bid File 3450) (Council District 1, 3, and 7). RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council: 1.Award a construction contract in the amount of $18,204,180 to Floyd Johnston Construction Company,Inc.for the City of Fresno Phase 2 Regional Transmission Mains Segment A2 Project - Bid File 3450. 2.Authorize the Director of Public Utilities,or designee,to sign the contract on behalf of the City of Fresno. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On February 26,2015,the City Council adopted a five-year water utility rate plan to finance the construction of a five-year water capital plan totaling approximately $429 million.The five-year capital plan included the construction of the Phase 2 Regional Transmission Mains (RTMs)that will allow the City of Fresno (City)to distribute treated surface water from the Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (Facility)to the existing water distribution system.Design of the second segment of the Phase 2 Regional Transmission Mains Segment A2 (Project)is complete,the bidding process has been finalized and Floyd Johnston Construction Company,Inc.has been determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. BACKGROUND On February 26,2015,the City Council adopted a five-year water utility rate plan to finance the City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1090 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-A On February 26,2015,the City Council adopted a five-year water utility rate plan to finance the construction of a five-year water capital plan totaling approximately $429 million.The five-year capital plan included the construction of the RTMs that will convey water from the Facility to the existing water distribution system through a network of approximately 13 miles of 66-to 20-inch diameter pipeline that will be constructed by four separate construction contracts that will proceed concurrently.The Project is the second of four RTM segments that will be constructed and it includes the construction of approximately four miles of 24- to 48-inch diameter pipeline. On January 7,2016,the City Council authorized the Director of Public Utilities to accept and execute a $63,100,000 State Revolving Fund (SRF)Low-Interest Loan through the State Water Resources Control Board (Board)for construction of the RTMs.The SRF Low-Interest Loan will fully finance the construction of the RTMs. Contractor Pre-Qualification Process The Department of Public Utilities solicited statements of qualifications for pre-qualification for general contractor services.Announcements requesting Pre-Qualification for General Contractor Services for the construction of the Project were published on February 18,2016,in the Fresno Business Journal and posted to the City’s PlanetBids Online site.The City received 14 pre- qualification submittals.Pre-qualification submittals were opened on March 18,2016.The submittals were evaluated by the Water Division’s selection committee utilizing the criteria outlined in the pre- qualification package. A total of 12 general contractors met the pre-qualification requirements. Construction Bidding Process On July 12,2016,a mandatory project pre-bid meeting was held at the Department of Public Utilities -Water Division,Program Management and Engineering Office,located at the City’s Municipal Services Center.Seven pre-qualified firms attended the mandatory pre-bid meeting.On June 27, 2016, the completed project plans and specifications were advertised in the Business Journal. Seven sealed bid proposals were received and publicly opened on August 18,2016.Floyd Johnston Construction Company,Inc.submitted a bid price in the amount of $18,204,180 and is considered to be the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.The Staff Determination of Award was posted on the City’s website on September 12,2016.The price is 9%below the Engineer’s Estimate of $20,000,000. The remaining six bids ranged in price from $18,917,439 to $22,847,720. The third lowest bidder,Vido Artukovich &Son Inc.(Artukovich)has filed an appeal of staff’s determination that Floyd Johnston Construction Company,Inc.is the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.A hearing was held for Artukovich to present its appeal to the hearing officer.Staff will read the hearing officer’s determination during the presentation to Council.The Council is not bound by the hearing officer’s determination. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS The Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan Update (Metro Plan Update)EIR (SCH No. 2013091021)was prepared and adopted by the Council on June 12,2014.The Metro Plan Update EIR is a project level EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15168 and is tiered from the MEIR (SCH NO.2012111015).Subsequent minor changes to the routing of the Pipeline within the plan area resulted in a supplemental environmental assessment Initial Study/Mitigated Negative DeclarationCity of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1090 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-A resulted in a supplemental environmental assessment Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (Pipeline MND)(SCH No.2015101105),which was considered and adopted by Council on February 4,2016.An addendum to the Pipeline MND,was considered and adopted by Council on July 14, 2016.Another addendum to the Pipeline MND was considered and adopted by Council on August 18, 2016.An analysis has been performed pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15162 to determine whether subsequent environmental review is required for the Project.Based on this analysis the following findings are made to support the determination that no subsequent environmental review is required: 1.No substantial changes are proposed in the Project which will require major revisions of the previous Pipeline MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects,or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. 2.No substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous Pipeline MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects,or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. 3.There is no new information which was not known or could not have been known at the time of the previous Pipeline MND that the Project will have significant effects not discussed in the MND. Furthermore,since a Pipeline MND was previously adopted for this Project,the considerations set forth in CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(C)and (D),related to the adequacy and feasibility of previously adopted mitigation measures,are not applicable.Based upon these findings,it has been determined that no further environmental documentation is required for this Project. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because the lowest responsive and responsible bidder is a local business according to the Fresno Municipal Code Section 4-108. FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact to the General Fund.The award of this construction contract will be funded by the SRF Low Interest Loan through the Board as part of the construction of the RTMs.Appropriations are included in Water Division’s FY 2017 Capital Improvement Program adopted budget within the State Low-Interest Loan Regional Transmission Mains Fund (40162).The loan repayments for the Low- Interest Loan were included in the water rate model used to create the five-year utility rate plan that was adopted by the City Council on February 26, 2015. Attachments: Project Map Bid Evaluation Information Sample Contract City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ 180 99 41 41 Olive Ave N Fowler AveMcKinley Ave N Palm AveShaw Ave N H St E Ashlan Ave N Chestnut AveWillow AveWinery AveN Temperance AveE Belmont Ave E Kings Canyon Rd Olive Ave Fresno StFirst St180 168 Construction NTP: Aug. 29, 2016 Segment A1Council Award: Sept. 22, 2016 Construction Start: Nov. 2016 Construction Finish: Jan. 2018 Segment A2 Future Contract Segment C Phase 2 Regional Transmission Mains Segments Future Contract Segment B City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities / Water Division 1.21 Phase 2 Regional Transmission Main – Segment A2 Bidding and Contract Documents CONTRACT CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK OF IMPROVEMENT THIS CONTRACT is made and entered into by and between CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”), and [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] (hereinafter referred to as “Contractor”) as follows: 1. Contract Documents. The “Notice Inviting Bids,” “Instructions to Bidders,” “Bid Proposal,” and the “Specifications” including “General Conditions,” “Special Conditions,” and “Technical Specifications” for the following: [Title] (Bid File No. [Bid File No.]) [Alternates (if any)] copies of which are annexed hereto, together with all the drawings, plans, and documents specifically referred to in said annexed documents, including Performance and Payment Bonds, if required, and are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Contract, and shall be known as the Contract Documents. 2. Price and Work. For the monetary consideration of [Written Dollar Amount] dollars and [Written Cents Amount] cents ($[Amount]), as set forth in the Bid Proposal, Contractor promises and agrees to perform or cause to be performed, in a good and workmanlike manner, under the direction and to the satisfaction of the City’s “Engineer,” and in strict accordance with the Specifications, all of the work as set forth in the Contract Documents. 3. Payment. City accepts Contractor’s Bid Proposal as stated and agrees to pay the consideration stated, at the times, in the amounts, and under the conditions specified in the Contract Documents. 4. Indemnification. To the furthest extent allowed by law including California Civil Code Section 2782, Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend City and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers from any and all loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeit ures, costs and damages (whether in contract, tort or strict liability, including, but not limited to personal injury, death at any time and property damage) incurred by City, Contractor or any other person, and from any and all claims, demands and actions in law or equity (including attorney’s fees and litigation expenses), arising or alleged to have arisen directly or indirectly out of performance of this Contract. Contractor’s obligations under the preceding sentence shall apply regardless of whether City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers are passively negligent, but shall not apply to any loss, liability, fines, penalties, forfeitures, costs or damages caused by the active or sole negligence, or willful misconduct, of City or any of its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. If Contractor should subcontract all or any portion of the work to be performed under this Contract, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to indemnify, hold harmless and defend C ity and each of its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers in accordance with the terms of the preceding paragraph. This section shall survive termination or expiration of this Contract. 5. Trench Shoring Detailed Plan. Contractor acknowledges the provisions of Section 6705 of the California Labor Code and, if said provisions are applicable to this Contract, agrees to comply therewith. 6. Worker’s Compensation Certification. In compliance with the provisions of Section 1861 of the California Labor Code, Contractor hereby certifies as follows: I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for worker’s compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work of this Contract and will make my subcontractors aware of this provision. City of Fresno Department of Public Utilities / Water Division 1.22 Phase 2 Regional Transmission Main – Segment A2 Bidding and Contract Documents IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract on the day and year here below written, of which the date of execution by City shall be subsequent to that of Contractor’s, and this Contract shall be binding and effective upon execution by both parties. [Contractor Name], [Legal Identity] By: Name: (Type or print written signature.) Title: Dated: By: Name: (Type or print written signature.) Title: Dated: CITY OF FRESNO, a California municipal corporation By: [Name], [Title] Department of Public Utilities Dated: ATTEST: YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk By: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN City Attorney By: [Name] Date Senior Deputy/Deputy City address: City of Fresno Attention: [Name], [Title] [Street Address] Fresno, CA [Zip] City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1195 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-B REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:THOMAS C. ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:KEVIN L. NORGAARD, PE, Supervising Professional Engineer Department of Public Utilities BY:SARAH AGUILA, Senior Engineering Technician Department of Public Utilities - Wastewater Management Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Sewer Rehabilitation/Replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Downtown Alleys (Bid File 3429) (Council District 3) 1.Adopt findings of Categorical Exemption Class 1,pursuant to Section 15301(d)(Existing facilities)and Categorical Exemption Class 2,pursuant to Section 15302(c)(Replacement or reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 2.***RESOLUTION -18th amendment to Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR)No.2016-118 appropriating $770,000 for Sewer Rehabilitation/Replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Downtown Alleys (Requires 5 affirmative votes) 3.Award a $609,270 contract to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc., of Fresno, California RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that City Council Adopt findings of Categorical Exemption Class 1,pursuant to Section 15301(d)(Existing facilities)and Categorical Exemption Class 2,pursuant to Section 15302 (c)(Replacement or reconstruction)of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA). Staff also recommends the Council adopt the 18th AAR No.2016-118 appropriating $770,000 for Sewer Rehabilitation/Replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Alleys,and award a $609,270 construction contract to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc. of Fresno, California. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After a detailed analysis of the downtown development plans and an inspection of the Downtown Sewer Collection System,the wastewater management group identified the project sewers for rehabilitation and replacement.The work to be performed will correct structural and capacity City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1195 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-B rehabilitation and replacement.The work to be performed will correct structural and capacity deficiencies.The Department of Public Utilities,Wastewater Management Division is seeking to award a construction contract in the amount of $609,270 for the Sewer Rehabilitation/Replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Downtown Alleys. BACKGROUND The Collection System Maintenance work group performed an inspection of the Downtown sewer systems.The goal of these inspections was to evaluate the structural and capacity handling capability of all the downtown sewer pipes.The investigation was done using Closed Circuit Television (CCTV).Through this investigation,portions of these sewer pipes were found to have structural deficiencies such as cracks and voids,some are past the design useful life and other pipes are undersized per the current City Standard design requirements. The ages of the pipes in the project area range from 1890 to 1962.The typical design life of a sewer pipe is 50 to 75 years.The advanced age,and structural deficiencies discovered in these areas require that portions of the sewer pipes be rehabilitated and others removed and replaced. The project consists of the removal of the 6”sewer main in Congo Alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street and replacing it with an 8”sewer main,rehabilitation of the 8”and 10”sewer mains in Congo Alley between Tuolumne Street and Fresno Street by means of CIPP liner installation,rehabilitation of the 8”sewer main in the H/Broadway Alley between Stanislaus Street and Tuolumne Street by means of CIPP liner installation,and rehabilitation of the 10”sewer main in the H/Broadway Alley between Broadway Street and Merced Alignment by means of CIPP liner installation.Sewer rehabilitation and replacement was proposed where capacity deficiencies, structural deficiencies and advanced age of pipe were identified. Plans and specifications were prepared for the project.A Notice Inviting Bids was published on August 19,2016,and posted on the City’s website.The specifications were distributed to twenty-one prospective bidders,and faxed to ten Builder Exchanges.The bid will expire on November 16,2016, 64 days after the September 13,2016 bid opening.Four sealed bid proposals were received and publicly opened on September 13,2016.The bid proposal prices range from $609,270.00 to $684,106.64. Emmett’s Excavation,Inc.was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder with a submitted bid of $609,270.00.The staff determination was posted on the City’s website.Staff recommends that the City Council award a construction contract in the amount of $609,270.00 to Emmett’s Excavation, Inc. as the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Staff has performed a preliminary environmental assessment and has determined that this project falls within Categorical Exemption Class 1,pursuant to Section 15301(d)(Existing facilities)and Categorical Exemption Class 2,pursuant to Section 15302(c)(Replacement or reconstruction)of the CEQA Guidelines because this project involves rehabilitation and replacement of existing sewer mains.Therefore,none of the exceptions to Categorical exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 apply to this project. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1195 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-B LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because the lowest responsive and responsible bidder is a local business. FISCAL IMPACT Funds in the amount of $750,000 were budgeted in FY16 but because of the last minute project scope changes,the project did not bid.This construction contract has no impact on the General Fund and is located in Council District 3.Funds in the amount of $770,000 are available in the Sewer Enterprise Fund 40501; the AAR is necessary to allocate the funds for the project construction. Attachments: 18th AAR No. 2016-118 Bid Evaluation and Fiscal Impact Statement Sample Contract Vicinity Map City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Date Adopted: 1 of 2 Date Approved: Effective Date: Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO ADOPTING THE 18th AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-118 TO APPROPRIATE $770,000 FOR SEWER REHABILITATION/REPLACEMENT IN THE CONGO AND H/BROADWAY DOWNTOWN ALLEYS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2016-118 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES Wastewater Operating $ 770,000 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: Wastewater Operating Retained Earnings: Account: 25300 Unreserved/Undesignated $ 770,000 Fund: 40501 Org Unit: 413501 Total Retained Earnings $ 770,000 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 35,000 57507 Contract Construction 700,000 59105 Purchasing – Variable Charge 10,000 59117 Overhead 25,000 Fund: 40501 Org Unit: 413501 Project: RC00158 Total Appropriations $ 770,000 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $770,000 for sewer rehabilitation / replacement in the Congo and H/Broadway Downtown Alleys. 2 of 2 CLERK’S CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF FRESNO } ss. CITY OF FRESNO } I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, California, at a regular meeting thereof, held on the Day of , 2016 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2016 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2016 Mayor Veto: , 2016 Council Override Veto: , 2016 YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk BY: ____________________________ Deputy City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1176 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-C REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:SCOTT L. MOZIER, PE, Director Public Works Department BY:ROBERT N. ANDERSEN, PE, Assistant Director Public Works Department, Capital Management Division SUBJECT ***RESOLUTION - 17th amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR) No. 2016-118 to appropriate $2,490,200 for new and existing capital projects in the Public Works Department (Citywide) (Requires 5 affirmative votes) RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the 17th Amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution No.2016-118,to appropriate $2,490,200 for new and existing capital projects in the Public Works Department. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There are a number of new capital improvement projects staff is preparing to implement which are funded from Federal grants,Measure “C”Trail Advancement and other local sources.The grant funded projects were awarded Federal funds through the Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP)administered by the Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG).Funding from Measure “C”Trail Advancement is administered by the Fresno County Transportation Authority (FCTA)through an agreement approved by the Council on September 1,2016.Staff recommends Council adopt the amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution (AAR)in order to provide appropriations in the Public Works FY 2017 Capital Budget to sufficiently cover anticipated expenditures for the cost of these new projects. BACKGROUND Staff is seeking Council approval of the attached AAR amendment which will appropriate funding for one existing and seventeen new capital projects.The projects are funded via a combination of RSTP,Measure “C”Trail Advancement and other local funding from developer deposits,with $2,490,200 of appropriations being requested for current FY 2017 expenditures.The remaining City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1176 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-C $2,490,200 of appropriations being requested for current FY 2017 expenditures.The remaining project costs of $22,036,200 will be included in the proposed FY2018 capital improvement budget and generally include the construction phases of the projects.The grant funds are included in the Federal Transportation Improvement Plan (FTIP) administered by the Fresno COG. The projects are categorized as follows: ·Street Projects -These twelve projects improve streets with proposed asphalt overlays including installation of curb ramps,signal loop detectors,signage,and striping.Funding comes primarily from RSTP grants.Some of the major projects included are Abby Street AC overlay from Divisadero to Olive,Jensen Overlay Cornelia to Chateau,Ashlan Overlay -Valentine to West,Jensen Overlay SR41 to MLK,Belmont Overlay Cedar to Chestnut and Olive Avenue Overlay Yosemite to Roosevelt.See the New Capital Projects Detail List attached for complete project locations.These projects were previously authorized by the Council as part of Resolution No.2015-238 for grant applications to Fresno COG.Total appropriations requested for this category are $947,700. ·Trail Projects -This category consists of five projects.The listing is comprised of the Mid Town Trail projects and includes Shields Bankside Trail,Herndon Canal Trail,McKinley Avenue Trail,Clovis Avenue Trail and Shields Avenue Trail.See the attached New Capital Projects Detail List for project locations.The total multi-year funding for the projects is proposed with Measure “C”Trail Advancement previously approved by Council. Appropriations of $1,490,500 are included in this category. ·Miscellaneous Projects -This category includes one project for right-of-way acquisition. Public Works will purchase right-of-way on behalf of the developer for off-site improvements associated with Tract 6095,located at 1375 S Armstrong Avenue.Funding is provided by the developer under a right-of-way acquisition agreement which is classified as other local funds. Total appropriations for the projects are $52,000. Based on a review of the existing FY 2017 Capital Budget the projects and the appropriations to fund anticipated FY 2017 expenditures must be added.The proposed adjustments are summarized in the tables attached.Detailed adjustments are in the Amendment to the AAR attached. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378 this item does not qualify as a “project”as provided in the California Environmental Quality Act requirements. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference does not apply to the action item as this is a budget item only.Local preference (if applicable) will be considered at the time of contract award. FISCAL IMPACT City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1176 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-C There is no new net impact to the General Fund.All proposed costs will be paid for from new and existing revenue sources. See attached Resolution for specific funds and associated costs. Attachments: New Capital Projects Project Type Summary New Capital Projects Detail List 17th Amendment to the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2016-118 City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ PUBLIC WORKS Project Type Summary October 20, 2016 Project Type Budget Amount Reallocation Amount Total Amount Operating Budget 0 0 $0 Street Projects 947,700 0 $947,700 Traffic Signal Projects 0 0 $0 Trail Projects 1,490,500 0 $1,490,500 CFD/Miscellaneous Projects 52,000 0 $52,000 TOTAL $2,490,200 $0 $2,490,200 Remaining Total Fund Project Council AAR Project Project Number Fund Name Number District Project Nane Appropriations Costs Costs Street Projects 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00784 7 Abby Overlay - Divisadero to Olive 109,300 1,157,400 1,266,700 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00785 6 First Street Overlay - Alluvial to Herndon 81,800 913,100 994,900 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00786 3 Jensen Overlay - Cornelia to Chateau Fresno 102,700 1,506,700 1,609,400 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00787 6 South Bound Friant Ave Overlay - Champlain to Shepherd SB 68,100 754,900 823,000 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00788 3 Inyo Overlay - Fulton to O 57,800 383,800 441,600 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00789 1 Ashlan Overlay - Valentine to West 100,300 1,745,500 1,845,800 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00790 3 Jensen Overlay - SR41 to MKL 91,800 1,232,700 1,324,500 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00791 7 Blackstone Overlay - Dakota to Ashlan 63,800 860,400 924,200 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00792 7 Belmont Overlay - Cedar to Chestnut 107,900 1,202,100 1,310,000 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00793 4 Ashlan Overlay - First to Millbrook 52,000 474,200 526,200 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00795 1,3 Olive Ave Improvements - Yosemite to Roosevelt 55,000 1,378,700 1,433,700 22048 Federal Grants Public Works PW00796 1 Polk Ave Street Reconstruction Shaw to Gettysburg 57,200 2,804,600 2,861,800 Total Street/Bridge Projects 947,700 14,414,100 15,361,800 Trail Projects 22513 Measure “C” Trail Advancement PW00725 7 Shields Bankside Trail Fresno to First 263,000 20,400 283,400 22513 Measure “C” Trail Advancement PW00762 7 Herndon Canal Trail - Shields to McKinley 255,000 1,553,200 1,808,200 22513 Measure “C” Trail Advancement PW00763 4,7 McKinley Ave Trail - Millbrook to Clovis 399,700 2,863,900 3,263,600 22513 Measure “C” Trail Advancement PW00764 4 Clovis Ave Trail - McKinley to Dayton 311,000 2,177,800 2,488,800 22513 Measure “C” Trail Advancement PW00774 7 Shields Ave Trail - Blackstone to Fresno 261,800 1,006,800 1,268,600 Total Trail Projects 1,490,500 7,622,100 9,112,600 Miscellaneous Projects 31653 R/W Acquisition - T6095 PW00794 5 R/W Acquisition - T6095 52,000 - 52,000 Total CFD/Miscellaneous Projects 52,000 0 52,000 Total Capital Projects 2,490,200 22,036,200 24,526,400 PUBLIC WORKS Projects Detail October 20, 2016 Date Adopted: 1 of 8 Date Approved: Effective Date: Resolution No. RESOLUTION NO. ___________ A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO ADOPTING THE 17th AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-118 TO APPROPRIATE $2,490,200 FOR NEW AND EXISTING CAPITAL PROJECTS IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO: THAT PART III of the Annual Appropriation Resolution No. 2016-118 be and is hereby amended as follows: Increase/(Decrease) TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Federal Grants Public Works $ 947,700 Measure “C” Trail Advancement 1,490,500 R/W Acquisition – T6095 52,000 THAT account titles and numbers requiring adjustment by this Resolution are as follows: Federal Grants Public Works Revenues: Account: 33114 Federal Reimbursement $ 947,700 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Total Revenues $ 947,700 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 49,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 20,200 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 3,500 59102 City Attorney Charges 2,000 59117 Overhead 34,600 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00784 Total Appropriations $ 109,300 2 of 8 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 36,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 14,900 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 3,500 59102 City Attorney Charges 2,000 59117 Overhead 25,400 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00785 Total Appropriations $ 81,800 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 27,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 11,100 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 43,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 19,100 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00786 Total Appropriations $ 102,700 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 13,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 5,600 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 37,500 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 900 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 100 59117 Overhead 9,500 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00787 Total Appropriations $ 68,100 3 of 8 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 11,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 4,700 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 31,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 8,100 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00788 Total Appropriations $ 57,800 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 19,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 8,000 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 56,500 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 13,800 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00789 Total Appropriations $ 100,300 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 20,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 8,500 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 46,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 800 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 14,500 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00790 Total Appropriations $ 91,800 4 of 8 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 11,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 4,700 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 37,500 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 1,000 59117 Overhead 7,100 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00791 Total Appropriations $ 63,800 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 50,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 20,600 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59117 Overhead 35,300 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00792 Total Appropriations $ 107,900 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 11,100 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 4,600 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 26,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 7,800 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00793 Total Appropriations $ 52,000 5 of 8 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 15,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 4,500 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 25,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 1,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 8,000 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00795 Total Appropriations $ 55,000 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 35,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 7,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 3,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 200 59117 Overhead 12,000 Fund: 22048 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00796 Total Appropriations $ 57,200 Measure “C” Trail Advancement Revenues: Account: 31310 Meas C Pedestrian Facilities $ 1,490,500 Fund: 22513 Org Unit: 189901 Total Revenues $ 1,490,500 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 42,600 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 17,600 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 6,500 57507 Contract Construction 160,200 58026 Capital Project Permits & Fees 6,000 59117 Overhead 30,100 Fund: 22513 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00725 Total Appropriations $ 263,000 6 of 8 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 63,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 25,700 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 120,500 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 44,300 Fund: 22513 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00762 Total Appropriations $ 255,000 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 98,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 40,300 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 190,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 69,400 Fund: 22513 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00763 Total Appropriations $ 399,700 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 75,500 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 30,800 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 125,000 57101 Land Acquisition 25,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 53,200 Fund: 22513 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00764 Total Appropriations $ 311,000 7 of 8 Increase/(Decrease) Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 83,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 34,200 53302 Prof Svcs/Consulting - Outside 75,000 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 5,000 58026 Capital Project Permits & Fees 5,000 59102 City Attorney Charges 500 59105 Purchasing - Variable Charge 500 59117 Overhead 58,600 Fund: 22513 Org Unit: 189901 Project: PW00774 Total Appropriations $ 261,800 R/W Acquisition – T6095 Revenues: Account: 34854 UGM Developer Contributions $ 52,000 Fund: 31653 Org Unit: 186010 Total Revenues $ 52,000 Appropriations: Account: 51101 Permanent Salaries $ 7,000 51104 Perm Fringe-Health&Welfare 2,500 53402 Specialized Services /Tech 31,000 57101 Land Acquisition 6,500 59102 City Attorney Charges 1,000 59117 Overhead 4,000 Fund: 31653 Org Unit: 186010 Project: PW00794 Total Appropriations $ 52,000 THAT the purpose is to appropriate $2,490,200 for new and existing capital projects in the Public Works Department. 8 of 8 CLERK’S CERTIFICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA} COUNTY OF FRESNO } ss. CITY OF FRESNO } I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, California, at a regular meeting thereof, held on the Day of , 2016 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mayor Approval: , 2016 Mayor Approval/No Return: , 2016 Mayor Veto: , 2016 Council Override Veto: , 2016 YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk BY: ____________________________ Deputy City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1181 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-D REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:JENNIFER K. CLARK, Director Development and Resource Management Department THROUGH:KELLI FURTADO, Assistant Director Development and Resource Management Department BY:CORRINA NUNEZ, Project Manager Housing and Community Development Division SUBJECT RESOLUTION -Approving assignment of Annadale Housing Partners’$2,996,720 loan to DHI King’s View Associates,L.P.,a California limited partnership and conversion of the loan to a fifty-five-year residual receipts loan at 0% interest RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution (Exhibit “A”)approving the assignment of the Annadale Housing Partners’(Annadale)$2,996,720 loan to DHI King’s View Associates,L.P.,a California limited partnership;and conversion of the loan to a fifty-five year residual receipts loan at 0% interest; and authorize the City Manager to execute assignment documents. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On March 3,2016,Annadale and Dawson Holdings Inc.(DHI)informed the Development and Resource Management Department that DHI was proposing to acquire and rehabilitate the Kings View Estates property;an affordable housing complex located in southwest Fresno.The complex is currently owned by Annadale.If DHI pursues its acquisition and rehabilitation of the Kings View property as proposed,staff recommends the City Council approve the assignment of the loan to DHI King’s View Associates,L.P.,(Exhibit “B”)and convert the $2,996,720 balloon loan to a fifty-five year residual receipts loan at 0% interest. BACKGROUND On December 5,2013,the City Council approved the restructure of the $2,996,720 loan for Annadale to eliminate accrued interest and late fees.The restructure was requested to reduce debt on the property and thereby allow for the owner to obtain tax credits to redevelop both the Kings View City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1181 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-D property and thereby allow for the owner to obtain tax credits to redevelop both the Kings View Manor and Kings View Estates.In accordance with the Council-approved Note terms,the restructured loan was to be paid-in-full on,or before,December 1,2017,(Exhibit “C”-Superseded and Restated Promissory Note). At that time,Council determined the restructure of the Note was subject to the terms of the Better Business Act (Act),but eligible for an exception since the City did not reasonably expect repayment under the terms and conditions of the Note and the Note was essentially a grant but structured as a loan to meet the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC)requirement for debt service on the property.Thereafter,City Council invoked the exception to the Act by a super majority of votes.The exception to the Act still applies in this case. Since execution of the $2,996,720 Superseded and Restated Note,the original development partner set to join the Annadale Housing Partners,L.P.,backed out of the proposed rehabilitation project.At that time,the remaining members of Annadale decided to sell the property to a housing development agency able to acquire and rehabilitate both the Kings View Manor and Kings View Estates units and property. At the listing of the property for sale by Annadale,AlliedArgenta (a southern California housing developer)submitted a proposal to acquire and rehabilitate the properties.Both parties had entered into a Purchase Agreement;however,AlliedArgenta did not receive approval of their proposed financing and the Annadale Housing Partners, L.P., relisted the property with ARA USA. In April 2015,Annadale approached another interested party,DHI (a northern California housing developer).DHI is a Sausalito-based housing development company that has created approximately 2,500 multifamily and senior affordable housing units.On March 3,2016,both parties entered into a Purchase Agreement to acquire only the Kings View Estates property for rehabilitation.The Kings View Manor portion of the property was not considered as part of the acquisition or rehabilitation deal as the complex had a history of high vacancy and low cash flow.On or about March,2016 the City allowed a lot line adjustment to separate the two properties and bring the Note and Assignment and Assumption Agreement to the City Council for approval. DHI proposes to apply for 4%tax credits that will provide a substantial portion of the financing necessary to complete the proposed acquisition or rehabilitation of the Kings View Estates.Other proposed financing sources include tax-exempt bonds to-be-issued,the R4CF loan,and deferred developer fees.The total project cost is estimated at $17 million or approximately $146,552 ($17M/116 units) per unit. If staff’s recommendation is approved,the City will allow for the assignment and assumption (Exhibit “B”-Assignment and Assumption Agreement)of the $2,996,720 Annadale loan to DHI King’s View Associates,L.P.Staff’s recommendation also includes the conversion of the balloon loan to a fifty- five year residual receipts loan at 0%interest.The loan terms and position may need to be adjusted slightly to be compatible with any proposed senior lender requirements. The Kings View Estates property has been in need of major rehabilitation and or redevelopment for years.It is in the City’s best interest to assist DHI through the assignment and assumption to provide for the complex’s one hundred and sixteen units and grounds to be rehabilitated. DHI’s proposed improvements to the Kings View Estates are as follows: City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1181 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-D Ø Modernize the units by installing new interior and exterior doors, windows, appliances, countertops, flooring, light fixtures, plumbing fixtures, garage doors, and window treatments; Ø New roofs; Ø Painting of the interior and exterior; Ø HVAC upgrades; Ø Installation of new landscaping, irrigation, and fencing; Ø Installation of ADA appliances as needed; Ø Reduce energy consumption by incorporating energy-efficient items; Ø Increase marketability; and Ø Provide improved amenities by repairing deferred maintenance items and improving common areas. A majority of the Kings View Estates units are currently occupied.Therefore,rehabilitation will be scheduled so current tenants are minimally disturbed.DHI will work to keep existing tenants during and after the property’s physical rehabilitation.Construction work will be scheduled between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.This will allow the tenants to be back in their units by evening.Construction crews may need to return to the units for more than a single day.If this is the case,at the end of each day,the tenant will be provided a clean useable unit to minimize disruption to their lives. The community room will be furnished for use during the day to the temporarily displaced tenants. This will give the tenants access to a bathroom,kitchen,and television and minimizes the amount of dislocation for tenants.It also allows for the rehabilitation to be phased building by building and enables the tenants from each building to remain close to their current neighbors. Once completed,the project will assist the City of Fresno with its affordable housing goals and objectives of the Housing Element of the 2035 General Plan and 2015-2019 HUD Consolidated Plan.In addition,it is anticipated the rehabilitation project will create an estimated twenty-plus construction related jobs for the duration of the rehabilitation work. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a project for CEQA purposes. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because the loan assignment does not include a bid on award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT The City will not receive payment in full on,or before,December 1,2017,as stated in the Superseded and Restated Note; instead, the City will receive residual receipts over a fifty-five-year Note term. Attachments Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibit B - Assignment and Assumption Agreement Exhibit C - Superseded and Restated Promissory Note City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1196 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-E REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:THOMAS C. ESQUEDA, Director Department of Public Utilities THROUGH:MICHAEL CARBAJAL, Division Manager Department of Public Utilities - Water Division BY:GLENN A. KNAPP, Professional Engineer Department of Public Utilities - Water Division SUBJECT Actions pertaining to Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition and Programmable Logic Control Software Installation and Integration for the City of Fresno’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Kings River Pipeline Project (All Districts): 1.Reject all bids for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition,and Programmable Logic Control Software Installation and Integration services for the City of Fresno’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Kings River Pipeline Project. (Bid File 3472). 2.Approve Project Change Order No.5 to WM Lyles Company in the amount of $2,493,750 for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition and Programmable Logic Control Software Installation and Integration Services for the City of Fresno’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Kings River Pipeline Project. 3.Approve a one-time extension of the current limits of Construction Contract Change Order Authority for the City of Fresno’s Chief Administrative Officer to $3,500,000 as related to the Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that Council reject all submitted bids,approve project Change Order No.5 (CO#5) as related to Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA)and Programmable Logic Control (PLC)software installation and integration services for the City of Fresno’s Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility (Facility),and Kings River Pipeline (Pipeline)Project,and approve a one-time extension of the current limits of Construction Contract Change Order Authority for the City’s Chief Administrative Officer to $3,500,000 for the Facility. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1196 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-E EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In July 2016,a single bid for services related to the installation and integration of SCADA and PLC software for the City’s Facility and Pipeline Projects was received over two times the Engineer’s Estimate.Although cost reduction negotiation efforts were implemented,the final proposed cost for services remained approximately 40%above the Engineer’s Estimate and outside the cost limits for this component in maintaining the overall established budget for the project.In recognition of potential construction schedule impacts related to this component,the general contractor (WM Lyles) has proposed to initiate a project Change Order utilizing a qualified integration service provider that they have worked successfully with in the past. Affirmative action by Council to:1)reject the submitted bid,2)approve project CO#5,and 3)provide a one-time extension of authority for project change order approvals to the City’s Chief Administrative Officer,will enable the City and contractor to move forward in meeting original project budget and schedule while maintaining an administrative avenue for approval of necessary and/or unanticipated project work that may cause or exacerbate increases in construction cost or duration. Costs related to completion of this project component are covered under the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SDWSRF) Low-Interest Loan previously accepted by Council for this project. BACKGROUND Requests for Proposals for installation and integration of SCADA and PLC software for the City’s Facility and the Pipeline Projects were extended to ten Building Exchanges,and advertised in the Business Journal on May 25,2016.During the initial bid period,the City Purchasing Department was informed that at least two qualified potential bidders were not intending to respond due to perceived overly restrictive qualification requirements (e.g.highly specific certifications and experience with a specified software product).Therefore,to encourage a greater pool of potential bidders,two bid addenda were issued during the bid period which extended the bidding period and modified bidder certification and experience requirements.A public proposal opening was held on July 12,2016,with one bid submitted. While the Engineer’s Estimate for this project component was approximately $2,500,000,the cost of services noted in the single submitted bid was $5,229,285 (~210%above the Engineers Estimate).In a coordinated effort with the City’s Purchasing Department,the submitting bidder performed a service cost re-evaluation,resulting in cost reductions of several work tasks,and submittal of a final cost estimate of $3,499,483 (~40%over the Engineers Estimate).To ensure accuracy of the Engineers Estimate,an independent verification was performed by the Department of Public Utilities’ programmatic engineering team, resulting in a comparable estimate of approximately $2,800,000. In post bid opening follow up,the City’s Purchasing Department verified that all potential bidders (plan holders)acknowledged receipt of all bid addenda and met minimum qualifications for the project.Two of the reputable potential bidders expressed reservations about submitting bids based on internal assessments that their qualifications would not overcome the eventual single bidder’s more specific qualifications in a qualifications-based competition.One of these two potential bidders also expressed concern that the schedule for a project of this size and complexity represented too much risk for them to submit a proposal. In recognition of the low probability for submission of an adequate number of cost-effective proposalsCity of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1196 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-E In recognition of the low probability for submission of an adequate number of cost-effective proposals and timelines associated with the re-bidding of this project component,WM Lyles has submitted a viable alternative for utilizing and sub-contracting a qualified service provider for completion of this project component (i.e.the same scope of work and schedule)within acceptable budget limits and in accordance with the established project completion date. WM Lyles and their electrical sub-contractor (Helix Electric)have proposed a project Change Order to utilize Technical Systems Incorporated (TSI)for SCADA and PLC installation and integration services.Helix and TSI staffs have a successful and long-term relationship in performing extensive software installation and integration services on a variety of water and wastewater projects.TSI’s 46 years of experience includes working with the designated program software. By incorporating this SCADA work component into the Facility through a contract change order,TSI will become a full member of the WM Lyles construction team directly linked to the electrical subcontractor.Helix’s intimate project knowledge and long-term working relationship with TSI will serve to mitigate the City’s schedule and cost risk exposure that would be present if the SCADA work was contracted directly to the City.The resultant team will be the single point of responsibility for completion of SCADA and PLC software installation and integration to meet operational expectations within budget and in accordance with the project schedule. The cost for this project change order is $2,493,750,which is 0.2%below the original Engineers Estimate.The SCADA project was included in development of the project construction budget for FY17,and thus,will not require any additions to the overall project budget.All costs for the SCADA project component are covered under the SDWSRF Low-Interest Loan previously accepted by Council. Authorization for change order approval on this project is delegated to the Chief Administrative Officer for up to $1,000,000 (in cumulative change order value)in accordance with the City’s Construction Management Act (approved by Council on May 21,2015).Once the $1,000,000 threshold is reached or exceeded,further change orders require City Council’s prior approval. Therefore,approval of this $2,493,750 change order for the Facility exhausts the Chief Administrative Officer’s change order approval authority.All future change orders on this project will require Council action regardless of size or urgency. Since this change order is shifting costs within the Facility project budget and does not change the overall Facility project cost,staff requests Council approval of a one-time $2,500,000 increase to the Chief Administrative Officers Construction Contract Change Order Authority for the Facility project bringing the authorization limit for cumulative change order value to $3,500,000.This will preserve the Construction Management Act’s intent of providing the Chief Administrative Officer with authority to approve changes for unanticipated/necessary work that must proceed with urgency to avert potential delays. Council approval of the above actions will not result in a net increase to the established construction budget. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS By the definition provided in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines,Section 15378, the rejection of all bids does not qualify as a “project” as defined by the CEQA requirements. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1196 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-E LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not implemented because actions are related to rejection of bids and a project change order. FISCAL IMPACT The recommendation for the rejection of all bids has no fiscal impact.The project change order for the SCADA software installation and integration services will be funded by the SDWSRF Low Interest Loan as part of the construction of the Facility and Pipeline projects.Appropriations are included in the Water Division’s Fiscal Year 2017 Capital Improvement Program adopted budget within the SRF Facility (D15-02012)Loan Fund (40188).The debt service payments for the low interest loan were included in the water rate model used to create the five-year utility rate plan that was adopted by the City Council on February 26, 2015. There is no impact to the General Fund. As the recommendation is for rejection of all bids, there is no fiscal impact. Attachments: Summary of Bid Evaluation Forms Bid Evaluation Forms Contract Change Order No. 5 City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY PROPOSERS REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR SE SWTF SCADA AND KINGS RIVER PIPELINE PLC SOFTWARE INSTALLATION AND INTEGRATION RFP 3472 Evaluation Criteria Partners in Control dba Enterprise Automation Cost $3,499,483. Qualifications of Key Technical Personnel Meets all requirements/certifications Project Experience Applicable past experience with multiple projects Capacity to Perform Work to Meet Major Milestones Yes Other Qualitative Criteria City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1162 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-F REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:KERRI L. DONIS, Fire Chief Fire Department SUBJECT Actions pertaining to FY 2015 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grant 1.Approve application for and acceptance of FY 2015 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER)grant award for $2,069,400 through the U.S.Department of Homeland Security,and authorize the Fire Chief to complete all required documents during the grant period. 2.RESOLUTION -Authorizing the application for and acceptance of FY 2015 Cycle Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER)funding issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Grant Program and authorizing completion of all required documents. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended Council adopt the resolution to accept the 2015 SAFER Grant for $2,069,400 to the FY 2017 Fire Department budget. Actual proceeds may vary based on actual payroll results. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Fire Department participated in the FY 2015 SAFER grant process with other public safety agencies and has been awarded $2,069,400 for twelve firefighting positions,which will enable the department to open a truck company.With the adoption of this grant,the Fire Department will increase its minimum daily staffing from 73 firefighters on duty each day to 77.This 2015 SAFER grant is for a two-year period and there is no grant matching or retention requirement beyond the two -year period of performance. BACKGROUND City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1162 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-F Under the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2013,Congress appropriated $321 million for SAFER Grants.SAFER Grants are competitive grants for fire departments for the purpose of hiring,recruiting,and retaining career and volunteer firefighters in communities.Grants are awarded on the basis of need through a competitive, peer-review process. The Fire Department submitted a request for twelve firefighting positions to enhance minimum daily staffing.These additional positions were approved as part of fiscal year 2017 budget and will be utilized in the department’s efforts to meet the two-in,two-out industry staffing standards per OSHA and would provide for a fourth firefighter on four apparatus experiencing high call volume. The period of performance for this 2015 SAFER grant is October 3,2016 through October 2,2018. During this period,the salaries and benefits of twelve firefighters will be reimbursed from FEMA.This will allow the City to maximize the use of grant funding specifically to enhance metropolitan emergency response efforts,thus providing a safer and more effective response to fire and life safety emergencies.The 2015 SAFER grant will fund twelve firefighter positions through October 2,2018, enabling the department to open a much needed four-person company.At the expiration of the grant,should the Fire Department choose to retain the twelve firefighters,would require $1.3 million on an annual basis going forward. Historically,the department has been successful in being awarded three prior SAFER grants as follows:$931,500 million in FY 2006 funding to hire nine positions;$2.5 million in FY 2011 funding for twelve positions;and $2.6 million in FY 2013 funding for twelve positions through May 4,2017,which is the end of the FY 2013 SAFER grant two-year period of performance. FISCAL IMPACT The period of performance for this 2015 SAFER grant is October 3,2016 through October 2,2018. The grant reimburses the City in full for base salaries and benefits.The grant does not reimburse for overtime and protective equipment.Overtime will approximate $34,000 annually.Equipment and Training will be upfront costs approximating $63,700 for equipment and $300,000 for drill school instructors.Expenditures and grant proceeds in the amount of $857,200 are estimated to be incurred in FY 2017.Full year estimated grant revenues and expenditures in the amount of $1.3 million will be included in the proposed FY 2018 budget. Full year funding in the amount of $1.3 million annually thereafter would be required to maintain the additional four persons on duty each day.Although not required under the grant guidelines,funding to maintain the enhanced staffing levels has been included in the Mayor’s five-year budget projections, thus providing a safer and more effective response to fire and life safety emergencies. Attachment: Resolution - Authorizing Acceptance of Grant City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1236 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-G REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:BRUCE RUDD, City Manager SUBJECT BILL -(For introduction and adoption)-An emergency ordinance of the City of Fresno,California, amending Section 1-308(g)of the Fresno Municipal Code,relating to Administrative Citations and Penalties and amending and adding Subsections to Section 11-307 of the Fresno Municipal Code, relating to Code Violations (Requires five affirmative votes). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the Council approve an emergency ordinance amending Fresno Municipal Code (FMC)Sections 1- 308(g)and 11-307 relating to egregious property owners and increased fines for health and safety and building code violations. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On December 8,2015,the City Manager established the Strike Team on Problem Properties (STOPP),which consists of representatives from the Department of Development and Resource Management,City Attorney’s Office,Fresno Police Department,and Fresno Fire Department,as well as the Fresno County and City Housing Authority.The original purpose of the STOPP Team has been two-fold;focus on negligent property owners of multi-family properties and to develop new policies and practices needed to revamp the manner in which the City of Fresno (City)addresses problem property owners.One of the first changes in policy was adopted in May 2016,when the Council amended FMC Section 10-708, which allowed the City to hold a Homeowner’s Association of Property Management firm responsible for activities that generated excessive calls for Police and Fire Services. Another issue identified by the STOPP Team was the level of citations for violations of health and safety requirements as prescribed by the FMC and State Building Codes compared to other general code infractions,such as overgrown vegetation,old tires,and trash.The recommended amendments to the FMC in addition to proposed changes in the Master Fee Schedule will rectify this by increasing the cost of health and safety violations from $200 to $800 for the first citation, $500 to $1,200 for the second citation and $800 to $1,600 for a third violation. This amendment also defines an “egregious property owner”as any person,firm,corporation,or other entity committing health and safety or building code violations in three or more occupied residential rental properties in a rolling twelve- month period.If approved,the amended ordinance would allow the City to double fines for health and safety and building code violations for property owners who meet the egregious property owner definition. BACKGROUND The City Manager has created a STOPP team whose focus has been to reduce the number of substandard rental City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1236 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #:2-G The City Manager has created a STOPP team whose focus has been to reduce the number of substandard rental housing units operating in the City.The STOPP Team found the Municipal Code does not differentiate between the various types of code violations and associated fines.For example,the lack of heat or hot water,similar to the situation, which occurred at the Summerset Apartments in November 2015,carries the same level of citation as an overgrown lawn.While an overgrown lawn can contribute to blight and negatively impact surrounding properties,it does not rise to the same level of health and safety that a lack of heat or hot water creates for our residents. Since being convened the STOPP Team inspections and related code actions have clearly demonstrated a need for adopting the recommended amendments as an emergency ordinance.For example,the very first property inspected by the STOPP Team identified water penetration and related interior damage from a failed roof,exposed electrical wiring, and no heat in one of the apartments other than what could be created from running a kitchen oven with the door open. Subsequent inspections of other properties have found apartments infested with vermin and or insects,failing hand rails and or stairs,and in one case,a faulty community washer and dryer that would electrocute tenants whenever they attempted to use the facilities.This is in addition to other types of health and safety code violations such as dry rot,failing exterior siding, faulty appliances, etc. Additionally,there are a number of negligent property owners who have a history of ignoring minimum health and safety and building code requirements as well as other general nuisance issues.These property owners’practice of deferring maintenance and or failing to make repairs comes at the expense of those who reside in a number of these rental units. In order to mitigate the negative impact these property owners are creating for many of our residents,it is also recommended the FMC be amended to define an “egregious property owner”and provide the City with the ability to double the fines for health and safety and building code violations for those property owners who continue to disregard minimum housing standards. Based on the findings of the STOPP Team,and previous code enforcement actions,it is clear the current level of citations have failed to create the financial deterrent needed to ensure these types of property owners allocate the necessary resources needed to provide safe and clean rental housing opportunities.Therefore,it is vital the following recommended amendments related to specific health and safety violations and the ability to double the applicable fines for egregious property owners be adopted by the Council. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS This is not a project for the purposes of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines,Section 15378(b)(5),as it is an administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this Emergency Ordinance does not include a bid or award of a construction or services contract. FISCAL IMPACT There is no direct fiscal impact from the passing of this Emergency Ordinance.However,there are fines and penalties assigned in the Emergency Ordinance,which may impact revenues depending upon the number and severity of cases identified.However,it is the intent of these amendments to improve the level of compliance by some property owners rather than generating additional revenues. Attachment: Ordinance City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 1 of 5 Date Adopted: Date Approved Effective Date: City Attorney Approval: ________ Ordinance No. BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 1-308(g) OF THE FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS AND PENALTIES AND AMENDING AND ADDING SUBSECTIONS TO SECTION 11-307 OF THE FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO CODE VIOLATIONS. WHEREAS, the current municipal regulations do not adequately deter property owners from disregarding health and safety violations in occupied residential rental properties; and WHEREAS, citizens, City staff, and the City Council have repeatedly voiced concerns regarding the substandard living conditions of residential rental properties within the City; and WHEREAS, this proposed amendment will financially deter property owners from disregarding health and safety violations in occupied residential rental properties by significantly increasing penalties for violations and doubling penalties for egregious property owners; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare because property owners have consistently ignored ongoing health and safety violations in occupied residential rental properties including, but not limited to the lack of heat and hot water, adequate roofing, exposed electrical wiring, and insect and vermin infestation; and 2 of 5 WHEREAS, pursuant to City of Fresno Charter Section 603 and California Government Code Section 36937, in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, the City Council may adopt an emergency ordinance; and WHEREAS, this emergency ordinance will take effect immediately in order to deter any further health and safety code violations within the City. THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRESNO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Subsection (g) of Section 1-308 of the Fresno Municipal Code is amended to read: SECTION 1-308. ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS AND PENALTIES. The City Council finds that there is a need for an alternative method of enforcement of violations of the Municipal Code. The City Council further finds and declares that an appropriate method for enforcement for violations of the Code is the following administrative citation and civil penalty program. (g)Penalty. Except as otherwise set forth in this Code, [the Master Fee Schedule shall establish the base schedule for the amount of the civil penalty assessed for code violations, which may vary by types and numbers of violations.] or by the Master Fee Resolution, the City Council establishes the following base schedule for determining the amount of the civil penalty to be assessed for each code violation specified in the administrative citation. (i)First violation within a rolling twelve-month period, one hundred dollars ($100.00); 3 of 5 (ii)Second occurrence of the same violation within a rolling twelve-month period, two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00); (iii)Third or subsequent occurrence of the same violation within a rolling twelve-month period, five hundred dollars ($500.00); SECTION 2. Section 11-307 of the Fresno Municipal Code is amended to read: SECTION. 11-307. VIOLATIONS. [(a)]It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation, or other entity to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this article. Each day that any building or lot is used, occupied or maintained contrary to any provisions of this article, shall [may] be deemed a separate offense. [(b)Violations deemed a threat to health and safety as defined in this Code or pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3 shall be penalized as set forth in the Master Fee Schedule.] [(c)Egregious violator. Any person, firm, corporation, or other entity committing health and safety or building code violations in three or more occupied residential rental properties in a rolling twelve-month period shall be deemed an egregious violator.] [(1)An egregious violator may be subject to double penalties, as set forth in the Master Fee Schedule, for health and 4 of 5 safety and building code violations on occupied rental residential properties .] [(2)An owner will no longer be deemed an egregious violator if all health and safety or building code violations are cured, all related fines, penalties, and fees are paid, and the owner does not accrue any new health and safety or building code violations for a six-month period.] SECTION 3. This emergency ordinance shall become effective and in full force upon its final passage. / / / / / / / / / / 5 of 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF FRESNO ) ss. CITY OF FRESNO ) I, YVONNE SPENCE, City Clerk of the City of Fresno, certify that the foregoing ordinance was adopted by the Council of the City of Fresno, at a regular meeting held on the _________ day of ______________, 2016. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: YVONNE SPENCE, CMC City Clerk BY: Deputy APPROVED AS TO FORM: DOUGLAS T. SLOAN, City Attorney BY: TRACY N. PARVANIAN Date Deputy City Attorney TNP:nd (72697nd-ns/tnp ) 10-14-16 City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:JENNIFER K. CLARK, Director Development and Resource Management Department THROUGH:MIKE SANCHEZ, Assistant Director Development and Resource Management Department WILL TACKETT, Supervising Planner Development Services Division BY:KIRA NOGUERA, Planner III Development Services Division SUBJECT HEARING to consider Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003, Rezone Application No. R-16-009, Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16-046, and related Environmental Assessment No. ANX- 16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046, filed by The Vincent Company Architects, on behalf of Louis Brosi. These applications pertain to approximately 18.52 acres of property located on the northwest corner of East Alluvial and North Chestnut Avenues. 1.Adopt the Finding of Conformity to the Fresno General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR SCH#2012111012),EA No.ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046,dated September 2, 2016. 2.BILL -(For introduction and adoption)-Approving Rezone Application No.R-16-009 to pre- zone the property from Fresno County RA-20 (Residential Agricultural,20 acres)zone district to the City of Fresno RS-5/UGM (Residential Single Family,Medium Density/Urban Growth Management) zone district. 3.***RESOLUTION -Approving Annexation Application No.ANX-16-003 to initiate annexation proceedings for incorporation of the subject property to the City of Fresno and detachment from the Fresno County Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District. 4.Approve Conditional Use Permit No.C-16-046,to allow for a planned development that includes a 30-lot single family residential subdivision (tentative map to be submitted at a later date)and a 176-unit multiple family residential complex with a density transfer,subject to the conditions of approval dated September 21, 2016. 5.***RESOLUTION -Approving the certification to the Fresno County Auditor the amount of the cancellation valuation fee for the cancellation of Agricultural Land Conservation Contract No. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: AP-1366, as required by Section 51283(b) of the California Government Code. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: a.ADOPT the Finding of Conformity to the Fresno General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR SCH#2012111012),EA No.ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046,dated September 2, 2016. b.ADOPT BILL approving Rezone Application No.R-16-009 requesting authorization to pre-zone the property from Fresno County RA-20 (Residential Agricultural,20 acres)zone district to the City of Fresno RS-5/UGM (Residential Single Family,Medium Density/Urban Growth Management) zone district. c.ADOPT RESOLUTION authorizing the Development and Resource Management Department Director to initiate annexation of the “Alluvial-Chestnut No.4 reorganization”with the Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) d.APPROVE Conditional Use Permit No.C-16-046,to allow for a planned development that includes a 30-lot single family residential subdivision (tentative map to be submitted at a later date)and a 176-unit multiple family residential complex with a density transfer, subject to the conditions of approval dated September 21, 2016. e.ADOPT RESOLUTION certifying to the Fresno County Auditor the amount of the cancellation valuation fee for the cancellation of Agricultural Land Conservation Contract (ALCC)No.Ap- 1366. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Vincent Company Architects, on behalf of Louis Brosi, has filed Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003, Rezone Application No. R-16-009, and Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16- 046 pertaining to approximately 18.52 acres of property located on the northwest corner of East Alluvial and North Chestnut Avenues. The applicant proposes a planned development that includes a 30-lot single family residential subdivision (tentative map to be submitted at a later date) and a 176-unit multiple family residential complex with a density transfer; pre-zoning from the Fresno County RA-20 (Residential Agricultural, 20 acres) zone district to the City of Fresno RS-5/UGM (Residential Single Family, Medium Density/Urban Growth Management) zone district; and detachment from the Fresno County Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District and annexation to the City of Fresno. The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Fresno General Plan and Woodward Park Community Plan. BACKGROUND Project Description City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: The Vincent Company Architects, on behalf of Louis Brosi, has filed Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003, Rezone Application No. R-16-009, and Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16- 046 pertaining to approximately 18.52 acres of property located on the northwest corner of East Alluvial and North Chestnut Avenues. The site can be described as a county island as it is unincorporated land in the County of Fresno, but is surrounded on all sides by land within the City of Fresno. The adjacent land uses to the north have been developed with single family residences (Tract 4190 recorded in 1992). Properties to the east of the subject property, across North Chestnut Avenue have been developed with condominiums (Tract 5646 recorded in 2007). Properties to the south of the subject property, across East Alluvial Avenue, have also been developed with single family residences (Tracts 4026 and 4514 recorded in 1993 & 1999, respectively). Directly adjacent to the subject property to the west is a park. Rezone Application No.R-16-009 proposes to pre-zone the subject property from the Fresno County RA-20 (Residential Agricultural,20 acres)zone district to the City of Fresno RS-5/UGM (Residential Single Family,Medium Density/Urban Growth Management)zone district for purposes of facilitating annexation to the City of Fresno.Actions related to the annexation of the subject property to the City of Fresno and reorganization,including detachment from the Fresno County Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District fall under the jurisdiction of the Fresno Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO). Conditional Use Permit Application No.C-16-046 requests authorization to develop the subject property with a 30-lot single family residential subdivision (tentative map to be submitted at a later date)and a 176-unit multiple family residential complex.Pursuant to Table 15-902 of the Fresno Municipal Code,development of Multi-Unit (multiple family)Residential in the RS-5 (Residential Single Family,Medium Density)zone district is permitted,subject to obtaining a conditional use permit. Development of the proposed 176 unit multi-unit development on ±11 acres results in a density of 16 du/acre,which exceeds the maximum allowable density of the Medium Density Residential (5.0- 12 du/acre)planned land use designation.Residential density for the proposed 30 single family residential lots on ±7 acres results in a density of 4.0 du/acre,which does not meet the minimum required density of the Medium Density Residential (5.0-12 du/acre)planned land use designation. However,with consideration to a Density Transfer (Ref §15-310-C of the FMC),the development of 206 residential units on the overall ±18 acre subject property results in a density of ±11 du/acre, which is consistent with the Medium Density Residential (5.0-12 du/acre)planned land use designation. In accordance with Section 15-310-C of the Fresno Municipal Code,the number of units per acre prescribed in the applicable plans for an existing or proposed zone district shall not be transferred to another existing or proposed zone district,unless a transfer is approved through the processing of a Planned Development Permit which includes all zone districts involved in the proposed transfer.Therefore,the conditional use permit application has also been filed to include a request to authorize the project as a Planned Development for purposes of facilitating a density transfer. Conditions of approval for the conditional use permit will include requirements for substantial compliance with the approved site plan and will assure that the required density designated for the subject property is met with future development. Historically,the property was developed with rural residential uses and at one time a commercial City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: nursery occupied a portion of the site. The project application also includes a request for cancelation of Agricultural Land Conservation (Williamson Act)Contract No.1366.A Notice of Non-Renewal for the agricultural land conservation contract was filed in 2012 but the mandatory 10-year period prior to effective cancellation has not elapsed.Therefore,the applicant will be required to pay a “cancelation valuation fee”as determined by the Fresno County Assessor’s Office in accordance with Section 51283(b)of the California Government Code prior to cancellation. Land Use Plans and Policies As proposed,the project would be consistent with the Fresno General Plan goals and objectives related to residential land use and the urban form: Goal No.7 of the Fresno General Plan encourages the City to provide for a diversity of districts, neighborhoods,housing types (including affordable housing),residential densities,job opportunities,recreation,open space,and educational venues that appeal to a broad range of people throughout the City. Goal No.8 of the Fresno General Plan encourages the development of Complete Neighborhoods and districts with an efficient and diverse mix of residential densities,building types,and affordability which are designed to be healthy,attractive,and centered by schools,parks,and public and commercial services to provide a sense of place and that provide as many services as possible within walking distance.Healthy communities demonstrate efficient development patterns providing for:Sufficient affordable housing development in appropriate locations;A mix of land uses and a built environment that supports walking and biking;Multimodal,affordable transportation choices; and, Safe public spaces for social interaction. Goal No.10 of the Fresno General Plan emphasizes increased land use intensity and mixed-use development at densities supportive of greater transit in Fresno.Greater densities are recognized as being achievable through encouragement,infrastructure,and incentives for infill and revitalization along major corridors and in Activity Centers. These Goals contribute to the establishment of a comprehensive city-wide land use planning strategy to meet economic development objectives,achieve efficient and equitable use of resources and infrastructure,and create an attractive living environment in accordance with Objective LU-1 of the Fresno General Plan. Similarly,supporting Objective LU-2 of the General Plan calls for infill development that includes a range of housing types,building forms,and land uses to meet the needs of both current and future residents. Likewise,Objective LU-5 of the General Plan calls for a diverse housing stock that will support balanced urban growth,and make efficient use of resources and public facilities;and,Implementing Policy LU-5-e promotes urban neighborhood residential uses to support compact communities and Complete Neighborhoods that include community facilities,walkable access to parkland and commercial services, and transit stops. The proposed project introduces and integrates elements of a compact community that includes City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 4 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: The proposed project introduces and integrates elements of a compact community that includes community facilities,walkable access to parkland and commercial services and transit stops in manner which affords a diversity of housing types and a wider range of affordability in a compatible relationship.A City of Fresno (FAX)bus line (38)has a stop at Cedar and Alluvial.Furthermore,the project is adjacent to a park and within 400 feet of Mountain View Elementary School. The proposed project introduces and integrates the characteristic elements and benefits of a compact self-sufficient community,which include community facilities,walkable access to commercial services,transit stops and open space amenities,thereby affording a unique opportunity for future residents to enjoy the convenient and healthy lifestyle of living within a Complete Neighborhood. The Fresno General Plan acknowledges that the sound planning principles for creating Complete Neighborhoods anticipate and plan in advance all amenities needed in a neighborhood to ensure quality and lasting property values before the residential units are built instead of trying to piecemeal those amenities after the fact. The proposed project effectively increases density and provides diversity of housing within an area predominantly developed with single family residences.The location of the proposed project intensifies density by adding single family residences and multi-family residences thereby providing a land use and product which will afford diversity while remaining compatible and complementary to adjacent development within the area. Objective UF-12 of the Fresno General Plan directs the City to locate roughly one-half of future residential development in infill areas, defined as being within the City on December 31, 2012. Supporting Policy LU-1-a of the Fresno General Plan also promotes new development within the existing City limits as of December 31,2012.Policies LU-1-e and LU-1-g recommend that annexations to the City conform to the General Plan Land Use Designations and maintain the City’s current Sphere of Influence (SOI) Boundaries without additional expansion. The proposed project and subject site are identified as a County Island in Figure IM-2 of the General Plan.Therefore,this project is considered infill development,given that the subject property is surrounded on all sides by developed land within the incorporated boundary of the City of Fresno; those lands having been annexed as early as 1981 and as recent as 2005. Therefore it is staff’s opinion that the proposed project is consistent with respective general and community plan objectives and policies and will not conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy or regulation of the City of Fresno.Furthermore,the proposed project,including the design and improvement of the subject property,is found;(1)to be consistent with the goals,objectives and policies of the applicable Fresno General Plan and Woodward Park Community Plan;(2)to be suitable for the type and density of development;(3)to be safe from potential cause or introduction of serious public health problems;and,(4)to not conflict with any public interests in the subject property or adjacent lands. Public Resources Evaluation of public services capacity and availability for the area has determined that public infrastructure improvements exist within the area to serve existing development within the vicinity City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 5 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: infrastructure improvements exist within the area to serve existing development within the vicinity as well as future development on the subject property.Furthermore,the proposed project will be obligated to pay fair share and proportional payment of fees and all development mitigation costs. Although the proposed development will increase the number of residential (single and multi- family)units on the site,the Department of Public Utilities (DPU)has determined that adequate sanitary sewer and water services are available to serve the project site subject to implementation of the Fresno General Plan policies and the mitigation measures of the related Master Environmental Impact Report and the construction and installation of public facilities and infrastructure in accordance with Department of Public Works standards,specifications and policies. Review for compliance with fire and life safety requirements for the interior of proposed buildings and the intended use are reviewed by both the Fire Department and the Building and Safety Services Section of the Development and Resource Management Department when a submittal for building plan review is made as required by the California Building Code. The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD)has indicated that permanent drainage service is available subject to the developer demonstrating that surface water runoff can be directed and conveyed to Master Plan facilities. Circulation Element Plan Policies and Major Street System Traffic Capacity The Fresno General Plan designates North Chestnut Avenue as an arterial street and East Alluvial Avenue as a collector street.The developer of this project will be required to dedicate and construct improvements along all major street frontages and on all interior local streets within the future single family residential subdivision. The proposed project is located within Traffic Impact Zone III pursuant to Figure MT-4 of the Fresno General Plan.In accordance with Fresno General Plan Policy MT-2-I,a Transportation Impact Study (TIS)dated July 8,2016 was prepared by Peters Engineering Group to assess the impacts of the new development on existing and planned streets. This assessment evaluated the impacts of the project by analyzing three intersections in the vicinity of the project during the AM and PM peak hours.Daily traffic counts were also collected for two local roadways in the vicinity of the project. The study has applied the factors outlined in the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE)Trip Generation Manual.Projected vehicle trips were calculated resulting in the expected generation of 104 vehicle trips during the morning (7 to 9 a.m.) peak hour travel period and 133 vehicle trips during the evening (4 to 6 p.m.) peak hour travel period. Based on the analyses included in the TIS,the intersection of Alluvial and Chestnut Avenues is currently operating below the Traffic Impact Zone (TIZ)Ill level of service (LOS)standard of LOS D during the AM and PM peak hours. With the addition of the project and the improvements at the intersection of Alluvial and Chestnut Avenues,the study intersections are all projected to operate at or above the TIZ Ill LOS D standard.The improvements to the intersection, as well as the payment of traffic impact fees,are included as conditions of approval to the Conditional Use Permit (C-16 -046).The Near Term and Cumulative Year 2036 analyses included in the TIS showed all intersections are projected to operate at or above the TIZ Ill LOS D standard. The Public Works Department,Traffic Engineering Division has reviewed the potential traffic related impacts for the proposed project and has determined that the streets adjacent to and near the subject site will be able to accommodate the quantity and kind of traffic which may be potentially generated subject to the requirements stipulated within the attached memoranda from the Traffic Engineering Division dated July 28th and September 6th,2016.These requirements generally include:(1)The provision of a minimum two points of vehicular access to major streets for any phase of the development;(2)Major and local street dedications;(3)Street improvements,(including,but not limited to, construction of concrete curbs,gutters,pavement,underground street lighting systems;and,(4)Payment of applicable impact fees (including,but not limited to,the Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI)Fee,Fresno Major Street Impact (FMSI) Fee, and the Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (RTMF) Fee. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 6 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: The area street plans are the product of careful planning that projects traffic capacity needs based on the densities and intensities of planned land uses anticipated at build-out of the planned area.Based upon the project requirements for street dedications,improvements,and contributions to the City wide impact fee system,the adjacent and interior streets will provide adequate access to,and recognize the traffic generating characteristics of,individual properties and,at the same time, afford the community an adequate and efficient circulation system. Petition for Cancellation of Agricultural Land Conservation Contracts (ALCC) In 1965,California adopted the California Land Conservation Act,or “Williamson Act,”which provides for the conservation of agricultural lands in order to preserve the state’s economic resources and discourage premature or unnecessary conversion of agricultural land to urban uses. The Fresno General Plan does not include agricultural planned land uses within the City Sphere of Influence and while the City of Fresno does not intend to have within its boundaries any land under an agricultural preserve contract,the City may become successor to a Williamson Act Contract as land currently within the County of Fresno becomes annexed to the City. California Government Code Sections 51280-51287 provide methodology for relief from the provisions of Agricultural Land Conservation Contracts (ALCC),or “Williamson Act”contracts,which were entered into by property owners, predecessors in interest,or successors for the purpose of retaining agricultural lands in parcels large enough to sustain agricultural uses permitted under the contracts. In accordance with these provisions the City of Fresno on April 4,2006,adopted Resolution No.2006-130 and in so doing adopted Rules of Procedure to Implement the California land Conservation Act of 1965 (“Williamson Act”). Under these rules (and in accordance with the Government Code)a property owner may request cancellation of a land conservation contract to terminate the contract on all or a portion of the property.The purpose of this process is to remove land from agricultural preserve status and subsequently remove the property from the land use restrictions associated with the Williamson Act and eliminate any tax savings inherent in agricultural preserves. The City of Fresno process for cancellation requires that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing on the cancellation petition and adopt a resolution with recommendations to be forwarded to the Council. Prior to any action by the Council giving approval to the cancellation of any contract,the Council must determine and certify to the County Auditor the amount of the cancellation (penalty)fee that the landowner shall pay the County Treasurer upon cancellation.The cancellation fee is an amount equal to 12.5 percent of the cancellation valuation of the property based upon the current market value of the land. In order to approve a cancellation request for an ALCC,the Council,pursuant to the Council adopted “Rules of Procedure,”must also make all of the findings under either one of two sets of determinations,which are listed below. Staff has addressed these findings pursuant to the latter set of determinations. 1.The cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act as evidenced by the following: a)Cancellation is for land on which a Notice of Non-renewal has been served. The requested cancellation is for land for which a Notice of Non-Renewal was filed on July 02, 2012. b)Cancellation is not likely to result in removal of adjacent lands from agricultural use. The cancellation will not result in removal of adjacent lands as all surrounding properties are located within the incorporated area of the City of Fresno and have been developed with urban uses. c)That cancellation is for an alternative use which is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Fresno General Plan. Cancellation is for purposes of a development project which meets all applicable provisions of the Fresno City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 7 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: Cancellation is for purposes of a development project which meets all applicable provisions of the Fresno Municipal Code and which is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Fresno General Plan. d)Cancellation will not result in discontinuous patterns of urban development. Development of the subject site is considered infill and will result in removal of a County Island. e)There is no proximate uncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contracted land be put,or that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non-contracted land. All proximate lands are located within the incorporated boundary of the City of Fresno and have been developed with urban uses. 2.The cancellation is in the public interest as evidenced by the following: a)Other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of the Williamson Act. The subject property is located within the City of Fresno’s planned urban area and sphere of influence as provided by the Amended and Reinstated Memorandum of Understanding between the County of Fresno and City of Fresno.This area was also identified as appropriate for urban development by the 1984 Fresno General Plan and acknowledged by a corresponding City/County joint planning resolution.The project site has been designated by the Fresno General Plan to be developed with medium density residential land uses. The notice of nonrenewal was filed due to the land no longer meeting the eligibility requirements of the Williamson Act.The land has not been in agricultural production in more than twenty years.The public interest of a complete neighborhood outweighs the value of an underutilized parcel completely surrounded by development. b)There is no proximate non-contracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contract land should be put,or that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non-contracted land. The Fresno General Plan objectives call for housing patterns that support balanced urban growth,and that make complete neighborhoods.The project site is fully surrounded on all sides by urban development.There is no proximate non-contracted land that is available or suitable for the proposed use. State of California Department of Conservation (DOC) On August 26,2016 the City of Fresno sent notification to the State of California Department of Conservation regarding the received petition for cancellation of ALCC No.AP-1366 in accordance with Section 51284.1 of the California Government Code.Pursuant to this section and prior to acting on the proposed cancellation,the Council shall consider comments made by the Director of Conservation.As of October 5,2016,the City has not received comments from the Department of Conservation. Staff believes the proposed cancellation is consistent with findings within the latter set determinations as noted since the cancellation is in the public interest;that public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of the Williamson Act;and, that there is no proximate non-contracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contract land should be put,and that the development of the contracted land will provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non-contracted land. Conclusion The appropriateness of the proposed project has been examined with respect to its consistency with goals and policies of the Fresno General Plan and the Woodward Park Community Plan;its compatibility with surrounding uses;and its avoidance or mitigation of potentially significant adverse environmental impacts.These factors have been evaluated as described above and by the accompanying environmental assessment.Upon consideration of this evaluation,it can be concluded that Annexation Application No.ANX-16-003,Rezone Application No.R-16-009,and Conditional Use Permit City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 8 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: concluded that Annexation Application No.ANX-16-003,Rezone Application No.R-16-009,and Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16-046 are appropriate for the project site. Public Notice and Input Notice of Hearing The Development and Resource Management Department mailed notices of this City Council hearing to surrounding property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property (Exhibit 3), pursuant to Section 15-5007-B-2 of the FMC. District Committee The District 6 Plan Implementation Committee unanimously recommended approval of the proposed applications at its regularly scheduled meeting held on July 20,2016.The committee commented that the project is a good fit for the area and the traffic intersection improvements would provide a positive improvement to the neighborhood. Public Input The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 27,2016,and noticed property owners within 500-feet of the subject property.The property owner provided an overview of the project,followed by a question and answer session. Approximately 24 individuals attended the meeting.Comments and questions from the public were primarily related to project design and traffic impacts to the neighborhood. Staff has received one individual at the counter and corresponded by email with one individual on the project during which specific questions regarding the proposal and the approval process were asked. Three letters from surrounding property owners were received by email. All letters are included in the record as Exhibit O. Fresno City Planning Commission Action Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003, Rezone Application No. R-16-009, Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16- 046, and related Environmental Assessment No. ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046, were considered by the Fresno City Planning Commission at its meeting on September 21, 2016. At the hearing, one member of the public spoke to ask that the applicant consider restriping Alluvial, East of Chestnut. After a complete hearing, the Commission voted and recommended the City Council approve the annexation, rezone, conditional use permit, and Williamson Act cancelation application with consideration of restriping by a 6-0 vote (one member absent). Required Findings Based upon analysis of the applications and subject to the applicant’s compliance with all conditions of approval,dated September 21,2016,staff concludes that the required Rezone findings of Section 15-5812 and Conditional Use Permit findings of Section-5306 of the FMC can be made. These findings are attached as Exhibits E & I respectively. ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS An environmental assessment was prepared for this project in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines.This process included the distribution of requests for comment from other responsible or affected agencies and interested organizations. Preparation of the environmental assessment necessitated a thorough review of the proposed project and relevant environmental issues and considered previously prepared environmental and technical studies pertinent to the area, including the Fresno General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR SCH No.2012111015).These environmental and technical studies have examined projected sewage generation rates of planned urban uses,the capacity of existing sanitary sewer collection and treatment facilities,and optimum alternatives for increasing capacities; groundwater aquifer resource conditions;water supply production and distribution system capacities;traffic carrying capacity of the planned major street system;and,student generation projections and school facility site location identification. The City of Fresno has conducted an initial study of the above-described project and it has been determined to be a City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 9 of 10 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1194 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: The City of Fresno has conducted an initial study of the above-described project and it has been determined to be a subsequent project that is fully within the scope of the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR)SCH No.2012111015 prepared for the Fresno General Plan adopted by the Fresno City Council on December 18,2014.Therefore,the Development and Resource Management Department proposes to adopt a Finding of Conformity for this project. With mitigation imposed,there is no substantial evidence in the record that this project may have additional significant, direct,indirect or cumulative effects on the environment that are significant and that were not identified and analyzed in the MEIR.After conducting a review of the adequacy of the MEIR pursuant to Public Resources Code,Section 21157.6 (b)(1),the Development and Resource Management Department,as lead agency,finds that no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified and that no new information,which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the MEIR was certified as complete has become available. The project is not located on a site which is included on any of the lists enumerated under Section 65962.5 of the Government Code including,but not limited to,lists of hazardous waste facilities,land designated as hazardous waste property,hazardous waste disposal sites and others,and the information in the Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement required under subdivision (f)of that Section.A public notice for the Environmental Assessment Application No.ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046 was published on September 2,2016 with no comments or appeals received to date. LOCAL PREFERENCE Local preference was not considered because this resolution and ordinance do not include a bid or award of a construction or service contract. FISCAL IMPACT Affirmative action by the Council will result in timely deliverance of the review and processing of the application as is reasonably expected by the applicant.Prudent financial management is demonstrated by the expeditious completion of this land use application inasmuch as the applicant has paid to the city a fee for the processing of this application and that fee is, in turn, funding the respective operations of the Development and Resource Management Department. Attachments: Exhibit A: Vicinity Map Exhibit B: Aerial Photograph Exhibit C: Public Hearing Noticing Mailing Map Exhibit D: Rezone Exhibit Exhibit E: Rezone Findings Exhibit F: Annexation Boundary Exhibit Exhibit G: Exhibits for Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 Exhibit H: Conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 dated September 21, 2016; including memoranda from responsible or commenting agencies Exhibit I: Conditional Use Permit Findings Exhibit J: Cancelation Fees for Agricultural Land Conservation Contract 1366 from Fresno County Assessor Exhibit K: Environmental Assessment No. ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046, dated September 2, 2016 Exhibit L: Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 13407, 13408 & 13409 Exhibit M: City Council Ordinance Bill for Rezone Application No. R-16-009 Exhibit N: City Council Resolution for Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 (Alluvial-Chestnut No. 4 Reorganization) Exhibit O: City Council Resolution for Certification of Cancelation Fee for Agricultural Land Conservation Contract (ALCC) No. AP-1366 Exhibit P: Letters of Concern Exhibit Q: City Council PowerPoint Presentation City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 10 of 10 powered by Legistar™ Exhibit “A” Vicinity Map VICINITY MAP Subject Property LEGEND Exhibit “B” Aerial Photograph N PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEE CROMWELLE CROMWELLE CROMWELLE CROMWELLE CROMWELLE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE FREDERICK AE FREDERICK AVE FREDERICK AE FREDERICK AE FREDERICK AN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEE JENNY AVEE JENNY AVEE JENNY AVEE JENNY AVEE JENNY AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEN LYNN AVEN LYNN AVEN LYNN AVEN LYNN AVEN LYNN AVEE SEAN AVEE SEAN AVEE SEAN AVEE SEAN AVEE SEAN AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRNNNNNE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEE FIR AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN LAUREENN LAUREENN LAUREEN N LAUREENN LAUREENN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEN P R IC E A V E N P R IC E A V E N P R IC E A V E N P R IC E A V E N P R IC E A V E E CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEExhibit “B” 2015 Aerial Photograph Exhibit “C” Public Hearing Notice Mailing List Vicinity Map 40407145 40407217ST 40407120T 404520X1 40407248 40407134T 4040901140409010 40409009 40407220 4040900540409004404090034040900240409001 40435321 40434320 40432322 40434305 40434206 40434208 40435211 40434106 40435304 40435325 40434207 40435323 40435210 40434213 4043410140434309 40435315 40434306 40434122 40434318 40421204 40434211 40434205 40434209 4043420240434204 40434103 40434105 4043430740434304 40434123 40435111 40435301 40434301 4043422040434214 40435342 40435334 40434107 40434125 40434121 40435311 40435307 40434221 40435309 40435209 4043531340435314 40434302 40434316 4043534740434310 40435112 40434216 40434218 40435204 40435207 40446024 40446023 40435106 40434108 40435104 40435406 40434401 40434102 40435324 40435335 40435501 40434311 4043534540435346 4043534440435343 40434312 40433401 40432317 40435310 4043540240435403 40434405 40434403 40434402 40435404 40434404 40435405 40434314 40419118 40435303 40419218 40433408404334074043340640433405404334044043340340433402 40419219 40435105 40432318404323194043232040432321 40435341 40432109 40419406 4044602540446026 4043351640433530 40434317 40433515 40433115 40433201 4043311640433130 40433315 40433501 40432415 40433330 40433101 40433316 40432430 40432401 40433301 40432416 40419311 40419321404193204041931940419318 40419317 40419316 40419313 40419312 40419111 4041930940419308 404336014041930740419305 40419112 40419116 404191134041911740419110 40419211 40433409T40433410T 40432111 40418318S 40419231 40419227 4041922140419232 40419109 40419206 40419107 40419108 40418218S 40418219S 4043211440432113 40446074 40446073 40428325 4043320440433205 40433111 40433511 404460164044602040446015 40446017 40446019 40446021 40446022 40446014 4043311940433117 4043311340433112 40433311 40432411 40433514 40433513 40433517 40433512 4043351940433520 4043350940433508 40433523 40433507 40433524 40433505 40433527 40433126 4043332140433327 40433127 40433120 40433328 40432402 40433123 40433108 40433308 40433128 40433106 40432405 40432410 40432403 4043241340432406 404324124043241940432423 40435336 40446077 40446072 40446078 40418121S 40428115 40421201 40418311S 40418220S40418224S40418221S 40418225S40418213S 40418309S 40418313S 40418226S 40418308S 40418215S 40428101 40421117 4042811140428114 40421202 404281034042810540428107 40428109 40421126 4042810240428108 40421118 404214114042131140421412 40421312 40428215 4042820140428214 40421111 40421413 40421317 40421418 4042140940421408 40421113404211124042831440421109404211084042110540421104 40428211 40428311 40428302404283034042822740428226404282234042822140428220 40452041 40452031 40452029 40452053 4045204740452051 40452033 40452045 40452024 40452027 40452055 40452043 40452039 40452052 40452011 40452002 40452010 40452012 40452008 40452001 ALLUVIAL AVE CHESTNUT AVEMAPLE AVESPRUCE AVE BIRCH AVE EL PASO AVE DECATUR AVE MATUS AVEGOSHEN AVE DEARING AVEFALLBROOK AVE PRICE AVEWOODROW AVEHOUSTON AVE LAUREEN AVEBACKER AVELOCUST AVELAVAL AVEBAIRD AVEHOUSTON AVE GOSHEN AVE Ad dress List Map, c:\gisdm6\automap\adrlist.mxd, Fri Sep 09 11:30:32 2016 Buffered at:1000 Feet, Legal Notices, Owners40407145 799959 A-16-003 NEES AVE MAPLE AVEWILLOW AVEALLUVIAL AVE HERNDON AVE Exhibit ”D” Rezone Exhibit RS‐4OSPRPIFresno CountyRM‐1OPIRS‐5±18.52 ac.From: RA‐20 (Fresno County)To: RS‐5/UGMCCExhibit “D” –Rezone Application No. R‐16‐009 Exhibit “E” Rezone Findings Rezone Findings Based upon analysis of the application and subject to the applicant’s compliance with all of the conditions of approval noted, staff concludes that the following required findings of Section 15-5812 of the FMC can be made. FINDINGS PER FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 15-5812. Finding A: The change is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, any operative plan, or adopted policy; a. As outlined in “Land Use Plans and Policies” discussion of the staff report, the application is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, the Woodward Park Community Plan, and other adopted policies. Finding B: The change is consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote growth of the city in orderly and sustainable manner, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare; b. As outlined in “Land Use Plans and Policies” discussion of the staff report, the application is consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote growth in an orderly and sustainable manner, support infill development, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare; Finding C: The change is necessary to achieve the balance of land uses desired by City and to provide sites for needed housing or employment-generated uses, consistent with the General Plan, any applicable operative plan, or adopted policy; and to increase the inventory of land within a given zone district to meet market demand. c. The change in land use will achieve a balance of land uses desired by City to provide needed housing at a higher density, consistent with General Plan. This project provides an increase inventory of land within a higher density zone district to meet market demand for multi-family housing in a manner which supports the Complete Neighborhood Concepts included within the GP. Exhibit “F” Annexation Boundary Exhibit EXHIBIT “A”  CHESTNUT ‐ ALLUVIAL REORGANIZATION    AREA TO BE DETACHED FROM THE NORTH CENTRAL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT AND THE KINGS RIVER  CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF FRESNO. MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS  FOLLOWS:  THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 36,  TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 20 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE  OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT TOWNSHIP PLAT THEREOF.  CONTAINING AN AREA OF 20.07 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.  LEGEND APN: 404-071-42APN: 404- 0 7 1- 4 1 RES. NO. ADOPTED: . CHESTNUT - ALLUVIALAPN: 404-071-34T Exhibit “G” Exhibits for Conditional Use Permit C-16-046 Exhibit “H” Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 dated September 21, 2016; including memoranda from responsible or commenting agencies Exhibit “I” Conditional Use Permit Findings Conditional Use Permit Findings Based upon analysis of the application and subject to the applicant’s compliance with all of the conditions of approval noted, staff concludes that the following required findings of Section 15-5306 of the FMC can be made. FINDINGS PER FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 15-5306. Finding A: The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Code and all other chapters of the Municipal Code; a.Pursuant to Table 15-902 of the Fresno Municipal Code, development of Multi-Unit (multiple family) Residential in the RS-5 (Residential Single Family, Medium Density) zone district is permitted, subject to obtaining a conditional use permit. The proposed project complies with all requirements and provision of the Fresno Municipal Code subject to compliance with the project conditions of approval. Finding B: The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any other applicable plan and design guideline the City has adopted; b.As outlined in “Land Use Plans and Policies” discussion above, the application is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies, the Woodward Park Community Plan, and other adopted policies. The application is consistent with the purpose of the Development Code to promote growth in an orderly and sustainable manner, support infill development, and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare; Finding C: The proposed use will not be substantially adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor be detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements; c.The proposed project has been evaluated for potential environmental impacts and will not result in significant effects as outlined within the attached Finding of Conformity to the Fresno General Plan Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR NO. 2012111015) dated September 2, 2016. Finding D: The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity; and d.The proposed project is located on an infill site completely surrounded by urban uses at an intensity and scale consistent with the designated land use of the Fresno General Plan. The proposed project has been designed with interface performance standards and design incorporated and in compliance with the transition standards of the Fresno Municipal Code. Finding E: The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, emergency access, utilities, and services required. e.The proposed project is consistent with the intensity and scale designated by the Fresno General Plan and Woodward Park Community Plan. Adequate access, infrastructure and service facilities are provided and available. Exhibit “J” Cancelation Fees for Agricultural Land Conservation Contract #1366 from Fresno County Assessor Exhibit “K” Environmental Assessment No. ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046 Dated September 02, 2016 Exhibit “L” Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 13407, 13408 & 13409 FRESNO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13408 The Fresno City Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on September 21, 2016, adopted the following resolution relating to Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003. WHEREAS, Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 has been filed with the City of Fresno by The Vincent Company Architects, pertaining to approximately 18.52 acres of property located on the northwest corner of East Alluvial and North Chestnut Avenues; and, WHEREAS, Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 proposes to initiate annexation proceedings to request a change of organization (“Alluvial-Chestnut No. 4 Reorganization”) resulting in an annexation to the City of Fresno and detachment from the North Central Fire Protection District and the Kings River Conservation District, of certain property consisting of an approximately 18.52 acre site and hereinafter called the “subject territory;” and, WHEREAS, LAFCO requires that the subject territory be pre-zoned consistent with the City of Fresno General Plan ("General Plan") prior to the initiation of annexation proceeding; and, WHEREAS, it has been determined that rezoning the subject territory with the RS-5/UGM (Residential Single-Family, Medium Density/Urban Growth Management) zone district is consistent with the Fresno General Plan; and, WHEREAS, the annexation will be made pursuant to Part 3 of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 contained in Division 3 of Title 5 commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code; and, WHEREAS, a description of the boundaries of the subject territory is set forth in Exhibit A; and, WHEREAS, this proposal is within the established sphere of influence of the City of Fresno; and, WHEREAS, the proposed reorganization is uninhabited under the definition of Section 56046 of the California Government Code; and, WHEREAS, municipal services for the subject territory will be provided in a manner described in the Service Delivery Plan pursuant to the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 56653; and, WHEREAS, the proposed annexation complies with the terms and standards of the 2003 Memorandum of Understanding ("2003 MOU") between the City of Fresno and the County of Fresno approved January 6, 2003; and, WHEREAS, this proposed reorganization will result in logical growth, the provision of municipal services, and the application of appropriate development standards and controls within the City of Fresno, and implements the Council’s policy to unify the metropolitan area; and, WHEREAS, on September 21, 2016, the Fresno City Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the proposed Annexation Application, as well as the proposed prezoning of the subject property in accordance with Rezone Application No. R-16-009 and considered the Planning Commission Resolution No. 13408 Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 September 21, 2016 Page 3 The foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Fresno City Planning Commission, upon a motion by Commissioner Holt, seconded by Commissioner Reed. VOTING : Ayes - Noes - Not Voting - Absent - Hold, Reed, Catalano, Garcia, Torossian, Vasquez None None Medina DATED: September 21, 2016 Attachment: Exhibit A Resolution No. 13408 Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 Filed by Lennar Fresno, Inc. Action: Recommend Approval FRESNO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 13409 The Fresno City Planning Commission, at its regular meeting on September 21, 2016, adopted the following resolution relating to Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046. WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 has been filed with the City of Fresno for the development of the subject property as described below: PROJECT: A planned development that includes a 30-lot single family residential subdivision (tentative map to be submitted at a later date) and a 176-unit multiple family residential complex with a density transfer, subject to the conditions of approval dated September 21, 2016. APPLICANT: the Vincent Company Architects LOCATION: Approximately 18.52 acres of property located on the northwest corner of East Alluvial and North Chestnut Avenues APN(s): 404-071-45 WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission on September 21, 2016, conducted a public hearing to consider Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16-046 pursuant to the Development Department; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission received both a written report September 21, 2016, and an oral presentation from the Development Department pertaining to the conditional use permit application; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission invited testimony regarding the conditional use permit application by Stephanie Fredrick, expressing concern with the ability of herself and other residents to enter and exit an apartment complex at 2662 East Alluvial on the north side of East Alluvial Avenue, east of North Chestnut Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission received testimony from the applicant representatives describing the proposed project; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that there is no substantial evidence in the record to indicate that Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 may have a significant effect on the environment; and, WHEREAS, the Fresno City Planning Commission, as a result of its inspections, investigations, and studies made by itself and in its behalf, and of testimonies offered at said hearing, has established that approval of the special permit would be in accordance with applicable provisions of the Fresno Municipal Code including the findings of Section 15-5306 of the Fresno Planning Commission Resolution No. 13409 Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 September21, 2016 Page 2 Municipal Code which can be made as attached as Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 is approved, subject to the following conditions, incorporated in said use permit file: Ill 1. Development shall take place in accordance with the Conditions of Approval dated September 21, 2016. 2. The Planning Commission added a Condition of Approval, stating the applicant shall restripe East Alluvial Avenue east of North Chestnut Avenue to include a suicide lane to serve 2662 East Alluvial as long as no acquisition of right of way is required. The foregoing Resolution was adopted by the Fresno City Planning Commission, upon a motion by Commissioner Holt, seconded by Commissioner Reed. VOTING: Ayes - Noes - Not Voting - Absent - Holt, Reed, Catalano, Garcia, Torossian, Vasquez None None Medina DATED: September 21, 2016 Attachment: Exhibit A Resolution No. 13409 Conditional Use Permit No. C-16-046 Filed by The Vincent Company Architects Action: Recommend Approval Exhibit “M” City Council Ordinance Bill for Rezone Application No. R-16-009 Exhibit “N” City Council Resolution for Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 (Alluvial-Chestnut No. 4 Reorganization) Exhibit “O” City Council Resolution for Certification of Cancelation Fee for Agricultural Land Conservation Contract (ALCC) No. AP-1366 Exhibit “P” Letters of Concern From:Winnie Nishimine To:Kira Noguera Subject:ANX-16-003/R, R-16-009, C-16-046 Date:Wednesday, September 21, 2016 5:46:33 PM We live on the northeast corner of Chestnut and Birch. The corner of Alluvial and Chestnut is of the utmost importance to me and my Birch Ave. neighbors. We have increased traffic problems since the Willow / International College ( or whatever it is called now) Campus has opened. This corner (Chestnut and Alluvial) is a traffic nightmare in the morning (Mountain View Elementary School commencement) and from 4-4:30 pm until 5:45 pm. The traffic is backed up so far south of Birch, it is difficult to enter Birch or our driveway (off of Chestnut). In addition, in the morning, Chestnut is like a freeway and drivers use this roadway like a freeway. There are children crossing Alluvial and Chestnut walking or riding their bikes to Mountain View, which makes it very dangerous for them. When we do complain, we get I or 2 days of police patrol, and then it stops and the traffic speeds again. There are pedestrians also, who, for some reason, do not use the sidewalks on the west side of Chestnut, and they are really in danger when walking. Furthermore, we have gotten broken into 2 times in the last 4 months. With this type of density, we feel that these projects may have a causative effect. Please consider these points when determining the density allotted for the acreage in development. Also, I was the only one notified about the hearing. Everyone is concerned about the development around us. We won a judgment when our wells had to be deepened, because the city has put 2 pumps to the north and south of us, thus depleting our water table. Another apartment complex has begun just southeast of us, which has us also concerned. Hopefully, the opening of Spruce will help the traffic flow towards the south and will not affect us. Dennis and Winnie Nishimine 2504 E. Birch Ave. Clovis, CA 93611 ( corner of Chestnut and Birch) Ms. Kira Noguera Development and Resource Management Department , Development Services Division City Hall 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, California 93721-3604 September 21, 2016 RE: Annexation Application No. ANX-16-003 Environmental Assessment No. ANX-16-003/R-16-009/C-16-046 Rezone Application No. R-16-009 Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-16-046 Dear Ms. Noguera, I live at 2511 E. Birch Ave., at the southeast corner of Chestnut & Birch Avenues. My property is within 1000 feet of the subject project. I did not receive the Notice of Public Hearing within the prescribed time limits. D ue to this delay in notification, I have not been able to formulate and detail my objection to the subject project as I would hope. I have also not been able to coordinate with the other residents within the area of influence for this proposed project. I am submitting this letter in hopes that the Planning Commission will have the time to fully consider my concerns. If this is not possible due to the timing of my submission, I am requesting that this application be continued until the next scheduled Planning Commission hearing. I represent the concerns of the Birch Ave residents within the County island south east of the subject project. We have nine (9) single family homes on our cul-de-sac. The only access for 7 of these homes is Birch Avenue. My home and Dr. & Mrs. Nishimine’s home have a driveway directly off of Chestnut Avenue. The home at the southeast corner of Chestnut and Alluvial also had access to their home directly from Chestnut. Below is a summary our concerns: 1.The increased traffic congestion at Birch Ave. and the individual driveways due to the single north bound lane along Chestnut. The traffic report misrepresents the impact of the new development. a.Part of the basis of their report was a physical survey completed on May 26th. What this survey missed is the impact of the traffic to Fresno State which had finished their classes before the survey. When in session there is a marked increase in both am and pm peak traffic. b.The traffic report made assumption of the percent of traffic using the surrounding streets. Although Chestnut is a major artery and Maple is consider local street, and Chestnut is much closer to proposed on-site access, the report stated that Chestnut and Maple would be used almost equally. I do not believe this is an accurate assumption. The nearest access to Hiway 168 is via Chestnut to Shaw and the on ramp to 168. The most direct route to Fresno State is via Chestnut or Cedar. Beyond Herndon Maple is not a through street. c.During peak pm hours the traffic backs up well over 1500’ down Chestnut. This blocks all 3 driveways and Birch Ave. Chestnut changes to a single lane in the middle of the curve south of my driveway (south of Birch). It is very common to be blocked from making a left hand turn from Birch (heading south). d.At the corner of Chestnut & Alluvial there is no right hand turn lane. This adds to the congestion. e.There is no consideration for northbound pedestrian or bike traffic in the proposed off-site improvements, yet the access for students walking to Mt. View School from the Sierra View Estates at Fir & Chestnut must travel to this corner to get to the nearest crosswalk. All of these traffic issues are existing now, without the addition of 206 new homes. Yet, the proposed development is not required to improving the east side of Chestnut between Birch and Alluvial. The Traffic Report barely addresses this side of the intersection and when mentioned seems to understate the impact of this development. Unless this is included in the off-site requirements the traffic will be unbearable and true safety problem. 2.The timeline for Phase 2 is very concerning. Since the requested Use Permit is based on the premise that the 6+ acres will be used for single family home why is there no requirement to entering some type of irrevocable development agreement that would guarantee that this parcel could never be used for commercial purposes? In the past this parcel was used for a unpermitted, unapproved business. Local authorities were unable to stop this use. We are very concerned that the apparent lack of a development schedule and plan may be a method to wait a few years and try to have this parcel rezoned. 3.The southeast of the intersection at Chestnut and Alluvial is prone to flooding. I did not see in the Public Works requirements that there is a requirement for storm drain. This needs to be addressed. Please note that I am only addressing the issues we have at the Chestnut & Alluvial intersection, but there are a number of issues along Alluvial to Willow that I do not have the time to address. This project needs a new review by the traffic and public works departments prior to an approval. Best regards, Sherry Larsen 2511 E. Birch Ave. Clovis, CA 93611 From: lynetteeve@gmail.com [mailto:lynetteeve@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 4:16 PM To: Marty Sorge-Jauss Subject: From Web Form: concern about a project Name: Lynette Bassman Address1: 2658 East Alluvial Ave. Address2: 115 City: Fresno State: CA Zip Code: 93720 Phone: 559-367-9529 Email: lynetteeve@gmail.com Fax: Preferred Contact Method: Email Subject: concern about a project Question/Comment I live at 2658 East Alluvial. I was unable to attend the meeting a few weeks ago about the proposed project planned for the northwest corner of Chestnut and Alluvial (and did not receive notice of the earlier meeting in April), but I have significant concerns that I want to share. I work 8 - 5, at a location to the east of my home, on Alluvial. If I leave any later than 7:35 in the morning, I usually am unable to make a left turn from my parking lot onto Alluvial due to backed up traffic in both directions. So I often have to turn right and go around the block, which is a waste of fuel and bad for the environment. The proposed project involves so many homes that I'm pretty sure that after it is built, even with the road improvements, I won't be able to avoid going around the block no matter how early I leave. My neighbor who attended the meeting (I think it was on the 21st) said that there was discussion of adding a left turn lane into our parking lot. That will help with a much more minor problem, of crossing one lane of traffic, but won't do anything to help those of us who need to turn left out of the parking lot, crossing two lanes of heavy traffic. There are a few mitigations I have thought of: 1. Install a traffic light for our complex. This would also slow things down for the neighbors next door to the west and the church on the other side. 2. There is a rental home just north of Alluvial on the east side of Chestnut. If we could be granted the right to share their driveway and have a right of way through their empty lot, it would enable us to cut off at least a tiny bit of the distance we'd have to go around the block. And if there was a left turn opportunity there or a u-turn opportunity just to the north, so we could cross Chestnut and go south, that would be great. 3. This m ight already be planned, but if the residents of that complex could enter and exit their parking lots on all three sides, rather than just Alluvial, that would spread things out a little bit, at least. There are likely other solutions that would help that I haven't thought of, but I just wanted to be sure you knew about the problem this will create for me, and for many of my neighbors,and for the environment. Exhibit “Q” City Council Power Point Presentation City Council Hearing October 20, 2016 Aerial Photo N PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEE CROMWELL E CROMWELL E CROMWELL E CROMWELL E CROMWELL E EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVE E DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVE E GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN FINE AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEN JUSTIN AVEE GOS H E N A V E E GOS H E N A V E E GOS H E N A V E E GOS H E N A V E E GOS H E N A V E E FREDERICK AE FREDERICK AVE FREDERICK AE FREDERICK AE FREDERICK A N MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVEN MICHELLE AVE AVE AVE AVE AVE AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN CHRIS AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEN STACIA AVEE AVEE AVEE AVEE AVEE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVEE PINEDALE AVE E MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVE E CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVE E BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVE E MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVE E NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVE E CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVE E BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVE E SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVE N BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MAPLE AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVE E HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVE E GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVE E FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVEE FREDERICK AVE N TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVE E EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVE N MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEN JACKSON AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVE N TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN TRELLIS CIRN N N N N E NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVEE NEES AVE N BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN BAIRD AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVE E E E E EE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVE N PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEN PAULA AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN HAYSTON AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEN MERIDIAN AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVE E EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN MATUS AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEN LAUREEN AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVE E GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVE E HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVE E JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVE N PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN PRICE AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN BACKER AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN SIERRA VISTA AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN DEARING AVEN LAUREEN N LAUREEN N LAUREEN N LAUREEN N LAUREEN N CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEN CHESTNUT AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVEE ALLUVIAL AVE E CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVE E DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVE E EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVE E FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVE N WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEN WOODROW AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVEE JORDAN AVE E HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVEE HOUSTON AVE E GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVEE GOSHEN AVE E FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVEE FALLBROOK AVE E EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVEE EL PASO AVE E DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVEE DECATUR AVE E CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVEE CROMWELL AVE E BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVEE BEDFORD AVE N PR ICE AVEN PR ICE AVEN PR ICE AVEN PR ICE AVEN PR ICE AVE E CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEE CHENNAULT AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEN WHITNEY AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVEE BIRCH AVE E SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVEE SPRUCE AVE N RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN RECREATION AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEN LAVAL AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVEE LOCUST AVE N BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEN BONADELLE AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVEE MINARETS AVE City Council Hearing October 20, 2016 REZONE MAP OS PR PI Fresno County RM-1 O ±18.52 ac. From: RA-20 (Fresno County) To: RS-5/UGM City Council Hearing October 20, 2016 Conditional Use Permit City Council Hearing October 20, 2016 Public Input •The District 6 Plan Implementation Committee recommended approval of the proposed applications at its regularly scheduled meeting held on July 20, 2016. •The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on April 27, 2016, and noticed property owners within 500-feet of the subject property. The property owner provided an overview of the project, followed by a question and answer session. Comments and questions from the public were related to project design and impacts to the neighborhood. •Phone calls, letters, and emails were received from surrounding property owners. •Planning Commission heard the item on September 21st, 2016 and recommended approval by a unanimous vote. City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1222 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Presentation of the SPCA Pet of the Month City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-459 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Proclamation of “NATIONAL BREAST CANCER MONTH” City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-461 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Proclamation of “ARTS AND HUMANITIES MONTH” City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1139 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Resolution of Commendation to Airport Operations Specialists Team City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ FROM THE OFFICES OF MAYOR ASHLEY SWEARENGIN, COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAUL CAPRIOGLIO AND CITY MANAGER BRUCE RUDD RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION WHEREAS, all commercial air service airports in the United States are required to have a Federal Aviation Administration-issued operating permit to ensure safety in air transportation, more commonly referred to as Part 139 Airport Certification, which is necessary for Fresno Yosemite International Airport’s operation; and WHEREAS, comprehensive and thorough Part 139 Certification inspections are conducted annually by the Federal Aviation Administration, and include the inspection of pavement conditions, markings, lighting, signage, wildlife control measures, vehicle operations, Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting operations, fueling facilities, nighttime operations, and training and administrative record keeping; and WHEREAS, keeping Fresno Yosemite International Airport in compliance with Part 139 regulations, under the guidance of Airport Operations Manager Ron Ames, is a collaborative effort by all airport staff, particularly the Airport Operations Specialists led by Ceasar Diaz and consisting of Chris Alamano, Charles Braun, David Cain, Kevin Eaker, Sergio Gutierrez, Travis Schaefer, David Schoenauer; and WHEREAS, the Federal Aviation Administration completed the Part 139 Certification inspection for Fresno Yosemite International Airport on July 29, 2016, and found no discrepancies, a feat very few airports in the United States have accomplished; and WHEREAS, the Airport Operations Specialists have proven their dedicated commitment to ensuring Fresno Yosemite International Airport is an operationally safe facility. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we, Mayor Ashley Swearengin, Council President Paul Caprioglio, and City Manager Bruce Rudd, do hereby recognize and congratulate the Airports Airport Operations Specialists team for their efforts in achieving a flawless, successful Part 139 Certification inspection. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Fresno, California, this 20th day of October, 2016. ____________________________ _________________________________ ASHLEY SWEARENGIN, MAYOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAUL CAPRIOGLIO ____________________________ BRUCE RUDD, CITY MANAGER City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1111 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Proclamation of “DISABILITY AWARENESS MONTH” City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1220 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION [Type the title of the ceremonial presentation here,as you wish it to appear on the agenda.Delete this text and the brackets as they only serve as instructions.] [If you need to include additional information, beyond the title for the agenda, enter it here. Delete this text and brackets as they only serve as instructions.] City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1221 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board Outstanding Achievement Awards -Third Quarter Award Winner - Lourdes Zavala City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1207 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: CEREMONIAL PRESENTATION Proclamation to honor the Veterans Memorial Museum for 25 years of Service. “Home of the Legion of Valor”. A quarter century of service to the community to maintain the museum offering an education to the public and schools as to why America has been involved in so many conflicts. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Fresno Staff Report 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 www.fresno.gov File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2016 FROM:JENNIFER K. CLARK, DIRECTOR Development and Resource Management Department BY:DAN ZACK, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Development and Resource Management Department SUBJECT HEARING - To consider adoption of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, the Downtown Development Code and related Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR), State Clearinghouse (SCH) # 2012041009. The following applications have been filed by the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department Director and pertain to approximately 7,290 acres in the Downtown Planning Area: 1.RESOLUTION -Certifying Final Program EIR (SCH No.2012041009),for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan,the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,and the Downtown Development Code. a.ADOPT Findings of Fact as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091; and, b.APPROVE a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097; and, c.ADOPT the Statement of Overriding Considerations as required by Public Resources Code, Section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093. 2.RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No A-16-009 which proposes to repeal the Central Area Community Plan,pertaining to approximately 1,701 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 3.BILL (For introduction and adoption)-Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A- 16-010 which proposes to repeal the Fulton-Lowell Specific Plan,pertaining to approximately 495 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 4.***RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-011 which proposes to adopt the July 27,2016 draft as amended by the October 2016 changes of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan,pertaining to approximately 7,290 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 5.***RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-012,which City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 1 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: 5.***RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-012,which proposes to adopt the July 27,2016 draft as amended by the October 2016 changes of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,pertaining to approximately 655 acres and located within the boundaries of the Downtown Planning Area. 6.RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-008,which proposes to update the text and Land Use Map (Figure LU-1)of the Fresno General Plan to incorporate the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan as well as to correspondingly amend the Edison,Roosevelt and West Area Community Plans and the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and the Fresno-Chandler Downtown Airport Master and Environs Specific Plan. 7.***BILL -(For introduction)Approving Text Amendment Application No.TA-16-002 which proposes amendments to the Citywide Development to incorporate the updated October 2016 draft of the Downtown Development Code.This code includes form-based zoning requirements for development within the DNCP and FCSP plan areas.New sections proposed to be added to the Citywide Development Code include standards for three new Downtown zones:Downtown Core,Downtown General and Downtown Neighborhood (Article 15 of Chapter 15 of the FMC)along with provisions related to Parking and Loading (Section 15-2407-A).In addition,an Urban Campus Overlay District is added in Section 15-1610 and a Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay District is added in Section 15-1611.Amended sections include Determining Frontage Coverage (Section 15-317),Fences,Walls and Hedges (Section 15-2006),Summary of Primary Planning Permits and Actions (Table 15-4907),Zone Clearance Applicability (Section 15-5102), Apartment Overlay District,(Section15-1609),Signs (Sections 15-2608 and 15-2610), and Terms and Definitions (Sections 15-5501 and 15-5502). 8.BILL -(For Introduction and Adoption)Approving Rezone Application No.R-16-011, which proposes to rezone all of the property within the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan areas to be consistent with the planned land use.The rezone covers approximately 7.290 acres.This action would necessitate repealing Resolution 2016-28,which created interim zoning in the Downtown Planning Area until such time as the final proposed zoning could be adopted. 9.RESOLUTION -Repealing Resolution No.2016-28,adopted on February 25,2016,to amend the zoning designation translation table for the Downtown Planning Area.This resolution created interim zone districts in the Downtown Planning Area until such time as the final proposed zoning could be adopted.It will no longer be necessary with approval of Rezone Application No. R-16-011, proposed with these applications. 10.RESOLUTION -Authorizing the Development and Resource Management Director or her designee to correct any typographical errors and update the text,policies,maps, tables,and exhibits contained in the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan,the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,the Fresno General Plan and the Downtown Development Code to reflect the final action taken by the Council,to the extent that such updates are necessary to maintain consistency. RECOMMENDATION Public hearing to consider adoption of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, the Downtown Development Code and related Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR), State Clearinghouse (SCH) # 2012041009. The following applications have been filed by the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department Director and City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 2 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: pertain to approximately 7,290 acres in the Downtown Planning Area: 1.RESOLUTION CERTIFYING Final Program EIR (SCH No.2012041009),for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan,the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,and the Downtown Development Code. a.ADOPT Findings of Fact as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091; and, b.APPROVE a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15097; and, c.ADOPT the Statement of Overriding Considerations as required by Public Resources Code, Section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093. 2.RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No A-16-009 which proposes to repeal the Central Area Community Plan,pertaining to approximately 1,701 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 3.BILL (For introduction and adoption)-Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-010 which proposes to repeal the Fulton-Lowell Specific Plan,pertaining to approximately 495 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 4.RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-011 which proposes to adopt the July 27,2016 draft as amended by the October 2016 changes of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan,pertaining to approximately 7,290 acres located in the Downtown Planning Area. 5.RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-012,which proposes to adopt the July 27,2016 draft as amended by the October 2016 changes of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,pertaining to approximately 655 acres and located within the boundaries of the Downtown Planning Area. 6.RESOLUTION -Approving Plan Amendment Application No.A-16-008,which proposes to update the text and Land Use Map (Figure LU-1)of the Fresno General Plan to incorporate the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan as well as to correspondingly amend the Edison,Roosevelt and West Area Community Plans and the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and the Fresno-Chandler Downtown Airport Master and Environs Specific Plan. 7.BILL -(For introduction)Approving Text Amendment Application No.TA-16-002 which proposes amendments to the Citywide Development to incorporate the updated October 2016 draft of the Downtown Development Code.This code includes form-based zoning requirements for development within the DNCP and FCSP plan areas.New sections proposed to be added to the Citywide Development Code include standards for three new Downtown zones:Downtown Core,Downtown General and Downtown Neighborhood (Article 15 of Chapter 15 of the FMC)along with provisions related to Parking and Loading (Section 15-2407-A).In addition,an Urban Campus Overlay District is added in Section 15-1610 and a Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay District is added City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 3 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: is added in Section 15-1610 and a Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay District is added in Section 15-1611.Amended sections include Determining Frontage Coverage (Section 15-317),Fences,Walls and Hedges (Section 15-2006),Summary of Primary Planning Permits and Actions (Table 15-4907),Zone Clearance Applicability (Section 15-5102), Apartment Overlay District,(Section15-1609),Signs (Sections 15-2608 and 15-2610), and Terms and Definitions (Sections 15-5501 and 15-5502). 8.BILL -(For Introduction and Adoption)Approving Rezone Application No.R-16-011, which proposes to rezone all of the property within the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan areas to be consistent with the planned land use.The rezone covers approximately 7.290 acres.This action would necessitate repealing Resolution 2016-28,which created interim zoning in the Downtown Planning Area until such time as the final proposed zoning could be adopted. 9.RESOLUTION -Repealing Resolution No.2016-28,adopted on February 25,2016,to amend the zoning designation translation table for the Downtown Planning Area.This resolution created interim zone districts in the Downtown Planning Area until such time as the final proposed zoning could be adopted.It will no longer be necessary with approval of Rezone Application No. R-16-011, proposed with these applications. 10.RESOLUTION -Authorizing the Development and Resource Management Director or her designee to correct any typographical errors and update the text,policies, maps,tables,and exhibits contained in the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,the Fresno General Plan and the Downtown Development Code to reflect the final action taken by the Council,to the extent that such updates are necessary to maintain consistency. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report describes the background, history, outreach, land use and planning analysis, and environmental impacts of the proposed adoption of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Downtown Development Code. Adoption of the Downtown plans and code is the final major step in updating the City’s land use framework, following the recently adopted General Plan, Citywide Development Code, and Zoning Map update. The complete versions of the Downtown plans, code, and Draft and Final Program EIRs are available for viewing at www.fresno.gov/downtownplan <http://www.fresno.gov/downtownplan>. BACKGROUND The Origins of the Plans and Code Downtown Fresno is where the city began.From its incorporation in 1885 through the 1960s it was the commercial,business,and cultural center of the Central Valley.After the Second World War Fresno’s pattern of development,like that of most American cities,was radically altered.People began to move out of Fresno’s pre-World War II residential neighborhoods and scatter into new northern subdivisions.Businesses and important institutions followed,resulting in a slow decline of Downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods.The leaders of Fresno acted swiftly to reverse the decline of Downtown by trying untested urban renewal concepts which were well intentioned,but didCity of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 4 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: decline of Downtown by trying untested urban renewal concepts which were well intentioned,but did not slow the decline of the area.As the northward growth of the city continued into the late 20th and early 21st centuries,Downtown’s economic decline was accompanied by extreme concentrations of poverty in many of the nearby neighborhoods. During the 1990s and 2000s,many American downtowns began reviving as a larger share of people began to rediscover the benefits of city living.Urban planning professionals began to regain an appreciation for the economic,social,and environmental benefits of walkable,mixed use communities and began to write new code which allowed a return to the development patterns that made downtowns successful in the first place. Fresno didn’t benefit from the first national wave of urban revitalization in the 1990s,but over the past decade many positive changes have indicated that now may be the time for Downtown Fresno’s big comeback.Important investments,both public and private,are demonstrating that many Fresnans are eager to live,work,and play in the urban heart of their community.The rising attendance at Downtown attractions such as Art Hop and the popularity of new Downtown housing attest to this. In 2010,against this backdrop of national downtown success and a local desire for a strong urban core, the City initiated the Downtown plans and code. Outreach The Downtown plans and code are the result of an intense public process from 2010 to 2012 that involved input from thousands of residents,business owners,and property owners from Downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods.Stakeholder interviews were held in order to identify challenges and opportunities.A series of public meetings and two six-day,open,participatory design workshops were also held.Attendance at one event topped 400 and resulted in 1,300 written comments.The evolution of the plans and code was based on extensive community input throughout all phases of planning,including:Initial Outreach and Discovery,Design Workshop,Follow-up Outreach, Community Plan Preparation, Environmental Impact Report Preparation, and Adoption. Key to the public process was the input and guidance of two advisory committees comprised of residents,business-owners,people who work in the plan areas,members of community organizations,and other stakeholders.The committees met throughout all phases of the planning process from 2010 to 2012 and reviewed the various drafts.Three documents were released for public comment in 2012:The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan,the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,and the Downtown Development Code.The committees recommended them for adoption by the City Council. Adoption of the Downtown plans and code were delayed in order to allow the General Plan and Citywide Development Code to be adopted first.The creation of the General Plan involved significant public outreach,including over 160 interviews with stakeholders,over 20 public workshops,over 100 presentations to community groups,and over 20 meetings of a Citizens Advisory Committee.During this outreach process,policies and goals affecting the entire city were discussed,including many of the concepts in the Downtown Plans and Code.In 2016 the Downtown plans and code were updated and re-released for public comment.Outreach also resumed,with staff holding 9 workshops with various Downtown residents,property owners,business owners,stakeholders,and the general City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 5 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: public. ANALYSIS The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DNCP)provides a blueprint for the successful regeneration of Downtown Fresno and its surrounding neighborhoods such as Lowell,Jefferson, Jane Addams,the Edison-area neighborhoods,and southeast neighborhoods.In all,the DNCP guides future actions in a 7,290 acre area.It is a visionary document that lays out the community’s long-term goals and provides detailed policies concerning a wide range of topics,including land use and development,transportation,the public realm of streets and parks,infrastructure,historic resources,and health and wellness.It envisions growth of about 10,000 housing units,or about 15,000 new residents. The Fulton Corridor Specific Plan The Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP)takes a more detailed look at the 655 acres at the traditional heart of the Downtown area.It provides detailed policies concerning a wide range of topics, including land use and development,historic resources,the public realm,transportation,and infrastructure. These policies provide the foundation for urban and economic growth,as well as the basis for the City to make the tough daily choices regarding growth,historic preservation,housing,transportation,the environment, community facilities,and community services.It envisions that the majority of the DNCP’s growth (about 6,300 units,or about 12,000 new residents)will occur within the FCSP area.Recommendations for priority infrastructure projects to support this new growth are included within the FCSP. The Downtown Development Code The Downtown Development Code (DDC)will implement the land use concepts of the DNCP and FCSP.It presents a new set of development standards that allows a range of development types that fit within the vision of the plans.The standards in the code are based on the best practices in Downtown revitalization across the nation,but are tailored to the unique conditions that exist in Fresno.By offering very clear and detailed parameters,a high degree of predictability is introduced into the project review process.Standards that have conventionally been obstacles to urban infill, such as height limits,parking requirements,density limitations,and lot coverage restrictions have been addressed in a way that makes projects which fit the community’s vision very easy to get entitled.Through this combination of factors,the DDC will attract investment that enhances Downtown and the neighborhoods. Initially,the DDC was set up to be a stand-alone code,completely separate from the city’s Zoning Ordinance,which was considered to be antiquated and incompatible with a modern downtown code. In the intervening period,a new Citywide Development Code was created and adopted which completely restructured and modernized all terminology,procedures,and standards for land use and development in Fresno.The Downtown Development Code has thus been completely reformatted and reorganized to work in harmony with, and be absorbed into, the Citywide Development Code. Three new zoning districts have been created for the urban core of Downtown:DTC-Downtown Core; City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 6 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: Three new zoning districts have been created for the urban core of Downtown:DTC-Downtown Core; DTG-Downtown General;and DTN-Downtown Neighborhood.These new zoning districts are designed to create a vibrant,walkable,mixed use metropolitan center.In addition,the UC-Urban Campus Overlay District was created to implement the vision for the growth and expansion of Community Regional Medical Center. All other areas within the Downtown Development Code will be governed by zoning districts that already exist in the Citywide Development Code.For example,most major streets will be zoned NMX -Neighborhood Mixed Use,and most residential areas will be zoned RS-5,which is a medium density district.The RS-5 base zoning will be coupled with a new overlay district called NR-Neighborhood Revitalization,which was created to ensure that infill in these neighborhoods is compatible with the historic housing stock and contributes to an improved quality of life for residents. Relationship to Other Plans The DNCP,FCSP,and DDC are fully compatible with the vision of the General Plan,and help in the implementation of many of its key goals,such as encouraging infill development and Downtown revitalization.However,a General Plan Amendment is proposed in order to make details about the names of land uses,and the precise boundaries of districts,consistent with the final versions of the Downtown plans and code.Also,the DDC helps to resolve a key issue with the General Plan’s Housing Element by providing a streamlined ministerial approval for eligible high-density housing projects. The boundaries of two older plans (the Fulton/Lowell Specific Plan and the Central Area Community Plan)are completely within the boundaries of the DNCP and FCSP.Therefore,staff recommends the repeal of these older plans.Policies from the older plans which are still relevant have been replicated within the DNCP and FCSP. The boundaries of the DNCP and FCSP partially overlap the Edison,Roosevelt,and West Area Community Plans;the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan;and the Fresno-Chandler Downtown Airport Master and Environs Specific Plan.Staff recommends amending these plans to be consistent with the DNCP and FCSP. Implementation of the Downtown Plans Much work has been underway even as the Downtown plans awaited adoption to implement key infrastructure,housing,and neighborhood revitalization needs and objectives within the FCSP and DNCP plan areas that resonated with community feedback during the public process.This section details some of the key investments made: ·Neighborhood Revitalization:In 2009,work began to start cultivating the Administration’s approach to neighborhood revitalization starting with a significant focus on leveraging funds for affordable housing,housing rehabilitation,code enforcement,energy efficiency,and community-oriented policing in the Lowell neighborhood.That approach has since evolved into the City’s Neighborhood Revitalization Teams and has expanded,initially through the Obama Administration’s Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative and Fresno’s Building Neighborhood Capacity Program,to the Lowell,Yokomi,Kirk,and Jefferson neighborhoods within the DNCP; and,will be expanding to several new neighborhoods within the DNCP area,including Jane Addams,Hidalgo/Leavenworth,Columbia,King,and Winchell neighborhoods over the nextCity of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 7 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: Addams,Hidalgo/Leavenworth,Columbia,King,and Winchell neighborhoods over the next two years. ·Building Resident-Leadership Capacity through Community Development Corporations: Deploying city-based Neighborhood Revitalization Teams from the Community Revitalization Division in nine of the DNCP neighborhoods represents a significant commitment of resources from the City.However,the Administration recognizes that restoration of the DNCP neighborhoods requires much more than an added layer of Neighborhood Revitalization staff. Participating in the national best-practices work of Building Neighborhood Capacity has reinforced the importance of resident-driven neighborhood revitalization through lasting civic organizations, such as Community Development Corporations (CDC). A CDC is a not-for-profit organization incorporated to provide programs,offer services and engage in other activities that promote and support of community development in a specific neighborhood or location.In other cities where more advanced neighborhood revitalization efforts are under way,it is not uncommon to find literally dozens of non-profit CDCs leading the charge at the neighborhood level to purchase dilapidated property and rehabilitate,lease and manage the property to the standards expected by the surrounding neighborhood.CDC boards include residents from the neighborhood and,if structured and managed well,create an opportunity for residents to provide clear input on the direction of their neighborhood with the financial resources needed to make systematic improvements.Well-functioning CDCs are an integral component of restoring and revitalizing older neighborhoods. Today,there are only four operational CDCs in Fresno in the Lowell,El Dorado and Highway City neighborhoods and the Blackstone corridor.In addition,a Southwest Fresno CDC was formed in 2016,but has not taken on any projects yet.To increase the CDC capacity in the City,in 2015 the City and the Fresno Housing Authority jointly funded a national expert to provide technical assistance to the CDCs in our community.The consultant has worked for the last year with the boards of directors from Southwest Fresno CDC,El Dorado Park CDC, Lowell CDC,and Better Blackstone CDC to improve their capacity and help them get to the point where they are financially sustainable and effective driving forces for neighborhood revitalization in target neighborhoods.To help implement these efforts further,the Administration will recommend to the City Council that a $100,000 matching grant be made to provide dedicated staff for two years to the Southwest CDC.The members of the Southwest Fresno CDC board of directors are Paul Binion (Westside Church of God),Richard Keyes (Retired),Yolanda Randles (West Fresno Family Resource Center),Brian King (Fresno EOC Street Saints),Margarita Rocha (Centro La Familia),Sabrina Kelley (Fresno Housing Authority),Shaneece Childress (Fresno Housing Authority),Eric Payne (State Center Community College District),Kathi Omachi (Chinatown Revitalization,Inc.),Jason Gridiron (Fresno Community Development Financial Institution),and Terance Frazier (TFS Investments). ·Affordable and Mixed-Income Housing:The housing focus within the FCSP and DNCP neighborhoods has been primarily on the rehabilitation of existing housing where funding is available and the construction of mixed-income housing to the extent feasible.New market rate housing at scale (greater than 12 units)is not financially feasible to construct in both the Fulton Corridor and the downtown neighborhoods.Because of the extent of concentrated poverty throughout the entire footprint of the FCSP and DNCP,the focus has been to City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 8 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: poverty throughout the entire footprint of the FCSP and DNCP,the focus has been to encourage the construction of mixed-income housing where financially feasible.In the past ten years,more than 500 new rental housing units have been built or are in the construction pipeline in the FCSP area alone;every single project over 12 housing units has included a minimum of 20%of all units restricted as affordable housing,with some projects including as much as 50%affordable housing (Hotel Fresno)or 100%affordable housing (CityView). Housing investments from Federal Entitlement Programs such as HOME and Neighborhood Stabilization Programs 1 &2 exceed $11.5 million from 2009 to present in the DNCP area. Another $25.5 million of RDA funds have provided additional housing in the downtown area. Future housing construction in the short-term within both the FCSP and DNCP will rely heavily upon availability of state and federal funds to ensure financial feasibility for both mixed-income and affordable housing projects. ·Streetscape Improvements:Within the DNCP and FCSP areas,over $14 million has been expended since 2010 to improve pedestrian access,construct bike lanes,and construct new street overlays,including new bike corridors along Hazelwood and Butler in the southeast neighborhoods and along Fresno and Tulare Streets in the Edison neighborhoods.This figure does not include the additional $16 million USDOT TIGER grant for the Fulton Reconstruction Project,the $2.1 million FTA Bus Livability grant to improve pedestrian access around the Van Ness and Mariposa BRT stop downtown,or the recently awarded Strategic Growth Council AHSC grant for the South Stadium TOD project which includes new pedestrian and bike facilities on Van Ness Avenue and Inyo Street within the FCSP footprint.In the last six years alone,over 10 miles of bike lanes have been added to the DNCP area,providing better connectivity from downtown into the surrounding neighborhoods.Many new pedestrian and bike infrastructure projects are identified within the FCSP and DNCP to ensure connectivity from downtown into the neighborhoods; ·Transit Infrastructure:The most significant transit investment in the FCSP and DNCP areas is the new Bus Rapid Transit system along the Ventura/Kings Canyon and Blackstone corridors, the result of a $38 million FTA Small Starts grant.This investment will ensure faster travel times via transit along those corridors.In addition,FAX is planning to increase headways along the Cedar Avenue corridor in the southeast neighborhoods to 15 minutes (during peak hours).Additional transit investment is under evaluation through FAX’s restructuring process, which ultimately will help reduce transit travel times within much of the DNCP and FCSP. Finally,the FCSP also includes a planned intermodal transit center adjacent to the future HSR station to ensure seamless transfers between HSR,FAX,BRT,and other regional transit providers. ·Parks:One new park is under construction in the FCSP/DNCP area -the Cultural Arts Park on Calaveras Street.The Parks Master Plan process currently underway will help provide additional feedback on the best locations for new parks within the FCSP and DNCP,as well as help prioritize how to invest in existing parks in the area.Additional local,state and federal funds will be needed to enhance existing and add new parks within the FCSP and DNCP areas. Future implementation of the DNCP and FCSP will rely upon availability of funding sources.The FCSP and DNCP lay out the specific projects recommended to implement the plans in their respective implementation chapters;however,the projects which ultimately get selected for funding City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 9 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: respective implementation chapters;however,the projects which ultimately get selected for funding will depend on a variety of factors,including how well they meet grant criteria,the level of community support for the project, and the readiness of the project to apply for funding. Committee and Commission Recommendations The Downtown plans and code were presented to the following committees and commissions for their recommendations:the Airport Land Use Commission,the Historic Preservation Commission,the District 3 Implementation Committee,the District 5 Implementation Committee,and the Fulton/Lowell Design Review Committee. The Planning Commission recommended adoption by a vote of 5 to 1.Their action included two errata that were provided to them to update an image in the FCSP and to correct erroneous section numbering in five pages of the DDC.Those two corrections have been incorporated into the exhibits that are provided to the Council with this staff report. The Airport Land Use Commission failed to find that the Downtown plans and code were consistent with the Chandler Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan due to concerns about density.The ALUC is an advisory body and the City Council may override their recommendation.In this instance,staff recommends such an override for the following reasons: 1.The ALUC already approved land use in this area with their consistency finding on the General Plan in 2014 that included land uses with higher densities in this area (ie the previous land use had no density limit); 2.The area is almost completely built out; 3.The Chandler Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan states that ALUCs have limited jurisdiction over existing land use. 4.The Citywide Development Code stipulates that airport plans supersede all other plans. 5.The EIR did not identify any significant impacts related to airport compatibility. As a final note,Director Aviation,Kevin Meikle has stated that the Airports Department,as the responsible entity to ensure that FAT and FCH remain in compliance with all Federal,State,and local regulations,is in support of the proposed ALUC Override action because the FCH plan is consistent with all applicable aviation regulations and standards and the Citywide Development Code stipulates that the airport plans supersede all other plans.Mr.Meikle has confirmed that the proposed Override will not diminish or jeopardize public safety or FCH’s continued viability. The Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the plans,code and EIR on August 22,2016.They provided comments and recommended approval.Many of their comments were incorporated into the documents. District 5 Implementation Committee and the Fulton/Lowell Design Review Committee, recommended approval of the plans and code.The District 3 Committee was unable to act due to lack of a quorum.The Fulton/Lowell Design Review Committee made the additional recommendation that language be added which allows them to continue to review projects within the Fulton/Lowell area.Staff agrees that their role is valuable and should continue,but proposes that the committee be restructured to serve as a Lowell Design Review Committee,and that their boundaries be modified to match the Lowell neighborhood as shown on Page 17 on the DNCP. City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 10 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS Environmental Impact Report Process The City,as the lead agency under the CEQA determined that an EIR was required for the proposed project.The firm of FirstCarbon Solutions was hired by the City of Fresno to prepare the EIR.The review and certification of the EIR involves the following procedural steps: Notice of Preparation (NOP):Upon the City’s determination that an EIR was required for this project, a NOP was made available to the general public and responsible trustee agencies to solicit input on issues of concern that should be addressed in the EIR.The initial NOP was issued in April of 2012, however shortly thereafter,the City paused the project to focus on the adoption of the General Plan. The project resumed in the summer of 2015,and another NOP was issued on September 8,2015, followed by the required 30-day comment period.The NOP included a project description,project location,and a brief overview of the topics to be covered in the EIR.Comment letters were received from several public agencies and private citizens and were incorporated into the Draft EIR (DEIR). Public Scoping Meeting:On September 29,2015,the City held a project scoping meeting to which the Responsible and Trustee agencies as well as interested members of the public were invited,and which had been duly advertised in advance.The meeting was attended by one member of the public. Notice of Completion (NOC):Upon completion of the DEIR,the City filed a NOC with the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research, to begin the public and agency review period. Public Notice/Public Review Concurrent with filing the NOC,the City provided public notice of the availability of the DEIR for public review,(by posting on the website,publishing in the Fresno Bee, mailing to all commenters and Citizen’s Advisory Committee members,and filing with the County Clerk on July 27,2016),and invited comment from the general public,agencies,organizations,and other interested parties.The length of the public review period was 45 days,(from July 27,2016 through September 12,2016)during which time written comments on the DEIR were submitted to the City of Fresno. Response to Comments:After the close of the public review period,the City prepared formal responses to the written comments received.A total of eight written comments were received from agencies/organizations and regarding the DEIR.As required by CEQA Guidelines,15088(b),City responses were sent to public agencies that submitted comments.The responses to comments were also made available on the City website 10 days prior to City Council consideration. Final EIR (FEIR):A FEIR was prepared that includes the comment letters and responses to comments and errata (which clarifies/corrects language contained in the DEIR).The DEIR consists of one bound volume and a compact disc of the Appendices,which was previously provided to the Planning Commission. Certification of the EIR:The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the adequacy and completeness of the EIR under CEQA and to certify the EIR and adopt the necessary Findings of City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 11 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP):The City Council will also consider adopting a program to implement the EIR’s recommended mitigation measures to mitigate,avoid,or substantially lessen the significant impacts of the project. Environmental Impact Report Analysis and Conclusions Project Objectives The proposed project is guided by several major project objectives identified in the EIR.Knowing these objectives will aid decision makers in their review of the project and associated environmental impacts. These objectives are as follows: Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan •To make the Downtown Neighborhoods attractive,healthy,mixed-income places to live, thanks to their historic character and their proximity to a revitalized Downtown. •To revive the underlying structure of the Downtown Neighborhoods to create identifiable neighborhoods, districts, and corridors. •To integrate the public realm of streets with a multi-modal transportation network that renders them walkable and livable. •To regenerate parks and public spaces and make them safe and accessible to residents. •To reinforce the identity of each of the Plan subareas by including all of the remaining ingredients for quality of life from childhood to old age within a walkable range. •To reintroduce missing street trees,irrigation,and sidewalks,and slow down traffic on primary thoroughfares through various traffic-calming measures. •To introduce a range of well-designed buildings that provide a variety of housing choices within easy access of parks, services, and jobs. •To design residential buildings to promote safety and community on the sidewalk and street. •To design commercial buildings with facades that are adjacent to sidewalks,are constructed of quality and durable materials,can accommodate a mix of uses at any one time,and can be reused over time under different programs. •To introduce High Speed Rail in a manner that has the most beneficial impact possible on the surrounding homes,businesses,and open spaces,while preserving Downtown’s interconnected street network to the maximum extent possible. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 12 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: The primary objectives of the FCSP are to define: •A vision for the future of Downtown that recognizes the importance of history and tradition while embracing opportunities for continued reinvestment, growth, and beneficial change. •Goals and policies that work in tandem with and refine those of the General Plan and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan to achieve the revitalization of the Plan area. •New land use policies for the Plan area that will guide upcoming zoning regulations.These new policies are calibrated to deliver new development that is consistent with Fresno’s physical character, history, and culture, as well as the community’s vision for its future growth. •The implementation strategy for transforming the Plan area’s streets,infrastructure,parks,and other public spaces.The above purposes provide private property owners with a clear understanding of the future context within which they are investing and reinvesting in their properties. •Revitalize Fulton District and promote it as a key asset and urban place.Strike a balance between the original character and value of the pedestrian-only Mall and its importance as the economic engine of the Downtown. Impacts Analyzed The EIR analyzed impacts to the following environmental areas,as these were the areas determined to have potential impacts: Aesthetics (Section 5.1) Agriculture Resources (Section 5.2) Air Quality (Section 5.3) Biological Resources (Section 5.4) Cultural Resources (Section 5.5) Geology and Soils (Section 5.6) Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Section 5.7) Hazards and Hazardous Materials (Section 5.8) Hydrology and Water Quality (Section 5.9) Land Use and Planning (Section 5.10) Noise (Section 5.11) Population and Housing (Section 5.12) Public Services and Recreation (Section 5.13) Transportation and Traffic (Section 5.14) Utilities and Service Systems (Section 5.15) Based on the analysis in the Initial Study,forest resources and mineral resources were not analyzed because it was not reasonably foreseeable that the proposed Project would cause significant impact to those areas. The EIR found impacts to the following areas:Aesthetics,Air Quality,Biological Resources,Cultural Resources,Greenhouse Gases,Hazards and Hazardous Materials,Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise,and Transportation and Traffic.The EIR includes recommended mitigation measures in theseCity of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 13 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: Noise,and Transportation and Traffic.The EIR includes recommended mitigation measures in these areas (See Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in Exhibit F).The recommended mitigation measures were found to reduce impacts to less than significant in all but four areas: •Air Quality •Greenhouse Gases •Noise •Traffic Overriding Considerations Pursuant to CEQA requirements,a statement of overriding consideration is required to approve the Project,because the project will result in significant unavoidable impacts.Staff recommends that the following overriding considerations be considered in approving the project despite its unavoidable significant impacts:job creation and economic opportunity,creation of tax revenues,improved public health and air quality related to enhanced walking,bicycling,and public transit opportunities, improved safety and security due to enhanced streetscapes and building facades, etc. Comments on DEIR After the DEIR was published and noticed for review and comment on July 27,2016,the City received several comments which were summarized and addressed in the FEIR.None of these comments contained new information that revealed any potentially new or more significant environmental impacts that could have required recirculation of the DEIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. LOCAL PREFERENCE N/A - No purchasing. FISCAL IMPACT N/A - No expenditures. Attachments/Exhibits: A -Project Location Map B -DNCP Redline C -FCSP Redline D -DDC Redline E -Plans and Code Comments Letters and Responses to Comments F -Final Program EIR G -Resolution Certifying Final Program EIR - (Note: this section contains a live link) H -Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No A-16-009 I -Ordinance Bill Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-010 City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 14 of 15 powered by Legistar™ File #:ID16-1158 Agenda Date:10/20/2016 Agenda #: J -Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-011 K -Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-012 L -Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-008 M -Ordinance Bill Approving Text Amendment Application No. TA-16-002 N -Ordinance Bill Approving Rezone Application No. R-16-011 O -Resolution Repealing Resolution No. 2016-28 P -Resolution Authorizing the DARM Director to Update Text, Tables, and Exhibits of the DDC Q -City of Fresno Housing Projects Map R - Planning Commission Resolutions S - PowerPoint Presentation City of Fresno Printed on 3/23/2023Page 15 of 15 powered by Legistar™ Exhibit A Project Location Map Project Location Map Exhibit B DNCP Redline Page # Other Location Description Change 2 Goals, gray box.Replaced definition of goals from "General direction-setters that present a long-term vision" to "Broad, direction-setting statements that present a long-term vision." 3 Significant Resources Definitions Added following all HERO references: "(if/when it is adopted by the City Council)" 9 Added the following immediately beneath the Fall 2015 - Spring 2016 heading: "General Plan Outreach (2010 to 2014). The Fresno General Plan was adopted following a process which lasted more than four years. The creation of the Plan involved significant public outreach, including over 160 interviews with stakeholders, over 20 public workshops, over 100 presentations to community groups, and over 20 meetings of a Citizens Advisory Committee. During this outreach process, policies and goals affecting the entire city were discussed, including many of the concepts in the DNCP." 9 2nd to last paragraph in right hand column: EIR The release date of the public draft EIR was corrected 9 Last paragraph in right hand column Added ther following text describing the public outreach that was conducted over summer 2016: "Continued Ongoing Outreach. In advance of the release of the DNCP to the public on July 27, City staff resumed public outreach on June 15, 2016 by providing a summary of the plan to the Board of the Downtown Fresno Partnership and taking input from the board members. On June 30 and July 6 the plan was presented to Downtown property owners, business owners, and developers. On July 13, the DNCP steering committee members participated in a community workshop, while on August 4 an open house on the plan was held during Art Hop, a monthly art exhibition in Downtown that attracts visitors from across the city. At the August Area Agency Executive luncheon the DNCP was presented to the heads of public agencies in the region to bring them up to date on what was being proposed and to provide input. Workshops were also held at the August 25 City Council meeting and the September 21 Planning Commission meeting. Finally, on September 29, City staff held a workshop for the Downtown Academy, a program run by the Fresno Downtown Partnership to educate the public on how Downtown works and how to participate in its revival." 9 Photos Reintroduced two photos at top of page, which had dropped out of July 27 Draft, but had appeared in earlier drafts. 2:15 Policy 2.9.9 Added following after last bullet item in list of recommended activities to create and promote a variety of incentives to stimulate rehabilitation of existing structures and construction of new dwellings: "Such activities should include protections for extremely-low and very-low income tenants of such buildings, including protections to prevent displacement and to support relocation of such residents within the same neighborhood. " 2:23 First Column Adjusted Land Use Designations and Overlay list to reflect latest zoning 2:24 Figure 2.9 - Planned Land Use Map Updated map and legend to reflect land use changes Summary of Changes made for the October, 2016 Version Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan 2:25 - 2:29 Table 2-2 Adjusted Land Use Designation labels at top of table to match Land Use Designation list on page 2:23 2:27 Table 2-2 Added Business Park land use designation discription 2:30 - 2:39 Figure 2.10 - 2.15 Planned Land Use Map Updated maps and legends to reflect land use changes 3:6 Policy 3:1:4 Adjusted policy to read: "Support incentives for potential Downtown transit riders, such as employees of major Downtown employers, students, residents of Downtown neighborhoods, and others." 3:7 Map Corrected typo In the map title from "pRIORITY" to "PRIORITY" 3:9 Policy 3.4.6 Updated Policy 3.4.6 so identifies the need to install curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements along McKinley between Marks and Golden State Boulevard 3:21 Map ▪ Updated map to show BRT route. ▪ Added black line designating road removal (Road Vacation) to legend. ▪ In legend, corrected misspelled word in "Road Diet + Bike Lanes" label (blue line) ▪ In legend, added "bike lanes" to list of "Major Streetscape Projects" (red line) ▪ Updated BRT route line as passes through Downtown 6:1 First column Added following to all HERO references: "(if/when it is adopted by the City Council)" 6:2 Second column, item "a" Updated text to states that Chandler Field is one of four officially designated historic districts (not three) 6:4 First Column, fourth paragraph Since Huntington Boulevard Historic District is no longer a potential district, removed the word potential from "One potential historic district has been identified to date" 6:4 Key Deficits Since database has been updated to include all properties that have been designated but additionally, any property which has been included in any historic survey or entitlement, whether the property is designated, eligible or not, deleted third bullet: "Need to update historic resources inventories. While the City’s current Historic Resources database contains over 4,885 entries, many potential historic resources that have not been formally designated by the City are absent from the database." 6:5 Map Removed the note stating "This figure is current as of March, 2011…" 6:5 Figure 6.1 Adjusted map so matches legend and vice versa to bring up to date with latest list of historic districts and potential historic districts. 6:6 Policy 6.1.2 Deleted\ Policy 6.1.2 since the historic Preservation Database is already on-line: "6.1.2 As resources become available, enhance the City’s database of all designated, evaluated, and potential historic resources and make it easily accessible to the community and affected property owners." 6:7 Policy 6.5.1 Deleted bullet point regarding New Deal Walking Tour since is available on the City's Historic Preservation Page: "Make available the New Deal walking tour brochure of Fresno prepared by the National Trust in 2008." 7:7 Policies 7.12.1 - 4 A new goal and related policies were created that would create a task force to monitor displacement and develop ways to reduce it if it emerges: "7.12 As Downtown and the downtown neighborhoods grow in population, ensure that existing residents and small businesses have opportunities to remain. "Intent: To avoid the displacement of long-time residents and merchants that sometimes occurs as formerly distressed areas are improved. "7.12. 1 The Mayor and City Council should convene a displacement task force explore ways to provide opportunities for low income residents and merchants to remain in their neighborhoods if significant displacement is observed due to substantial and sustained increases in rent. The task force should work in conjunction with low income residents, low income business owners, and property owners in the plan area. "7.12.2 City staff should periodically gather data on lease rates, vacancy rates, and, if applicable, displacement for use by the task force. Staff should also study neighborhoods in other cities which have experienced displacement to assist the task for in identifying similar patterns within the plan area. "7.12.3 The task force should identify a set of actions that can give displaced persons or businesses the opportunity to remain in the area if they wish to do so. "7.12.4 Continue to seek funding for mixed income and affordable housing within plan area, and work with the owners of affordable housing properties to ensure that affordability is maintained over the long term." 8:8 Map ▪ Updated BRT route line as passes through Downtown ▪ Added black line designating road removal (Road Vacation) to legend 8:11 Project T-A.9.1 Updated Action T-A.9.1 to identify the need to install curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements along McKinley between Marks and Golden State Boulevard 8:19 Project H/W-A.6 Added Action H/W-A.6 to convene a task force to monitor potential displacement and to identify potential solutions if it arises. i Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER, 2016 Fresno, California CHANGES ONLY 2 INTRODUCTION Lack of storefront windows and sidewalks without street furniture and street trees result in an uninviting streetscape. B. COMMUNITY PLAN SUMMARY The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan is the community’s tool for guiding the successful regeneration of Downtown Fresno and its surrounding neighborhoods. it is a visionary document that lays out the community’s long-term goals for the Community Plan Area and provides detailed policies concerning a wide range of topics, including land use and development, transportation, the public realm of streets and parks, infrastructure, historic resources, and health and wellness. The Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DNCP) is structured to enable the reader easy access to a large variety of topics presented for the 7,290 acre Plan Area. The following summarizes the organization of the document: Introduction. The Plan begins with a description of the overall Commu- nity Plan Area, including an explanation of the Plan’s purpose and its relationship to other plans and documents; its location and boundaries; and a summary of the process the City and the community went through to prepare this Community Plan. The chapter then continues with a discussion of the Community Plan Area context, including its history and existing social conditions, physical conditions, public realm conditions (parks, open space, and streetscape), utilities, infrastructure conditions, market and economic conditions, and conditions of historic and cultural resources. The chapter ends with an overview of the unique character of each of the Plan's individual planning areas, as well as descriptions of the existing challenges and opportunities that each area faces. They are described in further detail in Section G of this Chapter. The seven areas that comprise the DNCP's geography are: • Jane Addams Neighborhoods • Edison Neighborhoods • Lowell Neighborhood • Jefferson Neighborhood • Southeast Neighborhoods • South van Ness • Downtown Chapter 1 – Vision. The community's participation and input into the planning process resulted in a coordinated vision for the 7,290 acre Community Plan Area. This Chapter begins with community-generated strategies for revitalizing the overall Community Plan Area. Each of the Community Plan Areas’ seven individual areas is then described in terms of the improvements desired by their residents over the next 25 years. The vision is critical to this Plan since the Plan components that are described in the chapters that follow exist solely to carry out this vision as described in Chapter 1. Chapter 2 - Urban Form and Land Use. This chapter addresses the overall form, use, and character of development within the Downtown Neigh- borhoods. Topics include enhancing the unique sense of character and identity of the different areas within the Downtown and the Downtown Neighborhoods; revitalizing the Downtown, through jobs and economic development, the introduction of the High-Speed Rail station, and new and refurbished housing; revitalizing the Downtown Neighborhoods cor- ridors through code enforcement, public facilities and services, land use and building quality, and design of streetscape and public spaces. Most of these topics are further implemented through the Citywide Develop- ment Code, which guides land uses and development standards for all projects within the Community Plan Area. Chapter 3 – Transportation. This chapter includes information on the desired future multi-modal transportation network within the Downtown Neighborhoods, with the overall objective of reducing reliance on the private automobile and promoting transit use, walking, and biking. Chapter 4 - Parks, Open Space and Streetscapes. This chapter provides an overall vision for increasing the public space and streetscapes network in the Downtown Neighborhoods. Topics include improving the urban forest, expanding and improving parks, and increasing comfort to pedes- trians throughout the street network. Chapter 5 - Infrastructure and Natural Resources. This chapter addresses a range of topics, including water use, energy use, sewer capacity, and the provision of infrastructure. in addition to providing basic services to support future development within the Downtown Neighborhoods, a forward-looking approach to these topics can help make Fresno a state- wide leader in sustainability. Chapter 6 - Historic and Cultural Resources. This chapter includes strategies for preserving and reviving the unique history and culture of Downtown Fresno, as well as the historic neighborhoods around it. This includes both preserving existing buildings and ensuring that new development is compatible with the area’s historic character. Terms used in this document to describe historic, potential historic, or simply older buildings are shown on the opposite page. Chapter 7 - Health, Wellness and Community Development. This chapter includes goals, policies, and actions to address the health and quality of life for residents in the Downtown Neighborhoods. Key topics covered include improving access to healthy foods, reducing the negative impacts of pollution, increasing opportunities for physical activity, and providing community members and the City with an opportunity to collaborate on future plans. Chapter 8 – Implementation. A detailed implementation plan for the DNCP will be developed during the 30 day public review period. This Chapter will present the implementation measures necessary to execute the public dimension of the DNCP. The agents responsible for the suc- cessful revitalization of Fresno’s Downtown Neighborhoods will be the City's various departments, who will implement this Plan's various goals, policies, and actions and realize its particular projects. Chapters 2-7 begin with a brief introduction that presents the topic of each chapter. This is followed by a description of strategies that will be used to transform the Downtown Neighborhoods. Each chapter ends with a section that lists the goals and policies that provide direction and guidance for transformation. Goals and policies are described below: Goal GeneralBroad direction-setterssetting statements that present a long-term vision. Policy Policies support the stated goals by mandating, encouraging, or permitting desired actions. 3DNCPFRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 INTRODUCTION SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES DEFINITIONS The following terms are used in this Community Plan to describe properties that may warrant con- sideration for their historic significance. The definitions are intended to be specific for this Commu- nity Plan and may deviate from concepts that have been codified in standards and guidelines devel- oped by the National Park Service, the Department of the interior, and professional practitioners, including historians, architects, archeologists, and urban planners. Significant Resource means a resource that is one of the following: 1. Listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; 2. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places; 3. Determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources by the State Historical Resources Commission; 4. A Historic Resource as defined in Section 12-1603(o) of the Historic Preservation Ordi- nance (HPO), or a local historic district as defined in Section 12-1603(s)of the HPO, or a contributor to a local historic district, unless the resource has been found not to be histor- ically or culturally significant by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant Section 10(b) (2)(iv) of the Historic Environmental Review Ordinance (HERO) if/when it is adopted by the City Council; 5. identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Sec- tion 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the resource has been found not to be historically or culturally significant by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant to Sec- tion 10(b)(2)(iv) of the HERO (if/when it is adopted by the City Council); or, 6. A Potential Significant Resource that, after further analysis and review, the City has deter- mined should be treated as a Historically Significant Resource pursuant to the procedures in Section 9(b)(3) of the HERO (if/when it is adopted by the City Council). Potential Significant Resource means a resource that does not fall within the definition of Signifi- cant Resource but meets any or all of the following requirements: 1. it was identified as eligible or potentially eligible for listing in a national, state or local reg- ister of historical resources or it was identified as a potential contributor to a potential sig- nificant district in a survey that the city formally commissioned or was officially accepted or officially adopted by the Council or the HPC, but the survey does not meet one or more of the requirements of subsection (g) of Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code. 2. it is at least 45 years old; or 3. as determined by the Historic Preservation Project Manager, it meets the criteria for list- ing to the California Register of Historical Resources under subsection (j) of Section 5020.1 or Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code. Notwithstanding the above, a resource shall not be a Potential Significant Resource if within five years prior to submittal of the application for the Project under review: (i) the city in an adopted CEQA finding, determined that the resource was not historically significant for purposes of CEQA or (ii) the Council or the HPC accepted or officially approved a survey that found the resource was not eligible for listing to a national, state or local register. Significant District is a type of Significant Resource that is a finite group of resources related to one another in a clearly distinguishable way or any geographically definable area which possesses a sig- nificant concentration, linkage or continuity of sites, buildings, structures or objects united histori- cally or aesthetically by plan or physical development. Potential Significant District is a type of Potential Significant Resource that if found to be a Signifi- cant Resource would be a Significant District. Historic Character refers to the general form, appearance, and impression of a neighborhood or area established by extant development from the past. The term is used generally to recognize development patterns from Fresno’s past and is not meant to imply officially recognized historic significance. The garage of this Downtown Neighborhood house is placed in front of the building, taking the place of street-facing windows. The entire front yard is paved with concrete. Automobile-oriented site planning results in buildings set back far from the street, large parking lots, and an uninviting pedestrian environment. 9DNCPFRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 INTRODUCTION Residents give input at an evening session during the May 2010 Design Workshop. Residents discuss the evening's findings. City staff lead an evening presentation and discussion as the 2010 Design Workshop progresses. A resident describes his priorities for the Plan Area. Residents and consultants work together to prioritize the key goals for the Community Plan. Follow-up Outreach (May – October 2010) This phase began with a Community Advisory Committee meeting, the Planning Commission, and the City Council where preliminary goals, policies, and actions were released to the Community Advisory Commit- tee on October 19, 2010. With this input in hand, the preparation of the Draft Community Plan began. On October 14, 2011, the City released the Public Draft of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan for a 30-day public comment period. During this period, the City Manager initiated the Plan prior to the kick- off of the Environmental impact Report. in addition, during this period, the Committee convened four public workshops in order to provide the Committee and the public an opportunity to voice their opinion regarding the nature and recommendations of the Plan. Additional opportunities for public comment were provided during an October 19, 2011 Planning Commission Workshop and an October 20, 2011 City Council Workshop. Fall 2015- Spring 2016 General Plan Outreach (2010 to 2014). The Fresno General Plan was adopted following a process which lasted more than four years. The creation of the Plan involved significant public outreach, including over 160 interviews with stakeholders, over 20 public workshops, over 100 presentations to community groups, and over 20 meetings of a Citizens Advisory Committee. During this outreach process, policies and goals affecting the entire city were discussed, including many of the concepts in the DNCP. Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This phase is devoted to the genera- tion of the Environmental impact Report (EiR) in order to address the re- quirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The EiR evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the FCSP, the DNCP, and the Downtown Development Code. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was initially issued in April 2012. After the DNCP and the FCSP were put on hold in order for the General Plan Update to be adopted, a second NOP was issued in September 2015, which was followed by the release of the public draft EiR in Spring/Summer of 2016 on July 27, 2016. Summer/Fall 2016 Continued Ongoing Outreach. in advance of the release of the DNCP to the public on July 27, City staff resumed public outreach on June 15, 2016 by providing a summary of the plan to the Board of the Downtown Fresno Partnership and taking input from the board members. On June 30 and July 6 the plan was presented to Downtown property owners, business owners, and developers. On July 13, the DNCP steering com- mittee members participated in a community workshop, while on August 4 an open house on the plan was held during Art Hop, a monthly art exhibition in Downtown that attracts visitors from across the city. At the August Area Agency Executive luncheon the DNCP was presented to the heads of public agencies in the region to bring them up to date on what was being proposed and to provide input. Workshops were also held at the August 25 City Council meeting and the September 21 Planning Com- mission meeting. Finally, on September 29, City staff held a workshop for the Downtown Academy, a program run by the Fresno Downtown Partnership to educate the public on how Downtown works and how to participate in its revival. Plan Adoption. This phase is devoted to navigating the final Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and EiR through the public hearing and adoption process and includes consideration by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Airport Land Use Commission, the Planning Commis- sion, and the City Council. 2:15 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 Olive Avenue in the Tower District is an example of a corridor that through revitaliza- tion has strengthened neighborhood identity and appeal. An affordable housing project is built of quality materials and is designed according to the Craftsman-built traditions of the region. • Subsidized or deferred development fees (RCP 3-2.3). • Improvement districts (RCP 3-2.3). • Reducing the cost of obtaining financing for purchase, construction, and rehabilitation (CAP Res. 3-2). • Rent-purchase options (CAP Res. 3-2). • Working with local financial institutions to develop financing tools targeted to moderate-income home buy- ers in Fresno, and educating residents about the avail- ability of those products. • Creating a coordinated program to acquire, demolish, and rebuild blighted, non-traditional, multi-family resi- dential buildings. • Working with non-profit community development corpo- rations to redevelop blighted multi-family properties. Such activities should include protections for extremely-low and very-low income tenants of such buildings, including protections to prevent displacement and to support relocation of such residents within the same neighborhood. 2.10 Improve the quality of housing and encourage home ownership in the Downtown Neighborhoods Intent: To improve the quality of all housing and increase home ownership rates within the Downtown Neighborhoods. Together, this will increase neighborhood stability and address significant concerns about the health impacts related to poor quality housing. 2.10.1 Establish minimum standards for all rental housing in the Downtown Neighborhoods and require that all rental properties be rated for their quality and comply with the minimum standards within five years of adoption of the Plan. 2.10.2 Work with local banks to create and promote rent-to- buy policies or programs for housing in the Downtown Neighborhoods. 2.10.3 Work with non-profit community development corpora- tions to redevelop blighted multi-family properties in the Downtown Neighborhoods. 2.10.4 Use low-income and housing funds to purchase, rehabili- tate, and then sell homes to qualifying families. 2.10.5 Target public funding for housing rehabilitation to the most blighted properties and areas. 2.10.6 Continue and expand efforts to create outreach and edu- cation materials on existing home ownership and home rehabilitation programs and/or use City communication venues (such as the website, newsletters, and other exist- ing and potential future avenues) to educate the public about these programs. 2.10.7 Strengthen individual, family, and household assets through home-ownership in order to improve the condi- tions of the Downtown Neighborhoods. 2.11 Revitalize the corridors to strengthen neighborhood identity and appeal. Intent: To transform the Downtown Neighborhood’s corridors into unique, tree-lined, multi-modal, pedestrian-friendly thoroughfares. 2.11.1 Allow the character, intensity, and use mix along corridors to change in relation to the character of the neighborhoods and districts in which they pass through. 2.11.2 Ensure that new corridor development is compatible with that of adjacent neighborhoods or other sensitive uses, particularly in regards to noise, parking, and business hours. 2.11.3 Plan the Downtown Neighborhoods’ corridors as amenities for the adjacent neighborhoods as well as for the community at large. 2.11.4 Convert major thoroughfares from single-use commercial corridors into mixed-use areas with a diversity of retail, office, and residential uses, including mixed-use, multi- family housing in a variety of densities. 2.11.5 As resources allow, prioritize improving the visual appearance of corridors through streetscape improvements, renovation of existing buildings, and new development. 2.11.6 Conduct regular street maintenance and cleaning, with a focus on residential and pedestrian-oriented retail and commercial areas to create a welcoming environment within the Downtown Neighborhoods. 2:23 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 F. LAND USE DESIGNATIONS, OVERLAYS, AND PLANNED LAND USE MAP 1. Purpose and Establishment of Land Use Designations and Overlays. This section establishes the land use designations and overlays to implement the DNCP for property and right-of-ways within the FCSP boundaries. Property and right-of-ways subject to the DNCP shall be divided into the land use designations and overlays identified in Section F.2. 2. Land Use Designations and Overlays. All parcels within the boundaries of the DNCP as identified in Figure 2-9 and Figures 2-10 through 2-15 are subject to the following land use designations and overlays. See Table 2-2 for more detailed descriptions of each land use designation and overlay. a. Downtown Land Use Designations. i. Downtown Core. ii. Downtown General. iii. Downtown Neighborhood. b. Mixed-Use Land Use Designations. i. Corridor/Center. ii. Neighborhood bc. Residential Single-Family Land Use Designations. i. Medium Low Density. i. Medium Density. c. Residential Multi-Family Land Use Designations. i. Mobile Home Park d. Mixed-Use Land Use Designations. i. Corridor/Center. ii. Neighborhood ed. Employment Land Use Designations. i. Business Park ii. Light Industrial. iii. Heavy Industrial. fe. Public and Semi-PublicFacilities Land Use Designations. i. Public Facilitiesand Institutional. f. Open Space Land Use Designations. ii. Parks and Recreation. g. Overlays. i. Apartment House Overlay. ii. Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay. iii. Urban Campus Overlay. 3. Relationship to Citywide Development Code (CDC). The DNCP and the applicable sections of the Citywide Development Code will guide the transformation of Downtown Fresno by directing new buildings, whether public or private, to contribute positively to the streets, open spaces, and existing buildings within each particu- lar neighborhood and district and the community as a whole. The applicable sections of the Citywide Development Code have been drafted to be fully consistent and harmonious with the goals, intent, and policies of this Plan and shall serve as the primary mechanism for ensuring the physical development within the Plan’s boundaries occurs in accordance with the Plan’s vision. In circumstances where City staff conclude that a particular project or certain components of a particular project are not been fully addressed in the Citywide Development Code, this Plan shall be controlling in the determina- tion of the overall intent of the plan as it relates to the particular project or project components. The DNCP includes the Land Use Designations while the Citywide Development Code includes the associated zoning districts. In order to ensure consistency between the two documents, the regulatory geography of the land use des- ignations found in the DNCP is and should remain identical to the regulatory geography of the zoning districts in the Citywide Development Code. The difference between the two is the level of detail. The land use designations are broad descriptions of the intended future character and use and the Citywide Development Code provides detail on development standards including the follow- ing: a. Use Regulations b. Density and Massing Development Standards c. Site Design Development Standards d. Facade Design Development Standards 4. Relationship to Fresno-Chandler Downtown Airport Master and Environs Specific Plan (FCDASP). Upon adoption, the provisions of the DNCP shall take precedence over all of the regulations of the FCDASP, except those regulations related to aircraft noise and safety contours and avigation easements, as outlined in the FCDASP. 2:24 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTATE B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHANNINGWAY E L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO ST MCKENZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADERO ST HUNTINGTON AVE NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULARE ST VENTURAST C S T CALIFORNIA AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R TIN A V E P A R K WA Y DRSANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE P L A Z A D R WTENTHSTBELGRAVIA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORENCE AVE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINSAVE MERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A LL E L A V E H A Z E L W O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L LI N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVA T E FIFTHSTAM ADO RSTHST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLIN AVE GILBERT ST IR WIN A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E M ARIPO SASTU S T MERCE D STSANJO AQUINSTTUOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOODWARD AVEKERN ST BRALY AVE LOS A N GELESSTTHORN E AVEMONTE REYSTM ONOSTCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLERAVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSAL Y HAMILTON AVE LORENA AVE FRONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRY AVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSAR AVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALL T S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSE AVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y BS T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D AVE INYO ST GRACE STMA D D YDR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORA AVE HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE W O O DSONAVEGLENNAVEG ST GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of Fresno Downtown Development Code Zoning Map N E. GOALS AND POLICIES (Continued) KEY TO FIGURE 2-9 Downtown – Downtown Core SEE TABLE 2-2Downtown – Downtown General Downtown – Downtown Neighborhood Residential Single-Family – Medium Low Density Residential Single-Family – Medium Density Residential Multi-Family – Mobile Home Park Mixed-Use – Neighborhood Mixed-Use Mixed-Use – Corridor/Center Mixed-Use Employment – Business Park Employment – Light Industrial Employment – Heavy Industrial Public and Semi-PublicOpen Space – Parks and Recreation Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional Apartment House Overlay Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay Urban Campus Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) Boundary. JANE ADDAMS NEIGHBORHOODS see Figure 2-10 on page 2:30 JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD see Figure 2-13 on page 2:35LOWELL NEIGHBORHOOD see Figure 2-12 on page 2:34 SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOODS see Figure 2-14 on page 2:36 DOWNTOWN AND SOUTH VAN NESS see Figure 2-15 on page 2:38 EDISON NEIGHBORHOODS see Figure 2-11 on page 2:32 FIGURE 2-9 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP 2:25 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS a. Downtown Designations EXAMPLES OF INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER The examples are not intended to be interpreted literally as they represent the general range of scale, intensity, site organization and streetscape typical of the identified zoning district. INTENT AND PURPOSE INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER INTENDED FRONTAGE AND STREETSCAPE INTENDED LAND USE RANGE INTENDED PARKING i. Downtown Core The DTC designation encompasses Fresno’s cultural, civic, shopping, business, and transit center and is applied to the areas of the Downtown core generally bounded by Stanislaus Street, the Union Pacific tracks, Inyo Street and the alley between Van Ness Avenue and “L” Street. New buildings, which may accommodate up to 60 dwellings per acre with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 7.5, face and are entered from the street and contain a varied mix of uses, in- cluding ground floor uses that help activate Downtown’s street life. Older buildings are renovated and adaptivity reused. New buildings are up to 15 stories/190 feet tall, are built to the side property lines, and are located at or near the sidewalk to pro- mote active ground floor commercial activ- ity. Upper stories are expressed as a single volume, generating a consistent streetwall and emulating Downtown’s mixed-use and office buildings from year’s past. Above the fifth floor, upper volumes are massed as towers that contribute to Downtown Fresno’s already interesting skyline. Commercial frontages such as galleries, arcades, and shopfronts shape a network of walkable and interconnected streets with wide sidewalks that accommodate high pedestrian activity, street furniture in key locations, and outdoor dining. Street trees, planted in tree wells, reinforce human scale, provide shade, and add distinct character to each street. Most parking is accommodated with on- street spaces and strategically dispersed public garages. On-site parking is located either behind buildings or subterranean. Parking requirements are low to encourage utilization of transit and shared parking. Ground floors are occupied with retail, restaurant, and other active uses befitting a walkable, metropolitan downtown setting. Upper floors and the floor area behind street-facing active uses accommodate of- fice, civic, lodging, and residential uses. ii. Downtown General The DTG designation applies to the areas to the east and northwest of the Downtown Core: the Civic Center, Armenian Town and the Fresno Convention Center area, and the portions of Chinatown north of Fresno Street. New buildings, which may accom- modate up to 60 dwellings per acre with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 7.5, face and are entered from the street and accom- modate a variety of uses that are supportive of Downtown’s government employees, Convention Center visitors, and riders of the proposed High-Speed Rail system. New buildings are up to 10 stories/140 feet tall, are built to the side property lines, and with the exception of along the Mariposa Mall (Mariposa Street between M Street and P Street), are located at or near the sidewalk to promote ground floor commercial activ- ity. Buildings along the Mariposa Mall are setback from the sidewalk along a continu- ous build-to line to maintain the formal alignment of buildings that define the axial connection between the County Courthouse and City Hall. Upper stories are expressed as a single volume to generate a consistent streetwall. Commercial frontages such as galleries, arcades, and shopfronts shape a network of walkable and interconnected streets with wide sidewalks. Street trees, planted in tree wells, reinforce human scale, provide shade, and add distinct character to each street. The streetscape along the Mariposa Mall emphasises the axial connection between the County Courthouse and City Hall. Most parking is accommodated with on- street spaces and strategically dispersed public garages. On-site parking is located either behind buildings or subterranean. Parking requirements are low to encourage utilization of transit and shared parking. Ground floors are occupied with com- mercial, retail, and office uses that support active sidewalks and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind street-facing active uses accommodate a wide variety of office, civic, lodging, and residential uses. iii. Downtown Neighborhood The DTN designation applies to the urban neighborhoods immediately to the north, west, and south of the Downtown Core: the Mural District, Chinatown, and the South Stadium District. New development, which may accommodate up to 60 dwellings per acre with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 5.0, consists primarily of smaller-scale re- tail, office, workshop, and multi-family hous- ing that serves the Mural District’s thriving artist community, revitalizes Chinatown in conjunction with the proposed High-Speed Rail Station, and introduces diverse new uses into the South Stadium District. New buildings are up to 6 stories/90 feet tall and are accessed directly from the sidewalk to encourage pedestrian activity. Mixed-use and commercial buildings are located at or near the sidewalk and are expressed as sin- gle volumes. Residential buildings are set back from the sidewalk behind small front yards; living rooms, dining rooms, and other formal rooms face the street to provide “eyes on the street.” Streets and sidewalks are urban and shaped by a variety of frontages, including galleries, arcades, shopfronts, and stoops. Inviting sidewalks support pedestrian and com- mercial activity. Street trees, planted in tree wells, provide shade and reinforce the human scale of the DTN’s urban neighbor- hoods and its mixed-use streets. Most parking is accommodated with on- street spaces and strategically dispersed public garages. On-site parking is located either behind buildings or subterranean. Parking requirements are low to encourage utilization of transit and shared parking. Buildings are occupied by small scale retail, office, workshop, live-work, and residential uses. In addition, galleries, workshops, and studios cater to the Mural District’s artisan community, while limited light industrial and auto-related uses are allowed in the south Stadium District. 2:26 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE b. Residential Single-Family Designations EXAMPLES OF INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER The examples are not intended to be interpreted literally as they represent the general range of scale, intensity, site organization and streetscape typical of the identified zoning district. INTENT AND PURPOSE INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER INTENDED FRONTAGE AND STREETSCAPE INTENDED LAND USE RANGE INTENDED PARKING i. Medium Low Density The Medium Low Density designation provides for single family detached housing with densities of between 3.5 to 6 dwellings per acre. Within the Community Plan area it applies to the generally undeveloped parcels along the western edges of the Jane Addams and Edison neighborhoods. New develop- ment consists of single-family houses that face and are accessed from the street and reinforce the informal, rural character of the area. New buildings are house-scale and up to 2 stories/35 feet tall. Attics of buildings with pitched roofs may be inhabited and lit with dormer and gable windows. All buildings are set back substantially from the sidewalk to accommodate large, planted front yards. Living rooms, dining rooms, and other formal rooms face and provide “eyes on the street.” Buildings face the street with ground floor residential frontages such as porches and stoops. Streets are lined with large canopy street trees that reinforce the human scale and low intensity nature of the rural setting. Wide shoulders accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. On-site parking is located on the rear half of the lot and shielded from view from the public right-of-way. Visitor parking is ac- comodated with on-street spaces. Buildings are occupied with residential uses with limited home occupation activity. cd. Mixed-Use Designations ii. Medium Density The Medium Density designation applies to areas with predominately single-family residential development, but can also accommodate a mix of housing types, including small-lot starter homes and zero- lot-line developments such as duplexes and townhouses. Within the Community Plan area the Medium Density designation also applies to the Huntington Boulevard, St. John’s Cathedral District, and the L Street historic districts. New buildings, with densities of between 5 and 12 dwellings per acre, are mindful of the massing, scale, and character of existing single-family houses, especially within the area’s historic districts. New buildings are house-scale, up to 2 stories/35 feet in height, and are designed with massing that is respectful of neighbor- ing houses. Attics of buildings with pitched roofs may be inhabited and lit with dormer and gable windows. All buildings are set back from the sidewalk to provide a front yard that is consistent with the existing houses along the street. Living rooms, dining rooms, and other formal rooms face and provide “eyes on the street.” Multi- family buildings are compatible in scale and massing and virtually indistinguishable from single-family houses. Buildings face traditional, tree-lined streets. Streetscapes consist of sidewalks separated from the street by parkway strips planted with canopy street trees of varying species that shape the unique landscape character of each individual street and provide shade for pedestrians. On-site parking is located on the rear half of the lot and shielded from view from the public right-of-way. Visitor parking is ac- commodated with on-street spaces. Buildings are occupied with residential uses and limited home occupation activity. i. Corridor/Center Mixed-Use The Corridor/Center Mixed-Use designation allows for either horizontal or vertical mixed- use development along key circulation corridors where height and density can be easily accommodated. New development, ranging in density between 16 and 30 du/ acre will facilitate the transformation of ex- isting transportation corridors into vibrant, highly walkable areas with broad, pedestrian- friendly sidewalks, trees, landscaping, and local-serving uses. New buildings are up to 60 feet tall and step down in relationship to the scale and character of adjacent neighborhoods. Build- ings are located at or near the sidewalk and accessed directly from the sidewalk to encourage pedestrian activity. Buildings face tree-lined streets with ground floor shopfronts and ample upper floor windows. Street trees, planted in tree wells, reinforce human scale, provide shade for pe- destrians and trasnti users, and add distinct character to the street. Parking consists of both on-street spaces and off-street spaces located behind or under the building. Ground-floor retail and upper-floor resi- dential or offices are the primary uses, with residential uses, personal and business services, and public and institutional space as supportive uses. TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS 2:27 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS EXAMPLES OF INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER The examples are not intended to be interpreted literally as they represent the general range of scale, intensity, site organization and streetscape typical of the identified zoning district. INTENT AND PURPOSE INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER INTENDED FRONTAGE AND STREETSCAPE INTENDED LAND USE RANGE INTENDED PARKING ii. Light Industrial The Light Industrial designation accommo- dates a diverse range of light industrial uses. Light Industrial areas may serve as buffers between Heavy Industrial and other land uses and are generally located in areas with good transportation access, such as along railroads and State routes, and may accordingly generate substantial activity from large cargo or delivery vehicles. New buildings may be designed with a floor area ratio (FAR) of up to 1.5 and within the Community Plan area are designed according to the needs of the particular light industrial activity, and to the extent possible, provide street-friendly facades, especially when adjacent to commercial or residential build- ings. New buildings are up to 60 feet in height and may be located anywhere on the lot. Buildings are expressed in single or multiple volumes as determined by the particular function of the industrial activity and, to the extent possible, office and administrative uses are located towards the front of the lot, facing the street. To the extent possible, street-facing building facades provide windows and the primary entry into the building in order to ensure that indus- trial buildings contribute to a safe pedestrian environment through “eyes on the street.” Street trees are present to provide shade while accommodating the needs of large service and delivery vehicles. On-site parking should be located behind or beside the building, but not within front and street side setbacks. Buildings accommodate a diverse range of light industrial uses, including limited manufacturing and processing, research and development, fabrication, utility equipment and service yards, wholesaling, warehousing, and distribution activities. Small-scale retail and ancillary office uses are also permitted. ce. Employment Designationscd. Mixed-Use Designations ii. Neighborhood Mixed-Use The Neighborhood Mixed-Use designation allows a minimum of 50 percent residential uses and provides for mixed-use districts of local-serving, pedestrian-oriented commercial development, such as convenience shopping and professional offices. New development consists primarily of moderate intensity resi- dential buildings and commercial buildings that accommodate neighborhood services. At key corridor intersections, mixed-use buildings accommodate small-scale retail, office, civic, entertainment uses; housing may be accom- modated on upper floors. New buildings are up to 3 stories/40 feet tall and are accessed directly from the sidewalk to encourage pedestrian activity. Buildings vary in size and form, but are compatible in mass- ing and scale with adjacent buildings. Mixed- use and commercial buildings are located at or near the sidewalk and are expressed as single volumes. Residential buildings, set back from the sidewalk behind small front yards, are composed of house-scale masses with facades divided into house-scale increments. Living rooms, dining rooms, and other formal rooms face the street. Residential buildings face the street with resi- dential frontages such as front yards, porches, and stoops; commercial and mixed-use build- ing face the street with shopfronts. Streets are lined with inviting sidewalks and continuous parkway strips that may, depending on the ad- jacent use, be either landscaped or hardscaped with pavers. Street trees green these corridors, provide shade, and convey a unique character to each street. Parking consists of both on-street spaces and off-street spaces located behind, under or, except along BRT transit corridors, on the side of buildings. Parking requirements are moder- ate to encourage walking from nearby neigh- borhoods while accommodating visitors and patrons from the broader community. Buildings are occupied with ground floor hous- ing as well as ground floor commercial, retail and office uses. Upper floors are occupied with housing, office, or additional commercial uses. i. Business Park The Business Park designation provides for office/business parks in campus-like settings that are well suited for large offices or multi- tenant buildings. This designation is intended to accommodate and allow for the expansion of small businesses. New buildings may be designed with a floor area ratio (FAR) of up to 1.0. Given its proximity to residential uses, only limited outdoor storage is permitted, while adequate landscaping is imperative to minimize the visual impacts. New buildings are up to 60 feet tall and are set back from the sidewalk behind landscaped front yards. Street-facing facades and accessed directly from the sidewalk to encourage pedes- trian activity. Street-facing building facades provide windows and to the extent possible the primary entry into the building. Streets are lined with invit- ing sidewalks and continuous parkway strips that are planted with drought-tolerant land- scaping and street trees. On-site parking is located behind or beside the building, but not within front and street side setbacks. Typical land uses include research and develop- ment, laboratories, administrative and general offices, medical offices and clinics, profession- al offices, prototype manufacturing, testing, repairing, packaging, and printing. Small-scale retail and service uses serving local employees and visitors are permitted as secondary uses. 2:28 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE INTENT AND PURPOSE EXAMPLES OF INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER The examples are not intended to be interpreted literally as they represent the general range of scale, intensity, site organization and streetscape typical of the identified zoning district. INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER INTENDED FRONTAGE AND STREETSCAPE INTENDED LAND USE RANGE INTENDED PARKING ii. Public Facilitiesand Institutional The Public Facilities designation applies to public or institutional facilities, includ- ing city facilities, utilities, schools, health services, corporation yards, utility stations, and similar uses. New buildings may be built with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of up to 2.5 and 5.0 for hospitals and related uses. Within the Community Plan area, the Public facilities designation applies to Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, the Fresno Com- munity Regional Medical Center, the various cemeteries in the Jane Addams Neighbor- hood, as well as the Downtown Neighbor- hood’s various schools. New buildings are designed to accommodate the needs of the particular use while fronting adjacent public streets with street-friendly facades. New buildings are designed according to the needs of the particular public or institutional facility. Buildings are generally up to 35 feet in height, excepting buildings within the Fresno Community Regional Medical Center, where buildings may be up to 150 feet in height. Buildings located along public streets face the street with parking located behind the building or subterranean. Build- ings adjacent to residential neighborhoods are house-scale to relate to adjacent house- scale buildings. Buildings face the street with a variety of frontages, including front yards, porches, stoops, shopfronts, and lobbies with cano- pies. Streets are lined with inviting side- walks and street trees planted in, depending on the use or context, tree wells or continu- ous parkway strips. On-site parking is located behind street- facing buildings, subterranean, or at the center of the lot or campus. Parking is also provided in on-street parking spaces. Buildings accommodate a broad range of uses depending on the facility. df. Public and Semil-PublicFacilities Designations e. Open Space Designations TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS iii. Heavy Industrial The Heavy Industrial designation accom- modates the broadest range of industrial uses and may generate substantial activity from large cargo or delivery vehicles. New buildings may be designed with a floor area ratio (FAR) of up to 1.5, and within the Com- munity Plan area are designed according to the needs of the particular industrial activity, and to the extent possible, provide street- friendly facades, especially when adjacent to commercial or residential buildings. New buildings are up to 60 feet in height and may be located anywhere on the lot. Buildings are expressed in single or multiple volumes as determined by the function of the industrial activity and, to the extent possible, office and administrative uses are located towards the front of the lot, facing the street. To the extent possible, street-facing building facades provide windows and the primary entry into the building in order to ensure that industrial buildings contribute to a safe pedestrian environment through “eyes on the street.” Street trees are present to pro- vide shade while accommodating the needs of large service and delivery vehicles. On-site parking may be located anywhere on the lot except within front and street side setbacks. Buildings accommodate a broad range of industrial uses, including manufacturing, assembly, wholesaling, distribution, and storage activities that are essential to the development of a balanced economic base. Small-scale commercial services and ancil- lary office uses are also permitted. i. Parks and Recreation The Parks and Recreational Facilities designation applies to open space facilities that accommodate both active and pas- sive recreational uses such as public parks, outdoor and indoor playing fields, trails, playgrounds, and community centers. The Parks and Recreational Facilities designation may also include ponding basins or airport approach/clear zones that are developed for, programmed, and actively used for recre- ational purposes. Parks and recreational facilities front public streets to the maximum extent possible and provide easy access from surrounding sidewalks. To the extent possible, adjacent and sur- rounding buildings front parks and other recreational facilities to provide “eyes on the park.” Landscape, walls, and other features are low in order to enable visibility into and across parks and other facilities from sur- rounding sidewalks and streets. Tall fences are transparent. Parking is accommodated with on-street parking spaces and parking lots. To the extent possible, parking lots are located along side streets and are screened from adjacent sidewalks with low hedges, walls, or landscaping. Uses within the Parks and Recreational Facilities designation inlcude public parks, outdoor and indoor playing fields, trails, playgrounds, and community centers. ce. Employment Designations 2:29 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 fg. Overlays The Neighborhood Revitalization overlay designation is intended to preserve the unique character of neighborhoods near Downtown, enhance their walkability, and promote a diverse population. INTENT AND PURPOSE EXAMPLES OF INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER The examples are not intended to be interpreted literally as they represent the general range of scale, intensity, site organization and streetscape typical of the identified zoning district. INTENDED PHYSICAL CHARACTER INTENDED FRONTAGE AND STREETSCAPE INTENDED LAND USE RANGE INTENDED PARKING Buildings shall be composed of simple, well-proportioned volumes with street-facing façades that employ architectural articula- tion that is compatible with nearby homes. Building finishes are high-quality in nature and renovations of existing buildings are complimentary to the original structure Ground floor residential frontages such as front yards, porches, and stoops face traditional, tree-lined streets. Streetscapes consist of sidewalks separated from the street by parkway strips planted with canopy street trees of varying species that shape the unique landscape character of each individu- al street and provide shade for pedestrians. See underlying land use designation. See underlying land use designation. See underlying land use designation. The Apartment House designation is intended to preserve and enhance the pat- tern of pedestrian-oriented small-footprint apartment houses, grand homes, and small commercial buildings that exist in some surviving pre-World War II residential areas within Downtown. New buildings are mind- ful of the massing, scale, and character of buildings within this area that are listed on the Local Historic Register. New buildings are house-scale, up 35 feet in height, and are designed with massing that is respectful of neighboring houses. Attics of buildings with pitched roofs may be inhabited and lit with dormer and gable windows. All buildings are set back from the sidewalk to provide a front yard that is consistent with the existing houses along the street. Buildings are designed to provide “eyes on the street.” Multi- family and com- mercial buildings are compatible in scale and massing and virtually indistinguishable from single-family houses. Ground floor residential frontages such as front yards, porches, and stoops face traditional, tree-lined streets. Streetscapes consist of sidewalks separated from the street by parkway strips planted with canopy street trees of varying species that shape the unique landscape character of each individu- al street and provide shade for pedestrians. On-site parking is located on the rear half of the lot and shielded from view from the public right-of-way. Visitor parking is ac- commodated with on-street spaces. Buildings are occupied with residential uses, home occupation activity, and commercial services such as business, professional, medical, and dental offices uses. iv. Apartment House Overlay ii. Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay The Urban Campus overlay designation is intended to provide for large, centrally planned and operated campuses which inte- grate well into a dense, mixed-use, walkable urban environment. When Urban Campus areas are adjacent to residential neighbor- hoods transitions will be graceful. New buildings are block-scale and may reach up to 210 feet tall. With exemplary architecture, buildings may rise up to 235 feet in height. Within the site the physical layout may be campus-like, but at the perimeter the build- ings are located at or near the sidewalk and have active frontages on the ground floor. Canopy street trees reinforce the human scale of the area while providing shade and accommodating the needs of emergency vehicles. Parking consists of on-street spaces and on site spaces located anywhere on the lot within the campus, and behind buildings on the perimeter of the campus. See underlying land use designation. iii. Urban Campus Overlay TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS 2:30 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FIGURE 2-10 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - JANE ADDAMS NEIGHBORHOODS R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHA N NIN G WAYE L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO S T MCKE N ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADE R O ST HU NTIN GTON AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE T ULA RE ST VENTURA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R TI N A V E P A R K WA YDRSANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMA N AVE P L A Z A D RWTENTHSTB ELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORE N C E AVE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIV A T E FIFTHSTAM ADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLIN AVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E M ARIPOSASTU S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTT UOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBR ALY AVE LOS A N GELESSTTHOR N E AVEMONTEREYSTMONOSTCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSALY H A M ILTON AVE LORENA AVE F R ONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSAR AVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYEL L ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLO RADORA A V E HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE W O O DSONAVEGLENNAVEG ST GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of Fresno Downtown Development Code Zoning Map KEY TO FIGURE 2-10 Residential Single-Family – Medium Low Density SEE TABLE 2-2Residential Single-Family – Medium Density Residential Multi-Family – Mobile Home Park Mixed-Use – Neighborhood Mixed-Use Employment – Business Park Employment – Light Industrial Employment – Heavy Industrial Public and Semi-PublicOpen Space – Parks and Recreation Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional Downtown Revitalization Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary. 2:31 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHA N NIN G WAYE L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO S T MCKE NZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADER O ST HUNTIN G TO N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULARE ST VENTU RA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R TI N A V E P A R K WA YDRSANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE P L A Z A D RWTENTHSTBELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORE N C E A VE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIV A T E FIFTHSTAM ADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLIN AVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E MARIPOSASTU S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AV E LOS A N GELESSTTHOR N E AVEMONTE REYSTMONO STCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTA NISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AV E LORENA AVE F RONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORA A V E HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE W O O DSONAVEGLENNAVEG ST GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of Fresno Downtown Development Code Zoning Map 2:32 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FIGURE 2-11 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - EDISON NEIGHBORHOODS R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHAN NIN G WAYE L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO S T MCKE N ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADE R O ST HU NTIN GT O N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE T ULA RE ST VENTU RA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R T I N A V E PARKWAYDR SANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE PLAZAD R WTENTHSTB ELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORE N C E A VE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIV A T E FIFTHSTAM ADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLI N AVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E M ARIPOSASTU S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBR ALY AVE LOS A N GELESSTTHOR N E AVEMONTEREYSTMONOSTCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OL EANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE F R ONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y L IBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVEWHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLO RADORA A V EHEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOODSONAVE GLENNAVEG ST GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE GOLDEN STATE BLVD T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map KEY TO FIGURE 2-11 Downtown – Downtown Neighborhood SEE TABLE 2-2Residential Single-Family – Medium Low Density Residential Single-Family – Medium Density Mixed-Use – Neighborhood Mixed-Use Employment – Light Industrial Employment – Heavy Industrial Public and Semi-PublicOpen Space – Parks and Recreation Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional DowntownNeighborhood Revitalization Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary. 2:34 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FIGURE 2-12 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - LOWELL NEIGHBORHOOD R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHAN NIN G WAYE L MAVEMCKE N ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADER O ST HU NTIN GTO N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULA RE ST VENTU RA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R T I N A V E P A R K WA YDRSANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE P L A Z A D RWTENTHSTBELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELG RAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORE N C E AV E MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGI NS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVATE FIFTHSTAM ADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLINAVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E MARIPOSASTU S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AVE LOS A N GELESSTT HOR N E AVEMONTE REYSTMONOSTCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE F RONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORAAVE HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOODSONAVE GLENNAVEG S T GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVEGOLDEN S T A T E B L V D T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map KEY TO FIGURE 2-12 Downtown – Downtown Neighborhood SEE TABLE 2-2Residential Single-Family – Medium Density Mixed-Use – Neighborhood Mixed-Use Mixed-Use – Corridor/Center Mixed-Use Public and Semi-PublicOpen Space – Parks and Recreation Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional Apartment House Overlay Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary. DIVISADERO ST 2:35 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 FIGURE 2-13 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHAN NIN G WAYE L MAVEMCKE NZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADER O ST HU NTIN GTO N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULARE ST VENTU RA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R T I N A V E P A R K WA YDRSANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE P L A Z A D RWTENTHSTBELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLOREN C E A V E MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVATE FIFTHSTAM ADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLINAVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V EMARIPOSAST U S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNEST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AV E LOS A N GELESSTTHOR N E AVEMONTE REYSTMONO STCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUSST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDERAVE AMADORST FULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE FRONTAGERD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMONAVE ONEILAVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORAAVE HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOODSONAVE GLENNAVEG S T GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVEGOLDEN S T A T E B L V D T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map KEY TO FIGURE 2-13 Downtown – Downtown Neighborhood SEE TABLE 2-2Residential Single-Family – Medium Density Mixed-Use – Neighborhood Mixed-Use Mixed-Use – Corridor/Center Mixed-Use Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay Urban Campus Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary.ABBYSTBELMONT AVE 2:36 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FIGURE 2-14 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - SOUTHEAST NEIGHBORHOODS R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHAN NIN G WAYE L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO S T MCKE N ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADER O ST HU NTIN GTO N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULA RE ST VENTU RA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R T I N A V E P A R K WA YDRSANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADAAVEPARKWAY DR VOORMANAVE P L A Z A D R WTENTHSTBELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELG RAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORENCEAVE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGI NS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVATE FIFTHSTAMADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLINAVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V EMARIPOSAST U S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNEST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AVE LOS A N GELESSTTHOR N E AVEMONTE REYSTMONOSTCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUSST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDERAVE AMADORSTFULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE FRONTAGERD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMONAVE ONEILAVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/ B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORAAVE HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOODSONAVE GLENNAVEG ST GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVEGOLDEN STATE B L V D T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map KEY TO FIGURE 2-14 Downtown – Downtown Neighborhood SEE TABE 2-2Residential Single-Family – Medium Low Density Residential Single-Family – Medium Low Density Mixed-Use – Neighborhood Mixed-Use Mixed-Use – Corridor/Center Mixed-Use Public and Semi-PublicOpen Space – Parks and Recreation Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary. 2:38 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FIGURE 2-15 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - DOWNTOWN R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHA N NIN G WAYE L MAVEMCKE N ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADER O ST HU NTIN GTO N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE T ULA RE ST VENTU RA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R T I N A V E PARKWAYDR SANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMA N AVE PLAZADRW TENTHSTB ELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORE N C E A VE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIV A T E FIFTHSTAM ADORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLIN AVE GIL BERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E M ARIPOSASTU S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AV E LOS A N GELESSTT HORNEAVE MONTEREYSTMONO STCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OL EANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE F RONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVEWHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A / B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORAAVEHEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOODSONAVE GLENNAVEG S T GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVEGOLDEN STATE BLVD T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map KEY TO FIGURE 2-15 Downtown – Downtown Core SEE TABLE 2-2Downtown – Downtown General Downtown – Downtown Neighborhood Residential Single-Family – Medium Density Employment – Light Industrial Employment – Heavy Industrial Public and Semi-Public – Public Facilitiesand Institutional Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay Apartment House Overlay Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan (DNCP) Boundary. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) Boundary. DIVISADERO ST 2:39 CHAPTER 2: URBAN FORM AND LAND USE FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 FIGURE 2-15 - PLANNED LAND USE MAP - DOWNTOWN R A IL R O A D A V E TURNER AVE FRESNO STKI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTAT E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHA N NIN G WAYE L MAVEMCKE N ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADER O ST HU NTIN GTO N AV E NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULA RE ST VENTURA ST C S T CALIFORN I A AVE P O T T L E A V E CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM A R T I N A V E PARKWAYDR SANPABLOAVEF U L T O N S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADAAVEPARKWAY DR VOORMANAVE PLAZADRW TENTHSTB ELGRAV IA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORENCEAVE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITE AVE EL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L E L A V E H A Z E LW O O D B L V D DONAHOO ST C O L L I N S A V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVATE FIFTHSTAMA DORSTH ST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLINAVE GILBERT ST I R WI N A V E MAUD AVEINYO STJ O N E S A V E MARIPOSAST U S T MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNEST SANTACLARASTWOO DWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AVE LOS A N GELESSTTHORNEAVE MONTEREYSTMONO STCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUSST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STF S T N S T CHANDLER AVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTWA T E R M A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDERAVE AMADORSTFULTON/VANNESSALY H A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE FRONTAGERD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERRYAVE B R O A D W A Y LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSARAVE PACIFIC AVEK L E T T E A V E SANBENITOSTB A LLAVE O S T N S TCAPITOL STKERN MALLT S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMONAVE ONEILAVE V A N N E S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVEWHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O S T B S T M A Y O R A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/ C A L Y MONO ST L S T C S T B R O A DW A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A / B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y NEVADA AVE L S T C H I N A A L Y H O M E R U N A L Y F S T E ST S A N T A F E A V E Q S T B E N D A V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D D Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORAAVEHEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOODSONAVE GLENNAVEG S T GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVEGOLDEN STATE BLVD T O P E K A A V E Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 10/4/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map DIVISADERO ST 3:6 CHAPTER 3: TRANSPORTATION E. GOALS AND POLICIES 3.1 Develop the transit network into a viable alternative to single- occupancy vehicles. Intent: To provide high quality transit that is accessible, attractive, supported by land use policies, and perceived as an amenity for the Downtown Neighborhoods and the Downtown. 3.1.1 Continually seek opportunities to improve the quality, safety, and efficiency of transit service within the Downtown Neighborhoods and to regional destinations. 3.1.2 Work with transit providers serving the Downtown Neighborhoods to increase transit service to a level that allows residents to access goods, services, public facilities, parks, and employment via transit. Focus on improving headways and efficiency and strive to improve transit service for the following populations: • Transit dependent; • Persons with low and moderate incomes; • Seniors; • Persons with disabilities; and • Students. 3.1.3 Focus transit service and investments on high-priority transit corridors identified in Figure 3-2 (Transit Corridors). Restructure citywide transit service to concentrate these routes in order to make transit on these corridors fast, frequent, and reliable (FCSP 7-5-1). The primary transit cor- ridors that are shown in the diagram should be managed to minimize transit delay. In addition, investments in high quality bus shelters and pedestrian amenities should be pri- oritized on these corridors. 3.1.4 Support incentives for potential Downtown transit riders, such as employees of major Downtown employers, students, residents of Downtown neighborhoods, and others. 3.1.5 Engage in outreach and education efforts to publicize tran- sit options to residents and employees in the Downtown Neighborhoods. 3.1.6 As resources become available, establish employer-based incentive programs for use of public transit and increase awareness of such programs. 3.1.7 Support the development of the proposed HSR station in Downtown Fresno. 3.1.8 As resources become available, reconfigure the Downtown Transit center to improve pedestrian access between it, the Fulton District, and the proposed HSR station. 3.1.9 Continue to implement Bus Rapid Transit improvements along Blackstone Avenue and Abby Street, and Ventura Avenue/Kings Canyon Road. 3.1.10 As resources become available, prioritize the minimization of transit delay along key transit corridors through the use of signal prioritization for transit, queue jumping, optimal stop spacing, pre-paid fares, and other transit priority tools. (FCSP 7-5-2) 3.1.11 As resources become available, provide amenities that increase rider safety and comfort (such as lighting, shelters, benches, route information and similar improvements) at all transit stops. Focus initial improvements on the areas with the highest existing or potential future transit ridership, including pedestrian-oriented commercial and retail areas in the Downtown Neighborhoods. 3.1.12 Work with private bus providers to integrate their transit services into Downtown’s overall transit network. 3.2 Make the completion of the proposed California High-Speed Rail project among the city’s highest priorities, while minimizing its negative impact on the City. Intent: HSR has the potential to significantly impact the economic future of Fresno by service connecting Downtown Fresno to all of the major urban centers of California. To expedite successful comple- tion of HSR, capitalize upon the advantages the train brings, and minimize any negative impacts of the necessary rail and station infrastructure. 3.2.1 All new underpasses or overpasses should be welcoming to bicyclists and pedestrians. Sidewalks should be provided on both sides. Bikeways should also be provided, in the form of on-roadway bicycle lanes or other facilities, connecting to the City’s existing and planned bicycle network. 3.2.2 For all new or modified underpasses and overpasses, typi- cally maintain the same travel lane, sidewalk, and bikeway dimensions as those provided or planned on the same streets in the Downtown. Use similar landscape and light- ing treatments as practicable. Use urban street rather than highway standards for intersection treatments. Bus Rapid Transit provides the service quality of rail transit, while still enjoying the cost savings and flexibility of bus transit. A transit stop provides an inviting and sheltered place for riders to wait for a bus. 3:7 CHAPTER 3: TRANSPORTATION FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 FIGURE 3-2 - HIGH PRIORITY TRANSIT CORRIDORS Key Primary Secondary Proposed Intermodal Transit Center Proposed High-Speed Rail Station N Clinton Ave. Olive Ave. Nielsen Ave. Belmont Ave. Whitesbridge Ave. V a n N e s s A v e . C S t .Ventura St.Fresno St.Tulare St.Kearney Blvd. Church Ave. Belmont Ave. Tulare Ave. Kings Canyon Rd. S R 9 9 SR 41Fulton St.Blackstone Ave.Fresno St.First St.Cedar Ave.Seventh Ave.Maple Ave.Chestnut Ave.Butler Ave.Elm Ave.MLK Blvd.Thorne Ave.Trinity St.Mo t e l D r . McKinley Ave. California Ave. Parking is placed in a garage that is lined with street-facing retail and/or office uses to create an active streetscape that would otherwise be dominated by automobile parking. An in-street bulb-out brings the street tree closer to the automobile traffic, narrowing the perceived width of the street while allowing an uninterrupted pedestrian path along the sidewalk. 3:9 CHAPTER 3: TRANSPORTATION FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 3.4.2 As resources become available, reestablish an interconnected street grid comparable to Fresno’s original grid pattern in order to increase walkability and improve connections to parks, open space, schools, and neighborhood centers. (A complete list of locations to reconnect the street grid can be found in Figure 3-5 and the Implementation Chapter.) 3.4.3 Allow for the conversion of one-way streets into two-way streets in order to meet the City’s economic development and walkability goals as shown in Figure 3-5. 3.4.4 As resources become available, improve the street network in the Downtown planning area by implementing a range of physical improvements including reconnecting and improving the street grid, improving pedestrian connectivity, and improving rail crossings among others. 3.4.5 Do not install new pedestrian malls. 3.4.6 As resources become available, implement curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements in order to improve the image of the community, provide safe areas for pedestrians and improve storm water quality. Install improvements on: • McKinley Avenue between Golden State BoulevardRoute 99 and Marks Avenue; • Olive Avenue between Hughes and Marks Avenues; • Hughes Avenue between Belmont and McKinley Avenues; and • Belmont Avenue between Weber and Marks Avenues. 3.4.7 Incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) storm water management techniques with curb and gutters. 3.4.8 Coordinate curb and gutter improvements with the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) master plan. 3.4.9 Provide sidewalks on all streets in the Jane Addams Neighborhoods, but prioritize sidewalk improvements on high-volume streets where the need is the greatest. 3.4.10 Encourage the transformation and maintenance of alleys into clean, safe places, that provide access to parking and services. 3.4.11 As resources become available, fund alley maintenance through mechanisms such as assessment districts in order to spread costs of alley maintenance among multiple users. 3.4.12 Allow the introduction of carriage houses or granny flats along alleys in order to place more “eyes on the alley” to help reduce crime, discourage illegal dumping and vagrancy, and introduce more residential density in residential neighborhoods. 3.5 Manage parking to serve residents, businesses and visitors. Intent: To improve public space, promote walking and transit, and leverage the value of parking space as a community resource. 3.5.1 Treat parking as a utility that is shared by many uses in the surrounding area. 3.5.2 Approach parking as an integrated system of on-street and off-street spaces. 3.5.3 Use parking restriction policies to manage traffic, improve air quality in the Downtown Neighborhoods, discourage ille- gal parking, and generate a revenue stream for parking infra- structure, public transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and programs that attract businesses and customers Downtown. 3.5.4 As legally permitted, price parking as necessary to achieve specific availability targets at all times of day and all days of the week. To achieve this policy, implement the following: • Delegate to the City Manager and the Parking Services Division the authority to adjust parking prices to achieve availability targets. • Empower the Parking Division to operate public on-street spaces, off-street lots, and off-street garages as an inte- grated system. • Use parking payment technologies that allow motor- ists to pay easily with readily available payment media, including credit cards and cell phones. 3.5.5 Strive for all new commercial parking to be shared, and work with private parking operators to share existing parking as part of a unified Park Once system. 3.5.6 As resources become available, implement on-street diagonal parking to the greatest extent possible in the South Van Ness Area. 3.5.7 If additional Downtown parking is necessary to maintain adequate availability, consider using a variety of funding sources, including user fees, development impact fees, a Community Benefit District, or other special taxation district that is supported by Downtown property owners. Wide sidewalks that accommodate outdoor dining, street trees, and countdown sig- nals contribute to the generation of a pedestrian-friendly environment. A dedicated bike lane provides a safe route through a busy neighborhood center. 3:21 CHAPTER 3: TRANSPORTATION FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 W. Clinton Avenue W. McKinley Avenue W. Olive Avenue W. Belmont Avenue W. Nielsen Avenue W. Kearney Blvd W. Whitesbridge Blvd Amador Street E. Butler Avenue E. Kings Canyon Rd E. Tulare Avenue E. Olive Avenue E. Belmont Avenue HWY 180 HWY 180 Divisadero Chestnut AvenueCedar Avenue Maple Avenue 1st Street 7th Avenue Fresno StBlackstone AvenueElm StreetMartin Luther King, Jr BlvdWalnut AvenueThorne AvenueWest AvenueW. California Avenue W. Church Avenue Ha z e l w o o d B o u l e v a r dHWY 41N. Hughes AvenueN. Marks AvenueV a n N e s s A v e n u eM S t r e e tTuolumne Street P S t r e e t Ventura StreetB S t r e e tHWY 9 9 F S t r e e t Fresno StreetTulare StreetKearn StreetE. Huntington Blvd FIGURE 3-5 - THOROUGHFARE INTERVENTIONS N Clinton Ave. Olive Ave. Nielsen Ave. Belmont Ave. Whitesbridge Ave. V a n N e s s A v e . C S t .Ventura Ave.Fresno St.Tulare St.Kearney Blvd. Church Ave. Belmont Ave. Tulare Ave. Kings Canyon Rd. S R 9 9 SR 41Fulton St.Blackstone Ave.Fresno St.First St.Cedar Ave.Seventh Ave.Maple Ave.Chestnut Ave.Butler Ave.Elm Ave.MLK Blvd.Thorne Ave.Trinity St.Mo t e l D r . McKinley Ave. California Ave. Key Major Streetscape Projects - Widen Sidewalks - Corner Bulbouts - Lighting & Landscape - Facade Improvements - Bike Lanes Reconnect Street Grid Street Stabilization - Trees - Sidewalk Repair Road Diet + Bike Lanes One-way to two-way street conversion. Bus Rapid Transit - High Quality Shelters - Fix Sidewalk Gaps - Street Trees Street Vacation 6:1 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 A. INTRODUCTION Fresno’s heritage is evident in its many historic and cul- tural resources. Many neighborhoods within the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan are distinguished by their unique historic character. Revitalization efforts that recognize that charac- ter as a primary asset have proven to be effective in communities throughout the country. Well-maintained historic properties convey reliability and stability, making the community more attractive to new businesses, residents, and visitors. This Community Plan emphasizes preservation and adaptive reuse. The late 19th and early 20th-century urban pattern can provide the foundation for a desirable urban form that integrates various land uses, the transportation network, parks, and open space in a coor- dinated manner. Using the existing built environment as a catalyst not only protects Fresno’s heritage, but can also strengthen and sup- port a wide range of the City’s economic development and quality of life goals. The following terms are used in this chapter to describe properties that may warrant consideration for their historic significance. The definitions are intended to be specific for this Community Plan and may deviate from concepts that have been codified in standards and guidelines developed by the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior, and professional practitioners, including historians, architects, archeologists, and urban planners. Significant Resource means a resource that is one of the following: 1. Listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; 2. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places; 3. Determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources by the State Historical Resources Commission; 4. A Historic Resource as defined in Section 12-1603(o) of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (HPO), or a local his- toric district as defined in HPO Section 12-1603(s) of the HPO, or a contributor to a local historic district, unless the resource has been found not to be historically or culturally significant by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant to Section 10(b)(2)(iv) of the Historic Environmental Review Ordinance (HERO) if/when it is adopted by the City Council; 5. Identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the resource has been found not to be historically or culturally significant by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant to Section 10(b)(2)(iv) of the HERO (if/when it is adopted by the City Council); or, 6. A Potential Significant Resource that, after further analysis and review, the City has determined should be treated as a Historically Significant Resource pursuant to the procedures in Section 9(b)(3) of the HERO (if/when it is adopted by the City Council). Chapter 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Potential Significant Resource means a resource that does not fall within the definition of Significant Resource but meets any or all of the following requirements: 1. It was identified as eligible or potentially eligible for listing in a national, state or local register of historical resources or it was identified as a potential contributor to a potential signifi- cant district in a survey that the city formally commissioned or was officially accepted or officially adopted by the Council or the HPC, but the survey does not meet one or more of the requirements of subsection (g) of Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code. 2. It is at least 45 years old; or 3. As determined by the Historic Preservation Project Manager, it meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources under subsection (j) of Section 5020.1 or Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code. Notwithstanding the above, a resource shall not be a Potential Significant Resource if within five years prior to submittal of the application for the Project under review: (i) the city in an adopted CEQA finding, determined that the resource was not historically significant for purposes of CEQA or (ii) the Council or the HPC accepted or officially approved a survey that found the resource was not eligible for listing to a national, state or local register. Significant District is a type of Significant Resource that is a finite group of resources related to one another in a clearly dis- tinguishable way or any geographically definable area which pos- sesses a significant concentration, linkage or continuity of sites, buildings, structures or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. Potential Significant District is a type of Potential Significant Resource that if found to be a Significant Resource would be a Significant District. Historic Character refers to the general form, appearance, and impression of a neighborhood or area established by extant development from the past. The term is used generally to recog- nize development patterns from Fresno’s past and is not meant to imply officially recognized historic significance. 6:2 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Kearney Boulevard has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Roeding Park is the centerpiece of the Jane Addams neighborhoods. Downtown Fresno and its immediately surrounding neighborhoods include some of the City’s oldest and earliest developed areas, and have previously been subject to extensive surveys and studies. These earlier survey efforts have identified numerous individual his- toric and potential historic resources and several potential historic districts, including resources found eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical Resources. Several properties are listed in the National Register and many others have been designated as local historic resources by the City. Establishing a designated historic district requires a majority vote of property owners, the Historic Preservation Commission, and City Council approval. Figure 6-1 shows the existing Historic Resources and Historic Districts in the Downtown and surrounding areas. 1. Jane Addams Neighborhoods. The Jane Addams Neighborhoods are largely characterized by open space, empty lots and some mid-to-late 20th Century commercial development brought on by the construction of State Route 99. The area’s centerpiece is Roeding Park, a public park which houses the Fresno Chaffee Zoo. Dating from the first decade of the 20th Century, Roeding Park was determined eligible for listing on the National Register as a historic district2 and possesses many characteristics of a historic cultural landscape3. This area of Jane Addams was once served by a streetcar line that traversed Roeding Park. With the exception of Roeding Park, the Jane Addams Neighborhoods contain few previously identified historic or potentially historic properties. 2. Edison Neighborhoods. The Edison Neighborhoods are a primarily residential, largely working-class area that have been home to several waves of immigrant and ethnic communities, including African-Americans, Armenians, Volga Germans from Russia, Hispanics, Italians, Japanese, Chinese, and Hmong. The majority of homes date from the early 20th century through the 1960s. Some homes remain from the late 19th century. Prominent architectural styles include Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Spanish Revival, Minimal Traditional and Ranch. Historic integrity throughout the Edison area is often poor due to altera- tions and more recent infil. After World War II, the Edison Neighborhoods became increas- ingly associated with Fresno’s African-American and Hispanic communities. Much of the built resources associated with these communities have been demolished to develop more recent affordable and low-income housing, schools, and recreational facilities. Remaining buildings, structures, objects, and sites from the early development of these communities may hold potential historic significance in this context and warrant further study. The Edison Neighborhoods area contains a handful of previously identified historic and potentially historic properties including one of Fresno’s designated historic districts. Important historic properties include: a. Chandler Field/Fresno Municipal Airport. One of threefour officially designated historic districts in Fresno, the Chandler Field/Fresno Municipal Airport Historic District is located approximately two miles west of Downtown Fresno, along the north side of historic Kearney Boulevard. The WPA-era buildings are clustered in a campus setting that includes landscaping, several Beaux Arts-style lampposts and surface parking. b. Kearney Boulevard. This tree-lined boulevard with a Deco/ Moderne gateway has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. It was originally devel- oped as part of M. Theo Kearney’s “Chateau Fresno” prop- erty, located outside the Community Plan Area, which was never completed. 3. Lowell Neighborhood. The Lowell Neighborhood is one of the oldest residential neighborhoods in Fresno, and is the most intact and cohesive early neighborhood within the Community Plan Area. It contains significant concentrations of late-19th and early 20th century homes, including Queen Anne, American Foursquare, Neo-classical, Craftsman, Colonial Revival, Mission Revival, and Spanish Revival architectural styles. Over forty of the City’s designated historic properties are located here; many other neighborhood properties (both individual properties and historic districts) have been previously identified through survey or environmental review. Geographically isolated from neighborhoods to the north by the construction of State Route 180, the historic character of Lowell has largely been retained through years of neglect. Despite incompatible infill, many properties in disrepair, and some vacant lots, the Lowell area continues to exhibit the mature tree canopies, uniform setbacks, and regular rhythm of single-family houses and cottages indicative of the area’s prosperous work- ing-, middle-, and upper-middle class origins. These qualities and the building stock distinguish Lowell as an important early neighborhood in Fresno which retains much of its original char- acter. The protection and enhancement of Lowell’s historic and potentially historic resources should be a primary concern in the City’s current revitalization efforts. B. CONTEXT 2 Analysis by Page & Turnbull 2008-2009. As of August 2011, Roeding Park has not been formally listed on the National Register. 3 The Cultural Landscape Foundation website accessed August 26, 2011. http://tclf.org 6:4 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES B. CONTEXT (Continued) industrial areas and several major commercial thoroughfares, the majority of the Community Plan Area is residential. Most homes date from the early- and mid-20th century and are constructed on the City’s late 19th century grid street pattern that aligns with the cardinal directions. A handful of areas break from the grid in the self-contained subdivision style associated with the post- war era. Prominent architectural styles include Colonial Revival, Prairie Craftsman, Tudor Revival, Storybook, Spanish Revival, Minimal Traditional, and Ranch. In addition to residential neighborhoods, the Southeast Neighborhoods contain a considerable grouping of industrial properties in its southwestern portion near the railroad and State Route 41. Several of these properties represent Fresno’s early industrial history and have been designated as historic proper- ties by the City. Historic integrity throughout the Southeast area is somewhat fragmented due to alterations and large areas of more recent development. Several neighborhoods have retained their original character from the early 20th century, including the trees and landscape features that remain from their initial periods of development. While these neighborhoods may not meet criteria for designated historic districts, they deserve special planning consideration to protect historic elements and guide infill. The Southeast Neighborhoods contain over 30 previously identi- fied potentially historic properties; 26 properties have been designated by the City as historic resources. These include a high school and a collection of industrial buildings in addition to outstanding residential properties. One potential historic district has been identified to date: a. Huntington Boulevard Historic District. The Huntington Boulevard Historic District was formally designated by the City Council in 2015. It consists of early 20th Century resi- dential properties located on Huntington Boulevard from First Street on the west to Cedar Avenue on the east. 6. South Van Ness. South Van Ness contains a considerable grouping of industrial properties. Several of these properties represent Fresno’s early industrial history and have been des- ignated as historic properties by the City. A historic survey was conducted in 2015 which identified 17 properties that are eligible for the state or local registers, two potential heritage properties, and three potential historic districts. 7. Special Property Types. Several property types have been identi- fied as potentially historically significant to Fresno’s development history and can be found in several areas of the City. a. Bungalow Courts/Courtyard Housing. Bungalow courts and courtyard housing have been identified as an important residential property type in Fresno. One hundred and twenty- seven courts were identified through a city-wide reconnais- sance level survey in 2004. b. Garden Offices Complexes. Regional office park design of the post-World War period incorporated a series of low-rise, office buildings connected by open air gardens and atriums. Architects Robert Stevens and Gene Zellmer are notable pioneers of this building type, and often used Hans Sumpf stabilized adobe bricks in construction. c. Early Housing and Associated Structures. Early folk/vernacu- lar housing types such as Shotgun Houses and Hall & Parlor Houses are increasingly rare in Fresno. Ancillary buildings such as Carriage Houses and the summer kitchens of the Volga German community should also be treated with spe- cial attention. d. Sites, Structures, and Objects. It is important to note that properties other than buildings may also be historically significant. In Fresno, these may include signs, lampposts, street furniture, fountains, statues, public art, and infrastruc- ture such as bridges and canals. C. KEY DEFICITS In 1979, the City of Fresno’s City Council adopted a historic preservation ordinance, which was amended in 1999 (FMC 12-1600 et seq.). While numerous buildings, structures, objects, and sites located within the Community Plan areas have been preserved and protected through the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, several issues continue to threaten the City’s historic character and unique heritage. • Destruction of potential historic resources. A large number of potential historic buildings are being renovated without regard for the building’s potential significance. Many buildings have been irreparably altered. • Loss of potential historic districts. The historic character of areas identified as potential historic districts is being compro- mised by the demolition or inappropriate renovation of indi- vidual buildings. • Need to update historic resources inventories. While the City’s current Historic Resources database contains over 4,885 entries, many potential historic resources that have not been formally designated by the City are absent from the database. Bungalow Courts are an important residential property type in Fresno.The Huntington Boulevard Historic District consists of large early 20th Century properties located on Huntington Boulevard between First Street and Cedar Avenue. 6:5 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 Source: City of Fresno Planning and Development !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!(!(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !("""#################################") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") H UT F S E P R C N Q G A NAPA EASTDUNN BOYDT O P E K A ALTA B RACO LEEMAUDDWIGHT R A I L R O A D EIGHTHNIELSEN NINTHMINYO BALL CLAY EDEN ELEVENTHROSEHOLLYTYLER CLINTON BRALY LOTUSEL MONTE CEDARPOPPYPEARLBALCH G O L D E N S T A T E LEMON CLARAGEARY TERRACE MYERS HAWES KEARNEY IOWA MICHIGAN PLATT FIFTHEUNICEHOME BUTLER BONDBROWN IRW I N MONTECITOSIXTH C O B B UNIVERSITY P A R A L L E LANNAFOUNTAIN TULARE GENEVAFERNFERGER TURNER CHARLES HUNTER MONO KERCKHOFF TUPMANBREMER LAMONA DELPHIANORMAL LOWEADOLINEWELDON HEATONWESLEYBLACKSTONEPERALTA J O N E S ROOSEVELTMADISONVAGADES THIRDHAYSTONVAGEDESSIMPSON SAFFORDHUMBOLTCHERRYORCHARDABBYYOSEMITEVALENCIA M A R T I N K L E T T E P O T T L E LANEMARIPOSA IVYCHANDLER STROTHER LEWISPALM FOURTHPARKSARAHWHITES BRIDGE VERRUEFIRSTECHOALHAMBRA G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D TOWNSENDDOONPRINCETONFRESNO BENITOC O L L I N S ONEILL' LYELL OLIVE CAMBRIDGE WELLERWOODWARDLUCERNEBROADWAYWHITE ARCHIESECONDSNOWENGLEWOOD S A N T A F E NEVADA THESTAFOYNEJE ANN E HAMMOND BARDELLPL A Z A GRANTEFFIE MERCEDFULTON CHANCEFISHERTOBEY ROWELLANDREWS TRINITYAMAD ORFARRIS ORANGEANGUSMODOCMAROAWA T E R M A N WILSONPINE DUDLEY WISHONHARVEYEKLUND LIBERTY FLORADORA DENNETT H A Z E L W O O D ILLINOISTHORNEARTHUR AUGUSTAHEDGES WALNUTVOORMAN LYMAN KERN ELIZABETH M A Y O R OLEANDER HAMILTON THOMAS FAIRVIEWWEBSTER RAISINACARMEN BARTONDIAMONDSAN DIEGO MONTEREY SEVENTHYALE STEPHENSBELMONT HARVARD GEARHARTEL DORADOCLARKLINDENJACKSONVAN NESSCARRUTHDREXELFILLMORE DIVISADERO ELMKLONDIKE STANISLAUS CALLISCHSHERMANHARRISONLA SIE R R A VALERIADELNOFL0RENCE LILYCORTLAND SAN JOAQUIN MCKENZIE HOWARDSAN BENITOSANTA CLARACALAVERASDIANACHURCH FLORODORA WASHINGTON BEND L NICHOLASTENTHHARDTLORENAFRUIT LA SALLE TULIPFLORENCE GILBERT PICKFORDORLEANS FRANKLIN BERKELEY MILLBROOKMILDREDA TUOLUMNE PATTERSON MCKINLEY DONAHOO SHIELDS SACRAMENT O O PLUMASMARYATCHINSON CALIFORNIA VASSAR VENTURA LOS A N GELESGLENNPOPLARDEL MARW E B E R COLLEGECORNELL SAN PABLOHUNTINGTON MARTIN LUTHER KINGECHONINTHMICHIGANBLACKSTONE WELDON ELEVENTHTHIRDTHORNEMARIPOS A FLORODORA THIRDBELMONT FOURTHSTANISLAUSBLACKSTONETHORNEVALERIAFRESNOF PEARLTHIRDC O L L I N S NEVADA ETHORNE HARVEY ORCHARDCLARKFLORODORA H TERRACE HARVEYARTHUR MCKENZIE GRANT JACKSONBARTONEL MONTE BARTONWHITE GRANT DUDLEY TUOLUMNE STEPHENSTHORNEHAMMOND ELEVENTHVAN NESSTULARE OLIVE SHIELDS P MCKINLEY CHANCEFIRSTTHESTAHAMILTON LOWE B R O A DW A Y MAROABELMONT MCKINLEY LAMONA F FRESNO BONDF U L T O N CLINTON HAMILTON CEDARFRESNOWILSONMERCEDTULAREBONDQ MARIP OSA SHIELDS LOTUSVENTURA CORNELL B SNOWWILSONFRANKLIN PLAT TWILSONBELMONT WHITE FIFTHHEDGES VENTURACOLLEGEPARK PLAZAVENTURADELNOWILSON NINTHORCHARDH TENTHCALIFORNIA EIGHTHCALIFORNIA FOURTHPRINCETON NORMAL VAGADESSIMPSONIR W I N FOURTHPALMTHORNEA TERRACE FIFTHABBYVAN NESSCLARKV A N N E S S HEDGES MICHIGAN K L E T T E SHIELDS LORENA BROWN A CAMBRIDGE INYOFARRIS SECONDIOWA VASSAR GLENNHOME W E B E R MONO ALHAMBRA WOODWARDORCHARD SIXTHMONTEREYABBYCOLLEGE CALIFORNIAMERCEDPALMMYERS ORANGEO THIRDPLATT CEDARBELMONT ABBYEL DORAD ODELNO CEDARANGUSFRESNOSAFFORDDENNETT WOODWARD CHANCETHESTAHARVEY HEDGES CAMBRIDGE TULAREFMERCED OLIVE MCKENZIE HUNTINGTONMAROAVAN NESSMERCE D FOURTHSTROTHERDELNO ANGUSTRINITYBELMONT AU G U S T A SHIELDS YALE PINE BELMONT HAW E S MARIPOSALAMONAARTHUR FOURTHSECONDPRINCETON BRALYAMADORTHESTAOLIVECLARK ROWELLBRALYADOLINE WASHINGTON BELMONTTHORNE TULAREGLENNHEDGES PRINCETON DELNOROWELLYOSEMITECLINTON WASHINGTONFRESNO EL DORADO SECONDFLORADORA GILBERT MCKINLEY F F U L T O N L MCKENZIE THOMAS BELMONT VERRUEFRESNO A FLORADORA ORANGESAN PABLOBALCH DENNETT THESTACEDARHARVEY LOWE CLINTON AMADOR BROADWAYBROWN PINE PINE LORENAARTHUR C PICKFORDSIMPSON OLIVE S A N T A F E HEDGES EIGHTHHARVARD BALCHVAN NESSTYLER WALNUTHEDGESECHOCLARK NEVADA ILLINOISWISHONHDELNOCORNELL M TRINITYLOWEDELNOFTRINITYFOURTHNIELSEN MONOSAFFORDADOLINEGLENN FRUITANDREWS FIFTHGLENNHEDGES SANTA CLARA FLORENCE MICHIGAN CLINTON CEDARTURNER BELMONT BELMONT VENTUR A PRINCETON VERRUE IOWA TYLERFRUIT SACRA MENT O LILYTHOMAS HAMILTON TOWNSEND ALTA CAMBRIDGE ELEVENTHANGUSSAN JOAQUIN FIFTHMCKENZIE STANISLAUSPLATT HAMILTON OLIVE TYLER HOME FRESNO HEDGES BUTLER PLUMASPLUMASANDREWS HOME EFFIEILLINOIS SEVENTHFLORADORAFRESNO FIRSTBELMONT JACKSONPARALLELB R O A DW A Y NORMAL DENNETT R TENTHEFFIECALIFORNIA PERALTA IOWA P HAMMOND INYO FRESNOGLENNNINTHHUNTINGTON TYLER TERRACE JACKSONWHITEFULTON C O L L I N S THESTAPALMCLAY ILLINOIS TYLER H PLUMASHAMILTON YALE JACKSONDUDLEYTHORNE W A T E R M A N BELMONT L IOWAFRUITCORNELL PLUMASFLORODORA HUNTINGTON FIFTHFERN MICHIGAN AFARRISMILDREDA VENTURA CLINTON EIGHTHSEVENTHCALIFORNIA LAMONA INYO BROWN QARTHUR HAMILTONDEL MARCARRUTHVASSAR EASTVAN NESSGEARHARTBUTLER CORTLAND ARTHURNINTHPLUMASILLINOIS UNIVERSITY CEDARSEVENTHBELMONTBLACKSTONE CEDARHOWARDMCKINLEYWISHON OLIVE BELMONT MCKENZIEMAROA ROWELLMICHIGAN JACKSONG THOMAS MONO HAWESADOLINEVAGADES ROWELLFOURTHLIBERTY PERALTA GRANT MCKENZIE TULAREVAN NESSFARRISDENNETT HOME THORNEARTHURCLINTON FIRSTMARIPOSAMAROAVAGEDESBONDSTANISLAUS ANNATHORNEGRANT B TENTHTHESTAL TUOLU MNE TULARE MONOKERN UNIVERSITY VENTURAMILLBROOK EIGHTHPRINCETON THOMAS CALIFORNIA EL MONTEBLACKSTONEMCKINLEYFARRISVAN NESSFOURTHORANGEM A Y O R PINE PINE VERRUEVAN NESSPLUMASDELNOPALMNEVADAFOURTH KERCKHOFF TYLER TULAREHARRISONMERCEDMCKENZIE FOUNTAIN MONTECITOCLARKORCHARD CALIFORNIA F U L T O N ORLEANSTRINITYLOS ANGELESJACKSONFRESNO CARMEN MONTEREY ANGUSVENTURA FIFTHMADISON TRINITYTHORNEHARVARD MERCED MARIPOSASTANISLAUS INYO HARVEY CHANCETULAREARTHUREFFIECOLLEGE GFRUIT CARMEN ECHOVAN NESSBROWN BREMER NBROADWAY TULARE TULARE BALCH FLORENCE MILLBROOKJACKSONB R O A D W A Y CEDARSHIELDS VAN NESSFIFTHSEVENTHPALMFIRSTFOUNTAIN ELEVENTHUNIVERSITY DIAMONDB R O A D W A Y NORMALHARRISON EIGHTHMILLBROOKMADISON PRINCETON MODOCHARRISONTYLER AMADO RWISHON KEARNEY ELEVENTHGLENNLTULAREFRUIT BALCHCOLLEGEVAN NESSROOSEVELTHOMEWISHON P O T T L E FLORENCEANGUSCALAVERASCALIFORNIACHERRYBELMONT BARTONHARRISONMARYTHORNEGLENNMAROAWHITES BRIDGE VASSAR PALMGRANT TYLER CEDARWISHONROOSEVELTINYO STANISLAUS FIRSTB R O A DW A Y VENTURAECHOCOLLEGE V A N N E S SFRESNOHARRISONWELDON NEVADA FLORADORA BUTLER TULAREVAGADES ORANGEILLINOIS BELMONT CLINTON FIRSTFIFTHIOWA TOWNSEND PRINCETON SHIELDS OLIVE THIRDTULAREARTHUR ARCHIEBROWN MICHIGAN FRESNO J O N E S ILLINOIS THIRDMARIPOSAFIRSTEL DORADO CLARKMARIPOSAFARRIS BUTLERWISHONAG MCKINLEY CLARKHOME THORNEDELNOEFFIEL ANGUSA HARVARD VASSAR FULTONCHANCECORNELL ECHOECHODELNOPALMWHITE ANDREWS EFFIEBELMONTDEL MARFRANKLIN ADOLINESAN JOAQUIN WEBSTER ILLINOIS SECONDANGUSSEVENTHWELDON CALIFORNIATHORNE TULARE NORMAL SAN JOAQUIN KERN CARMEN CAMBRIDGE THORNELIBERTY C ANNAFOURTHMODOCCORTLAND C O L L I N S FLORENCE MCALAVERAS MARIPOSAB TENTHANDREWS ORCHARDDENNETT EIGHTHHEDGESDELNO ILLINOIS NEVADA LIBERTY OLIVE LOWE NORMAL VENTURA SAN BENITOFIFTHWELDON SECONDMARIPOS A NINTHKERNINYO CORNELL HPALM HOLLYHAMILTON ELEVENTHHARVEY SEVENTHCORNELL MERCED OLIVE HOME PARKROSEMARIPOSAH CHERRYSANTA CLARAOLEANDER VAN NESSABBYHUMBOLTJACKSONCALIFORNIA LORENA WASHINGTONCEDARFISHERFLORADORA ARTHURTERRACE WASHINGTON TENTHFLORENCEPLUMASFRUIT MARIPOSA LIBERTYTHESTAFRESNOFRUIT WALNUTTHOMAS FRANKLIN BLACKSTONEEL MONTE CORTLAND BUTLERCALAVERAS FOURTHBROADWAYLORENA ALHAMBRA FIFTHGCLARK FIRSTCLARKOLIVE ORANGEMERCEDECHOKERNCARMEN CALIFORNIA WHITE JACKSONORCHARDORANGEG CLINTON TUOLUMNE ILLINOIS HARVEY MCKENZIE HUNTINGTON FOURTHCOLLEGEA LINDENN EIGHTHCALIFORNIA VERRUE N FRESNOANGUSB ORCHARDPOPPYPALMLEEWISHONFLORODORA ELEVENTHUNIVERSITY BROADWAYVOORMAN WISHONMARYMONOFERGERDENNETT OLIVE E FRESNOSHIELDS TRINITYCEDARCOLLEGEBUTLER VOORMANHARRISON CORNELL BALCH FRUITEIGHTHVALERIASEVENTHTRINITYAMADOR DUDLEY THOMAS VAN NESSHARVARD LAMONA POPLARTHIRDWOODWARD B R O A D W A Y WEBSTER FIRSTEFFIEGEARHARTSAN PABLOABBYFRUITHARRISONPINE UNIVERSITY MARIPOSABARTONCALIFORNIA MILLBROOKSIMPSON ADOLINEFRUITHOME POPLARMADISON OLIVE HAMMOND FLORADORA SARAHFILLMORE LOS ANGELESWISHONB R O A D W A Y P SECONDFARRISATCHINSON ORCHARDHUNTINGTONWISHON THORNEPERALTA DUDLEY CORNELL BUTLER THOMAS EL DORADO FOURTHGRANT ARTHURHARVARD BARTONFERGERANGUSCALIFORNIA PERALTA K L E T T E WISHONFRESNODIVISADERO BARTONWASHINGTONEFFIEGLENNHEDGESLUCERNE FIRSTB MCKINLEY KERNTURNER MONO LYELLMODOC CLARAEDEN THIRDSTEPHENSARTHURMONO ANDREWS HOLLYCOLLEGEFIFTHOLIVE F P L A Z A NICHOLASFRESNOVENTURA PLUMASV A N N E S S SIMPSON HEATONGLENNVALERIA EIGHTHANGUSCALIFORNIA BALCH SAN JOAQUIN PINE FIRSTPINE STANISLAUSWHITES BRIDGE MAROAPRINCETON HOMEHARRISON THIRDCORNELL VENTURAVAGEDESFRESNOGLENN SECONDAUGUSTAHARVEYADOLINECLAY PINE FOUNTAIN M A R T I N P O T T L E BROWN ORCHARDLAMONAANGUS SIXTHNMAROACORNELL SANTA CLARAECHOAFRUIT ANGUSDUDLEY GENEVAYALE BLACKSTONERAISINACEDARMODOCC C HARVEY ANDREWS PALMFRUITEIGHTHPRINCETON ILLINOIS LEWIS MARIPOS A MCKENZIE NORMAL ROOSEVELTCEDARCLARKDIVISADERO VOORMAN SECONDVAGADESHEDGES HUNTINGTONFISHER LANEINYOWHITES BRIDGE WISHONHOME HAMILTON DENNETT COLLEGEMONOF U L T O N WEBSTER TERRACE LIBERTY ORANGEORCHARDHOME CALIFORNIA HOME G OLIVE THOMAS SEVENTHOMAROAYALE EUNICEBRALYINYO OLIVECLARK FIRSTHOME M A Y O R EKLUNDMODOCIVYVENTURAMARIP OSA BROWN HAZELWOODSECONDV A N N E S SSAN PABLOCALLISCHWILSONCEDARKERN CLAY THORNEPRINCETON WILSONTHOMAS FERGERSEVENTHANGUSFOURTHADOLINEG MERCEDFRUIT LORENA WISHONORANGEFLORADORA ABBYSIXTHDENNETT FOURTHPLATT YALE SAN PABLOTHESTACALAVERASFISHERSHIELDS MCKINLEY ROOSEVELTTUOLUMNE THIRDDELNOCOLLEGEWHITE ILLINOIS FRESNO ANGUSFLORADORA ELEVENTHBRALY TENTHORCHARDWILSONEFFIEINYO FOURTHEIGHTHWILSONA ORCHARDCORNELL EIGHTHP ORLEANS WASHINGTONPOPLAR CEDARCHURC H MAROAFARRISAUGUSTAARTHURNORMAL WASHINGTON HEDGES ANNAMCKINLEY FOUNTAIN ATCHINSON VENTURA GRANT CLAY HEDGES THOMAS L S A N T A F E PRINCETON PLATT WELDON HAMMOND WOODWARD HEDGES VAN NESSWELLERL VENTURAROOSEVELT E THOMASVAN NESSROWELLOLIVE DIANACAMBRIDGE RAISINAPLUMASMCKINLEY FRUITFLORADORATHESTA MONTECITO FIFTHS MARIP OSASTANISLAUSFRUIT MECHOPOPLAR B JACKSONH FIRSTCOLLEGEINYO JACKSONABBYFRESNOFOUNTAIN FRESNO FLORADORA MADISON TUOLUMNE TUOLUMNE C MERCEDH A Z E L W O O D PLAZAAMAD OR SAN JOAQUIN NINTHLEEBONDSAFFORDSANTA CLARAFLORODORA MONO HAYSTONMADISONAUGUSTA ILLINOIS SHIELDS VENTURAF U L T O N BONDTUOLUMNE CALLISCHOLIVE GRANTGRANT FRANKLIN G BARTONCOLLEGETHOMAS LYELLHARRISONYALE OLIVE KERNTHORNEFRESNO GRANTMARIPOSA FRESNOSIXTHFRANKLIN ELIZABETHADOLINE FISHERTERRACE OLIVE THORNENEVADA HAMMOND V A N N E S S TERRACE H FIRSTHAMMOND SIMPSON CLARKGEARHARTMAROACALLISCHTHESTANEVADA CALIFORNIA THORNENINTHVOORMAN LA SALLE ANGUSJACKSONHOWARDEL MONTE WELDON IVYELIZABETH OLIVE TRINITYFIFTHADOLINEGLENNARTHURMICHIGAN TUOLUMNE ORCHARDBELMONT FOURTHF U L T O N MICHIGAN HAMILTONCLARKHOWARDTERRACE THOMAS JACKSONFOUNTAIN HARVARD HARRISONBELMONTFRUITTHORNE KERCKHOFF CAMBRIDGE HAZELWOODBROADWAYOLIVE EIGHTHWILSONBROWN TUOLUMNE BROWN PRINCETON FOURTHSHIELDS KERCKHOFF SANTA CLARA HAWES TERRACE PLUMASATCHINSON TRINITYCLINTON CALAVERASCLINTON LEWIS BELMONT E F F I EDELNO ALTA NEVADAROOSEVELT VENTURA MARIPOS APALMFRUIT SARAHAMADOR CEDARFIRSTVENTURATHORNEW E B E R THESTAN PICKFORDPLAZAFERGERFRESNOMONO VENTURA LEMON FLORENCETHORNEPALM PINE DIANAWELDON HAZELWOODHOME PINE MICHIGAN FRUITSEVENTHFRUITGRANT TUOLUMNE DWIGHTEIGHTHTHOMASORCHARDTHESTAM A Y O R PERALTA HARRISONFRUITEIGHTHHOME ELEVENTHSEVENTHFLORENCE FLORADORA FRUITMCKINLEY EDEN BELMONT PRINCETON BELMONT C BALCH VENTURADEL MARHARRISONSIMPSONBENDFRUITFOUNTAINVAN NESSUNIVERSITY LORENA BARTONMAROADELNOWILSONWILSONHARRISONMCKENZIE SHIELDS HEDGES FISHERCLINTON THORNESTANISLAUSFLORENCEPLUMAS FRESNOFRUITO CEDARPALMBROWNARTHUR OLIVEADOLINEPERALTA MODOCFRANKLIN ORLEANS BELMONT MCKENZIE LOWE LORENA BUTLER LORENA LAMONA FIRSTGEARY HEDGES CALIFORNIAFRUIT V A N N E S S WHITEHOWARD TULARE BELMONTFRUITWHITE B FLORADORA THOMAS MCKENZIE A SIMPSON HAMILTON H HOWARDPARALLELHARVARD NINTHBELMONT NINTHENGLEWOODPALM ARTHURBELMONTVAN NESSBARTONDENNETT WALNUTMADISON MCKENZIECOLLEGEEFFIE GRANT TUOLUMNE ORCHARDWOODWARD CLAY HEATONPLUMASFIFTH JACKSONOLIVE IRW I N BARTONMARIPOSA OLIVE YALE TURNERSAN PABLOORCHARDMERCEDKERNLINDENCLAY STANISLAUS HOMEEFFIE HAMILTON HEATONCOLLEGEFIFTHUNIVERSITY PRINCETON NINTHMARIPOSAGLENNNINTHBELMONT LAMONA DELNOEIGHTHLANE FRUITSTROTHER ARTHURYALE PRINCETON STEPHENSPLATT V A N N E S S ROWELLANGUSWOODWARDPALMSIXTHHEDGES FLORENCE ELIZABETH BONDWA T E R M A N EDEN MODOCDELNOOLIVE H DONAHOOABBYOLIVE C BARTONSHIELDS CORTLAND FARRISSEVENTHHUNTINGTON CHARRISON U ELIZABETH FOURTHWASHINGTONFISHERHAMMOND G WHITEVAGADES C TOWNSEND YALE HEDGES GILBERT CALIFORNIATHORNEDUDLEY HARVARD MARIP OSA FIFTHEIGHTHTHORNELOS AN GELESTHORNEE IOWA HEDGES HOME ARTHURBUTLER CLINTON SIMPSON TULARE CHERRYBLACKSTONECORTLAND BUTLER P O T T L E LORENACALAVERASGLENN CLARKMCKINLEY CALIFORNIA DENNETT DUDLEY BELMONT F U L T O NSAN PABLOEKLUNDFRESNO MONODEL MARNEVADA TYLERDREXEL EFFIEGEARHARTCALAVERASFLORODORA ELIZABETH LOS AN GELES VASSAR CALAVERASANGUSH FLORENCETENTHBROWNBLACKSTONEVAN NESSF CEDARTHORNEB LAMONA CLAY ORANGETHESTAHARVARD ROWELLBELMONT HUNTINGTON NINTHTHOMASCLARK THIRDCLARKHEDGES CALIFORNIA INYO VENTURADEL MARGLENNP O T T L E UNIVERSITYDELNO FULTONWHITE FOUNTAIN BRALYCOLLEGEVOORMAN HAMILTONFRESNONEVADA MICHIGAN GRANTECHOHAMMOND HEDGES VENTURAHARVEY V A N N E S S CEDARHOME TENTHARTHURFLORENCE BLACKSTONEHARVARD SAN JOAQUIN TURNERDEL MARHOME HAMMOND HARVARD FISHERFOUNTAIN HOWARDELIZABETH BELMONT SIXTHGLENNEL MONTE HAMMOND MERCE D WILSONALHAMBRA ILLINOISANGUS G CLAYVAN NESSMSAN PABLOLEWIS THOMASFRESNO LYELLCLARKFRESNOORCHARDBROADWAYDUNN MONO AUGUSTAEL MONTEBLACKSTONE ORANGESEVENTHHOMEFARRIS DIVISADERO KERN TENTHMCKENZIE FIFTHBLACKSTONEPATTERSON FLORADORAEFFIEPRINCETONFRESNO WOODWARD F U L T O N MONO YALE BALCH LAMONA FLORADORA VASSAR ORLEANS TENTHCLAY LEWIS TENTHAUGUSTATHOMAS TERRACE MARIPOSAHARRISONTERRACE SHIELDS FIRSTANDREWS NINTHROWELLEL MONTEDELNOYALEANGUSTHOMAS SIXTHCORNELL FIFTHE E L M CORTLAND TYLERMAROA OLIVE BROWN ROWELLTHORNEFLORADORA EIGHTHFRESNOHUNTINGTON CALIFORNIA BELMONT THORNEBRALY JACKSONPLATT WASHINGTON OWISHON SAN BENITOSANTA CLARAILLINOIS PLUMASBUTLER NORMAL HOME LORENA CLINTON INYO VENTURAHARRISONCOLLEGEJACKSONCALAVERASORCHARDTUOLUMNE GEARY DIVISADERO MONTECITO MARIPOSA G DEL MARDUDLEY MADISON PRINCETON KERCKHOFF MARIPOS A FIFTHMADISONGLENN BUTLER PINE ANDREWS MCKINLEY ORCHARDSHIELDS CEDARMARIPOSACEDARARTHURELEVENTHYALE FIFTHHUNTINGTON THOMAS SHIELDS HAWES FPALMARTHUR PLATTFRESNO MERCED H WHITE YALE SAN JOAQUIN M A Y O RVAN NESSOLIVE BRALY ROWELLOLIVE FLORADORA VAN NESSMARIPOSATHIRDTHOMASCOLLEGE MODOCECHOHEDGES TOWNSEND CHANCEPINE FRESNOTULARE F U L T O N VENTURA KEARNEY CALIFORNIAFERGERLEWISVENTURABELMONTLOS ANGELESM OLIVE HEDGES HARVARD HOME GRANT TULARE UNIVERSITY EFFIEBALCH MCKENZIE VOORMANMAROA STANISLAUSFLORADORA S A N T A F E BROWN B ARTHURGRANTSAN PABLOORLEANSMAROAVASSAR L FOURTHTHOMAS BONDO O BELMONT YALE COLLEGEGRANT PLATT EL DOR AD OARTHUR ANGUSHARRISONWISHONBRALY THOMAS ROWELLFULTONROWELLEIGHTHMONTECITO PRINCETON NINTHGEARY VENTURA PLATT LOWE MCKINLEY MONTEREY SEVENTHHOME PALMPLATT MONO BALCH PRINCETON P DENNETT NINTHSIMPSON HEDGES MADISONTHESTA OGLENN FIRSTFRESNO HAMMOND MARTIN LUTHER KINGABBYMILDREDA FRUITILLINOIS WOODWARD MILLBROOKSIXTHTERRACE TENTHFLORADORA GRANT CHERRYCLARKVENTURABLACKSTONE H A Z E L W O O DTHESTAH HARVEY BELMONTPALM FRUITYALE CEDARTHOMAS IOWADELNO STROTHER VALERIABUTLERCALAVERAS BARTONBUTLERFIRSTP TULAREMARIPOSAMCKENZIE FIFTHBELMONT YALE SECONDHAZELWOODSAFFORDWHITES BRIDGE HARVARD YALEDEL MARNEVADA BE L M O N T FARRISHARVARD FRESNOFARRISSTEPHENS CEDARGLENNEIGHTHTULAREVAN NESSAMADOR OLIVE POPLARFRESNOSIMPSON MCKENZIE TOWNSEND CARMEN DIVISADERO TERRACE W A T E R M A N RWISHONTUOLU MNE BROWN FLORENCE EIGHTHFIFTHFIRSTV A N N E S SMAROA BELMONT C CALIFORNIAPOPLARFOURTHCORNELL CAMBRIDGE PALMMCKINLEY ECHOCORNELL CARMEN MILLBROOKYALE ARCHIEFRESNOMILLBROOKVENTURAPRINCETON LAMONA FIRSTINYO MARIP OSA TERRACE LEEGRANT CHURCH VERRUE L E HOME ELEVENTHCALLISCHTHESTAFRUITH FRANKLIN G O L D E N S T A T E SAFFORDUNIVERSITY VENTURA SHIELDSARTHUR THESTAFIRSTVAN NESSEIGHTHDUNN HEDGES BALCH OLIVE HARVARD BELMONTFRUIT THOMAS TULARESAN PABLOIOWAFRESNOBROWN THOMAS SHIELDS HAMILTON TERRACE DIVISADERO HARVEY NEVADA CALLISCHSTANISLAUSGRANT FIRSTCLARKDIANAFRUITMODOCVASSAR CORNELL DELNOCALIFORNIA FRANKLIN DUDLEY HAZELWOODUNIVERSITY WISHONJACKSONEFFIEPINE FOURTHORANGENEVADA MCKINLEY G UNIVERSITY DIVISADERO INYO EUNICETULARE SIMPSON PINE PLUMASAMADOR MODOCNEVADA HEDGES THORNEWILSONBLACKSTONEROWELLVAN NESSHOME SECONDOLEANDER FRESNOMCKINLEY BALCH CORNELL ANDREWS CORNELL FOURTHTYLER MERCED FIFTHBELMONT HEDGES KERNKERNPALM MAROAFLORENCE ORANGEELEVENTHL FIFTHFRESNO UNIVERSITY B MICHIGAN MARIPOSAPLUMASTHORNEM FRESNOHFRUITFRESNO SIMPSON B R O A D W A Y MONTEREYPALMHEDGES CLINTON BLACKSTONEFIRSTLORENAMAROAWILSON KERN ELEVENTHLAMONA ANGUSMICHIGAN TURNER MCKENZIE FLORADORA UNIVERSITY BARTONKEARNEY TRINITYV A N N E S S MERCED CARMENCLARK EIGHTHELIZABETH HAMMOND W A T E R M A N WELDON FRESNOINYO V A N N E S S THORNECEDARSAN PABLOTHIRDHOME AUGUSTATHOMAS FRESNOWISHONLORENA BONDLIBERTYFARRISP A R A L L E L ILLINOIS MONO BROWN Q FRESNOBARTONPERALTA CALAVERAS BARTONAMAD O R NINTHTHESTAMARIPOSA PARKVENTURA HARVARD PARKWISHONCLARKCLINTON TULARE AMADOR FRESNOANGUSFULTONROOSEVELTTUOLUMNE HARVARD SIMPSONOLIVE M WELDON TULAREAPALMKEARNEY PLUMASWHITE ORCHARDSAN PABLOFIFTHSECONDFARRISGRANT YALE DEL MARFULTONANGUSPINE NINTHWASHINGTON VENTURA ILLINOISTHESTAMCKINLEYLINDENROOSEVELTCOLLEGE MONOFIRSTROOSEVELT BALCHMAROAL SANTA CLARAPARALLELCOLLEGECALIFORNIA ILLINOISSECOND HUNTINGTON FLORENCE SHIELDS CAMBRIDGE ILLINOIS CLARKROOSEVELTSTROTHER BLACKSTONEROWELLVAGADESE BELMONT YALE NINTHCLAY TUOLUMNE V A N N E S S FOURTHCLAY HARVEYARTHURGLENN THOMAS VASSAR ORLEANSMARIPOSAHEDGES CLINTON PINE OLIVE P MARIPOSALOWE ANGUS ENGLEWOOD JACKSONFRESNOPINE MCKINLEY ORCHARDHAMILTON MICHIGAN TOWNSEND N C IOWA TUOLUMNE ORCHARDVENTURAWELDON VAN NESSCALAVERASHEDGESCOLLEGE FLORADORA MCKENZIETHORNE N OLEANDER HOME MONO MERCED SIXTHBERKELEY MERCE D MCKINLEY MICHIGAN KERCKHOFF LYELL VASSAR MILLBROOKA KERCKHOFF ANDREWS MONO CHANCEHOME THORNEOFRESNOABBY BARTONF U L T O N WOODWARD DIVISADERO CEDARENGLEWOOD OLIVE THESTANINTHCLAY SIMPSON CLINTON HARVEYCALAVERAS OLEANDER WILSONCLAY TULARE EIGHTHHAMMOND TULARE M HAWE S TULARE CEDARN KERNFOUNTAIN BARTONWELDON HARRISONDUDLEY LIBERTYMARIPOSAFRUITOLIVE MONTECITOFRUITPRINCETONADOLINE BARTONTHIRDSIXTHDIANAVAN NESSPEARLWISHONWILSONUCOLLEGE STANISLAUS CARMEN BLACKSTONEGEARY HOME WASHINGTON ELEVENTHFSAFFORD LFRUIT HOWARDIOWA MICHIGAN BREMER FRESNOTHOMAS TULARE CLAY ORANGETHORNECEDARTHORNEGLENNHARRISONWILSONHEDGES OLIVE WELDON HOME FIRSTWOODWARD EASTHOME YALE FRESNOWELDON GLENNTULAREADOLINE WHITE INYO NINTHP TENTHFLORODORA THORNEMCKINLEY HEDGES HOME HOME V A N N E S S TURNER M A Y O R L HAMILTONEFFIECORNELL NFRESNOCALAVERAS ILLINOISANGUSWELDONORCHARDLINDEN TULAREBROWN WOODWARD SEVENTHKERNCOLLEGECLINTON KERN CALIFORNIA EIGHTHOLIVE CEDARDELNOTHORNEMARIPOS A FOUNTAIN BELMONT UNIVERSITY VENTURA EASTHAYSTONTULARE HEATON THOMASMAROAOLIVE WOODWARD ATCHINSON POPLARTUOLUMNE TUPMANFLORODORA INYOCALIFORNIA PRINCETON NINTHRDEL MARORCHARDC O L L I N S TYLER YALE HARVARD THOMAS MCKENZIE LANE MICHIGAN MCKINLEY CHANCEM KEARNEY ILLINOIS KEARNEYDELNO FISHERSIMPSON THORNEFERGERK L E T T E FIFTHTHESTATERRACE ALHAMBRA JACKSONEFFIEYALE ECHOWISHONECHOM ORANGEONEILL'ELEVENTHEDEN FIRSTFRUITABBYGLENNIOWA VASSAR MONO HAMMOND ONEILL'SIXTHSIXTHHOME NINTHMONTEREYHARVARD CLARKMONTEREY TYLER CLARKFOURTHCORNELL MODOCOLIVE J O N E S B THIRDALTAARTHURPOPLARUNIVERSITY NEVADAMARIPOSA CALAVERAS BUTLERBLACKSTONEBUTLERMAROASIXTH FRESNO SHIELDS IOWA BELMONT HEDGES P O T T L E MARIPOS A A NEVADA HEDGES SECONDMAROAHAZELWOODMCKINLEY LIBERTYFRESNO HAWES STANISLAUSHEDGES B EIGHTHBONDLANEINYOVENTURA SANTA CLARA HOME SAN JOAQUIN WELDON OLEANDER HUNTINGTON TERRACE OLIVE B TENTHPALMN ELEVENTHJACKSONOLIVE ARTHUROLIVEARTHUR WELDON HFERGER FIFTHB R O A D W A Y CLINTON TOWNSENDANGUSSAN PABLOFILLMORE EL MONTE TUOLU MNE FRESNOORCHARDWASHINGTONARTHURDENNETT WHITEWILSONDELNOWELDON TENTHHARRISONOLIVE BLACKSTONEDELNOMONO INYO MILLBROOKFIFTHKERCKHOFF CAMBRIDGE MADISON FIFTHVENTURA TVAGEDES HAMILTONPALMMADISONTHIRDTHORNENFRUIT ATCHINSON FULTONBEND CEDAROLIVE G CALIFORNIATHORNE F U L T O N PARALLELELEVENTHTHIRDTULARE BELMONT OLIVE GLENNBALL PERALTA TENTHTHOMAS FIFTHMARYHARVARD HEDGES FRESNOMAROAFRANKLIN CEDARM THORNEHOME FIRSTLYELL OLIVE SIXTHVASSAR MONOSECONDWELDON WHITE ARTHURCALIFORNIA FISHERB R O A D W A Y YALE YOSEMITEMCKENZIE LORENA WOODWARD B R O A D W A Y LEMON CEDARLOWE VENTURA FIFTHMCKENZIE MCKINLEY WALNUTHAMILTONCLARKFRANKLIN DENNETT HOME OLIVE HUNTINGTON NINTHBALCH ROWELLELEVENTHLINDENSECONDFULTONELMFLORADORA STANISLAUSFARRISYALE WEBSTER MYERS KERN HARVARD MCKINLEY B R O A D W A Y ORCHARDFLORADORA SIMPSON MONO ANDREWS MADISON MCKENZIEFRESNO TULARE CAMBRIDGE ANGUSDIVISADERO HARVARD SECONDM A Y O R INYO THIRDFIRSTV A N N E S S MADISONHARRISONCORNELL JACKSONCLINTON FOURTHTURNER BUTLER MILDREDA ILLINOISFIFTHDIANATYLERDEL MARFRUITHAMMOND VENTURAMARIPOSAWASHINGTONFARRISCLINTON OLIVE F WHITEGLENN ELEVENTHWASHINGTONCLARK NINTHCLAY ARTHUROLIVE FRUITFIFTHGLENNEIGHTHHARVARD SANTA CLARADIVISADERO MCKENZIE CORNELL VALENCIA FRESNO FLORENCE THIRDE FULTONSAN PABLOANGUSFIFTHNINTHMCKENZIE HARVARD MCKENZIE DIANACLINTON EFFIEOLIVE GLENNFLORENCE WOODWARDCALAVERAS ELEVENTHGLENNNEVADA KERNEDEL MARPOPLARCLARKPLUMASCLINTON ARTHURHARRISONVASSAR ADOLINECLINTON WASHINGTON CALIFORNIA WELDON BRALY ANDREWS TULAREHARRISONLAMONA MILLBROOKBELMONT HEDGES HUNTINGTON ILLINOIS PERALTA FRESNO TULARE ANGUSALTA PRINCETON WOODWARD ILLINOISPOPLAR MODOCC BUTLERFRESNOFRUITMCKINLEY MARIP OSA MILLBROOKBELMO N T BRALY EIGHTHDIANAKERNORANGEGRANTPALM LOWE VASSAR TUOLUMNEECHO THESTAF U L T O N TULAREMAROACLINTON NORMAL HEDGES TUOLUMNE EIGHTHFLORENCE FRANKLIN MCKENZIE F MCKINLEY O SECONDTHIRDMADISON EIGHTHFIRSTSAN DIEGOPOPLAR BUTLER FRESNOCLAY OLIVE H KEARNEY HEDGES YALE TENTHF MERCED TULAREMONOFRUIT IOWA THIRDHARRISONLA SIERRA B ARCHIEFOURTHLYELLMILLBROOKVAGADESHOWARDDUDLEY CARMEN MARIPOSAFIRSTM A R T I N VASSAR VAN NESSLYELLTHESTAWELDON M HOME CARMEN MARIPOSAFRESNO LANE O ROWELLSIXTHCALLISCHTYLER OLIVE WELDON HAMILTON BELMONT BELMONT SECONDPALMMERCED HEDGES SAN JOAQUIN ALTA HAWES WHITES BRIDGE FOUNTAIN GRANTCOLLEGE FIRSTFIRSTDEL MARVAN NESSORLEANS MARIPOSA MCKENZIE ALTAARTHUR ILLINOIS BUTLER MONTEREY FLORENCE BARTONFIFTHBLACKSTONECLAY F U L T O N HEDGES TURNERMAROACALAVERAS ELEVENTHECHOCOLLEGEUNIVERSITY WELDON STANISLAUSSIMPSON FOURTHM CLARKFRANKLIN EIGHTHPERALTA NINTHLOWEFRESNOMARIPOSALAMONA SIMPSON TRINITYH A HOME NINTHANDREWS OLIVE MONO BARTONDIVISADEROPALM HAMILTON GRANTMAROAFLORADORA L THIRDPRINCETON MONOWILSON LORENAMONO CALIFORNIA H IVYBARTONTULARE PLAZAKEARNEY PALMIOWA MCKENZIE MICHIGAN TULARE CALAVERASFULTONNEVADA E BREMER WASHINGTON IOWA CEDARJACKSONEFFIEHAMMOND ARTHURMONTEREY CAMBRIDGE YALE ELEVENTHH M GEARY FIFTHPALMPINE BONDCHERRYGRANT E HARVARD ANDREWS PALMCARMEN FLORENCEFRUIT CEDARTHIRDBRALY THIRDMICHIGAN AUGUSTASHIELDS FLORADORA THESTAROWELLFOUNTAIN COLLEGEVASSAR POPLARO PLUMASMERCE D WOODWARD MADISONHARRISONTHOMAS TENTHTULARE ANGUSHARVEY BARTONANGUSELINDEN LYELL P A R A L L E L SECONDFIFTHTHORNECLINTON FLORADORAWILSON SECONDBELMONT HAMMOND BREMERVAGEDES STROTHER CALAVERASNINTHAMADOR BARTONSTANISLAUS CLARKBROADWAYTHIRDVAN NESSHARRISONF U L T O N MILLBROOKBROADWAYF HUNTINGTON OLIVE VAGEDESLORENA KERCKHOFF TERRACE TULARE TULARETHORNESIMPSON BROWN SANTA CLARAMADISON B R O A D W A Y KEARNEY STANISLAUS FRESNOTHORNEINYOTHESTAGLENNMCKINLEY ARTHURTOWNSEND CORNELL THORNEFRUITHOME WISHONFLORADORA STANISLAUS MONTECITO LEMON PATTERSON CALAVERASCEDARTENTHLORENA FIFTHNINTHEIGHTHFOURTHFRESNOSEVENTHABBYPRINCETON SAN JOAQUIN R NINTHTULAREMARIPOSA ROWELLVAN NESSSIXTHKERCKHOFF PINE K L E T T E OLIVE BELMONT MYERS JACKSONMCKINLEY 5 7 1 4 2 3 3 3 8 6 9 93 96 95 71 51 46 43 3184 62 63 67 99 69 85 11 68 70 24 25 97 72 666523 19 55 17 48 2120 47 16 61 18 54 50 53 49 58 777659 22 57 10 8687 41 88 90 89 92 45 39 44 42 40 35 383736 14 15 33 34 13 32 12 98 27 82 83 56 60 78 75 30 91 74 94 64 52 26 271 270 269 268 266 264 267 261 262 263 011 260259 258 257 255 254 253 248 247 246 245 244 252 250 251 199 141 137 101 100 189110 125 124 123 157174 172 163 161 203237160213 212 159 169 168 121 156 231 167166 226 164 119 152 151 147 149146150145115116114148118 155 117112 211 144 153 173171170 185 242 193 128 129 133126 132 131 134127 130 186207 109 188 201 221 217216 175 196 243215 235 236 240 238 210 191 178 218 214 202 219 205 233 192194 143206 223222 204140139224 135 142208 138 180 108 102 105 184 229 209 103 176 197 183 239106 234 122 198 179 230 200 225 195 107 232 181 104 241 120 228 190 162 158 014 013 010 008 009 001 003 005 007 S.R. 41S.R. 1 8 0 S . R . 9 9 S.R. 168MARKSCHERYLGRIFFITH ATLASPONTIAC BRIARWOODRICEWOODBELLAIRE SUSSEX SAGINAWMARKS RICEWOODPONTIAC BRIARWOODGRIFFITH ATLASSUSSEX FINEWINERYMCKINLEYLAUREENNORMAL WELDON UNIVERSITY MCKINLEY CHESTNUTDEARINGHUNTINGTON BALCH LAUREL FILLMORE GARDENPLATT RECREATIONDEARINGFILLMORE LAUREL GARDENRECREATIONBUTLER CHESTNUTLYELL HEATON ORLEANS TOWNSEND GARDEN!(187 2973!(!( !( !( 79 81PALMMAGILL FREMONT FERGERHARRISONPALO ALTO PAUL SAFFORDROOSEVELTMAGILL PALO ALTO PAUL !(182 SHAW HAYESSANTA ANA !(227 SHAW CORNELIADALEMIS S I O N PA R K W A Y FORESTIEREFAIRMONT !(177 SIXTHBULLDOG NINTHMILLBROOK!(136 Kearney Blvd.National Register Eligible/landscape 8 S.R. 41D:\projects\hpbasemap3.mxd LEGEND HISTORIC DISTRICTS: DESIGNATED AND PROPOSED Adoline - Palm (Proposed)(1991 Tower District Specific Plan) Bellevue Bungalow (Proposed)(1994 Ratkovich Plan) Chandler Field/Fresno Municipal Airport (Designated 2005) East Madison (Proposed)(1994 Ratkovich Plan) Huntington Boulevard (Designated 2015) Lower Fulton - Van Ness (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) L Street (Proposed)(1994 Ratkovich Plan) North Park (Proposed)(1994 Ratkovich Plan) Porter Tract (Designated 2000) Santa Fe Warehouse (Proposed)(1994 Ratkovich Plan) St. Johns (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Terrace Gardens (Proposed)(1991 Tower District Specific Plan) Wilson Island Wilson's North Fresno Tract (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) EARLY ETHNIC NEIGHBORHOODS Uptown Culture-Arts District Chinatown Germantown Old Armeniantown d:\projects\hpbasemap5.mxd "#1991 Weitz Survey 1994 Ratkovich Survey Heritage Properties")!( !( !( !( !( SYMBOLIZATION Local Register of Historic Resources National Register of Historic Places Local Significance Relocated Outside City Demolished Properties HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR 1 Old Fresno Water Tower 2444 Fresno St.1894 91 City Fire Alarm Station 2945 Fresno St.1917 183 Herbert C. Gundelfinger Home 1038 E. Yale Ave.1919 2 Thomas R. Meux Home 1007 R St.1889 92 Van Valkenburgh Home 1125 T St.1903 184 Drs. George & Jessie Hare Home 815 E. McKinley Ave.1918 3 Warehouse Row Buildings 764 P St.1903-1910 93 National Warehouse 860 Santa Fe Ave.1905-1930 185 William Saroyan Residence 3204 E. El Monte Way 1914 3 Warehouse Row Buildings 744 P St.1903-1910 94 Santa Fe Hotel 935 Santa Fe Ave.1926 186 Jacob Parret Home 2069 E. Harvey Ave.1900 3 Warehouse Row Buildings 702 P St.1903-1910 95 Fasset Home #1 905 P St.1900 187 William Saroyan Residence 2729 W. Griffith Way 1963 4 Physicians Building 2607 Fresno St.1926 96 Fasset Home #2 915 P St.1900 188 Joseph Maracci Residence 985 N. Van Ness Ave.1916 5 Fresno Republican Building 2130 Kern St.1919 97 Neverman Home 309 M St.1912 189 Thomas Arrioto Residence 505 E. Kearney Blvd.1932 6 Fresno City College 1101 E. University Ave.1916 98 Old Barn 100-1/4 M St.1900 190 Tower Theater 815 E. Olive Ave.1939 7 Warnors Theater 1400-1430 Fulton St.1929 99 Fresno Trolley Cars (Diner)1731 S. Cherry Ave.c1912-c1925 191 Eugene Mathewson Residence 319 N. Calaveras St.1905 8 Louis Einstein Home 1600 M St.1913 100 American Self Storage Co.1844 S. Cherry Ave.1918 192 Hiram Barkalew Home 153 N. Van Ness Ave.1911 9 Y.W.C.A. Residence Hall 1660 M St.1921 101 Holt Lumber Co.1916 S. Cherry Ave.1915 193 Dr. Oliver Howard Home 3263 E. Huntington Blvd.1914 10 Santa Fe Depot 2650 Tulare St.1896 102 Main Home 520 W. Princeton Ave.1914 194 Thomas Cowan Residence 153 N. Yosemite Ave.1906 11 Southern Pacific Depot 1713 Tulare St.1889 103 Peden Home 315 E. Brown Ave.1937 195 C. W. Harlow Residence 986 N. Roosevelt Ave.1913 12 Tinkler Mission Chapel 475 N. Broadway 1917 104 Old St. Agnes Hospital 603 W. Home Ave.1929 196 John H. Fearon Residence 2540 E. Grant Ave.1906 13 Bethel Lutheran Church 183 N. Broadway 1917 105 Miller Home 1516 N. Van Ness Ave.1910 197 Shipp-Selland Residence 1002 E. Cambridge Ave.1919 14 Spencer Home 395 N. San Pablo Ave.1899 106 Mosgrove Home 660 E. Pine Ave.1910 198 Blum Residence 3870 E. Huntington Blvd.1927 15 Woolfolk Home 267 N. San Pablo Ave.1907 107 James Porteous Home 1095 N. Van Ness Ave.1911 199 Sullenger Building 2420-2440 Stanislaus St.1921 16 Scottish Rite Temple 1455 L St.1937 108 Solorio Residence 415 N. Ferger Ave.1927 200 Osage Apartment Building 635 E. Belmont Ave.1929 17 Fresno County Hall of Records 2281 Tulare St.1935 109 Vincent Home 921 N. San Pablo Ave.1889 201 Eaton Flats Apartments 125-131 N. Fresno St.1917 18 Beeler/Thorton Machine Shop 914 M St.1915 110 St. Alphonsus Catholic Church 307 W. Kearney Blvd.1913 202 Moore-Koop Residence 258 N. College Ave.1895 19 Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church 2226 Ventura St.1914 111 Teilman Home 919 W. Kearney Blvd.1915 203 Hoonanian Residence 461 N St.1900 20 McVey Home 1322 N St.1903 112 Helm Home 1749 L St.1901-1902 204 Ira Brooks Home 226 N. Fulton 1905 21 McVey Home 1326 N. St.1903 113 Long (Black) Home 1727 L St.1907 205 Porter-Barnard Home 320 N. Fulton 1909 22 Old Post Office Substation 2404 Kern St.1921 114 Bean Home 1705 L St.1904 206 Kutner Residence 174 N. Fulton St.1910 23 First Mexican Baptist Church 1061 E St.1924 115 Kutner Home 1651 L St.1901 207 George Fathy Residence 844 N. Van Ness Ave.1922 24 Fresno Buddhist Temple 1340 Kern St.1920 116 Montgomery Thomas Home 1642 L St.1897 208 Sample Sanitarium 311 N. Fulton St.1913 25 First Armenian Presbyterian Church 515 Fulton St.1905 117 Newman Home (Removed)1743 L St.1911 209 Normandy Village Apartments 2617-2645 N. Maroa 1935 26 Fresno Brewing Co.100 M St.1907 118 Towne Apartments 1717 L St.1908 210 Ella Hoxie Home 251 N. Blackstone Ave.1896 27 Fresno City College Library 1122 E. University Ave.1931 119 Fresno Bee Building 1545 Van Ness Ave.1922 211 Velvet Ice Cream Co. Building 1948-1950 Broadway 1929 28 Fort Miller Block House 890 W. Belmont Ave.1851 120 P. G. & E. Building 1401 Fulton St.1923 212 Basque Hotel 1102 F St.1922 29 Roessler Winery 1902 N. Winery Ave.1893 121 Pacific Southwest Building 1060 Fulton Mall 1923 213 Fresno Fire Department No. 3 1406-1430 Fresno St.1939 30 A. G. Wishon Home 3555 E. Huntington Blvd.1915 122 Mason Building 1044 Fulton Mall 1918 214 Henry Offutt Home 227 N. Glenn Ave.1900 31 Sun Maid Raisin Growers Coop.2901 E. Hamilton Ave.1918 123 Bank of Italy 1001 Fulton Mall 1917 215 Prior Home 458 N. Howard Ave.1921 32 Hayhurst Home 405 N. Broadway 1919 124 Radin-Kamp Department Store 959 Fulton Mall 1924 216 Edward Waterman Home 2535 E. McKenzie Ave.1904 33 Cowdrey Home 330 N. Park Ave.1903 125 T. W. Patterson Building 2014 Tulare St.1922 217 C.C.S. Tufts Home 2635 E. McKenzie Ave.1889 34 Cardwell Home 357 N. Glenn Ave.1895 126 Aten Home 1133 S St.1914 218 Donahoo Home 103 N. Park Ave.1891 35 Thompson Home 274 N. Glenn Ave.1892 127 Gilbert Home 1145 T St.1910 219 W. H. Spencer Duplex 401-403 San Pablo Ave.1928 36 Hines Home 333 N. Blackstone Ave.1886 128 Ewing Home 1025 T St.1916 220 Emmanuel Lutheran Church 1115 U St.1929 37 Griffen Home 319 N. Blackstone Ave.1913 129 F. K. Prescott Home 2983 Tulare St.1906 221 Frank L. Smith Home 245 N. U St.1910 38 Brix Home 313 N. Blackstone Ave.1910 130 Anderson Home 1120 T St.1913 222 John Humiston Home 229 N. Yosemite St.1905 39 Hewitt Home 175 N. Diana St.1891 131 Goodman Home 1060 T St.1906 223 Christian Samuelson Home 232 N. Yosemite St.1919 40 Anderson Home 329 N. Clark St.1911 132 Gundlefinger Home 1020 T St.1910 224 T.E. Mellen Property 250 N. Yosemite St.1907 41 Collins Home 1107 R St.1905 133 Martin Home 1002 T St.1912 225 Nystrom Residence 725 N. Wilson Ave.1932 42 Shipp Home 305 N. Clark St.1905 134 John Meux Home 1045 U St.1907 226 Parker Nash Building 1462 Broadway c1898 43 Rutherford Home 230 N. Clark St.1888 135 Cobb Home 271 N. Yosemite St.1913 227 Brewer Adobe 5901 W. Shaw Ave.c1923 44 McKay Home 201 N. Clark St.1899 136 Proffitt Home 5218 N. Millbrook Ave.1911 228 Jacob Andreas Home 309 E St.1905 45 Gerlitz Home 121 N. U St.1905 137 Stone Home 408 N. Fulton St.1877 229 Wild Residence 567 E. Clinton Ave.1929 46 Bonsel/Rush Home 115 N. U St.1904 138 A. G. Wishon Home 340 N. Fulton St.1904 230 Roosevelt High School 4250 E. Tulare Ave.1920-1950 47 Ramona Apartments 1316 L St.1911 139 Farr Home 245 N. Fulton St.1907 231 Hopkins Residence 1458 E. Divisadero Ave.1909 48 Brix Apartments 2301 Fresno St.1913 140 Alexander Home 235 N. Fulton St.1908 232 Whitney-Huntting Home 1105 N. Echo Ave.1917 49 Fresno City Hall (Annex)2326 Fresno St.1939 141 Hanger Home 425 N. Fulton St.1900 233 Adam Baird Home 136 N. Van Ness Ave.1889-1890 50 U.S. Post Office (Main)2309 Tulare St.1939 142 McIndoo Home 310 N. Fulton St.1913 234 Kearney Boulevard Gateway Fresno St. at Kearney Blvd.1933 51 Chorbajian Home 647 M St.1916 143 McAlphine Home 171 N. Van Ness Ave.1900 235 Joseph J. Bolitho Home 33 N. Calaveras St.1918-1919 52 Fresno Memorial Auditorium 1235 O St.1935 144 Graff Home 916 E. Divisadero St.1905 236 McGee-Macias Home 115 N. Calaveras St.1898 53 Old Fresno Unified School District Office 2348 Mariposa Mall 1936 145 Evinger Home 2024 Amador St.1912 237 Valley Lahvosh Baking Co.502 M St.1920-1921 54 Maubridge Apartment Building 2344 Tulare St.1911 146 Sadler Office Supply Co.1717 Van Ness Ave.1926 238 E. J. Huntzicker Memorial Hall 245 N. Calaveras St.1938 55 Schmidt Home 460 N St.1908 147 Romain Home 2055 San Joaquin St.1905 239 Gates-Twining Home 640 E. Pine Ave.1932 56 Mink Home 344 N St.1907 148 Davidson Home 1762 Van Ness Ave.1906 240 John C. Fox Home 128 N. Calaveras St.c1905 57 Turpin Home 2522 Inyo St.1915 149 Gundelfinger Home (The Mansion)2201 Calaveras St.1912 241 Samuel E. Johnston Home 1526 E. Andrews Ave.1952 58 Twining Laboratories 2527 Fresno St.1930 150 Harvey Swift Home 1605 L St.1905 242 State Center Warehouse and Cold Storage Co. 747 R St.1918 59 Berven Rug Mills Inc.616 P St.1917 151 Hoover Residence 1552 L St.1916 243 Thomas Thorn Home 2543 E. Madison Ave.1910 60 Central Packaging Supply Co.2534 San Benito St.1920 152 Nestel Home 1527 L St.1897 244 The Cearley-Twining Home 625 E. Home Ave.1918 61 Rainbow Ballroom (Natatorium)1725 Broadway 1918 153 First Congregational Church 11 N. San Pablo Ave.1911 245 The Nis Johnson Home 601 E. Pine Ave.1921 62 Legler Home 305 E St.1900 154 First Church of Christ Scientist 1615 N St.1916 246 Shams Rio Grande Service Station 205 Fulton St.1938 63 Fresno Temple Church of God 208 E St.1914 155 Temple Beth Israel 2336 Calaveras St.1923 247 Dale Brothers Coffee Can Sign 1420 H St.c1937 64 Bank of America Building 957-951 F St.1908 156 Schutz Residence 1522 N St.1900 248 Benham Ice Cream Co./Dale Brothers Coffee Co. Bldg 1420-1432 H St.1912-1937 65 Bow On Tong Association Building 935 China Alley 1920 157 Turner Building 802-812 Van Ness Ave.1922 248 Benham Ice Cream Co./Dale Brothers Coffee Co. Bldg 1420-1432 H St.1912-1937 66 Bing Kong Tong Association Building 921-929 China Alley 1900 158 Blacks Market 755 Van Ness Ave.1923 249 J.M. Menend/Murray Ice Cream Co. Building 175 Fulton St.1924 67 Vartanian Home 362 F St.1891 159 James Phelan Building 700 Van Ness Ave.1914 250 John Fairweather Home 248 N. Van Ness Ave.c1905 68 Zacky Farms Grain Elevators 315 H St.1938 160 Sun Stereo Warehouse 736 Fulton St.1918 251 John B. Frinchaboy Home 243 N. College Ave.c1903 69 Fresno Planing Mill 1820 Monterey St.1917 161 Rustigian Building 701-723 Fulton St.1920 252 William and Helen Sutherland Home 1460 N. Wishon Ave.1913-1914 70 Bekins Van and Storage 301 Van Ness Ave.1921 162 Carmel Saddlery 748 Broadway 1916 253 W. D. Coates Home 264 N. Van Ness Ave.c1905 71 Travelers Hotel 1812 Tulare St.1916 163 Zellerbach Paper Co. Building 1776 Kern St.1918 254 Amazon S. Hays Home 330 N. Fulton St.c1907 72 Komotos Department Store and Hotel 1536-1542 Kern St.1908 164 P.G. & E. Building 1544 Fulton St.1926 255 Mary Matson Home 1440 E. Divisadero St.1904 73 Roessler Home 4881 E. University Ave.1914 165 Wilson Theater Building 1445-1463 Fulton St.1926 257 Former Santa Fe Land Improvement Co.209 N. Diana St.c1900 74 Johnson Home 3811 E. Illinois Ave.1907 166 Hotel Fresno 1257 Broadway 1913 258 Gustav and Edith Manheim Home 617 E. Pine Ave.1920 75 Mundorff Home 3753 E. Balch Ave.1917 167 Mattei Building 1177 Fulton Mall 1921 259 Floyd W. Cowan Home 642 E. Weldon Ave.1921 76 Weems Home 3121 E. El Monte Way 1918 168 Helm Building 1101 Fulton Mall 1914 260 W.P. Stanton Home 650 E. Weldon Ave.1921 77 Hughes Home 743 S. Fourth St.1917 169 Hobbs Parsons Produce Co.903 H St.1903 261 Fresno Photo Engraving Building 748-752 Fulton Street 1946 78 Robinson Home 1003 S. Orange Ave.1900 170 Rowell Building 2100 Tulare St.1912 262 Liberty Laundry Building 1830 Inyo Street 1928 79 Shuttera Home 320 S. Chestnut Ave.1924 171 Liberty Theater 944 Van Ness Ave.1917 263 Baskin's Auto Supply Sign 729 Broadway 1956 80 John Euless Home 373 S. Peach Ave.1913 172 Kern Kay Hotel 906-912 Van Ness Ave.1912 264 Frank Chance Field Site sw corner Ventura and Cedar 1935-1941 81 Wiley Giffen Home 4824 E. Butler Ave.1916 173 Hotel Virginia 2125-2139 Kern St.1920 265 William F. Jones Home 1112 E. Franklin Avenue 1911 82 Van Ness Gate Entrance 2208 S. Van Ness Ave.1925 174 Hotel California 851 Van Ness Ave.1923 266 The Deacon-Eilert Home 660 E. Carmen Avenue 1919 83 California Products Co.3000 E. Butler Ave.1898 175 Owen Home 2631 E. Washington Ave.1902 267 The John B. Marshall Homes 164 N. Echo Avenue c1884, c1908 84 San Joaquin Grocers Wholesale Warehouse 104 Fulton St.1913 176 Russ Clements Service Station 2740 N. Van Ness Ave.1926 268 George and Adelphia Rowell Home 153 N. Effie Street 1903 85 St. Genevieves Catholic Church 1127 Tulare St.1938 177 Forestiere Underground Gardens 5021 W. Shaw Ave.1906 269 United Grocers Warehouse 801 R Street 1931 86 St. Johns Cathedral Catholic Church 2814 Mariposa St.1902 178 Ohannesian Home 1225 E. Divisadero St.1920 270 Crest Theater 1160 Broadway Plaza 1949 87 St. Johns Rectory 2814 Mariposa St.1928 179 Clovis M. Cole Home 3615 E. Kerckhoff Ave.1914 271 Alfred and Minnie Cherin Home 233 E. Cornell Ave.1949 88 St. Johns Hall School 2811 Mariposa St.1926 180 Gibbs Home 369 N. Ferger Ave.1918 272 Frank and May Driver Home 129 N. College Ave c1902 89 H. H. Brix Mansion 2844 Fresno St.1911 181 Paul Kindler Home 1520 E. Olive Ave.1929 90 Rehorn Home 1050 S St.1906 182 Frank J. Craycroft Home 6545 N. Palm Ave.1927 FIGURE 6-1 - HISTORIC RESOURCES AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS* N • Need for guidance on rehabilitation of potentially historic build- ings. Property owners appear to lack information and guidance for how to rehabilitate older and potentially historic buildings. As a result, potentially historic resources have been rehabilitated in ways that impact the integrity of the potential resources and the character and context of the surrounding area. • Incompatible Infill. Incompatible infill has been a primary cause of damage to the area’s historic character, particularly in those areas where smaller parcels have been assembled into large sites that are out of scale with the original development pattern. The lack of design standards relative to nearby historic sites has compromised the historic fabric of the neighborhoods. D. VISION FOR CHANGE Downtown Fresno and its neighborhoods are connected to their heritage and culture through a diverse network of buildings, places and activities. The Downtown Neighborhoods area contains one of the largest concentrations of historic resources in the Central Valley and is a source of identity and community pride for Fresno’s residents. Visitors to the area are treated to a wide variety of build- ings, structures, objects, sites, and districts that represent Fresno’s diverse history from the earliest years to the present. The City has strong standards for ensuring the preservation of historic resources for future generations, and new investment is compatible with and sensitive to the existing character of each neighborhood. * This Figure is current as of March, 2011. An updated map will be provided upon Plan adoption. The portions of the Downtown Neighborhoods not shown in this Figure do not contain historic resources or historic districts as of March, 2011. KEY !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !("""#################################") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") H UT F S E P R C N Q G A NAPA EASTDUNN BOYDT O P E K A ALTA B RACO LEEMAUDDWIGHT R A I L R O A D EIGHTHNIELSEN NINTHMINYO BALL CLAY EDEN ELEVENTHROSEHOLLYTYLERCLINTON BRALY LOTUSEL MONTE CEDARPOPPYPEARLBALCH GOLDEN STATE LEMON CLARAGEARY TERRACE MYERS HAWES KEARNEY IOWA MICHIGAN PLATT FIFTHEUNICEHOME BUTLER BONDBROWN IR W I N MONTECITOSIXTH C O B B UNIVERSITY P A R A L L E LANNAFOUNTAIN TULARE GENEVAFERNFERGER TURNER CHARLES HUNTER MONO KERCKHOFF TUPMANBREMERLAMONADELPHIANORMAL LOWEADOLINEWELDON HEATONWESLEYBLACKSTONEPERALTA J O N E SROOSEVELT MADISONVAGADES THIRDHAYSTONVAGEDESSIMPSONSAFFORD HUMBOLTCHERRYORCHARDABBYYOSEMITEVALENCIA M A R T I N K L E T T E P O T T L E LANEMARIPOSA IVYCHANDLER STROTHER LEWISPALM FOURTHPARKSARAHWHITES BRIDGE VERRUEFIRSTECHOALHAMBRA G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D TOWNSENDDOONPRINCETONFRESNO BENITO C O L L I N S ONEILL' LYELL OLIVECAMBRIDGE WELLERWOODWARDLUCERNEBROADWAYWHITE ARCHIESECONDSNOWENGLEWOOD S A N T A F E NEVADA THESTAFOYNEJEANNEHAMMOND BARDELLP L A Z A GRANTEFFIE MERCEDFULTONCHANCEFISHERTOBEY ROWELLANDREWS TRINITYAMADORFARRIS ORANGEANGUSMODOCMAROAW A T E R M A NWILSONPINEDUDLEYWISHON HARVEYEKLUND LIBERTY FLORADORADENNETT H A Z E LW O O D ILLINOISTHORNEARTHUR AUGUSTAHEDGES WALNUTVOORMAN LYMAN KERNELIZABETH M A Y O R OLEANDER HAMILTON THOMAS FAIRVIEWWEBSTER RAISINACARMEN BARTONDIAMONDSAN DIEGOMONTEREY SEVENTHYALE STEPHENSBELMONT HARVARD GEARHARTEL DORADOCLARKLINDEN JACKSONVAN NESSCARRUTHDREXELFILLMORE DIVISADERO ELMKLONDIKE STANISLAUSCALLISCHSHERMANHARRISONLA SIERRA VALERIADELNOFL0RENCE LILYCORTLAND SAN JOAQUINMCKENZIE HOWARDSAN BENITOSANTA CLARACALAVERASDIANACHURCH FLORODORA WASHINGTON BEND L NICHOLASTENTHHARDTLORENAFRUITLA SALLE TULIPFLORENCE GILBERT PICKFORDORLEANS FRANKLIN BERKELEY MILLBROOKMILDREDA TUOLUMNE PATTERSONMCKINLEY DONAHOO SHIELDS SACRAMENTO O PLUMASMARYATCHINSON CALIFORNIA VASSAR VENTURA LOS ANGELESGLENNPOPLARDEL MARWEBERCOLLEGECORNELLSAN PABLOHUNTINGTON MARTIN LUTHER KINGECHONINTHMICHIGANBLACKSTONEWELDON ELEVENTHTHIRDTHORNEMARIP OSA FLORODORA THIRDBELMONT FOURTHSTANISLAUSBLACKSTONETHORNEVALERIAFRESNOF PEARLTHIRDC O L L I N S NEVADA ETHORNE HARVEY ORCHARDCLARKFLORODORA H TERRACE HARVEYARTHUR MCKENZIE GRANT JACKSONBARTONEL MONTE BARTONWHITE GRANT DUDLEY TUOLUMNE STEPHENSTHORNEHAMMOND ELEVENTHVAN NESSTULAREOLIVESHIELDS P MCKINLEY CHANCEFIRSTTHESTAHAMILTON LOWE B R O A D W A YMAROABELMONT MCKINLEY LAMONA F FRESNOBONDF U L T O N CLINTON HAMILTON CEDARFRESNOWILSONMERCED TULAREBONDQ MARIPOSASHIELDS LOTUSVENTURA CORNELL B SNOWWILSONFRANKLIN PLATTWILSONBELMONT WHITE FIFTHHEDGES VENTURACOLLEGEPARK PLAZAVENTURADELNOWILSONNINTHORCHARDH TENTHCALIFORNIA EIGHTHCALIFORNIA FOURTHPRINCETONNORMALVAGADES SIMPSONIR W I N FOURTHPALMTHORNEA TERRACE FIFTHABBYVAN NESSCLARKV A N N E S S HEDGESMICHIGAN K L E T T E SHIELDS LORENA BROWN A CAMBRIDGE INYOFARRISSECONDIOWA VASSARGLENN HOMEWEBER MONO ALHAMBRA WOODWARDORCHARD SIXTHMONTEREYABBYCOLLEGE CALIFORNIAMERCEDPALMMYERS ORANGEO THIRDPLATT CEDARBELMONTABBY EL DORADODELNOCEDARANGUSFRESNOSAFFORDDENNETT WOODWARD CHANCETHESTAHARVEYHEDGESCAMBRIDGE TULAREFMERCED OLIVE MCKENZIE HUNTINGTONMAROAVAN NESSMERCED FOURTHSTROTHERDELNO ANGUSTRINITYBELMONT AUGUSTASHIELDSYALEPINE BELMONT HAW E S MARIPOSALAMONAARTHUR FOURTHSECONDPRINCETON BRALYAMADORTHESTAOLIVECLARK ROWELLBRALYADOLINE WASHINGTON BELMONTTHORNE TULAREGLENNHEDGESPRINCETONDELNO ROWELLYOSEMITECLINTON WASHINGTONFRESNO EL DORADO SECONDFLORADORA GILBERT MCKINLEY F F U L T O N L MCKENZIE THOMAS BELMONT VERRUEFRESNO A FLORADORA ORANGESAN PABLOBALCH DENNETT THESTACEDARHARVEY LOWE CLINTON AMADORBROADWAYBROWNPINEPINE LORENAARTHURCPICKFORD SIMPSONOLIVE S A N T A F E HEDGES EIGHTHHARVARD BALCHVAN NESSTYLER WALNUTHEDGESECHOCLARK NEVADA ILLINOISWISHONHDELNOCORNELL M TRINITYLOWEDELNOFTRINITYFOURTHNIELSEN MONOSAFFORDADOLINEGLENN FRUITANDREWS FIFTHGLENNHEDGES SANTA CLARAFLORENCE MICHIGANCLINTON CEDARTURNER BELMONT BELMONT VENTURAPRINCETON VERRUE IOWA TYLERFRUIT SACRAMENTO LILYTHOMAS HAMILTON TOWNSEND ALTA CAMBRIDGE ELEVENTHANGUSSAN JOAQUINFIFTHMCKENZIE STANISLAUSPLATT HAMILTON OLIVE TYLER HOME FRESNOHEDGES BUTLER PLUMASPLUMASANDREWS HOMEEFFIE ILLINOIS SEVENTHFLORADORAFRESNOFIRST BELMONT JACKSONPARALLELB R O A D W A Y NORMALDENNETT R TENTHEFFIECALIFORNIA PERALTA IOWA P HAMMOND INYOFRESNOGLENNNINTHHUNTINGTON TYLERTERRACE JACKSONWHITEFULTON C O L L I N S THESTAPALMCLAY ILLINOIS TYLER H PLUMASHAMILTON YALE JACKSONDUDLEYTHORNE WA T E R M A N BELMONT L IOWAFRUITCORNELL PLUMASFLORODORA HUNTINGTON FIFTHFERNMICHIGAN AFARRISMILDREDA VENTURA CLINTON EIGHTHSEVENTHCALIFORNIA LAMONA INYOBROWN QARTHUR HAMILTONDEL MARCARRUTHVASSAR EASTVAN NESSGEARHARTBUTLER CORTLAND ARTHURNINTHPLUMASILLINOIS UNIVERSITY CEDARSEVENTHBELMONTBLACKSTONE CEDARHOWARDMCKINLEYWISHONOLIVE BELMONT MCKENZIEMAROA ROWELLMICHIGAN JACKSONG THOMAS MONO HAWESADOLINEVAGADES ROWELLFOURTHLIBERTY PERALTA GRANT MCKENZIE TULAREVAN NESSFARRISDENNETT HOME THORNEARTHURCLINTON FIRSTMARIPOSAMAROAVAGEDESBONDSTANISLAUS ANNATHORNEGRANT B TENTHTHESTAL TUOLUMNETULARE MONOKERN UNIVERSITY VENTURAMILLBROOK EIGHTHPRINCETONTHOMAS CALIFORNIA EL MONTEBLACKSTONEMCKINLEYFARRISVAN NESSFOURTHORANGEM A Y O R PINEPINE VERRUEVAN NESSPLUMASDELNOPALMNEVADAFOURTH KERCKHOFF TYLER TULAREHARRISONMERCED MCKENZIE FOUNTAIN MONTECITOCLARKORCHARD CALIFORNIA F U L T O N ORLEANSTRINITYLOS ANGELESJACKSONFRESNO CARMEN MONTEREY ANGUSVENTURA FIFTHMADISON TRINITYTHORNEHARVARD MERCEDMARIPOSASTANISLAUS INYOHARVEY CHANCETULAREARTHUREFFIECOLLEGE GFRUITCARMENECHO VAN NESSBROWNBREMER NBROADWAY TULARETULARE BALCH FLORENCE MILLBROOKJACKSONB R O A D W A Y CEDARSHIELDSVAN NESSFIFTHSEVENTHPALMFIRSTFOUNTAIN ELEVENTHUNIVERSITY DIAMONDB R O A DW A Y NORMALHARRISON EIGHTHMILLBROOKMADISON PRINCETON MODOCHARRISONTYLER AMADORWISHON KEARNEY ELEVENTHGLENNLTULAREFRUIT BALCHCOLLEGEVAN NESSROOSEVELTHOMEWISHON P O T T L E FLORENCEANGUSCALAVERASCALIFORNIACHERRYBELMONT BARTONHARRISONMARYTHORNEGLENNMAROAWHITES BRIDGE VASSAR PALMGRANT TYLER CEDARWISHONROOSEVELTINYOSTANISLAUS FIRSTB R O A D W A Y VENTURAECHOCOLLEGE V A N N E S SFRESNOHARRISONWELDON NEVADA FLORADORA BUTLER TULAREVAGADESORANGEILLINOIS BELMONT CLINTON FIRSTFIFTHIOWA TOWNSEND PRINCETONSHIELDSOLIVE THIRDTULAREARTHURARCHIEBROWNMICHIGAN FRESNOJ O N E S ILLINOIS THIRDMARIPOSAFIRSTEL DORADOCLARK MARIPOSAFARRISBUTLERWISHONAG MCKINLEY CLARKHOMETHORNEDELNOEFFIE L ANGUSA HARVARDVASSAR FULTONCHANCECORNELLECHOECHO DELNOPALMWHITE ANDREWSEFFIE BELMONTDEL MARFRANKLINADOLINE SAN JOAQUINWEBSTER ILLINOIS SECONDANGUSSEVENTHWELDON CALIFORNIATHORNE TULARE NORMAL SAN JOAQUINKERNCARMENCAMBRIDGETHORNE LIBERTY C ANNAFOURTHMODOCCORTLAND C O L L I N S FLORENCE MCALAVERAS MARIPOSAB TENTHANDREWS ORCHARDDENNETT EIGHTHHEDGESDELNO ILLINOIS NEVADA LIBERTY OLIVE LOWE NORMAL VENTURA SAN BENITO FIFTHWELDON SECONDMARIPOSANINTHKERNINYOCORNELL HPALM HOLLYHAMILTON ELEVENTHHARVEY SEVENTHCORNELL MERCEDOLIVE HOME PARKROSEMARIPOSAH CHERRYSANTA CLARAOLEANDERVAN NESSABBYHUMBOLTJACKSONCALIFORNIA LORENA WASHINGTONCEDARFISHERFLORADORA ARTHURTERRACE WASHINGTON TENTHFLORENCEPLUMASFRUIT MARIPOSA LIBERTYTHESTAFRESNOFRUIT WALNUTTHOMAS FRANKLINBLACKSTONE EL MONTE CORTLAND BUTLERCALAVERAS FOURTHBROADWAYLORENA ALHAMBRA FIFTHGCLARK FIRSTCLARKOLIVE ORANGEMERCEDECHOKERNCARMEN CALIFORNIA WHITE JACKSONORCHARDORANGEG CLINTON TUOLUMNE ILLINOIS HARVEY MCKENZIE HUNTINGTON FOURTHCOLLEGEALINDENN EIGHTHCALIFORNIA VERRUE N FRESNOANGUSB ORCHARDPOPPYPALMLEEWISHONFLORODORA ELEVENTHUNIVERSITY BROADWAYVOORMANWISHON MARYMONOFERGERDENNETT OLIVE E FRESNOSHIELDS TRINITYCEDARCOLLEGEBUTLER VOORMANHARRISON CORNELL BALCH FRUITEIGHTHVALERIASEVENTHTRINITYAMADOR DUDLEYTHOMASVAN NESSHARVARD LAMONA POPLARTHIRDWOODWARD B R O A D W A Y WEBSTER FIRSTEFFIEGEARHARTSAN PABLOABBYFRUITHARRISONPINEUNIVERSITYMARIPOSA BARTONCALIFORNIA MILLBROOKSIMPSONADOLINEFRUITHOME POPLARMADISON OLIVE HAMMOND FLORADORA SARAHFILLMORE LOS ANGELESWISHONB R O A D W A Y P SECONDFARRISATCHINSON ORCHARDHUNTINGTONWISHON THORNEPERALTADUDLEYCORNELL BUTLER THOMAS EL DORADO FOURTHGRANT ARTHURHARVARD BARTONFERGERANGUSCALIFORNIA PERALTA K L E T T EWISHON FRESNODIVISADERO BARTONWASHINGTONEFFIEGLENNHEDGESLUCERNE FIRSTB MCKINLEY KERNTURNER MONO LYELLMODOC CLARAEDEN THIRDSTEPHENSARTHURMONO ANDREWS HOLLYCOLLEGEFIFTHOLIVE F P L A Z A NICHOLASFRESNOVENTURA PLUMASV A N N E S S SIMPSON HEATONGLENNVALERIA EIGHTHANGUSCALIFORNIA BALCH SAN JOAQUIN PINE FIRSTPINE STANISLAUSWHITES BRIDGEMAROAPRINCETON HOMEHARRISON THIRDCORNELL VENTURAVAGEDESFRESNOGLENN SECONDAUGUSTAHARVEYADOLINECLAYPINEFOUNTAIN M A R T I N P O T T L E BROWN ORCHARDLAMONAANGUS SIXTHNMAROACORNELL SANTA CLARAECHOAFRUIT ANGUSDUDLEY GENEVAYALEBLACKSTONE RAISINACEDARMODOCC C HARVEYANDREWSPALM FRUITEIGHTHPRINCETON ILLINOIS LEWIS MARIP OSA MCKENZIE NORMAL ROOSEVELTCEDARCLARKDIVISADERO VOORMAN SECONDVAGADESHEDGES HUNTINGTONFISHER LANEINYOWHITES BRIDGEWISHONHOME HAMILTON DENNETTCOLLEGE MONO F U L T O N WEBSTERTERRACE LIBERTY ORANGEORCHARDHOME CALIFORNIA HOME G OLIVETHOMAS SEVENTHOMAROAYALE EUNICEBRALYINYOOLIVECLARKFIRSTHOME M A Y O REKLUNDMODOC IVYVENTURAMARIPOSABROWN HAZELWOODSECONDV A N N E S SSAN PABLOCALLISCHWILSONCEDARKERNCLAY THORNEPRINCETONWILSONTHOMASFERGER SEVENTHANGUSFOURTHADOLINEGMERCEDFRUIT LORENAWISHON ORANGEFLORADORAABBY SIXTHDENNETT FOURTHPLATT YALESAN PABLOTHESTACALAVERASFISHERSHIELDSMCKINLEY ROOSEVELTTUOLUMNE THIRDDELNOCOLLEGEWHITE ILLINOIS FRESNOANGUSFLORADORA ELEVENTHBRALY TENTHORCHARDWILSONEFFIEINYOFOURTHEIGHTHWILSONA ORCHARDCORNELL EIGHTHP ORLEANS WASHINGTONPOPLAR CEDARCHUR C HMAROAFARRIS AUGUSTAARTHURNORMAL WASHINGTON HEDGES ANNAMCKINLEY FOUNTAIN ATCHINSON VENTURAGRANT CLAYHEDGESTHOMAS L S A N T A F E PRINCETON PLATT WELDON HAMMOND WOODWARD HEDGESVAN NESSWELLERL VENTURAROOSEVELT E THOMASVAN NESSROWELLOLIVE DIANACAMBRIDGE RAISINAPLUMASMCKINLEY FRUITFLORADORATHESTA MONTECITO FIFTHS MARIPOSASTANISLAUSFRUITMECHOPOPLAR B JACKSONH FIRSTCOLLEGEINYOJACKSONABBYFRESNOFOUNTAIN FRESNOFLORADORA MADISON TUOLUMNETUOLUMNECMERCED H A Z E LW O O D PLAZAAMADORSAN JOAQUIN NINTHLEEBONDSAFFORDSANTA CLARAFLORODORA MONO HAYSTONMADISONAUGUSTA ILLINOIS SHIELDS VENTURAF U L T O N BONDTUOLUMNE CALLISCHOLIVE GRANT GRANT FRANKLIN G BARTONCOLLEGETHOMAS LYELLHARRISONYALEOLIVE KERNTHORNEFRESNOGRANTMARIPOSA FRESNOSIXTHFRANKLIN ELIZABETHADOLINE FISHERTERRACE OLIVE THORNENEVADA HAMMOND V A N N E S S TERRACE H FIRSTHAMMONDSIMPSONCLARK GEARHARTMAROACALLISCHTHESTANEVADA CALIFORNIA THORNENINTHVOORMAN LA SALLE ANGUSJACKSONHOWARDEL MONTE WELDON IVYELIZABETHOLIVE TRINITYFIFTHADOLINEGLENNARTHURMICHIGAN TUOLUMNE ORCHARDBELMONT FOURTHF U L T O N MICHIGAN HAMILTONCLARKHOWARDTERRACETHOMAS JACKSONFOUNTAINHARVARDHARRISON BELMONTFRUITTHORNE KERCKHOFF CAMBRIDGE HAZELWOODBROADWAYOLIVE EIGHTHWILSONBROWN TUOLUMNE BROWNPRINCETON FOURTHSHIELDS KERCKHOFF SANTA CLARAHAWES TERRACE PLUMASATCHINSONTRINITY CLINTON CALAVERASCLINTONLEWIS BELMONT E F F I EDELNO ALTA NEVADAROOSEVELT VENTURA MARIPOSAPALMFRUITSARAHAMADOR CEDARFIRSTVENTURATHORNEWEBER THESTAN PICKFORDPLAZAFERGERFRESNOMONO VENTURALEMON FLORENCETHORNEPALM PINE DIANAWELDON HAZELWOODHOME PINEMICHIGANFRUIT SEVENTHFRUITGRANT TUOLUMNE DWIGHTEIGHTHTHOMASORCHARDTHESTAM A Y O R PERALTAHARRISONFRUIT EIGHTHHOMEELEVENTH SEVENTHFLORENCE FLORADORA FRUITMCKINLEY EDEN BELMONT PRINCETON BELMONT C BALCH VENTURADEL MARHARRISONSIMPSONBENDFRUITFOUNTAINVAN NESSUNIVERSITY LORENA BARTONMAROADELNOWILSONWILSONHARRISONMCKENZIE SHIELDS HEDGES FISHERCLINTON THORNESTANISLAUSFLORENCEPLUMAS FRESNOFRUITO CEDARPALMBROWNARTHUR OLIVEADOLINEPERALTA MODOCFRANKLIN ORLEANS BELMONT MCKENZIE LOWE LORENA BUTLER LORENA LAMONA FIRSTGEARY HEDGES CALIFORNIAFRUITV A N N E S S WHITEHOWARD TULAREBELMONTFRUITWHITE B FLORADORATHOMAS MCKENZIE A SIMPSON HAMILTON H HOWARDPARALLELHARVARD NINTHBELMONT NINTHENGLEWOODPALM ARTHURBELMONTVAN NESSBARTONDENNETT WALNUTMADISON MCKENZIECOLLEGEEFFIE GRANT TUOLUMNE ORCHARDWOODWARD CLAY HEATONPLUMASFIFTH JACKSONOLIVE IRW I N BARTONMARIPOSAOLIVEYALE TURNERSAN PABLOORCHARDMERCEDKERNLINDENCLAY STANISLAUSHOMEEFFIE HAMILTON HEATONCOLLEGEFIFTHUNIVERSITYPRINCETONNINTHMARIPOSAGLENNNINTHBELMONT LAMONA DELNOEIGHTHLANE FRUITSTROTHER ARTHURYALE PRINCETON STEPHENSPLATT V A N N E S S ROWELLANGUSWOODWARDPALMSIXTHHEDGES FLORENCE ELIZABETH BONDWA T E R M A N EDENMODOCDELNO OLIVE H DONAHOOABBYOLIVE C BARTONSHIELDSCORTLANDFARRIS SEVENTHHUNTINGTONCHARRISON U ELIZABETH FOURTHWASHINGTONFISHERHAMMOND G WHITEVAGADES C TOWNSEND YALEHEDGES GILBERT CALIFORNIATHORNEDUDLEY HARVARD MARIPOSA FIFTHEIGHTHTHORNELOS ANGELESTHORNEE IOWA HEDGESHOME ARTHURBUTLER CLINTONSIMPSON TULARE CHERRYBLACKSTONECORTLAND BUTLER P O T T L E LORENACALAVERASGLENNCLARKMCKINLEY CALIFORNIA DENNETTDUDLEY BELMONT F U L T O NSAN PABLOEKLUNDFRESNOMONODEL MARNEVADA TYLERDREXEL EFFIEGEARHARTCALAVERASFLORODORAELIZABETH LOS ANGELES VASSARCALAVERAS ANGUSH FLORENCETENTHBROWNBLACKSTONEVAN NESSF CEDARTHORNEB LAMONA CLAY ORANGETHESTAHARVARD ROWELLBELMONT HUNTINGTON NINTHTHOMASCLARK THIRDCLARKHEDGES CALIFORNIAINYO VENTURADEL MARGLENNP O T T L E UNIVERSITYDELNOFULTON WHITE FOUNTAIN BRALYCOLLEGEVOORMAN HAMILTONFRESNONEVADA MICHIGAN GRANTECHOHAMMONDHEDGES VENTURAHARVEY V A N N E S S CEDARHOME TENTHARTHURFLORENCEBLACKSTONEHARVARDSAN JOAQUINTURNERDEL MARHOMEHAMMONDHARVARD FISHERFOUNTAIN HOWARDELIZABETH BELMONT SIXTHGLENNEL MONTE HAMMOND MERCEDWILSONALHAMBRA ILLINOISANGUS G CLAYVAN NESSMSAN PABLOLEWIS THOMASFRESNO LYELLCLARKFRESNOORCHARDBROADWAYDUNN MONO AUGUSTAEL MONTEBLACKSTONE ORANGESEVENTHHOMEFARRIS DIVISADERO KERNTENTHMCKENZIE FIFTHBLACKSTONEPATTERSON FLORADORAEFFIEPRINCETONFRESNO WOODWARD F U L T O N MONO YALE BALCH LAMONAFLORADORAVASSAR ORLEANS TENTHCLAYLEWIS TENTHAUGUSTATHOMASTERRACE MARIPOSAHARRISONTERRACESHIELDS FIRSTANDREWS NINTHROWELLEL MONTEDELNOYALEANGUSTHOMAS SIXTHCORNELL FIFTHE E L M CORTLANDTYLERMAROA OLIVEBROWN ROWELLTHORNEFLORADORA EIGHTHFRESNOHUNTINGTON CALIFORNIA BELMONT THORNEBRALY JACKSONPLATT WASHINGTON OWISHON SAN BENITOSANTA CLARAILLINOIS PLUMASBUTLER NORMAL HOME LORENA CLINTON INYOVENTURAHARRISONCOLLEGEJACKSONCALAVERASORCHARDTUOLUMNE GEARY DIVISADERO MONTECITO MARIPOSA GDEL MARDUDLEY MADISON PRINCETON KERCKHOFF MARIPOSAFIFTHMADISONGLENN BUTLER PINEANDREWSMCKINLEYORCHARDSHIELDS CEDARMARIPOSA CEDARARTHURELEVENTHYALE FIFTHHUNTINGTON THOMASSHIELDS HAWES FPALMARTHUR PLATTFRESNO MERCED H WHITE YALE SAN JOAQUIN M A Y O RVAN NESSOLIVE BRALY ROWELLOLIVE FLORADORA VAN NESSMARIPOSATHIRDTHOMASCOLLEGE MODOCECHOHEDGES TOWNSEND CHANCEPINE FRESNOTULARE F U L T O N VENTURAKEARNEY CALIFORNIAFERGERLEWISVENTURABELMONTLOS ANGELESM OLIVE HEDGESHARVARD HOME GRANT TULARE UNIVERSITYEFFIE BALCH MCKENZIE VOORMANMAROA STANISLAUSFLORADORA S A N T A F E BROWN B ARTHURGRANTSAN PABLOORLEANSMAROAVASSAR L FOURTHTHOMAS BONDO O BELMONT YALECOLLEGE GRANT PLATT EL DORADOARTHURANGUSHARRISONWISHONBRALY THOMAS ROWELLFULTONROWELLEIGHTHMONTECITO PRINCETON NINTHGEARY VENTURA PLATT LOWE MCKINLEY MONTEREYSEVENTHHOMEPALM PLATT MONO BALCH PRINCETON P DENNETT NINTHSIMPSONHEDGES MADISONTHESTA OGLENN FIRSTFRESNO HAMMOND MARTIN LUTHER KINGABBYMILDREDA FRUITILLINOIS WOODWARD MILLBROOKSIXTHTERRACE TENTHFLORADORA GRANT CHERRYCLARKVENTURABLACKSTONEH A Z E L W O O DTHESTAH HARVEY BELMONTPALM FRUITYALE CEDARTHOMAS IOWADELNO STROTHERVALERIA BUTLERCALAVERAS BARTONBUTLERFIRSTP TULAREMARIPOSAMCKENZIE FIFTHBELMONT YALE SECONDHAZELWOODSAFFORDWHITES BRIDGE HARVARDYALEDEL MARNEVADA BE L M O N TFARRISHARVARD FRESNOFARRISSTEPHENSCEDARGLENNEIGHTHTULAREVAN NESSAMADOR OLIVEPOPLAR FRESNOSIMPSON MCKENZIE TOWNSEND CARMEN DIVISADERO TERRACE W A T E R M A N RWISHONTUOLUMNE BROWN FLORENCE EIGHTHFIFTHFIRSTV A N N E S SMAROA BELMONT C CALIFORNIAPOPLARFOURTHCORNELLCAMBRIDGEPALMMCKINLEYECHOCORNELLCARMENMILLBROOKYALE ARCHIEFRESNOMILLBROOKVENTURAPRINCETONLAMONA FIRSTINYOMARIPOSA TERRACE LEEGRANT CHURCH VERRUE L E HOME ELEVENTHCALLISCHTHESTAFRUITH FRANKLIN GOLDEN STATESAFFORDUNIVERSITY VENTURASHIELDSARTHUR THESTAFIRSTVAN NESSEIGHTHDUNN HEDGES BALCH OLIVE HARVARD BELMONTFRUIT THOMAS TULARESAN PABLOIOWAFRESNOBROWN THOMASSHIELDS HAMILTON TERRACE DIVISADERO HARVEY NEVADA CALLISCHSTANISLAUSGRANT FIRSTCLARKDIANAFRUITMODOCVASSARCORNELL DELNOCALIFORNIA FRANKLIN DUDLEY HAZELWOODUNIVERSITYWISHON JACKSONEFFIEPINE FOURTHORANGENEVADA MCKINLEY G UNIVERSITY DIVISADERO INYOEUNICETULARE SIMPSONPINE PLUMASAMADOR MODOCNEVADA HEDGES THORNEWILSONBLACKSTONEROWELLVAN NESSHOME SECONDOLEANDER FRESNOMCKINLEY BALCH CORNELL ANDREWS CORNELL FOURTHTYLER MERCEDFIFTHBELMONT HEDGES KERNKERNPALMMAROAFLORENCE ORANGEELEVENTHL FIFTHFRESNOUNIVERSITY B MICHIGAN MARIPOSAPLUMASTHORNEM FRESNOHFRUITFRESNOSIMPSON B R O A D W A Y MONTEREYPALMHEDGESCLINTONBLACKSTONE FIRSTLORENAMAROAWILSONKERN ELEVENTHLAMONAANGUSMICHIGAN TURNER MCKENZIE FLORADORAUNIVERSITY BARTONKEARNEY TRINITYV A N N E S S MERCED CARMENCLARK EIGHTHELIZABETH HAMMOND W A T E R M A N WELDON FRESNOINYOV A N N E S S THORNECEDARSAN PABLOTHIRDHOME AUGUSTATHOMAS FRESNOWISHONLORENA BONDLIBERTYFARRISP A R A L L E L ILLINOIS MONO BROWN Q FRESNOBARTONPERALTA CALAVERASBARTONAMADOR NINTHTHESTAMARIPOSAPARKVENTURA HARVARD PARKWISHONCLARKCLINTON TULAREAMADOR FRESNOANGUSFULTONROOSEVELTTUOLUMNE HARVARD SIMPSONOLIVE M WELDON TULAREAPALMKEARNEY PLUMASWHITE ORCHARDSAN PABLOFIFTHSECONDFARRISGRANT YALEDEL MARFULTONANGUSPINE NINTHWASHINGTON VENTURA ILLINOISTHESTAMCKINLEYLINDENROOSEVELTCOLLEGE MONOFIRSTROOSEVELT BALCHMAROAL SANTA CLARAPARALLELCOLLEGECALIFORNIA ILLINOISSECOND HUNTINGTON FLORENCE SHIELDSCAMBRIDGE ILLINOISCLARKROOSEVELT STROTHERBLACKSTONE ROWELLVAGADESE BELMONT YALE NINTHCLAY TUOLUMNE V A N N E S S FOURTHCLAYHARVEYARTHURGLENNTHOMASVASSAR ORLEANSMARIPOSAHEDGESCLINTONPINE OLIVE P MARIPOSALOWE ANGUS ENGLEWOOD JACKSONFRESNOPINEMCKINLEY ORCHARDHAMILTON MICHIGAN TOWNSEND N C IOWA TUOLUMNE ORCHARDVENTURAWELDONVAN NESSCALAVERASHEDGESCOLLEGE FLORADORA MCKENZIETHORNE N OLEANDER HOME MONOMERCED SIXTHBERKELEY MERCEDMCKINLEY MICHIGAN KERCKHOFF LYELL VASSAR MILLBROOKA KERCKHOFF ANDREWS MONO CHANCEHOMETHORNE OFRESNOABBY BARTONF U L T O N WOODWARD DIVISADERO CEDARENGLEWOODOLIVE THESTANINTHCLAY SIMPSONCLINTONHARVEYCALAVERAS OLEANDERWILSON CLAY TULAREEIGHTHHAMMOND TULAREM HAW E S TULARE CEDARN KERNFOUNTAIN BARTONWELDONHARRISONDUDLEY LIBERTYMARIPOSAFRUITOLIVE MONTECITOFRUITPRINCETONADOLINE BARTONTHIRDSIXTHDIANAVAN NESSPEARLWISHONWILSONUCOLLEGE STANISLAUSCARMEN BLACKSTONEGEARY HOME WASHINGTON ELEVENTHFSAFFORD LFRUIT HOWARDIOWA MICHIGANBREMERFRESNO THOMAS TULARE CLAY ORANGETHORNECEDARTHORNEGLENNHARRISONWILSONHEDGESOLIVEWELDON HOMEFIRST WOODWARD EASTHOMEYALE FRESNOWELDON GLENNTULAREADOLINEWHITE INYO NINTHP TENTHFLORODORATHORNEMCKINLEYHEDGESHOME HOME V A N N E S S TURNER M A Y O R L HAMILTONEFFIECORNELL NFRESNOCALAVERAS ILLINOISANGUSWELDONORCHARDLINDEN TULAREBROWN WOODWARD SEVENTHKERNCOLLEGECLINTON KERNCALIFORNIA EIGHTHOLIVE CEDARDELNOTHORNEMARIPOSA FOUNTAIN BELMONT UNIVERSITY VENTURAEASTHAYSTONTULARE HEATON THOMASMAROAOLIVE WOODWARD ATCHINSONPOPLARTUOLUMNETUPMANFLORODORAINYOCALIFORNIA PRINCETON NINTHRDEL MARORCHARDC O L L I N S TYLERYALEHARVARD THOMAS MCKENZIE LANE MICHIGANMCKINLEY CHANCEM KEARNEY ILLINOIS KEARNEYDELNO FISHERSIMPSONTHORNE FERGERK L E T T E FIFTHTHESTATERRACEALHAMBRA JACKSONEFFIEYALEECHOWISHONECHO M ORANGEONEILL'ELEVENTHEDEN FIRSTFRUITABBYGLENNIOWA VASSAR MONO HAMMOND ONEILL'SIXTHSIXTHHOME NINTHMONTEREYHARVARDCLARK MONTEREY TYLER CLARKFOURTHCORNELL MODOCOLIVE J O N E S B THIRDALTAARTHURPOPLARUNIVERSITY NEVADAMARIPOSA CALAVERASBUTLERBLACKSTONEBUTLERMAROASIXTH FRESNO SHIELDS IOWA BELMONT HEDGES P O T T L E MARIPOSAA NEVADA HEDGES SECONDMAROAHAZELWOODMCKINLEY LIBERTYFRESNO HAWESSTANISLAUS HEDGES B EIGHTHBONDLANEINYOVENTURA SANTA CLARAHOME SAN JOAQUIN WELDON OLEANDER HUNTINGTON TERRACEOLIVE B TENTHPALMN ELEVENTHJACKSONOLIVE ARTHUROLIVEARTHUR WELDON HFERGER FIFTHB R O A DW A Y CLINTON TOWNSENDANGUSSAN PABLOFILLMORE EL MONTE TUOLUMNE FRESNOORCHARDWASHINGTONARTHURDENNETT WHITEWILSONDELNOWELDON TENTHHARRISONOLIVE BLACKSTONEDELNOMONO INYOMILLBROOKFIFTHKERCKHOFF CAMBRIDGE MADISON FIFTHVENTURA TVAGEDES HAMILTONPALMMADISONTHIRDTHORNENFRUIT ATCHINSONFULTON BEND CEDAROLIVE G CALIFORNIATHORNEF U L T O N PARALLELELEVENTHTHIRDTULAREBELMONT OLIVEGLENN BALL PERALTA TENTHTHOMAS FIFTHMARYHARVARDHEDGES FRESNOMAROAFRANKLIN CEDARM THORNEHOME FIRSTLYELL OLIVE SIXTHVASSAR MONOSECONDWELDON WHITE ARTHURCALIFORNIA FISHERB R O A D W A Y YALEYOSEMITE MCKENZIE LORENA WOODWARD B R O A DW A Y LEMON CEDARLOWE VENTURA FIFTHMCKENZIE MCKINLEY WALNUTHAMILTONCLARKFRANKLIN DENNETTHOME OLIVE HUNTINGTON NINTHBALCH ROWELLELEVENTHLINDENSECONDFULTONELMFLORADORA STANISLAUSFARRISYALEWEBSTER MYERS KERNHARVARDMCKINLEY B R O A DW A Y ORCHARDFLORADORASIMPSON MONO ANDREWS MADISON MCKENZIEFRESNO TULARE CAMBRIDGE ANGUSDIVISADERO HARVARD SECONDM A Y O R INYOTHIRDFIRSTV A N N E S S MADISONHARRISONCORNELL JACKSONCLINTON FOURTHTURNER BUTLER MILDREDA ILLINOISFIFTHDIANATYLERDEL MARFRUITHAMMOND VENTURAMARIPOSAWASHINGTONFARRISCLINTONOLIVE F WHITEGLENN ELEVENTHWASHINGTONCLARK NINTHCLAY ARTHUROLIVE FRUITFIFTHGLENNEIGHTHHARVARD SANTA CLARADIVISADERO MCKENZIE CORNELL VALENCIAFRESNO FLORENCE THIRDEFULTONSAN PABLOANGUSFIFTHNINTHMCKENZIE HARVARD MCKENZIE DIANACLINTONEFFIE OLIVEGLENN FLORENCE WOODWARDCALAVERAS ELEVENTHGLENNNEVADA KERNEDEL MARPOPLARCLARKPLUMASCLINTONARTHURHARRISONVASSARADOLINECLINTON WASHINGTON CALIFORNIA WELDON BRALY ANDREWS TULAREHARRISONLAMONA MILLBROOKBELMONT HEDGES HUNTINGTON ILLINOIS PERALTA FRESNO TULAREANGUSALTA PRINCETON WOODWARD ILLINOISPOPLAR MODOCC BUTLERFRESNOFRUITMCKINLEY MARIPOSA MILLBROOKBELM O N T BRALY EIGHTHDIANAKERNORANGEGRANTPALM LOWE VASSAR TUOLUMNEECHO THESTAF U L T O N TULAREMAROACLINTONNORMALHEDGES TUOLUMNE EIGHTHFLORENCE FRANKLIN MCKENZIE F MCKINLEY O SECONDTHIRDMADISON EIGHTHFIRSTSAN DIEGOPOPLARBUTLER FRESNOCLAYOLIVE H KEARNEY HEDGESYALE TENTHF MERCED TULAREMONOFRUIT IOWA THIRDHARRISONLA SIERRA B ARCHIEFOURTHLYELLMILLBROOKVAGADESHOWARDDUDLEYCARMENMARIPOSAFIRST M A R T I N VASSARVAN NESSLYELLTHESTAWELDON M HOMECARMEN MARIPOSAFRESNOLANE O ROWELLSIXTHCALLISCHTYLER OLIVEWELDON HAMILTON BELMONT BELMONT SECONDPALMMERCED HEDGES SAN JOAQUINALTA HAWES WHITES BRIDGE FOUNTAIN GRANTCOLLEGE FIRSTFIRSTDEL MARVAN NESSORLEANS MARIP OSA MCKENZIE ALTAARTHUR ILLINOIS BUTLER MONTEREYFLORENCE BARTONFIFTHBLACKSTONECLAY F U L T O N HEDGES TURNERMAROACALAVERAS ELEVENTHECHOCOLLEGEUNIVERSITYWELDON STANISLAUSSIMPSON FOURTHMCLARKFRANKLIN EIGHTHPERALTA NINTHLOWEFRESNOMARIPOSALAMONASIMPSONTRINITYH A HOME NINTHANDREWS OLIVE MONO BARTONDIVISADEROPALM HAMILTON GRANTMAROAFLORADORA L THIRDPRINCETON MONOWILSON LORENAMONO CALIFORNIA H IVYBARTONTULAREPLAZAKEARNEYPALM IOWA MCKENZIE MICHIGAN TULARE CALAVERASFULTONNEVADA E BREMER WASHINGTON IOWA CEDARJACKSONEFFIEHAMMONDARTHUR MONTEREY CAMBRIDGEYALE ELEVENTHH M GEARY FIFTHPALMPINEBOND CHERRYGRANT E HARVARDANDREWSPALMCARMEN FLORENCEFRUIT CEDARTHIRDBRALY THIRDMICHIGAN AUGUSTASHIELDSFLORADORA THESTAROWELLFOUNTAINCOLLEGEVASSARPOPLAR O PLUMASMERCED WOODWARD MADISONHARRISONTHOMAS TENTHTULAREANGUSHARVEY BARTONANGUSELINDEN LYELL P A R A L L E L SECONDFIFTHTHORNECLINTON FLORADORAWILSON SECONDBELMONT HAMMONDBREMERVAGEDES STROTHERCALAVERAS NINTHAMADORBARTONSTANISLAUSCLARKBROADWAYTHIRDVAN NESSHARRISONF U L T O N MILLBROOKBROADWAYF HUNTINGTON OLIVEVAGEDES LORENA KERCKHOFF TERRACE TULARE TULARETHORNESIMPSONBROWN SANTA CLARAMADISON B R O A DW A Y KEARNEYSTANISLAUS FRESNOTHORNEINYOTHESTAGLENNMCKINLEY ARTHURTOWNSEND CORNELL THORNEFRUITHOMEWISHON FLORADORA STANISLAUS MONTECITO LEMON PATTERSON CALAVERASCEDARTENTHLORENA FIFTHNINTHEIGHTHFOURTHFRESNOSEVENTHABBYPRINCETON SAN JOAQUIN R NINTHTULAREMARIPOSA ROWELLVAN NESSSIXTHKERCKHOFF PINE K L E T T E OLIVE BELMONT MYERS JACKSONMCKINLEY 5 7 1 4 2 3 3 3 8 6 9 93 96 95 71 51 46 43 3184 62 63 67 99 69 85 11 68 70 24 25 97 72 666523 19 55 17 48 2120 47 16 61 18 54 50 53 49 58 777659 22 57 10 86 87 41 88 90 89 92 45 39 44 42 40 35 383736 14 15 33 34 13 32 12 98 27 82 83 56 60 78 75 30 91 74 94 64 52 26 271 270 269 268 266 264 267 261 262 263 011260259258 257 255 254 253 248 247 246 245244252 250251 199 141 137 101 100 189110 125 124 123 157174 172 163161 203237160213 212159 169 168121 156 231 167166 226 164 119 152 151 147149146150 145115116114148118155 117112 211144 153 173171170 185 242 193 128 129 133126 132 131 134127 130 186207109188 201 221 217216 175 196 243215 235 236 240 238 210 191 178 218 214 202 219 205 233 192194 143206 223222204140139224 135 142208 138 180 108 102105184229209103176197183239106 234 122 198 179 230 200 225195107232181104241 120 228 190 162 158 014 013 010 008 009 001003 005 007 S.R. 41S.R. 1 8 0 S . R . 9 9 S.R. 168MARKSCHERYLGRIFFITH ATLASPONTIAC BRIARWOODRICEWOODBELLAIRESUSSEX SAGINAWMARKS RICEWOODPONTIAC BRIARWOODGRIFFITH ATLASSUSSEX FINEWINERYMCKINLEYLAUREENNORMAL WELDON UNIVERSITY MCKINLEY CHESTNUTDEARINGHUNTINGTON BALCH LAUREL FILLMORE GARDENPLATT RECREATIONDEARINGFILLMORE LAUREL GARDENRECREATIONBUTLER CHESTNUTLYELL HEATON ORLEANS TOWNSEND GARDEN!(187 2973!(!( !( !( 79 81PALMMAGILLFREMONTFERGERHARRISONPALO ALTOPAULSAFFORDROOSEVELTMAGILLPALO ALTOPAUL!(182SHAWHAYESSANTA ANA!(227SHAWCORNELIADALEMISSIONPARKWAYFORESTIEREFAIRMONT!(177SIXTHBULLDOGNINTHMILLBROOK!(136 Kearney Blvd. National Register Eligible/landscape 8 S.R. 41D:\projects\hpbasemap3.mxd LEGEND HISTORIC DISTRICTS: DESIGNATED AND PROPOSED Adoline - Palm (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) Bellevue Bungalow (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Chandler Field/Fresno Municipal Airport (Designated 2005) East Madison (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Huntington Boulevard (Designated 2015) Lower Fulton - Van Ness (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) L Street (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) North Park (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Porter Tract (Designated 2000) Santa Fe Warehouse (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) St. Johns (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Terrace Gardens (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) Wilson Island Wilson's North Fresno Tract (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) EARLY ETHNIC NEIGHBORHOODS Uptown Culture-Arts District Chinatown Germantown Old Armeniantown d:\projects\hpbasemap5.mxd "#1991 Weitz Survey 1994 Ratkovich Survey Heritage Properties")!( !( !( !( !( SYMBOLIZATION Local Register of Historic Resources National Register of Historic Places Local Significance Relocated Outside City Demolished Properties HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR1 Old Fresno Water Tower 2444 Fresno St.1894 91 City Fire Alarm Station 2945 Fresno St.1917 183 Herbert C. Gundelfinger Home 1038 E. Yale Ave.19192 Thomas R. Meux Home 1007 R St.1889 92 Van Valkenburgh Home 1125 T St.1903 184 Drs. George & Jessie Hare Home 815 E. McKinley Ave.19183 Warehouse Row Buildings 764 P St.1903-1910 93 National Warehouse 860 Santa Fe Ave.1905-1930 185 William Saroyan Residence 3204 E. El Monte Way 19143 Warehouse Row Buildings 744 P St.1903-1910 94 Santa Fe Hotel 935 Santa Fe Ave.1926 186 Jacob Parret Home 2069 E. Harvey Ave.19003 Warehouse Row Buildings 702 P St.1903-1910 95 Fasset Home #1 905 P St.1900 187 William Saroyan Residence 2729 W. Griffith Way 19634 Physicians Building 2607 Fresno St.1926 96 Fasset Home #2 915 P St.1900 188 Joseph Maracci Residence 985 N. Van Ness Ave.19165 Fresno Republican Building 2130 Kern St.1919 97 Neverman Home 309 M St.1912 189 Thomas Arrioto Residence 505 E. Kearney Blvd.19326 Fresno City College 1101 E. University Ave.1916 98 Old Barn 100-1/4 M St.1900 190 Tower Theater 815 E. Olive Ave.19397 Warnors Theater 1400-1430 Fulton St.1929 99 Fresno Trolley Cars (Diner)1731 S. Cherry Ave.c1912-c1925 191 Eugene Mathewson Residence 319 N. Calaveras St.19058 Louis Einstein Home 1600 M St.1913 100 American Self Storage Co.1844 S. Cherry Ave.1918 192 Hiram Barkalew Home 153 N. Van Ness Ave.19119 Y.W.C.A. Residence Hall 1660 M St.1921 101 Holt Lumber Co.1916 S. Cherry Ave.1915 193 Dr. Oliver Howard Home 3263 E. Huntington Blvd.191410 Santa Fe Depot 2650 Tulare St.1896 102 Main Home 520 W. Princeton Ave.1914 194 Thomas Cowan Residence 153 N. Yosemite Ave.190611 Southern Pacific Depot 1713 Tulare St.1889 103 Peden Home 315 E. Brown Ave.1937 195 C. W. Harlow Residence 986 N. Roosevelt Ave.191312 Tinkler Mission Chapel 475 N. Broadway 1917 104 Old St. Agnes Hospital 603 W. Home Ave.1929 196 John H. Fearon Residence 2540 E. Grant Ave.190613 Bethel Lutheran Church 183 N. Broadway 1917 105 Miller Home 1516 N. Van Ness Ave.1910 197 Shipp-Selland Residence 1002 E. Cambridge Ave.191914 Spencer Home 395 N. San Pablo Ave.1899 106 Mosgrove Home 660 E. Pine Ave.1910 198 Blum Residence 3870 E. Huntington Blvd.192715 Woolfolk Home 267 N. San Pablo Ave.1907 107 James Porteous Home 1095 N. Van Ness Ave.1911 199 Sullenger Building 2420-2440 Stanislaus St.192116 Scottish Rite Temple 1455 L St.1937 108 Solorio Residence 415 N. Ferger Ave.1927 200 Osage Apartment Building 635 E. Belmont Ave.192917 Fresno County Hall of Records 2281 Tulare St.1935 109 Vincent Home 921 N. San Pablo Ave.1889 201 Eaton Flats Apartments 125-131 N. Fresno St.191718 Beeler/Thorton Machine Shop 914 M St.1915 110 St. Alphonsus Catholic Church 307 W. Kearney Blvd.1913 202 Moore-Koop Residence 258 N. College Ave.189519 Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church 2226 Ventura St.1914 111 Teilman Home 919 W. Kearney Blvd.1915 203 Hoonanian Residence 461 N St.190020 McVey Home 1322 N St.1903 112 Helm Home 1749 L St.1901-1902 204 Ira Brooks Home 226 N. Fulton 190521 McVey Home 1326 N. St.1903 113 Long (Black) Home 1727 L St.1907 205 Porter-Barnard Home 320 N. Fulton 190922 Old Post Office Substation 2404 Kern St.1921 114 Bean Home 1705 L St.1904 206 Kutner Residence 174 N. Fulton St.191023 First Mexican Baptist Church 1061 E St.1924 115 Kutner Home 1651 L St.1901 207 George Fathy Residence 844 N. Van Ness Ave.192224 Fresno Buddhist Temple 1340 Kern St.1920 116 Montgomery Thomas Home 1642 L St.1897 208 Sample Sanitarium 311 N. Fulton St.191325 First Armenian Presbyterian Church 515 Fulton St.1905 117 Newman Home (Removed)1743 L St.1911 209 Normandy Village Apartments 2617-2645 N. Maroa 193526 Fresno Brewing Co.100 M St.1907 118 Towne Apartments 1717 L St.1908 210 Ella Hoxie Home 251 N. Blackstone Ave.189627 Fresno City College Library 1122 E. University Ave.1931 119 Fresno Bee Building 1545 Van Ness Ave.1922 211 Velvet Ice Cream Co. Building 1948-1950 Broadway 192928 Fort Miller Block House 890 W. Belmont Ave.1851 120 P. G. & E. Building 1401 Fulton St.1923 212 Basque Hotel 1102 F St.192229 Roessler Winery 1902 N. Winery Ave.1893 121 Pacific Southwest Building 1060 Fulton Mall 1923 213 Fresno Fire Department No. 3 1406-1430 Fresno St.193930 A. G. Wishon Home 3555 E. Huntington Blvd.1915 122 Mason Building 1044 Fulton Mall 1918 214 Henry Offutt Home 227 N. Glenn Ave.190031 Sun Maid Raisin Growers Coop.2901 E. Hamilton Ave.1918 123 Bank of Italy 1001 Fulton Mall 1917 215 Prior Home 458 N. Howard Ave.192132 Hayhurst Home 405 N. Broadway 1919 124 Radin-Kamp Department Store 959 Fulton Mall 1924 216 Edward Waterman Home 2535 E. McKenzie Ave.190433 Cowdrey Home 330 N. Park Ave.1903 125 T. W. Patterson Building 2014 Tulare St.1922 217 C.C.S. Tufts Home 2635 E. McKenzie Ave.188934 Cardwell Home 357 N. Glenn Ave.1895 126 Aten Home 1133 S St.1914 218 Donahoo Home 103 N. Park Ave.189135 Thompson Home 274 N. Glenn Ave.1892 127 Gilbert Home 1145 T St.1910 219 W. H. Spencer Duplex 401-403 San Pablo Ave.192836 Hines Home 333 N. Blackstone Ave.1886 128 Ewing Home 1025 T St.1916 220 Emmanuel Lutheran Church 1115 U St.192937 Griffen Home 319 N. Blackstone Ave.1913 129 F. K. Prescott Home 2983 Tulare St.1906 221 Frank L. Smith Home 245 N. U St.191038 Brix Home 313 N. Blackstone Ave.1910 130 Anderson Home 1120 T St.1913 222 John Humiston Home 229 N. Yosemite St.190539 Hewitt Home 175 N. Diana St.1891 131 Goodman Home 1060 T St.1906 223 Christian Samuelson Home 232 N. Yosemite St.191940 Anderson Home 329 N. Clark St.1911 132 Gundlefinger Home 1020 T St.1910 224 T.E. Mellen Property 250 N. Yosemite St.190741 Collins Home 1107 R St.1905 133 Martin Home 1002 T St.1912 225 Nystrom Residence 725 N. Wilson Ave.193242 Shipp Home 305 N. Clark St.1905 134 John Meux Home 1045 U St.1907 226 Parker Nash Building 1462 Broadway c189843 Rutherford Home 230 N. Clark St.1888 135 Cobb Home 271 N. Yosemite St.1913 227 Brewer Adobe 5901 W. Shaw Ave.c192344 McKay Home 201 N. Clark St.1899 136 Proffitt Home 5218 N. Millbrook Ave.1911 228 Jacob Andreas Home 309 E St.190545 Gerlitz Home 121 N. U St.1905 137 Stone Home 408 N. Fulton St.1877 229 Wild Residence 567 E. Clinton Ave.192946 Bonsel/Rush Home 115 N. U St.1904 138 A. G. Wishon Home 340 N. Fulton St.1904 230 Roosevelt High School 4250 E. Tulare Ave.1920-195047 Ramona Apartments 1316 L St.1911 139 Farr Home 245 N. Fulton St.1907 231 Hopkins Residence 1458 E. Divisadero Ave.190948 Brix Apartments 2301 Fresno St.1913 140 Alexander Home 235 N. Fulton St.1908 232 Whitney-Huntting Home 1105 N. Echo Ave.191749 Fresno City Hall (Annex)2326 Fresno St.1939 141 Hanger Home 425 N. Fulton St.1900 233 Adam Baird Home 136 N. Van Ness Ave.1889-189050 U.S. Post Office (Main)2309 Tulare St.1939 142 McIndoo Home 310 N. Fulton St.1913 234 Kearney Boulevard Gateway Fresno St. at Kearney Blvd.193351 Chorbajian Home 647 M St.1916 143 McAlphine Home 171 N. Van Ness Ave.1900 235 Joseph J. Bolitho Home 33 N. Calaveras St.1918-191952 Fresno Memorial Auditorium 1235 O St.1935 144 Graff Home 916 E. Divisadero St.1905 236 McGee-Macias Home 115 N. Calaveras St.189853 Old Fresno Unified School District Office 2348 Mariposa Mall 1936 145 Evinger Home 2024 Amador St.1912 237 Valley Lahvosh Baking Co.502 M St.1920-192154 Maubridge Apartment Building 2344 Tulare St.1911 146 Sadler Office Supply Co.1717 Van Ness Ave.1926 238 E. J. Huntzicker Memorial Hall 245 N. Calaveras St.193855Schmidt Home 460 N St.1908 147 Romain Home 2055 San Joaquin St.1905 239 Gates-Twining Home 640 E. Pine Ave.193256 Mink Home 344 N St.1907 148 Davidson Home 1762 Van Ness Ave.1906 240 John C. Fox Home 128 N. Calaveras St.c190557 Turpin Home 2522 Inyo St.1915 149 Gundelfinger Home (The Mansion)2201 Calaveras St.1912 241 Samuel E. Johnston Home 1526 E. Andrews Ave.195258 Twining Laboratories 2527 Fresno St.1930 150 Harvey Swift Home 1605 L St.1905 242 State Center Warehouse and Cold Storage Co. 747 R St.191859 Berven Rug Mills Inc.616 P St.1917 151 Hoover Residence 1552 L St.1916 243 Thomas Thorn Home 2543 E. Madison Ave.191060 Central Packaging Supply Co.2534 San Benito St.1920 152 Nestel Home 1527 L St.1897 244 The Cearley-Twining Home 625 E. Home Ave.191861 Rainbow Ballroom (Natatorium)1725 Broadway 1918 153 First Congregational Church 11 N. San Pablo Ave.1911 245 The Nis Johnson Home 601 E. Pine Ave.192162 Legler Home 305 E St.1900 154 First Church of Christ Scientist 1615 N St.1916 246 Shams Rio Grande Service Station 205 Fulton St.193863 Fresno Temple Church of God 208 E St.1914 155 Temple Beth Israel 2336 Calaveras St.1923 247 Dale Brothers Coffee Can Sign 1420 H St.c193764 Bank of America Building 957-951 F St.1908 156 Schutz Residence 1522 N St.1900 248 Benham Ice Cream Co./Dale Brothers Coffee Co. Bldg 1420-1432 H St.1912-193765 Bow On Tong Association Building 935 China Alley 1920 157 Turner Building 802-812 Van Ness Ave.1922 248 Benham Ice Cream Co./Dale Brothers Coffee Co. Bldg 1420-1432 H St.1912-193766 Bing Kong Tong Association Building 921-929 China Alley 1900 158 Blacks Market 755 Van Ness Ave.1923 249 J.M. Menend/Murray Ice Cream Co. Building 175 Fulton St.192467 Vartanian Home 362 F St.1891 159 James Phelan Building 700 Van Ness Ave.1914 250 John Fairweather Home 248 N. Van Ness Ave.c190568 Zacky Farms Grain Elevators 315 H St.1938 160 Sun Stereo Warehouse 736 Fulton St.1918 251 John B. Frinchaboy Home 243 N. College Ave.c190369 Fresno Planing Mill 1820 Monterey St.1917 161 Rustigian Building 701-723 Fulton St.1920 252 William and Helen Sutherland Home 1460 N. Wishon Ave.1913-191470 Bekins Van and Storage 301 Van Ness Ave.1921 162 Carmel Saddlery 748 Broadway 1916 253 W. D. Coates Home 264 N. Van Ness Ave.c190571 Travelers Hotel 1812 Tulare St.1916 163 Zellerbach Paper Co. Building 1776 Kern St.1918 254 Amazon S. Hays Home 330 N. Fulton St.c190772 Komotos Department Store and Hotel 1536-1542 Kern St.1908 164 P.G. & E. Building 1544 Fulton St.1926 255 Mary Matson Home 1440 E. Divisadero St.190473 Roessler Home 4881 E. University Ave.1914 165 Wilson Theater Building 1445-1463 Fulton St.1926 257 Former Santa Fe Land Improvement Co.209 N. Diana St.c190074 Johnson Home 3811 E. Illinois Ave.1907 166 Hotel Fresno 1257 Broadway 1913 258 Gustav and Edith Manheim Home 617 E. Pine Ave.192075 Mundorff Home 3753 E. Balch Ave.1917 167 Mattei Building 1177 Fulton Mall 1921 259 Floyd W. Cowan Home 642 E. Weldon Ave.192176 Weems Home 3121 E. El Monte Way 1918 168 Helm Building 1101 Fulton Mall 1914 260 W.P. Stanton Home 650 E. Weldon Ave.192177 Hughes Home 743 S. Fourth St.1917 169 Hobbs Parsons Produce Co.903 H St.1903 261 Fresno Photo Engraving Building 748-752 Fulton Street 194678 Robinson Home 1003 S. Orange Ave.1900 170 Rowell Building 2100 Tulare St.1912 262 Liberty Laundry Building 1830 Inyo Street 192879 Shuttera Home 320 S. Chestnut Ave.1924 171 Liberty Theater 944 Van Ness Ave.1917 263 Baskin's Auto Supply Sign 729 Broadway 195680 John Euless Home 373 S. Peach Ave.1913 172 Kern Kay Hotel 906-912 Van Ness Ave.1912 264 Frank Chance Field Site sw corner Ventura and Cedar 1935-194181 Wiley Giffen Home 4824 E. Butler Ave.1916 173 Hotel Virginia 2125-2139 Kern St.1920 265 William F. Jones Home 1112 E. Franklin Avenue 191182 Van Ness Gate Entrance 2208 S. Van Ness Ave.1925 174 Hotel California 851 Van Ness Ave.1923 266 The Deacon-Eilert Home 660 E. Carmen Avenue 191983 California Products Co.3000 E. Butler Ave.1898 175 Owen Home 2631 E. Washington Ave.1902 267 The John B. Marshall Homes 164 N. Echo Avenue c1884, c190884 San Joaquin Grocers Wholesale Warehouse 104 Fulton St.1913 176 Russ Clements Service Station 2740 N. Van Ness Ave.1926 268 George and Adelphia Rowell Home 153 N. Effie Street 190385 St. Genevieves Catholic Church 1127 Tulare St.1938 177 Forestiere Underground Gardens 5021 W. Shaw Ave.1906 269 United Grocers Warehouse 801 R Street 193186 St. Johns Cathedral Catholic Church 2814 Mariposa St.1902 178 Ohannesian Home 1225 E. Divisadero St.1920 270 Crest Theater 1160 Broadway Plaza 194987 St. Johns Rectory 2814 Mariposa St.1928 179 Clovis M. Cole Home 3615 E. Kerckhoff Ave.1914 271 Alfred and Minnie Cherin Home 233 E. Cornell Ave.194988 St. Johns Hall School 2811 Mariposa St.1926 180 Gibbs Home 369 N. Ferger Ave.1918 272 Frank and May Driver Home 129 N. College Ave c190289 H. H. Brix Mansion 2844 Fresno St.1911 181 Paul Kindler Home 1520 E. Olive Ave.192990 Rehorn Home 1050 S St.1906 182 Frank J. Craycroft Home 6545 N. Palm Ave.1927 !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!(!( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !(!(!(!(!(!(!( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !("""#################################") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") H UT F S E P R C N Q G A NAPA EASTDUNN BOYDT O P E K A ALTA B RACO LEEMAUDDWIGHT R A I L R O A D EIGHTHNIELSEN NINTHMINYO BALL CLAY EDEN ELEVENTHROSEHOLLYTYLERCLINTON BRALY LOTUSEL MONTE CEDARPOPPYPEARLBALCH GOLDEN STATE LEMON CLARAGEARY TERRACE MYERS HAWES KEARNEY IOWA MICHIGAN PLATT FIFTHEUNICEHOME BUTLER BONDBROWN IRW I N MONTECITOSIXTH C O B B UNIVERSITY P A R A L L E LANNAFOUNTAIN TULARE GENEVAFERNFERGER TURNER CHARLES HUNTER MONO KERCKHOFF TUPMANBREMERLAMONADELPHIANORMAL LOWEADOLINEWELDON HEATONWESLEYBLACKSTONEPERALTA J O N E SROOSEVELT MADISONVAGADES THIRDHAYSTONVAGEDESSIMPSONSAFFORD HUMBOLTCHERRYORCHARDABBYYOSEMITEVALENCIA M A R T I N K L E T T E P O T T L E LANEMARIPOSA IVYCHANDLER STROTHER LEWISPALM FOURTHPARKSARAHWHITES BRIDGE VERRUEFIRSTECHOALHAMBRA G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D TOWNSENDDOONPRINCETONFRESNO BENITO C O L L I N S ONEILL' LYELL OLIVECAMBRIDGE WELLERWOODWARDLUCERNEBROADWAYWHITE ARCHIESECONDSNOWENGLEWOOD S A N T A F E NEVADA THESTAFOYNEJEANNEHAMMOND BARDELLP L A Z A GRANTEFFIE MERCEDFULTONCHANCEFISHERTOBEY ROWELLANDREWS TRINITYAMADORFARRIS ORANGEANGUSMODOCMAROAWA T E R M A NWILSONPINEDUDLEYWISHON HARVEYEKLUND LIBERTY FLORADORADENNETT H A Z E L W O O D ILLINOISTHORNEARTHUR AUGUSTAHEDGES WALNUTVOORMAN LYMAN KERNELIZABETH M A Y O R OLEANDER HAMILTON THOMAS FAIRVIEWWEBSTER RAISINACARMEN BARTONDIAMONDSAN DIEGOMONTEREY SEVENTHYALE STEPHENSBELMONT HARVARD GEARHARTEL DORADOCLARKLINDEN JACKSONVAN NESSCARRUTHDREXELFILLMORE DIVISADERO ELMKLONDIKE STANISLAUSCALLISCHSHERMANHARRISONLA SIERRA VALERIADELNOFL0RENCE LILYCORTLAND SAN JOAQUINMCKENZIE HOWARDSAN BENITOSANTA CLARACALAVERASDIANACHURCH FLORODORA WASHINGTON BEND L NICHOLASTENTHHARDTLORENAFRUITLA SALLE TULIPFLORENCE GILBERT PICKFORDORLEANS FRANKLIN BERKELEY MILLBROOKMILDREDA TUOLUMNE PATTERSONMCKINLEY DONAHOO SHIELDS SACRAMENTO O PLUMASMARYATCHINSON CALIFORNIA VASSAR VENTURA LOS ANGELESGLENNPOPLARDEL MARWEBERCOLLEGECORNELLSAN PABLOHUNTINGTON MARTIN LUTHER KINGECHONINTHMICHIGANBLACKSTONEWELDON ELEVENTHTHIRDTHORNEMARIP OSA FLORODORA THIRDBELMONT FOURTHSTANISLAUSBLACKSTONETHORNEVALERIAFRESNOF PEARLTHIRDC O L L I N S NEVADA ETHORNE HARVEY ORCHARDCLARKFLORODORA H TERRACE HARVEYARTHUR MCKENZIE GRANT JACKSONBARTONEL MONTE BARTONWHITE GRANT DUDLEY TUOLUMNE STEPHENSTHORNEHAMMOND ELEVENTHVAN NESSTULAREOLIVESHIELDS P MCKINLEY CHANCEFIRSTTHESTAHAMILTON LOWE B R O A DW A YMAROABELMONT MCKINLEY LAMONA F FRESNOBONDF U L T O N CLINTON HAMILTON CEDARFRESNOWILSONMERCED TULAREBONDQ MARIPOSASHIELDS LOTUSVENTURA CORNELL B SNOWWILSONFRANKLIN PLATTWILSONBELMONT WHITE FIFTHHEDGES VENTURACOLLEGEPARK PLAZAVENTURADELNOWILSONNINTHORCHARDH TENTHCALIFORNIA EIGHTHCALIFORNIA FOURTHPRINCETONNORMALVAGADES SIMPSONIRW I N FOURTHPALMTHORNEA TERRACE FIFTHABBYVAN NESSCLARKV A N N E S S HEDGESMICHIGAN K L E T T E SHIELDS LORENA BROWN A CAMBRIDGE INYOFARRISSECONDIOWA VASSARGLENN HOMEWEBER MONO ALHAMBRA WOODWARDORCHARD SIXTHMONTEREYABBYCOLLEGE CALIFORNIAMERCEDPALMMYERS ORANGEO THIRDPLATT CEDARBELMONTABBY EL DORADODELNOCEDARANGUSFRESNOSAFFORDDENNETT WOODWARD CHANCETHESTAHARVEYHEDGESCAMBRIDGE TULAREFMERCED OLIVE MCKENZIE HUNTINGTONMAROAVAN NESSMERCED FOURTHSTROTHERDELNO ANGUSTRINITYBELMONT AUGUSTASHIELDSYALEPINE BELMONT HAW E S MARIPOSALAMONAARTHUR FOURTHSECONDPRINCETON BRALYAMADORTHESTAOLIVECLARK ROWELLBRALYADOLINE WASHINGTON BELMONTTHORNE TULAREGLENNHEDGESPRINCETONDELNO ROWELLYOSEMITECLINTON WASHINGTONFRESNO EL DORADO SECONDFLORADORA GILBERT MCKINLEY F F U L T O N L MCKENZIE THOMAS BELMONT VERRUEFRESNO A FLORADORA ORANGESAN PABLOBALCH DENNETT THESTACEDARHARVEY LOWE CLINTON AMADORBROADWAYBROWNPINEPINE LORENAARTHURCPICKFORD SIMPSONOLIVE S A N T A F E HEDGES EIGHTHHARVARD BALCHVAN NESSTYLER WALNUTHEDGESECHOCLARK NEVADA ILLINOISWISHONHDELNOCORNELL M TRINITYLOWEDELNOFTRINITYFOURTHNIELSEN MONOSAFFORDADOLINEGLENN FRUITANDREWS FIFTHGLENNHEDGES SANTA CLARAFLORENCE MICHIGANCLINTON CEDARTURNER BELMONT BELMONT VENTURAPRINCETON VERRUE IOWA TYLERFRUIT SACRAMENTO LILYTHOMAS HAMILTON TOWNSEND ALTA CAMBRIDGE ELEVENTHANGUSSAN JOAQUINFIFTHMCKENZIE STANISLAUSPLATT HAMILTON OLIVE TYLER HOME FRESNOHEDGES BUTLER PLUMASPLUMASANDREWS HOMEEFFIE ILLINOIS SEVENTHFLORADORAFRESNOFIRST BELMONT JACKSONPARALLELB R O A DW A Y NORMALDENNETT R TENTHEFFIECALIFORNIA PERALTA IOWA P HAMMOND INYOFRESNOGLENNNINTHHUNTINGTON TYLERTERRACE JACKSONWHITEFULTON C O L L I N S THESTAPALMCLAY ILLINOIS TYLER H PLUMASHAMILTON YALE JACKSONDUDLEYTHORNE W A T E R M A N BELMONT L IOWAFRUITCORNELL PLUMASFLORODORA HUNTINGTON FIFTHFERNMICHIGAN AFARRISMILDREDA VENTURA CLINTON EIGHTHSEVENTHCALIFORNIA LAMONA INYOBROWN QARTHUR HAMILTONDEL MARCARRUTHVASSAR EASTVAN NESSGEARHARTBUTLER CORTLAND ARTHURNINTHPLUMASILLINOIS UNIVERSITY CEDARSEVENTHBELMONTBLACKSTONE CEDARHOWARDMCKINLEYWISHONOLIVE BELMONT MCKENZIEMAROA ROWELLMICHIGAN JACKSONG THOMAS MONO HAWESADOLINEVAGADES ROWELLFOURTHLIBERTY PERALTA GRANT MCKENZIE TULAREVAN NESSFARRISDENNETT HOME THORNEARTHURCLINTON FIRSTMARIPOSAMAROAVAGEDESBONDSTANISLAUS ANNATHORNEGRANT B TENTHTHESTAL TUOLUMNETULARE MONOKERN UNIVERSITY VENTURAMILLBROOK EIGHTHPRINCETON THOMAS CALIFORNIA EL MONTEBLACKSTONEMCKINLEYFARRISVAN NESSFOURTHORANGEM A Y O R PINEPINE VERRUEVAN NESSPLUMASDELNOPALMNEVADAFOURTH KERCKHOFF TYLER TULAREHARRISONMERCED MCKENZIE FOUNTAIN MONTECITOCLARKORCHARD CALIFORNIA F U L T O N ORLEANSTRINITYLOS ANGELESJACKSONFRESNO CARMEN MONTEREY ANGUSVENTURA FIFTHMADISON TRINITYTHORNEHARVARD MERCEDMARIPOSASTANISLAUS INYOHARVEY CHANCETULAREARTHUREFFIECOLLEGE GFRUITCARMENECHO VAN NESSBROWNBREMER NBROADWAY TULARETULARE BALCH FLORENCE MILLBROOKJACKSONB R O A DW A Y CEDARSHIELDSVAN NESSFIFTHSEVENTHPALMFIRSTFOUNTAIN ELEVENTHUNIVERSITY DIAMONDB R O A D W A Y NORMALHARRISON EIGHTHMILLBROOKMADISON PRINCETON MODOCHARRISONTYLER AMADORWISHON KEARNEY ELEVENTHGLENNLTULAREFRUIT BALCHCOLLEGEVAN NESSROOSEVELTHOMEWISHON P O T T L E FLORENCEANGUSCALAVERASCALIFORNIACHERRYBELMONT BARTONHARRISONMARYTHORNEGLENNMAROAWHITES BRIDGE VASSAR PALMGRANT TYLER CEDARWISHONROOSEVELTINYOSTANISLAUS FIRSTB R O A DW A Y VENTURAECHOCOLLEGE V A N N E S SFRESNOHARRISONWELDON NEVADA FLORADORA BUTLER TULAREVAGADESORANGEILLINOIS BELMONT CLINTON FIRSTFIFTHIOWA TOWNSEND PRINCETONSHIELDSOLIVE THIRDTULAREARTHURARCHIEBROWNMICHIGAN FRESNOJ O N E S ILLINOIS THIRDMARIPOSAFIRSTEL DORADOCLARK MARIPOSAFARRISBUTLERWISHONAG MCKINLEY CLARKHOMETHORNEDELNOEFFIE L ANGUSA HARVARDVASSAR FULTONCHANCECORNELLECHOECHO DELNOPALMWHITE ANDREWSEFFIE BELMONTDEL MARFRANKLINADOLINE SAN JOAQUINWEBSTER ILLINOIS SECONDANGUSSEVENTHWELDON CALIFORNIATHORNE TULARE NORMAL SAN JOAQUINKERNCARMENCAMBRIDGETHORNE LIBERTY C ANNAFOURTHMODOCCORTLAND C O L L I N S FLORENCE MCALAVERAS MARIPOSAB TENTHANDREWS ORCHARDDENNETT EIGHTHHEDGESDELNO ILLINOIS NEVADA LIBERTY OLIVE LOWE NORMAL VENTURA SAN BENITO FIFTHWELDON SECONDMARIPOSANINTHKERNINYOCORNELL HPALM HOLLYHAMILTON ELEVENTHHARVEY SEVENTHCORNELL MERCEDOLIVE HOME PARKROSEMARIPOSAH CHERRYSANTA CLARAOLEANDERVAN NESSABBYHUMBOLTJACKSONCALIFORNIA LORENA WASHINGTONCEDARFISHERFLORADORA ARTHURTERRACE WASHINGTON TENTHFLORENCEPLUMASFRUIT MARIPOSA LIBERTYTHESTAFRESNOFRUIT WALNUTTHOMAS FRANKLINBLACKSTONE EL MONTE CORTLAND BUTLERCALAVERAS FOURTHBROADWAYLORENA ALHAMBRA FIFTHGCLARK FIRSTCLARKOLIVE ORANGEMERCEDECHOKERNCARMEN CALIFORNIA WHITE JACKSONORCHARDORANGEG CLINTON TUOLUMNE ILLINOIS HARVEY MCKENZIE HUNTINGTON FOURTHCOLLEGEALINDENN EIGHTHCALIFORNIA VERRUE N FRESNOANGUSB ORCHARDPOPPYPALMLEEWISHONFLORODORA ELEVENTHUNIVERSITY BROADWAYVOORMANWISHON MARYMONOFERGERDENNETT OLIVE E FRESNOSHIELDS TRINITYCEDARCOLLEGEBUTLER VOORMANHARRISON CORNELL BALCH FRUITEIGHTHVALERIASEVENTHTRINITYAMADOR DUDLEY THOMASVAN NESSHARVARD LAMONA POPLARTHIRDWOODWARD B R O A DW A Y WEBSTER FIRSTEFFIEGEARHARTSAN PABLOABBYFRUITHARRISONPINEUNIVERSITYMARIPOSA BARTONCALIFORNIA MILLBROOKSIMPSONADOLINEFRUITHOME POPLARMADISON OLIVE HAMMOND FLORADORA SARAHFILLMORE LOS ANGELESWISHONB R O A DW A Y P SECONDFARRISATCHINSON ORCHARDHUNTINGTONWISHON THORNEPERALTADUDLEYCORNELL BUTLER THOMAS EL DORADO FOURTHGRANT ARTHURHARVARD BARTONFERGERANGUSCALIFORNIA PERALTA K L E T T EWISHON FRESNODIVISADERO BARTONWASHINGTONEFFIEGLENNHEDGESLUCERNE FIRSTB MCKINLEY KERNTURNER MONO LYELLMODOC CLARAEDEN THIRDSTEPHENSARTHURMONO ANDREWS HOLLYCOLLEGEFIFTHOLIVE F P L A Z A NICHOLASFRESNOVENTURA PLUMASV A N N E S S SIMPSON HEATONGLENNVALERIA EIGHTHANGUSCALIFORNIA BALCH SAN JOAQUIN PINE FIRSTPINE STANISLAUSWHITES BRIDGEMAROAPRINCETON HOMEHARRISON THIRDCORNELL VENTURAVAGEDESFRESNOGLENN SECONDAUGUSTAHARVEYADOLINECLAYPINEFOUNTAIN M A R T I N P O T T L E BROWN ORCHARDLAMONAANGUS SIXTHNMAROACORNELL SANTA CLARAECHOAFRUIT ANGUSDUDLEY GENEVAYALEBLACKSTONE RAISINACEDARMODOCC C HARVEYANDREWSPALM FRUITEIGHTHPRINCETON ILLINOIS LEWIS MARIP OSA MCKENZIE NORMAL ROOSEVELTCEDARCLARKDIVISADERO VOORMAN SECONDVAGADESHEDGES HUNTINGTONFISHER LANEINYOWHITES BRIDGEWISHONHOME HAMILTON DENNETTCOLLEGE MONO F U L T O N WEBSTERTERRACE LIBERTY ORANGEORCHARDHOME CALIFORNIA HOME G OLIVE THOMAS SEVENTHOMAROAYALE EUNICEBRALYINYOOLIVECLARKFIRSTHOME M A Y O REKLUNDMODOC IVYVENTURAMARIPOSABROWN HAZELWOODSECONDV A N N E S SSAN PABLOCALLISCHWILSONCEDARKERNCLAY THORNEPRINCETONWILSON THOMASFERGER SEVENTHANGUSFOURTHADOLINEGMERCEDFRUIT LORENAWISHON ORANGEFLORADORAABBY SIXTHDENNETT FOURTHPLATT YALESAN PABLOTHESTACALAVERASFISHERSHIELDSMCKINLEY ROOSEVELTTUOLUMNE THIRDDELNOCOLLEGEWHITE ILLINOIS FRESNOANGUSFLORADORA ELEVENTHBRALY TENTHORCHARDWILSONEFFIEINYOFOURTHEIGHTHWILSONA ORCHARDCORNELL EIGHTHP ORLEANS WASHINGTONPOPLAR CEDARCHUR C HMAROAFARRIS AUGUSTAARTHURNORMAL WASHINGTON HEDGES ANNAMCKINLEY FOUNTAIN ATCHINSON VENTURAGRANT CLAYHEDGES THOMAS L S A N T A F E PRINCETON PLATT WELDON HAMMOND WOODWARD HEDGESVAN NESSWELLERL VENTURAROOSEVELT E THOMASVAN NESSROWELLOLIVE DIANACAMBRIDGE RAISINAPLUMASMCKINLEY FRUITFLORADORATHESTA MONTECITO FIFTHS MARIPOSASTANISLAUSFRUITMECHOPOPLAR B JACKSONH FIRSTCOLLEGEINYOJACKSONABBYFRESNOFOUNTAIN FRESNOFLORADORA MADISON TUOLUMNETUOLUMNECMERCED H A Z E L W O O D PLAZAAMADORSAN JOAQUIN NINTHLEEBONDSAFFORDSANTA CLARAFLORODORA MONO HAYSTONMADISONAUGUSTA ILLINOIS SHIELDS VENTURAF U L T O N BONDTUOLUMNE CALLISCHOLIVE GRANT GRANT FRANKLIN G BARTONCOLLEGETHOMAS LYELLHARRISONYALEOLIVE KERNTHORNEFRESNOGRANTMARIPOSA FRESNOSIXTHFRANKLIN ELIZABETHADOLINE FISHERTERRACE OLIVE THORNENEVADA HAMMOND V A N N E S S TERRACE H FIRSTHAMMONDSIMPSONCLARK GEARHARTMAROACALLISCHTHESTANEVADA CALIFORNIA THORNENINTHVOORMAN LA SALLE ANGUSJACKSONHOWARDEL MONTE WELDON IVYELIZABETHOLIVE TRINITYFIFTHADOLINEGLENNARTHURMICHIGAN TUOLUMNE ORCHARDBELMONT FOURTHF U L T O N MICHIGAN HAMILTONCLARKHOWARDTERRACE THOMAS JACKSONFOUNTAINHARVARDHARRISON BELMONTFRUITTHORNE KERCKHOFF CAMBRIDGE HAZELWOODBROADWAYOLIVE EIGHTHWILSONBROWN TUOLUMNE BROWNPRINCETON FOURTHSHIELDS KERCKHOFF SANTA CLARAHAWES TERRACE PLUMASATCHINSONTRINITY CLINTON CALAVERASCLINTONLEWIS BELMONT E F F I EDELNO ALTA NEVADAROOSEVELT VENTURA MARIPOSAPALMFRUITSARAHAMADOR CEDARFIRSTVENTURATHORNEWEBER THESTAN PICKFORDPLAZAFERGERFRESNOMONO VENTURALEMON FLORENCETHORNEPALM PINE DIANAWELDON HAZELWOODHOME PINEMICHIGANFRUIT SEVENTHFRUITGRANT TUOLUMNE DWIGHTEIGHTHTHOMASORCHARDTHESTAM A Y O R PERALTAHARRISONFRUIT EIGHTHHOMEELEVENTH SEVENTHFLORENCE FLORADORA FRUITMCKINLEY EDEN BELMONT PRINCETON BELMONT C BALCH VENTURADEL MARHARRISONSIMPSONBENDFRUITFOUNTAINVAN NESSUNIVERSITY LORENA BARTONMAROADELNOWILSONWILSONHARRISONMCKENZIE SHIELDS HEDGES FISHERCLINTON THORNESTANISLAUSFLORENCEPLUMAS FRESNOFRUITO CEDARPALMBROWNARTHUR OLIVEADOLINEPERALTA MODOCFRANKLIN ORLEANS BELMONT MCKENZIE LOWE LORENA BUTLER LORENA LAMONA FIRSTGEARY HEDGES CALIFORNIAFRUITV A N N E S S WHITEHOWARD TULAREBELMONTFRUITWHITE B FLORADORA THOMAS MCKENZIE A SIMPSON HAMILTON H HOWARDPARALLELHARVARD NINTHBELMONT NINTHENGLEWOODPALM ARTHURBELMONTVAN NESSBARTONDENNETT WALNUTMADISON MCKENZIECOLLEGEEFFIE GRANT TUOLUMNE ORCHARDWOODWARD CLAY HEATONPLUMASFIFTH JACKSONOLIVE IR W I N BARTONMARIPOSAOLIVEYALE TURNERSAN PABLOORCHARDMERCEDKERNLINDENCLAY STANISLAUSHOMEEFFIE HAMILTON HEATONCOLLEGEFIFTHUNIVERSITYPRINCETONNINTHMARIPOSAGLENNNINTHBELMONT LAMONA DELNOEIGHTHLANE FRUITSTROTHER ARTHURYALE PRINCETON STEPHENSPLATT V A N N E S S ROWELLANGUSWOODWARDPALMSIXTHHEDGES FLORENCE ELIZABETH BONDW A T E R M A N EDENMODOCDELNO OLIVE H DONAHOOABBYOLIVE C BARTONSHIELDSCORTLANDFARRIS SEVENTHHUNTINGTONCHARRISON U ELIZABETH FOURTHWASHINGTONFISHERHAMMOND G WHITEVAGADES C TOWNSEND YALEHEDGES GILBERT CALIFORNIATHORNEDUDLEY HARVARD MARIPOSA FIFTHEIGHTHTHORNELOS ANGELESTHORNEE IOWA HEDGESHOME ARTHURBUTLER CLINTONSIMPSON TULARE CHERRYBLACKSTONECORTLAND BUTLER P O T T L E LORENACALAVERASGLENNCLARKMCKINLEY CALIFORNIA DENNETTDUDLEY BELMONT F U L T O NSAN PABLOEKLUNDFRESNOMONODEL MARNEVADA TYLERDREXEL EFFIEGEARHARTCALAVERASFLORODORAELIZABETH LOS ANGELES VASSARCALAVERAS ANGUSH FLORENCETENTHBROWNBLACKSTONEVAN NESSF CEDARTHORNEB LAMONA CLAY ORANGETHESTAHARVARD ROWELLBELMONT HUNTINGTON NINTHTHOMASCLARK THIRDCLARKHEDGES CALIFORNIAINYO VENTURADEL MARGLENNP O T T L E UNIVERSITYDELNOFULTON WHITE FOUNTAIN BRALYCOLLEGEVOORMAN HAMILTONFRESNONEVADA MICHIGAN GRANTECHOHAMMONDHEDGES VENTURAHARVEY V A N N E S S CEDARHOME TENTHARTHURFLORENCEBLACKSTONEHARVARDSAN JOAQUINTURNERDEL MARHOMEHAMMONDHARVARD FISHERFOUNTAIN HOWARDELIZABETH BELMONT SIXTHGLENNEL MONTE HAMMOND MERCEDWILSONALHAMBRA ILLINOISANGUS G CLAYVAN NESSMSAN PABLOLEWIS THOMASFRESNO LYELLCLARKFRESNOORCHARDBROADWAYDUNN MONO AUGUSTAEL MONTEBLACKSTONE ORANGESEVENTHHOMEFARRIS DIVISADERO KERNTENTHMCKENZIE FIFTHBLACKSTONEPATTERSON FLORADORAEFFIEPRINCETONFRESNO WOODWARD F U L T O N MONO YALE BALCH LAMONAFLORADORAVASSAR ORLEANS TENTHCLAYLEWIS TENTHAUGUSTATHOMAS TERRACE MARIPOSAHARRISONTERRACESHIELDS FIRSTANDREWS NINTHROWELLEL MONTEDELNOYALEANGUSTHOMAS SIXTHCORNELL FIFTHE E L M CORTLANDTYLERMAROA OLIVEBROWN ROWELLTHORNEFLORADORA EIGHTHFRESNOHUNTINGTON CALIFORNIA BELMONT THORNEBRALY JACKSONPLATT WASHINGTON OWISHON SAN BENITOSANTA CLARAILLINOIS PLUMASBUTLER NORMAL HOME LORENA CLINTON INYOVENTURAHARRISONCOLLEGEJACKSONCALAVERASORCHARDTUOLUMNE GEARY DIVISADERO MONTECITO MARIPOSA GDEL MARDUDLEY MADISON PRINCETON KERCKHOFF MARIPOSAFIFTHMADISONGLENN BUTLER PINEANDREWSMCKINLEYORCHARDSHIELDS CEDARMARIPOSA CEDARARTHURELEVENTHYALE FIFTHHUNTINGTON THOMASSHIELDS HAWES FPALMARTHUR PLATTFRESNO MERCED H WHITE YALE SAN JOAQUIN M A Y O RVAN NESSOLIVE BRALY ROWELLOLIVE FLORADORA VAN NESSMARIPOSATHIRDTHOMASCOLLEGE MODOCECHOHEDGES TOWNSEND CHANCEPINE FRESNOTULARE F U L T O N VENTURAKEARNEY CALIFORNIAFERGERLEWISVENTURABELMONTLOS ANGELESM OLIVE HEDGESHARVARD HOME GRANT TULARE UNIVERSITYEFFIE BALCH MCKENZIE VOORMANMAROA STANISLAUSFLORADORA S A N T A F E BROWN B ARTHURGRANTSAN PABLOORLEANSMAROAVASSAR L FOURTHTHOMAS BONDO O BELMONT YALECOLLEGE GRANT PLATT EL DORADOARTHURANGUSHARRISONWISHONBRALY THOMAS ROWELLFULTONROWELLEIGHTHMONTECITO PRINCETON NINTHGEARY VENTURA PLATT LOWE MCKINLEY MONTEREYSEVENTHHOMEPALM PLATT MONO BALCH PRINCETON P DENNETT NINTHSIMPSONHEDGES MADISONTHESTA OGLENN FIRSTFRESNO HAMMOND MARTIN LUTHER KINGABBYMILDREDA FRUITILLINOIS WOODWARD MILLBROOKSIXTHTERRACE TENTHFLORADORA GRANT CHERRYCLARKVENTURABLACKSTONEH A Z E LW O O DTHESTAH HARVEY BELMONTPALM FRUITYALE CEDARTHOMAS IOWADELNO STROTHERVALERIA BUTLERCALAVERAS BARTONBUTLERFIRSTP TULAREMARIPOSAMCKENZIE FIFTHBELMONT YALE SECONDHAZELWOODSAFFORDWHITES BRIDGE HARVARDYALEDEL MARNEVADA BE L M O N TFARRISHARVARD FRESNOFARRISSTEPHENSCEDARGLENNEIGHTHTULAREVAN NESSAMADOR OLIVEPOPLAR FRESNOSIMPSON MCKENZIE TOWNSEND CARMEN DIVISADERO TERRACE WA T E R M A N RWISHONTUOLUMNE BROWN FLORENCE EIGHTHFIFTHFIRSTV A N N E S SMAROA BELMONT C CALIFORNIAPOPLARFOURTHCORNELLCAMBRIDGEPALMMCKINLEYECHOCORNELLCARMENMILLBROOKYALE ARCHIEFRESNOMILLBROOKVENTURAPRINCETONLAMONA FIRSTINYOMARIPOSA TERRACE LEEGRANT CHURCH VERRUE L E HOME ELEVENTHCALLISCHTHESTAFRUITH FRANKLIN GOLDEN STATESAFFORDUNIVERSITY VENTURASHIELDSARTHUR THESTAFIRSTVAN NESSEIGHTHDUNN HEDGES BALCH OLIVE HARVARD BELMONTFRUIT THOMAS TULARESAN PABLOIOWAFRESNOBROWN THOMASSHIELDS HAMILTON TERRACE DIVISADERO HARVEY NEVADA CALLISCHSTANISLAUSGRANT FIRSTCLARKDIANAFRUITMODOCVASSARCORNELL DELNOCALIFORNIA FRANKLIN DUDLEY HAZELWOODUNIVERSITYWISHON JACKSONEFFIEPINE FOURTHORANGENEVADA MCKINLEY G UNIVERSITY DIVISADERO INYOEUNICETULARE SIMPSONPINE PLUMASAMADOR MODOCNEVADA HEDGES THORNEWILSONBLACKSTONEROWELLVAN NESSHOME SECONDOLEANDER FRESNOMCKINLEY BALCH CORNELL ANDREWS CORNELL FOURTHTYLER MERCEDFIFTHBELMONT HEDGES KERNKERNPALMMAROAFLORENCE ORANGEELEVENTHL FIFTHFRESNOUNIVERSITY B MICHIGAN MARIPOSAPLUMASTHORNEM FRESNOHFRUITFRESNOSIMPSON B R O A DW A Y MONTEREYPALMHEDGESCLINTONBLACKSTONE FIRSTLORENAMAROAWILSONKERN ELEVENTHLAMONAANGUSMICHIGAN TURNER MCKENZIE FLORADORAUNIVERSITY BARTONKEARNEY TRINITYV A N N E S S MERCED CARMENCLARK EIGHTHELIZABETH HAMMOND WA T E R M A N WELDON FRESNOINYOV A N N E S S THORNECEDARSAN PABLOTHIRDHOME AUGUSTATHOMAS FRESNOWISHONLORENA BONDLIBERTYFARRISP A R A L L E L ILLINOIS MONO BROWN Q FRESNOBARTONPERALTA CALAVERASBARTONAMADOR NINTHTHESTAMARIPOSAPARKVENTURA HARVARD PARKWISHONCLARKCLINTON TULAREAMADOR FRESNOANGUSFULTONROOSEVELTTUOLUMNE HARVARD SIMPSONOLIVE M WELDON TULAREAPALMKEARNEY PLUMASWHITE ORCHARDSAN PABLOFIFTHSECONDFARRISGRANT YALEDEL MARFULTONANGUSPINE NINTHWASHINGTON VENTURA ILLINOISTHESTAMCKINLEYLINDENROOSEVELTCOLLEGE MONOFIRSTROOSEVELT BALCHMAROAL SANTA CLARAPARALLELCOLLEGECALIFORNIA ILLINOISSECOND HUNTINGTON FLORENCE SHIELDSCAMBRIDGE ILLINOISCLARKROOSEVELT STROTHERBLACKSTONE ROWELLVAGADESE BELMONT YALE NINTHCLAY TUOLUMNE V A N N E S S FOURTHCLAYHARVEYARTHURGLENN THOMAS VASSAR ORLEANSMARIPOSAHEDGESCLINTONPINE OLIVE P MARIPOSALOWE ANGUS ENGLEWOOD JACKSONFRESNOPINEMCKINLEY ORCHARDHAMILTON MICHIGAN TOWNSEND N C IOWA TUOLUMNE ORCHARDVENTURAWELDONVAN NESSCALAVERASHEDGESCOLLEGE FLORADORA MCKENZIETHORNE N OLEANDER HOME MONOMERCED SIXTHBERKELEY MERCEDMCKINLEY MICHIGAN KERCKHOFF LYELL VASSAR MILLBROOKA KERCKHOFF ANDREWS MONO CHANCEHOMETHORNE OFRESNOABBY BARTONF U L T O N WOODWARD DIVISADERO CEDARENGLEWOODOLIVE THESTANINTHCLAY SIMPSONCLINTONHARVEYCALAVERAS OLEANDERWILSON CLAY TULAREEIGHTHHAMMOND TULAREM HAW E S TULARE CEDARN KERNFOUNTAIN BARTONWELDONHARRISONDUDLEY LIBERTYMARIPOSAFRUITOLIVE MONTECITOFRUITPRINCETONADOLINE BARTONTHIRDSIXTHDIANAVAN NESSPEARLWISHONWILSONUCOLLEGE STANISLAUSCARMEN BLACKSTONEGEARY HOME WASHINGTON ELEVENTHFSAFFORD LFRUIT HOWARDIOWA MICHIGANBREMERFRESNO THOMAS TULARE CLAY ORANGETHORNECEDARTHORNEGLENNHARRISONWILSONHEDGESOLIVEWELDON HOME FIRSTWOODWARD EASTHOMEYALE FRESNOWELDON GLENNTULAREADOLINEWHITE INYO NINTHP TENTHFLORODORATHORNEMCKINLEYHEDGESHOME HOME V A N N E S S TURNER M A Y O R L HAMILTONEFFIECORNELL NFRESNOCALAVERAS ILLINOISANGUSWELDONORCHARDLINDEN TULAREBROWN WOODWARD SEVENTHKERNCOLLEGECLINTON KERNCALIFORNIA EIGHTHOLIVE CEDARDELNOTHORNEMARIPOSA FOUNTAIN BELMONT UNIVERSITY VENTURAEASTHAYSTONTULARE HEATON THOMASMAROAOLIVE WOODWARD ATCHINSONPOPLARTUOLUMNETUPMANFLORODORAINYOCALIFORNIA PRINCETON NINTHRDEL MARORCHARDC O L L I N S TYLERYALEHARVARD THOMAS MCKENZIE LANE MICHIGANMCKINLEY CHANCEM KEARNEY ILLINOIS KEARNEYDELNO FISHERSIMPSONTHORNE FERGERK L E T T E FIFTHTHESTATERRACEALHAMBRA JACKSONEFFIEYALEECHOWISHONECHO M ORANGEONEILL'ELEVENTHEDEN FIRSTFRUITABBYGLENNIOWA VASSAR MONO HAMMOND ONEILL'SIXTHSIXTHHOME NINTHMONTEREYHARVARDCLARK MONTEREY TYLER CLARKFOURTHCORNELL MODOCOLIVE J O N E S B THIRDALTAARTHURPOPLARUNIVERSITY NEVADAMARIPOSA CALAVERASBUTLERBLACKSTONEBUTLERMAROASIXTH FRESNO SHIELDS IOWA BELMONT HEDGES P O T T L E MARIPOSAA NEVADA HEDGES SECONDMAROAHAZELWOODMCKINLEY LIBERTYFRESNO HAWESSTANISLAUS HEDGES B EIGHTHBONDLANEINYOVENTURA SANTA CLARAHOME SAN JOAQUIN WELDON OLEANDER HUNTINGTON TERRACEOLIVE B TENTHPALMN ELEVENTHJACKSONOLIVE ARTHUROLIVEARTHUR WELDON HFERGER FIFTHB R O A D W A Y CLINTON TOWNSENDANGUSSAN PABLOFILLMORE EL MONTE TUOLUMNE FRESNOORCHARDWASHINGTONARTHURDENNETT WHITEWILSONDELNOWELDON TENTHHARRISONOLIVE BLACKSTONEDELNOMONO INYOMILLBROOKFIFTHKERCKHOFF CAMBRIDGE MADISON FIFTHVENTURA TVAGEDES HAMILTONPALMMADISONTHIRDTHORNENFRUIT ATCHINSONFULTON BEND CEDAROLIVE G CALIFORNIATHORNEF U L T O N PARALLELELEVENTHTHIRDTULAREBELMONT OLIVEGLENN BALL PERALTA TENTHTHOMAS FIFTHMARYHARVARDHEDGES FRESNOMAROAFRANKLIN CEDARM THORNEHOME FIRSTLYELL OLIVE SIXTHVASSAR MONOSECONDWELDON WHITE ARTHURCALIFORNIA FISHERB R O A D W A Y YALEYOSEMITE MCKENZIE LORENA WOODWARD B R O A D W A Y LEMON CEDARLOWE VENTURA FIFTHMCKENZIE MCKINLEY WALNUTHAMILTONCLARKFRANKLIN DENNETTHOME OLIVE HUNTINGTON NINTHBALCH ROWELLELEVENTHLINDENSECONDFULTONELMFLORADORA STANISLAUSFARRISYALEWEBSTER MYERS KERNHARVARDMCKINLEY B R O A D W A Y ORCHARDFLORADORASIMPSON MONO ANDREWS MADISON MCKENZIEFRESNO TULARE CAMBRIDGE ANGUSDIVISADERO HARVARD SECONDM A Y O R INYOTHIRDFIRSTV A N N E S S MADISONHARRISONCORNELL JACKSONCLINTON FOURTHTURNER BUTLER MILDREDA ILLINOISFIFTHDIANATYLERDEL MARFRUITHAMMOND VENTURAMARIPOSAWASHINGTONFARRISCLINTONOLIVE F WHITEGLENN ELEVENTHWASHINGTONCLARK NINTHCLAY ARTHUROLIVE FRUITFIFTHGLENNEIGHTHHARVARD SANTA CLARADIVISADERO MCKENZIE CORNELL VALENCIAFRESNO FLORENCE THIRDEFULTONSAN PABLOANGUSFIFTHNINTHMCKENZIE HARVARD MCKENZIE DIANACLINTONEFFIE OLIVEGLENN FLORENCE WOODWARDCALAVERAS ELEVENTHGLENNNEVADA KERNEDEL MARPOPLARCLARKPLUMASCLINTONARTHURHARRISONVASSARADOLINECLINTON WASHINGTON CALIFORNIA WELDON BRALY ANDREWS TULAREHARRISONLAMONA MILLBROOKBELMONT HEDGES HUNTINGTON ILLINOIS PERALTA FRESNO TULAREANGUSALTA PRINCETON WOODWARD ILLINOISPOPLAR MODOCC BUTLERFRESNOFRUITMCKINLEY MARIPOSA MILLBROOKBELM O N T BRALY EIGHTHDIANAKERNORANGEGRANTPALM LOWE VASSAR TUOLUMNEECHO THESTAF U L T O N TULAREMAROACLINTONNORMALHEDGES TUOLUMNE EIGHTHFLORENCE FRANKLIN MCKENZIE F MCKINLEY O SECONDTHIRDMADISON EIGHTHFIRSTSAN DIEGOPOPLARBUTLER FRESNOCLAYOLIVE H KEARNEY HEDGESYALE TENTHF MERCED TULAREMONOFRUIT IOWA THIRDHARRISONLA SIERRA B ARCHIEFOURTHLYELLMILLBROOKVAGADESHOWARDDUDLEYCARMENMARIPOSAFIRST M A R T I N VASSARVAN NESSLYELLTHESTAWELDON M HOMECARMEN MARIPOSAFRESNOLANE O ROWELLSIXTHCALLISCHTYLER OLIVEWELDON HAMILTON BELMONT BELMONT SECONDPALMMERCED HEDGES SAN JOAQUINALTA HAWES WHITES BRIDGE FOUNTAIN GRANTCOLLEGE FIRSTFIRSTDEL MARVAN NESSORLEANS MARIP OSA MCKENZIE ALTAARTHUR ILLINOIS BUTLER MONTEREYFLORENCE BARTONFIFTHBLACKSTONECLAY F U L T O N HEDGES TURNERMAROACALAVERAS ELEVENTHECHOCOLLEGEUNIVERSITYWELDON STANISLAUSSIMPSON FOURTHMCLARKFRANKLIN EIGHTHPERALTA NINTHLOWEFRESNOMARIPOSALAMONASIMPSONTRINITYH A HOME NINTHANDREWS OLIVE MONO BARTONDIVISADEROPALM HAMILTON GRANTMAROAFLORADORA L THIRDPRINCETON MONOWILSON LORENAMONO CALIFORNIA H IVYBARTONTULAREPLAZAKEARNEYPALM IOWA MCKENZIE MICHIGAN TULARE CALAVERASFULTONNEVADA E BREMER WASHINGTON IOWA CEDARJACKSONEFFIEHAMMONDARTHUR MONTEREY CAMBRIDGEYALE ELEVENTHH M GEARY FIFTHPALMPINEBOND CHERRYGRANT E HARVARDANDREWSPALMCARMEN FLORENCEFRUIT CEDARTHIRDBRALY THIRDMICHIGAN AUGUSTASHIELDSFLORADORA THESTAROWELLFOUNTAINCOLLEGEVASSARPOPLAR O PLUMASMERCED WOODWARD MADISONHARRISONTHOMAS TENTHTULAREANGUSHARVEY BARTONANGUSELINDEN LYELL P A R A L L E L SECONDFIFTHTHORNECLINTON FLORADORAWILSON SECONDBELMONT HAMMONDBREMERVAGEDES STROTHERCALAVERAS NINTHAMADORBARTONSTANISLAUSCLARKBROADWAYTHIRDVAN NESSHARRISONF U L T O N MILLBROOKBROADWAYF HUNTINGTON OLIVEVAGEDES LORENA KERCKHOFF TERRACE TULARE TULARETHORNESIMPSONBROWN SANTA CLARAMADISON B R O A D W A Y KEARNEYSTANISLAUS FRESNOTHORNEINYOTHESTAGLENNMCKINLEY ARTHURTOWNSEND CORNELL THORNEFRUITHOMEWISHON FLORADORA STANISLAUS MONTECITO LEMON PATTERSON CALAVERASCEDARTENTHLORENA FIFTHNINTHEIGHTHFOURTHFRESNOSEVENTHABBYPRINCETON SAN JOAQUIN R NINTHTULAREMARIPOSA ROWELLVAN NESSSIXTHKERCKHOFF PINE K L E T T E OLIVE BELMONT MYERS JACKSONMCKINLEY 5 7 1 4 2 3 3 3 8 6 9 93 96 95 71 51 46 43 3184 62 63 67 99 69 85 11 68 70 24 25 97 72 666523 19 55 17 48 2120 47 16 61 18 54 50 53 49 58 777659 22 57 10 86 87 41 88 90 89 92 45 39 44 42 40 35 383736 14 15 33 34 13 32 12 98 27 82 83 56 60 78 75 30 91 74 94 64 52 26 271 270 269 268 266 264 267 261 262 263 011260259258 257 255 254 253 248 247 246 245244252 250251 199 141 137 101 100 189110 125 124 123 157174 172 163161 203237160213 212159 169 168121 156 231 167166 226 164 119 152 151 147149146150 145115116114148118155 117112 211144 153 173171170 185 242 193 128 129 133126 132 131 134127 130 186207109188 201 221 217216 175 196 243215 235 236 240 238 210 191 178 218 214 202 219 205 233 192194 143206 223222204140139224 135 142208 138 180 108 102105184229209103176197183239106 234 122 198 179 230 200 225195107232181104241 120 228 190 162 158 014 013 010 008 009 001003 005 007 S.R. 41S.R. 1 8 0 S . R . 9 9 S.R. 168MARKSCHERYLGRIFFITH ATLASPONTIAC BRIARWOODRICEWOODBELLAIRESUSSEX SAGINAWMARKS RICEWOODPONTIAC BRIARWOODGRIFFITH ATLASSUSSEX FINEWINERYMCKINLEYLAUREENNORMAL WELDON UNIVERSITY MCKINLEY CHESTNUTDEARINGHUNTINGTON BALCH LAUREL FILLMORE GARDENPLATT RECREATIONDEARINGFILLMORE LAUREL GARDENRECREATIONBUTLER CHESTNUTLYELL HEATON ORLEANS TOWNSEND GARDEN!(187 2973!(!( !( !( 79 81PALMMAGILLFREMONTFERGERHARRISONPALO ALTOPAULSAFFORDROOSEVELTMAGILLPALO ALTOPAUL!(182SHAWHAYESSANTA ANA!(227SHAWCORNELIADALEMISSIONPARKWAYFORESTIEREFAIRMONT!(177SIXTHBULLDOGNINTHMILLBROOK!(136 Kearney Blvd. National Register Eligible/landscape 8 S.R. 41D:\projects\hpbasemap3.mxd LEGEND HISTORIC DISTRICTS: DESIGNATED AND PROPOSED Adoline - Palm (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) Bellevue Bungalow (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Chandler Field/Fresno Municipal Airport (Designated 2005) East Madison (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Huntington Boulevard (Designated 2015) Lower Fulton - Van Ness (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) L Street (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) North Park (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Porter Tract (Designated 2000) Santa Fe Warehouse (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) St. Johns (Proposed) (1994 Ratkovich Plan) Terrace Gardens (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) Wilson Island Wilson's North Fresno Tract (Proposed) (1991 Tower District Specific Plan) EARLY ETHNIC NEIGHBORHOODS Uptown Culture-Arts District Chinatown Germantown Old Armeniantown d:\projects\hpbasemap5.mxd "#1991 Weitz Survey 1994 Ratkovich Survey Heritage Properties")!( !( !( !( !( SYMBOLIZATION Local Register of Historic Resources National Register of Historic Places Local Significance Relocated Outside City Demolished Properties HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR HP#NAME ADDRESS YEAR1 Old Fresno Water Tower 2444 Fresno St.1894 91 City Fire Alarm Station 2945 Fresno St.1917 183 Herbert C. Gundelfinger Home 1038 E. Yale Ave.19192 Thomas R. Meux Home 1007 R St.1889 92 Van Valkenburgh Home 1125 T St.1903 184 Drs. George & Jessie Hare Home 815 E. McKinley Ave.19183 Warehouse Row Buildings 764 P St.1903-1910 93 National Warehouse 860 Santa Fe Ave.1905-1930 185 William Saroyan Residence 3204 E. El Monte Way 19143 Warehouse Row Buildings 744 P St.1903-1910 94 Santa Fe Hotel 935 Santa Fe Ave.1926 186 Jacob Parret Home 2069 E. Harvey Ave.19003 Warehouse Row Buildings 702 P St.1903-1910 95 Fasset Home #1 905 P St.1900 187 William Saroyan Residence 2729 W. Griffith Way 19634 Physicians Building 2607 Fresno St.1926 96 Fasset Home #2 915 P St.1900 188 Joseph Maracci Residence 985 N. Van Ness Ave.19165 Fresno Republican Building 2130 Kern St.1919 97 Neverman Home 309 M St.1912 189 Thomas Arrioto Residence 505 E. Kearney Blvd.19326 Fresno City College 1101 E. University Ave.1916 98 Old Barn 100-1/4 M St.1900 190 Tower Theater 815 E. Olive Ave.19397 Warnors Theater 1400-1430 Fulton St.1929 99 Fresno Trolley Cars (Diner)1731 S. Cherry Ave.c1912-c1925 191 Eugene Mathewson Residence 319 N. Calaveras St.19058 Louis Einstein Home 1600 M St.1913 100 American Self Storage Co.1844 S. Cherry Ave.1918 192 Hiram Barkalew Home 153 N. Van Ness Ave.19119 Y.W.C.A. Residence Hall 1660 M St.1921 101 Holt Lumber Co.1916 S. Cherry Ave.1915 193 Dr. Oliver Howard Home 3263 E. Huntington Blvd.191410 Santa Fe Depot 2650 Tulare St.1896 102 Main Home 520 W. Princeton Ave.1914 194 Thomas Cowan Residence 153 N. Yosemite Ave.190611 Southern Pacific Depot 1713 Tulare St.1889 103 Peden Home 315 E. Brown Ave.1937 195 C. W. Harlow Residence 986 N. Roosevelt Ave.191312 Tinkler Mission Chapel 475 N. Broadway 1917 104 Old St. Agnes Hospital 603 W. Home Ave.1929 196 John H. Fearon Residence 2540 E. Grant Ave.190613 Bethel Lutheran Church 183 N. Broadway 1917 105 Miller Home 1516 N. Van Ness Ave.1910 197 Shipp-Selland Residence 1002 E. Cambridge Ave.191914 Spencer Home 395 N. San Pablo Ave.1899 106 Mosgrove Home 660 E. Pine Ave.1910 198 Blum Residence 3870 E. Huntington Blvd.192715 Woolfolk Home 267 N. San Pablo Ave.1907 107 James Porteous Home 1095 N. Van Ness Ave.1911 199 Sullenger Building 2420-2440 Stanislaus St.192116 Scottish Rite Temple 1455 L St.1937 108 Solorio Residence 415 N. Ferger Ave.1927 200 Osage Apartment Building 635 E. Belmont Ave.192917 Fresno County Hall of Records 2281 Tulare St.1935 109 Vincent Home 921 N. San Pablo Ave.1889 201 Eaton Flats Apartments 125-131 N. Fresno St.191718 Beeler/Thorton Machine Shop 914 M St.1915 110 St. Alphonsus Catholic Church 307 W. Kearney Blvd.1913 202 Moore-Koop Residence 258 N. College Ave.189519 Holy Trinity Armenian Apostolic Church 2226 Ventura St.1914 111 Teilman Home 919 W. Kearney Blvd.1915 203 Hoonanian Residence 461 N St.190020 McVey Home 1322 N St.1903 112 Helm Home 1749 L St.1901-1902 204 Ira Brooks Home 226 N. Fulton 190521 McVey Home 1326 N. St.1903 113 Long (Black) Home 1727 L St.1907 205 Porter-Barnard Home 320 N. Fulton 190922 Old Post Office Substation 2404 Kern St.1921 114 Bean Home 1705 L St.1904 206 Kutner Residence 174 N. Fulton St.191023 First Mexican Baptist Church 1061 E St.1924 115 Kutner Home 1651 L St.1901 207 George Fathy Residence 844 N. Van Ness Ave.192224 Fresno Buddhist Temple 1340 Kern St.1920 116 Montgomery Thomas Home 1642 L St.1897 208 Sample Sanitarium 311 N. Fulton St.191325 First Armenian Presbyterian Church 515 Fulton St.1905 117 Newman Home (Removed)1743 L St.1911 209 Normandy Village Apartments 2617-2645 N. Maroa 193526 Fresno Brewing Co.100 M St.1907 118 Towne Apartments 1717 L St.1908 210 Ella Hoxie Home 251 N. Blackstone Ave.189627 Fresno City College Library 1122 E. University Ave.1931 119 Fresno Bee Building 1545 Van Ness Ave.1922 211 Velvet Ice Cream Co. Building 1948-1950 Broadway 192928 Fort Miller Block House 890 W. Belmont Ave.1851 120 P. G. & E. Building 1401 Fulton St.1923 212 Basque Hotel 1102 F St.192229 Roessler Winery 1902 N. Winery Ave.1893 121 Pacific Southwest Building 1060 Fulton Mall 1923 213 Fresno Fire Department No. 3 1406-1430 Fresno St.193930 A. G. Wishon Home 3555 E. Huntington Blvd.1915 122 Mason Building 1044 Fulton Mall 1918 214 Henry Offutt Home 227 N. Glenn Ave.190031 Sun Maid Raisin Growers Coop.2901 E. Hamilton Ave.1918 123 Bank of Italy 1001 Fulton Mall 1917 215 Prior Home 458 N. Howard Ave.192132 Hayhurst Home 405 N. Broadway 1919 124 Radin-Kamp Department Store 959 Fulton Mall 1924 216 Edward Waterman Home 2535 E. McKenzie Ave.190433 Cowdrey Home 330 N. Park Ave.1903 125 T. W. Patterson Building 2014 Tulare St.1922 217 C.C.S. Tufts Home 2635 E. McKenzie Ave.188934 Cardwell Home 357 N. Glenn Ave.1895 126 Aten Home 1133 S St.1914 218 Donahoo Home 103 N. Park Ave.189135 Thompson Home 274 N. Glenn Ave.1892 127 Gilbert Home 1145 T St.1910 219 W. H. Spencer Duplex 401-403 San Pablo Ave.192836 Hines Home 333 N. Blackstone Ave.1886 128 Ewing Home 1025 T St.1916 220 Emmanuel Lutheran Church 1115 U St.192937 Griffen Home 319 N. Blackstone Ave.1913 129 F. K. Prescott Home 2983 Tulare St.1906 221 Frank L. Smith Home 245 N. U St.191038 Brix Home 313 N. Blackstone Ave.1910 130 Anderson Home 1120 T St.1913 222 John Humiston Home 229 N. Yosemite St.190539 Hewitt Home 175 N. Diana St.1891 131 Goodman Home 1060 T St.1906 223 Christian Samuelson Home 232 N. Yosemite St.191940 Anderson Home 329 N. Clark St.1911 132 Gundlefinger Home 1020 T St.1910 224 T.E. Mellen Property 250 N. Yosemite St.190741 Collins Home 1107 R St.1905 133 Martin Home 1002 T St.1912 225 Nystrom Residence 725 N. Wilson Ave.193242 Shipp Home 305 N. Clark St.1905 134 John Meux Home 1045 U St.1907 226 Parker Nash Building 1462 Broadway c189843 Rutherford Home 230 N. Clark St.1888 135 Cobb Home 271 N. Yosemite St.1913 227 Brewer Adobe 5901 W. Shaw Ave.c192344 McKay Home 201 N. Clark St.1899 136 Proffitt Home 5218 N. Millbrook Ave.1911 228 Jacob Andreas Home 309 E St.190545 Gerlitz Home 121 N. U St.1905 137 Stone Home 408 N. Fulton St.1877 229 Wild Residence 567 E. Clinton Ave.192946 Bonsel/Rush Home 115 N. U St.1904 138 A. G. Wishon Home 340 N. Fulton St.1904 230 Roosevelt High School 4250 E. Tulare Ave.1920-195047 Ramona Apartments 1316 L St.1911 139 Farr Home 245 N. Fulton St.1907 231 Hopkins Residence 1458 E. Divisadero Ave.190948 Brix Apartments 2301 Fresno St.1913 140 Alexander Home 235 N. Fulton St.1908 232 Whitney-Huntting Home 1105 N. Echo Ave.191749 Fresno City Hall (Annex)2326 Fresno St.1939 141 Hanger Home 425 N. Fulton St.1900 233 Adam Baird Home 136 N. Van Ness Ave.1889-189050 U.S. Post Office (Main)2309 Tulare St.1939 142 McIndoo Home 310 N. Fulton St.1913 234 Kearney Boulevard Gateway Fresno St. at Kearney Blvd.193351 Chorbajian Home 647 M St.1916 143 McAlphine Home 171 N. Van Ness Ave.1900 235 Joseph J. Bolitho Home 33 N. Calaveras St.1918-191952 Fresno Memorial Auditorium 1235 O St.1935 144 Graff Home 916 E. Divisadero St.1905 236 McGee-Macias Home 115 N. Calaveras St.189853 Old Fresno Unified School District Office 2348 Mariposa Mall 1936 145 Evinger Home 2024 Amador St.1912 237 Valley Lahvosh Baking Co.502 M St.1920-192154 Maubridge Apartment Building 2344 Tulare St.1911 146 Sadler Office Supply Co.1717 Van Ness Ave.1926 238 E. J. Huntzicker Memorial Hall 245 N. Calaveras St.193855Schmidt Home 460 N St.1908 147 Romain Home 2055 San Joaquin St.1905 239 Gates-Twining Home 640 E. Pine Ave.193256 Mink Home 344 N St.1907 148 Davidson Home 1762 Van Ness Ave.1906 240 John C. Fox Home 128 N. Calaveras St.c190557 Turpin Home 2522 Inyo St.1915 149 Gundelfinger Home (The Mansion)2201 Calaveras St.1912 241 Samuel E. Johnston Home 1526 E. Andrews Ave.195258 Twining Laboratories 2527 Fresno St.1930 150 Harvey Swift Home 1605 L St.1905 242 State Center Warehouse and Cold Storage Co. 747 R St.191859 Berven Rug Mills Inc.616 P St.1917 151 Hoover Residence 1552 L St.1916 243 Thomas Thorn Home 2543 E. Madison Ave.191060 Central Packaging Supply Co.2534 San Benito St.1920 152 Nestel Home 1527 L St.1897 244 The Cearley-Twining Home 625 E. Home Ave.191861 Rainbow Ballroom (Natatorium)1725 Broadway 1918 153 First Congregational Church 11 N. San Pablo Ave.1911 245 The Nis Johnson Home 601 E. Pine Ave.192162 Legler Home 305 E St.1900 154 First Church of Christ Scientist 1615 N St.1916 246 Shams Rio Grande Service Station 205 Fulton St.193863 Fresno Temple Church of God 208 E St.1914 155 Temple Beth Israel 2336 Calaveras St.1923 247 Dale Brothers Coffee Can Sign 1420 H St.c193764 Bank of America Building 957-951 F St.1908 156 Schutz Residence 1522 N St.1900 248 Benham Ice Cream Co./Dale Brothers Coffee Co. Bldg 1420-1432 H St.1912-193765 Bow On Tong Association Building 935 China Alley 1920 157 Turner Building 802-812 Van Ness Ave.1922 248 Benham Ice Cream Co./Dale Brothers Coffee Co. Bldg 1420-1432 H St.1912-193766 Bing Kong Tong Association Building 921-929 China Alley 1900 158 Blacks Market 755 Van Ness Ave.1923 249 J.M. Menend/Murray Ice Cream Co. Building 175 Fulton St.192467 Vartanian Home 362 F St.1891 159 James Phelan Building 700 Van Ness Ave.1914 250 John Fairweather Home 248 N. Van Ness Ave.c190568 Zacky Farms Grain Elevators 315 H St.1938 160 Sun Stereo Warehouse 736 Fulton St.1918 251 John B. Frinchaboy Home 243 N. College Ave.c190369 Fresno Planing Mill 1820 Monterey St.1917 161 Rustigian Building 701-723 Fulton St.1920 252 William and Helen Sutherland Home 1460 N. Wishon Ave.1913-191470 Bekins Van and Storage 301 Van Ness Ave.1921 162 Carmel Saddlery 748 Broadway 1916 253 W. D. Coates Home 264 N. Van Ness Ave.c190571 Travelers Hotel 1812 Tulare St.1916 163 Zellerbach Paper Co. Building 1776 Kern St.1918 254 Amazon S. Hays Home 330 N. Fulton St.c190772 Komotos Department Store and Hotel 1536-1542 Kern St.1908 164 P.G. & E. Building 1544 Fulton St.1926 255 Mary Matson Home 1440 E. Divisadero St.190473 Roessler Home 4881 E. University Ave.1914 165 Wilson Theater Building 1445-1463 Fulton St.1926 257 Former Santa Fe Land Improvement Co.209 N. Diana St.c190074 Johnson Home 3811 E. Illinois Ave.1907 166 Hotel Fresno 1257 Broadway 1913 258 Gustav and Edith Manheim Home 617 E. Pine Ave.192075 Mundorff Home 3753 E. Balch Ave.1917 167 Mattei Building 1177 Fulton Mall 1921 259 Floyd W. Cowan Home 642 E. Weldon Ave.192176 Weems Home 3121 E. El Monte Way 1918 168 Helm Building 1101 Fulton Mall 1914 260 W.P. Stanton Home 650 E. Weldon Ave.192177 Hughes Home 743 S. Fourth St.1917 169 Hobbs Parsons Produce Co.903 H St.1903 261 Fresno Photo Engraving Building 748-752 Fulton Street 194678 Robinson Home 1003 S. Orange Ave.1900 170 Rowell Building 2100 Tulare St.1912 262 Liberty Laundry Building 1830 Inyo Street 192879 Shuttera Home 320 S. Chestnut Ave.1924 171 Liberty Theater 944 Van Ness Ave.1917 263 Baskin's Auto Supply Sign 729 Broadway 195680 John Euless Home 373 S. Peach Ave.1913 172 Kern Kay Hotel 906-912 Van Ness Ave.1912 264 Frank Chance Field Site sw corner Ventura and Cedar 1935-194181 Wiley Giffen Home 4824 E. Butler Ave.1916 173 Hotel Virginia 2125-2139 Kern St.1920 265 William F. Jones Home 1112 E. Franklin Avenue 191182 Van Ness Gate Entrance 2208 S. Van Ness Ave.1925 174 Hotel California 851 Van Ness Ave.1923 266 The Deacon-Eilert Home 660 E. Carmen Avenue 191983 California Products Co.3000 E. Butler Ave.1898 175 Owen Home 2631 E. Washington Ave.1902 267 The John B. Marshall Homes 164 N. Echo Avenue c1884, c190884 San Joaquin Grocers Wholesale Warehouse 104 Fulton St.1913 176 Russ Clements Service Station 2740 N. Van Ness Ave.1926 268 George and Adelphia Rowell Home 153 N. Effie Street 190385 St. Genevieves Catholic Church 1127 Tulare St.1938 177 Forestiere Underground Gardens 5021 W. Shaw Ave.1906 269 United Grocers Warehouse 801 R Street 193186 St. Johns Cathedral Catholic Church 2814 Mariposa St.1902 178 Ohannesian Home 1225 E. Divisadero St.1920 270 Crest Theater 1160 Broadway Plaza 194987 St. Johns Rectory 2814 Mariposa St.1928 179 Clovis M. Cole Home 3615 E. Kerckhoff Ave.1914 271 Alfred and Minnie Cherin Home 233 E. Cornell Ave.194988 St. Johns Hall School 2811 Mariposa St.1926 180 Gibbs Home 369 N. Ferger Ave.1918 272 Frank and May Driver Home 129 N. College Ave c190289 H. H. Brix Mansion 2844 Fresno St.1911 181 Paul Kindler Home 1520 E. Olive Ave.192990 Rehorn Home 1050 S St.1906 182 Frank J. Craycroft Home 6545 N. Palm Ave.1927 6:6 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES E. GOALS AND POLICIES 6.1 Identify potential historic resources through context development, survey, evaluation, and designation. Intent: Federal, state and local regulations that protect historic and cultural resources are based on identification and designation. In order to maintain and protect a community’s built legacy, it is necessary to identify the properties that are meaningful to the com- munity’s historical development and contribute to its character. Identification is the first step in establishing priorities for the restora- tion and protection of a community’s resources. 6.1.1 As resources become available, identify, document and promote all historic and cultural resources, and potential resources within the Downtown Neighborhoods. (CAP Urb 7-3) 6.1.2 As resources become available, enhance the City’s database of all designated, evaluated, and potential historic resources and make it easily accessible to the community and affected property owners. 6.1.32 Understand the types and locations of historic resources and potential historic resources throughout the City. 6.1.43 Promote awareness of resources important to the City’s his- tory within the community. 6.1.54 Incorporate knowledge of historic and potentially historic resources into planning and development. 6.2 Protect historic and cultural resources from demolition and inappro- priate alterations. Intent: To strengthen the procedures and mechanisms that will help protect historic resources. Inappropriate alterations and/or additions to historic resources raise important concerns. Historic resources, and/or the context in which they are meaningful, may be damaged due to alterations, additions or demolition. 6.2.1 Preserve, rehabilitate, and reuse historic resources with materials and finishes consistent with their original design. 6.2.2 As resources become available, protect the unique historic resources in each of Downtown Fresno’s planning areas as a means of enhancing the unique identity and character of each planning area. 6.2.3 Provide educational forums for policy makers that stress the role of preservation as an economic tool in revitalization. 6.2.4 Discourage the demolition or inappropriate alteration of potential historic resources and encourage their appropriate renovation by providing guidance and incentives for rehabilitation and compatible alterations. 6.2.5 As funds become available, provide more Historic Preservation staff to manage a more robust Historic Preservation program. 6.2.6 Encourage salvaging of architectural elements that would otherwise be transported to landfills as a result of alterations or demolition. 6.2.7 Encourage sympathetic rehabilitation and assist owners with adapting their homes to current needs while retaining his- toric integrity. 6.2.8 Protect historic and cultural resources in each of the Downtown Neighborhoods’ planning areas. • Use Roeding Park and its historic features as a focal point for redevelopment of the Jane Addams area. • Ensure that Roeding Park and the Fresno Chaffee Zoo are preserved and enhanced as regional destinations. • Rehabilitate the historic portions of Roeding Park accord- ing to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to pre- serve this outstanding example of landscape design and historically-significant arboretum. • Preserve, rehabilitate, and reuse the historic industrial buildings in the South Van Ness planning area. • Designate Kearney Boulevard as a Scenic Route to further protect its scenic qualities and reestablish the Boulevard as an important address within Fresno. • Begin the process to designate the three potential districts in Lowell that were determined to be eligible for listing on the local register as historic districts in the 2008 GPA survey. Designation of historic districts requires the consent of a majority of the property own- ers within the proposed district. (See FMC, section 12-1610(c).) 6.2.9 Sponsor a regular “State of Historic Preservation” collo- quium for policy makers, city staff, and community members to address and discuss preservation and cultural heritage issues. The preservation of historic buildings such as the Santa Fe Station, connects Fresno to its heritage and culture. Incompatible infill is a primary cause of damage to the Plan Area’s historic character. 6:7 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 New development that is incompatible with the massing, scale, setbacks, and pedestrian-oriented disposition of buildings in historically sensitive areas. A house is rehabilitated with materials and finishes that are consistent with its original design. 6.3 Protect historic resources and their setting from incompatible new development within historically sensitive areas. Intent: The value of a historic structure is greatly diminished if it is surrounded by incompatible more recent development. When new buildings are introduced adjacent to historic resources, it is impor- tant that they are designed in a manner that reinforces the historic character of the area. 6.3.1 As resources become available, preserve, rehabilitate, and reuse historic resources consistent with their original design. 6.3.2 As resources become available, restore and maintain the historic character of neighborhoods. 6.3.3 Require new development to be compatible with the massing, scale, setbacks, and pedestrian-oriented disposition of adjacent historic resources. 6.3.4 Pursue stricter code enforcement to eliminate inappropriate alterations (including “stucco wraps”). 6.4 Promote the preservation of historic and cultural resources through financial incentives and technical assistance. Intent: Financial incentives, including federal tax credits, preservation easements, and property tax abatements can be used to help fund the rehabilitation of historic properties. These incentives can defray the costs of a potential rehabilitation. Technical assistance regarding character-defining features, construction techniques, treatment of historic materials, and compatible replacement materials will result in many more historic and cultural resources preserved for future generations. 6.4.1 As resources become available, provide technical assistance and financial incentives for property owners to rehabilitate their properties in a manner that doesn’t degrade historic integrity. Promote and make accessible the available resources – including the Community Development Block Grants program, the Mills Act, and technical assistance – to owners of historic buildings. 6.4.2 Identify and promote funding sources for the rehabilitation of historic properties. Promote, and where possible provide, low-cost funding for revitalization of residential properties. 6.4.3 Re-establish and fund as resources are available the City’s low interest loan program for historic property owners. 6.4.4 Sponsor preservation workshops at the neighborhood level to provide technical assistance to property owners concerning the maintenance, rehabilitation and restoration of historic resources and potential historic resources. 6.4.5 Work with construction trade groups to support apprentice- ship programs that teach restoration techniques such as lead paint remediation, historic woodworking and finishing. 6.4.6 Expand the existing facade improvement program to incor- porate guidelines for the rehabilitation of historic storefronts. 6.5 Integrate historic preservation into the community and economic development strategies. Intent: Historic preservation is a proven, effective community and economic development strategy. Unique historic structures are the signature of many communities and Fresno is no exception. Historic preservation projects result in investment in the local economy. Policies that help preserve neighborhoods involve both historic pres- ervation and economic development. 6.5.1 Capitalize on Fresno’s historic landmarks and resources. • Work with local agencies to better incorporate preserva- tion and historic sites into heritage tourism programs. • Install the “Preserve America” signs in Downtown Fresno. • Develop wayfinding signs from SR 99 that advertise Fresno’s “historic Downtown.” • Prepare an updated walking tour of Downtown Fresno which highlights historic sites and neighborhoods. • Make available the New Deal walking tour brochure of Fresno prepared by the National Trust in 2008. 6.5.2 Use historic preservation as a basic tool for neighborhood improvements and community development. 6.5.3 Engage community members and groups to gather informa- tion regarding historic resources. 6.5.4 Encourage maintenance of both designated and potential historic resources to help restore the historic character of neighborhoods. 6.5.5 Support neighborhood revitalization programs designed to foster an appreciation of Fresno’s distinctive housing types. 6:8 CHAPTER 6: HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 6.6 Protect archeological resources from the impacts of new develop- ment. Intent: To ensure that archeological resources discovered during the construction process are identified, evaluated, and treated as war- ranted. 6.6.1 Require that all mitigation measures for archeological resources fully comply with the requirements of CEQA. E. GOALS AND POLICIES (Continued) This building on the corner of F Street and Tulare Street is a source of identity and pride for Fresno residents. Fresno Landmarks such as the Warnors Theater can help spark investment in the lo- cal economy. 7:7 CHAPTER 7: HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 Community gardens promote health and community benefits, including increased physical activity, access to affordable healthy food, positive social interaction, and local economic activity. 7.11.1 Avoid concentrations of social services (homeless shelters and subsidized housing) in any one of the Downtown Neighborhood’s planning area. 7.11.2 Ensure homeless shelters and permanent supportive hous- ing are built throughout the City and ensure that these facili- ties provide a safe environment. 7.11.3 Explore partnerships with local job training organizations and programs. Produce stores provide residents and workers with convenient access to safe, afford- able, and nutritious foods. 8:8 CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTATION W. Clinton Avenue W. McKinley Avenue W. Olive Avenue W. Belmont Avenue W. Nielsen Avenue W. Kearney Blvd Whitesbridge Avenue Amador Street E. Butler Avenue E. Huntington Blvd E. Kings Canyon Rd E. Tulare Avenue E. Olive Avenue E. Belmont Avenue HWY 180 HWY 180 Divisadero Chestnut AvenueCedar Avenue Maple Avenue 1st Street 7th Avenue Fresno StreetBlackstone AvenueAbbey StreetVan Ness AvenueFulton StreetBroadwayElm StreetMartin Luther King, Jr BlvdWalnut AvenueThorne AvenueWest AvenueW. California Avenue W. Church Avenue Fresno StreetLos Angeles StreetTulare StreetInyo StreetVentura StreetToulumne Street V a n N e s s A v e n u e P S t r e e t M S t r e e t B S t r e e tHWY 9 9 HWY 41F S t r e e tN. Hughes AvenueN. Marks AvenueKey Major Streetscape Projects - Widen Sidewalks - Corner Bulbouts - Lighting & Landscape - Facade Improvements Reconnect Street Grid Street Stabilization - Trees - Sidewalk Repair Safe Routes to Schools - Paths - Corner Crossings Road Diet + Bike Lines One-way to two-way street conversion. Remove Tuolumne Street overpass Bus Rapid Transit - High Quality Shelters - Fix Sidewalk Gaps - Street Trees Street Vacation G. TRANSPORTATION (continued) FIGURE 8-1 - NEAR TERM PRIORITIES N 8:11 CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTATION FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 Project Project Name Project Description Location (area) Responsibility Time Frame Potential Funding Source* T-A.7 Create Safe-Routes- to-Schools Program Create a Safe-Routes-to-Schools program for each subarea that includes the identification of walking routes to schools and creates a list of targeted improvements necessary to improve pedestrian and vehicular safety in these areas. Require applicants with projects over 10 units and/or larger than 5 acres to provide a safe-route-to-school plan. J, SE near-term Measure C or Gen- eral Fund T-A7.1 McKinley Avenue (Marks Avenue to Hughs Avenue).JA Public Works near-term Safe Routes to Schools T-A.7.2 Olive Avenue (Marks Avenue to Hughs Avenue).JA Public Works near-term Safe Routes to Schools T-A.7.3 Belmont Avenue (Hughs Avenue to Weber Avenue).JA Public Works near-term Safe Routes to Schools T-A.7.4 Hughs Avenue (McKinley Avenue to Belmont Avenue). JA Public Works near-term Safe Routes to Schools T-A.8 Create Pedestrian Improvement Plan Create a pedestrian improvement plan for the Southeast Neighborhoods that includes a detailed list of improvements to key community destinations (such as Mosqueda Park), prioritizing the improvements and identifying funding sources for the improvements. SE mid-term Measure C or Gen- eral Fund T-A.9 Implement Curb, Gutter and Side- walk Improvements In order to ensure safe access to schools and parks, create a list of locations for new curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements and develop a funding plan to construct these facilities. At minimum, curbs, gutters and sidewalks should be introduced along the following streets and on residential streets adjacent to schools: T-A.9.1 McKinley Avenue (Golden State BoulevardSR 99 to Marks Avenue). JA mid-term Federal or State grants T-A.9.2 Olive Avenue (Hughs Avenue to Marks Avenue).JA mid-term Federal or State grants T-A.9.3 Hughes Avenue (Belmont Avenue to McKinley Avenue). JA long-term Federal or State grants T-A.9.4 Belmont Avenue (Weber Avenue to Marks Avenue).JA mid-term Federal or State grants T-A.9.5 Motel Drive.JA long-term Federal or State grants T-A.9.6 California Avenue.E long-term Federal or State grants; Measure C Tier 1 for West to Ventura T-A.10 Develop Streetscape Standards Develop comprehensive streetscape standards for the Downtown Neighborhoods that emphasize pedestrian and bicycle access and safety. All near-term Measure C, CDBG T-A.11 Bus Rapid Transit Construct a rapid bus transit on Ventura Street/Kings Canyon Road and Abby Street/Blackstone Avenue. DT, SE near-term FTA grants T-A.12 Universal Pass Program Consider universal transit pass programs that gives employees in the Plan Area unlimited access to local transit. All mid-term T-A.13 Traffic Operations Center In order to manage the transportation system from a centralized location, connect all existing and new traffic signals to the existing traffic operations center. DT T-A.14 Truck Enforcement Program Create an enforcement program to reduce conflicts and nuisances caused by trucks by addressing and preventing trucks from driving on non-designated truck routes. T-A.15 Implement pedes- trian safety im- provements Throughout the Downtown Neighborhoods including the following: T-A.15.1 At-grade pedestrian crosswalks to Roeding Park across Belmont Avenue and Olive Avenue in the Jane Addams subarea. JA T-A.15.2 A pedestrian bridge across Highway 99 at Harvey Avenue to improve pedestrian access in the Jane Addams subarea. JA long-term Federal, State, Measure C grants T-A.15.3 Sidewalks along Tulare Street between Cedar Avenue and 6th Street and prioritize Cedar Avenue as a pedestrian corridor in the Southeast Fresno subarea. SE mid-term Federal and State grants JA Jane Addams Neighborhoods * These Potential Funding Sources are preliminary for the Public Draft purposes. The project parameters and project costs will con- tinue to be refined during the Public Review Process.E Edison Fresno Neighborhoods L Lowell Neighborhood J Jefferson Neighborhood SE Southeast Neighborhoods DT Downtown SVN South Van Ness G. TRANSPORTATION (continued) 8:19 CHAPTER 8: IMPLEMENTATION FRESNO DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOODS COMMUNITY PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 Project Project Name Project Description Location (area) Responsibility Time Frame Potential Fund- ing Source* H/W – A.1 Subarea Open Houses On an annual basis (ideally during the same month of each year), the City should sponsor or support community open houses in each Downtown Neighborhood to discuss the prog- ress of the Community Plan implementation and identify new programs and projects to improve quality of life. These open houses should be sponsored by the neighborhood organiza- tions and/or other non-profit organizations working in each Downtown Neighborhood. H/W – A.2 Community Garden Construction Construct or support the construction of a community garden in each subarea within five years of adoption of the Community Plan and one new community garden each five years thereafter. H/W – A.3 Social Service Concentration Ordinance Create an ordinance regulating the maximum number and concentration of social services (homeless shelters and sub- sidized housing) in any individual subarea of the Downtown Neighborhoods, with the goal of ensuring an even distribution of services throughout the City to the extent permitted by law. H/W – A.4 CPTED Training Train all planning staff in Crime Prevention Through Environ- mental Design (CPTED) principles and strategies. H/W – A.5 Separation of sensi- tive and noxious uses As part of the permitting process, designate resources to ensure that new sensitive uses such as schools, healthcare facilities, residences, nursing homes, and parks are not located within 500 feet of building uses that generate toxic pollutants. H/W – A.6 Displacement of long-time residents and merchants Designate resources for City staff to: • Convene a displacement task force to explore ways to provide opportunities for low income residents and merchants to remain in their neighborhoods if significant displacement is observed due to substantial and sustained increases in rent. • Periodically gather data on lease rates, vacancy rates, and, if applicable, displacement for use by the task force. • Continue to seek funding for mixed income and affordable housing within the plan area, and work with the owners of affordable housing properties to ensure that affordability is maintained over the long term. JA Jane Addams Neighborhoods * These Potential Funding Sources are preliminary for the Public Draft purposes. The project parameters and project costs will continue to be refined during the Public Review Process.E Edison Fresno Neighborhoods L Lowell Neighborhood J Jefferson Neighborhood SE Southeast Neighborhoods DT Downtown SVN South Van Ness K. HEALTH, WELLNESS, AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Community health and well-being are – and will continue to be – a principal quality-of-life issue for residents and businesses in Downtown Fresno. Both people and property are also greatly affected by how the City is built and designed. Rising obesity, poor air quality, and associ- ated high levels of lung disease and asthma, and concerns over the homeless population and neighborhood crime are all reasons that Fresno’s decision makers have taken a renewed interest in promoting policies and programs that improve community health. Specific projects and/or actions, timing, cost, and potential funding sources are as follows: Exhibit C FCSP Redline Page # Other Location Description Change Letter from Mayor Change first sentence of second to last paragraph from "Well over a century on" to "Well over a century later." Preface Left photo Change the caption for the bottom left photo on the Preface page from "1936" to "1920s." Preface Second paragraph, last sentence Changed to: "Businesses and important institutions, such as Fresno State University, churches, and hospitals, followed..." Preface Second column, first paragraph Corrected grammar of second to last sentence as follows: "There many found they could live in new houses, move more freely, and exercise a greater range of working, retail, and entertainment choices." 1:2 Goals, gray box.Replaced definition of goals from "General direction-setters that present a long-term vision" to "Broad, direction-setting statements that present a long-term vision." 1:3 Bottom Image Legend updated to show gray for existing buildings, tan for historic buildings, and white for potential development. 1:6 First paragraph under "A. Purpose" heading Changed fifth and sixth sentences as follows: "Prior to the adoption of the new Citywide Development Code in 2015, Fresno’s zoning standards focused mostly on land use, and included relatively generic, suburban physical design standards that are common to many cities and towns. For managing routine changes in the use of existing buildings, tThe existing zoning regulations worked quite well, but could not successfully reshape and refurbish Downtown." 1:7 Map Fixed "Fulton Lowell Specific Plan" and "Yosemite School Area Specific Plan" labels, which were illegible in the previous draft. 1:10 Second column Corrected grammar under "Evening Presentations" heading as follows: "...alternative visions for its future, ranging from doing nothing differently, to restoring the Mall..." 1:11 Second column, second paragraph Since EIR was released for public review, updated second sentence as follows: " These alternatives, [will be]have been studied by the Environmental Impact Report, and are described in Chapter 4 of this Specific Plan." 1:11 Second column Added the following immediately beneath the Fall 2015 - Spring 2016 heading: "General Plan Outreach (2010 to 2014). The Fresno General Plan was adopted following a process which lasted more than four years. The creation of the Plan involved significant public outreach, including over 160 interviews with stakeholders, over 20 public workshops, over 100 presentations to community groups, and over 20 meetings of a Citizens Advisory Committee. During this outreach process, policies and goals affecting the entire city were discussed, including many of the concepts in the FCSP." 1:11 Second column, second to last paragraph The release date of the public draft EIR was corrected. Summary of Changes made for the October, 2016 Version Fulton Corridor Specific Plan 1:11 Last paragraph in right hand column between the "Summer 2016" heading and the next paragraph Added ther following text describing the public outreach that was conducted over summer 2016: "Continued Ongoing Outreach. In advance of the release of the FCSP to the public on July 27, City staff resumed public outreach on June 15, 2016 by providing a summary of the plan to the Board of the Downtown Fresno Partnership and taking input from the board members. On June 30 and July 6 the plan was presented to Downtown property owners, business owners, and developers. On July 13, the FCSP steering committee members participated in a community workshop, while on August 4 an open house on the plan was held during Art Hop, a monthly art exhibition in Downtown that attracts visitors from across the city. At the August Area Agency Executive luncheon the FCSP was presented to the heads of public agencies in the region to bring them up to date on what was being proposed and to provide input. Workshops were also held at the August 25 City Council meeting and the September 21 Planning Commission meeting. Finally, on September 29, City staff held a workshop for the Downtown Academy, a program run by the Fresno Downtown Partnership to educate the public on how Downtown works and how to participate in its revival." 2:1 Second Paragraph under "The Community's Vision" heading. Updated second paragraph to be consistent with Table 1.3A as follows: "This plan sets out to do just that by adding approximately 6,300 residential units, which in turn raises the Plan Area’s resident population from 3,877 people to approximately 16,00013,500 people." 2:2 Item 4 (Vibrancy and Vitality), last sentence Updated last sentence as follows: "As in other great cities, our Downtown is a vibrant and exciting place of intensity, where even the ways to relax are exhilarating." 2:6 Second Paragraph under "2.3 Design Principles" heading Updated fourth sentence as follows: "They are neighbors that form the public realm, provide “eyes on the street,” shape the skyline, create shadowsshade and generate foot, vehicular, and transit traffic." should be changed to create shade. 2:6 Item 1 (Infill Development)) photo Remove highlight from caption (the word "mural" was highlighted). 2:7 Item 6 (Walkability and Bikablity) Changed first sentence to: "Compact urban form, environments designed for people, not cars…" to "Compact urban form, environments designed primarily for people, not cars, and multiple pedestrians…" 3:5 Item "c" under "Armenian Town / Convention Center" Changed "Radisson Hotel" to "DoubleTree." 3:5 Photo in far right column Replaced Divisadero Triangle precedent photo of Helm Home with more current photo (after its recent restoration). 3:6 Second paragraph Updated last sentence as follows: "Vacancies and blighted conditions persist throughout Downtown, and many of the area’s largest buildings remain shuttered and in poor disrepair." 3:11 Bottom Map Moved bubble #4 denoting the Existing First Presbyterian Church, to the correct location at the corner of M and Calaveras. 3:16 Last paragraph in first column. Updated as follows: "Chinatown is also home to an extensive network of underground, interconnected basements." 3:19 First Paragraph Changed "Radisson Hotel" to "DoubleTree." 3:22 Second paragraph under "A. Regional Economic Context" heading Revised second sentence as follows: "Much of the economic growth in Fresno County has occurred in resident-serving sectors, while the agriculture-related industries experienced a significant decline." 3:22 Last paragraph in second column. Added the following at the end of the last sentence: "The success or Bitwise Industries has shown that Downtown has tremendous potential to develop a strong technology sector." 3:23 Last paragraph in second column. Updated as follows: This projected demand for housing, office, and retail and entertainment space exists despite the current past state of disinvestment in Downtown and the development community’s preference in recent past years for suburban sites. However, to achieve the desired results as quickly and efficiently as possible, efforts must be made the City must continue to focus all possible investment towards Downtown and to be consistent in implementing this Plan’s development strategy for many years." 3:23 Photo Replaced caption for left photo with following: "Policies of the mid 20th century resulted in streetscapes that were lifeless, unfriendly to pedestrians, and which discouraged commerce." 6:3 Figure 6.2A Updated diagram, reclassifying parts of Ventura and R Streets 6:8 Policy 6-9-11 Added following new policy: 6-9-11 When considering providing funding, letters of support for grant applications, other assistance to projects, give priority to projects with high quality workmanship, materials, articulation, and amenities. 7:2 Significant Resources Definitions Added following all HERO references: "(if/when it is adopted by the City Council)" 8:7 First paragraph Changed "Radisson Hotel" to "DoubleTree." 8:28 Wayfinding signage image The wayfinding signage image was updated to reflect the latest version of the program. 9:20 Figure 9.5A Corrected BRT route so is up to date. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER, 2016 Fresno, California CHANGES ONLY City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street · Fresno, California 93721 · (559) 621-8000 · Fax (559) 621-7990 · www.fresno.gov Ashley Swearengin Mayor tried to make downtown more like its suburban counterparts actually eroded the urban core, rather than revitalizing it. Like the rapidly growing city, Downtown also became a less focused place. With the conception of the freeway triangle in 1957, the notion of downtown grew in size from a few blocks to hundreds of acres. Projects over a mile apart from each other were considered helpful to the revitalization effort, even though there was no synergy or connectivity between them. Meanwhile at ground zero on Fulton, the core of our main street was becoming a different kind of economic anchor, one that was pulling the rest of Downtown down with it. Much of Downtown Fresno’s story of decline is common to cities across America. Yet over the last two decades,many of those cities have been able to revitalize their urban centers — many, like Fresno, despite generations of urban decay. Now, it is Fresno’s turn to revitalize our downtown. Fortunately, we have many successful examples to draw upon. We know the most successful downtowns direct investment and resources to a focused area. Through good urban planning and design, projects in proximity begin to support each other and create foot traffic. Shoppers, diners, and concert-goers can park once and spend hours exploring the benefits that vibrant downtowns offer. As customers walk past storefronts, new businesses open to take advantage of the activity. Historic buildings add unique character, respecting the region’s past while differentiating downtown from newer, less distinctive suburbs. There is no reason these revitalization fundamentals will work differently in Fresno than they have so well, time and again, in other places. A critical step in this journey: the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan. The Specific Plan and the accompanying new Form-Based Code for development are consistent with the General Plan and new Citywide Development Code and replace the outdated regulations of the City’s 1960s-era zoning code with new rules that make it easier than ever to develop great projects based on the best of our past. The new Specific Plan and Code replace the frustration of the stalwart first investors with a new sense of momentum, built symbiotically from one project to another to another, as more and more people invest and develop with ease, as well as confidence. Well over a century later, Downtown Fresno is still the place to see what our city and region are all about. Except today, more than just the story of our past, Downtown is the story of our future.It is the story of our community coming together, remembering its identity, and choosing to do what it takes to ensure a vibrant future.It is the story of realizing we really can get the fundamentals right and make Downtown Fresno a vibrant asset to our city and region once again. Under the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, there has never been a better time to invest in our urban core than today. Welcome to Downtown Fresno. Sincerely, tried to make downtown more like its suburban counterparts actually eroded the urban core, rather than revitalizing it. Like the rapidly growing city, Downtown also became a less focused place. With the conception of the freeway triangle in 1957, the notion of downtown grew in size from a few blocks to hundreds of acres. Projects over a mile apart from each other were considered helpful to the revitalization effort, even though there was no synergy or connectivity between them. Meanwhile at ground zero on Fulton, the core of our main street was becoming a different kind of economic anchor, one that was pulling the rest of Downtown down with it. Much of Downtown Fresno’s story of decline is common to cities across America. Yet over the last two decades, many of those cities have been able to revitalize their urban centers — many, like Fresno, despite generations of urban decay. Now, it is Fresno’s turn to revitalize our downtown. Fortunately, we have many successful examples to draw upon. We know the most successful downtowns direct investment and resources to a focused area. Through good urban planning and design, projects in proximity begin to support each other and create foot traffic. Shoppers, diners, and concert-goers can park once and spend hours exploring the benefits that vibrant downtowns offer. As customers walk past storefronts, new businesses open to take advantage of the activity. Historic buildings add unique character, respecting the region’s past while differentiating downtown from newer, less distinctive suburbs. There is no reason these revitalization fundamentals will work differently in Fresno than they have so well, time and again, in other places. A critical step in this journey: the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan. The Specific Plan and the accompanying new Form-Based Code for development are consistent with the General Plan and new Citywide Development Code and replace the outdated regulations of the City’s 1960s-era zoning code with new rules that make it easier than ever to develop great projects based on the best of our past. The new Specific Plan and Code replace the frustration of the stalwart first investors with a new sense of momentum, built symbiotically from one project to another to another, as more and more people invest and develop with ease, as well as confidence. Well over a century onlater, Downtown Fresno is still the place to see what our city and region are all about. Except today, more than just the story of our past, Downtown is the story of our future. It is the story of our community coming together, remembering its identity, and choosing to do what it takes to ensure a vibrant future. It is the story of realizing we really can get the fundamentals right and make Downtown Fresno a vibrant asset to our city and region once again. Under the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, there has never been a better time to invest in our urban core than today. Welcome to Downtown Fresno. PREFACE Downtown Fresno is where the city began. From its incorporation in 1885 and through the 1960’s, it was the commercial, business and cultural center of the Central Valley: A vibrant and compact place comprised of bustling sidewalks shaded by awnings, successful street level retail stores with offices above, convenient parking, and – until the 1930’s – an accessible streetcar system. A great number of historic photographs describe Downtown in this extraordinary traditional urban form. After the Second World War, Fresno’s pattern of development, like that of most American cities, was radically altered. The passage of the G.I. Bill in 1944 enabled returning veterans to purchase homes and establish businesses. In addition, the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, passed during the height of the Cold War, authorized and funded the construc- tion of freeways across the entire United States. These freeways sup- ported military and civil defense operations, facilitated interstate travel and commerce, and, perhaps unwittingly, encouraged the decentraliza- tion of America’s City Centers. Indeed, the automobile provided easy access to inexpensive land and made it no longer necessary to locate residential, commercial, and business uses in close proximity to one another. The completion of the Mayfair subdivision in 1947, north of the Plan Area, included Fresno’s first suburban shopping mall and ushered in an era of development at the suburban fringe. People began to move out of Fresno’s pre-World War II residential neighborhoods and scatter into the new, northern subdivisions. Businesses and important institu- tions, such as Fresno State University, churches, and hospitals, followed, resulting in a slow decline of Downtown and its surrounding corridors. The leaders of Fresno reacted swiftly to this emerging trend. In 1958, they invited the most famous urban planner of the period, Victor Gruen, to come to Fresno and to frame a vision and plan for modernizing the center of the city. The Gruen Plan was daring for its time. Yet, many of its prescriptions – supporting the building of freeways, pedestrianizing the commercial core of Downtown, encouraging street closures and one way conversions, promoting wholesale building demolition and super- block formation – proved ineffective and failed to revitalize Downtown. Indeed, as the below photo of Fulton Street in the late 1950’s shows, Downtown was not completely dead. Many stores still existed and competed for business – primarily because they were visible to pass- ing motorists. The elimination of automobiles from the Fulton Mall removed this flow of potential customers, arguably hastening the decline of the stores that lined its length and contributing to the chronic vacancy of its historic office buildings. In addition, the closure of Fulton Street, Merced Street, Mariposa Street, and Kern Street made Downtown more difficult to navigate. The Gruen Plan declared the form of the historic Downtown obsolete, but the Modern Downtown it so passionately promoted did not become desirable to the market. Similar planning and “urban renewal” efforts became the norm, yet frequently did more harm than good to estab- lished downtowns and surrounding neighborhoods. The failure of these efforts – along with the inexpensive land, wide streets, new schools, and newly relocated retailers found at the city’s edge – lured Fresnans to the suburbs in droves. There many found they could live in new houses, move more freely, and exercise a greater range of working, retail, and entertainment choices. For a couple of generations, the development field tipped decidedly in favor of massive suburban growth. The municipal government also became focused on servicing this kind of suburban growth. Demolition of historic buildings and large scale development that was not designed to fit with its surroundings began to occur Downtown. As a result, Downtown’s economy was deeply shaken and its traditional, walkable, human-scale, mixed-use urban form was put into question as it became characterized by high vacancy rates, low land values, a total absence of people once the work day ended, and concentrated poverty in the surrounding neighborhoods. By 1990, Downtown Fresno, including the Fulton Mall, was in a state of physical, economic, and social free fall. According to a study completed in 2008, the Fulton Mall generated about $365,969 in annual property and sales tax revenues. If the Mall were developed and built to its potential, the preparers of the study estimated that it could generate over $6 million annually in City revenues. Therefore, the Mall was contributing only 5.7 percent of its revenue generating potential in 2008.1 The great recession of 2008 exposed Fresno’s fiscal fragility. With no net source of revenue being generated by property and sales taxes in the center of the city, and Fresno’s city-wide finances weakened, major layoffs and drastic reductions in services resulted. At that critical point in the city’s history, the revitalization of its Downtown became a matter of fiscal urgency. Many cities now draw a significant portion of their revenues from an economically vibrant down- town. Will Fresno follow this path? View of Fulton Street at Mariposa Street looking north (1959). Credit: Pop Laval Foundation View of Fulton Street at Tulare Street (1936)in the 1920s. Credit: Pop Laval Foundation 1 Market Profiles, “Economic Impact Study Listing of Fulton Mall on National Register of Historic Places,” September 2008. 1:2 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Chapter 9: Transportation. This Chapter outlines Downtown’s future multi-modal transportation network that accommodates private automobiles, transit, walking, and biking. Key topics include street reconfiguration, transit and bicycle networks, “Park Once” and street parking, and the basic design of the proposed High-Speed Rail station area. Chapter 10: Sustainability, Infrastructure, and Resources. This Chapter addresses a range of topics, including water use, energy use, sewer capacity, and the provision of infrastructure. In addition to providing basic services to support future and existing development within Downtown, a forward-looking approach to these topics continues Fresno’s role as a statewide leader in conservation and resource management. Chapter 11: Implementation. The Plan proposes a development strategy driven by private investors. Plan-wide policies focus on historic preservation, retail and employment, shared parking, the public realm, livable neighborhoods, civic initiatives, and specific plan-implementation initiatives such as fast-tracking desirable development. Private sector development will be driven by residential, retail, and commercial market demand, and by the attraction provided by public improvements, predictable entitlement processes, and Downtown’s unique and desirable character. Chapters 6-10 provide goals and policies that provide direction and guidance for transformation, while Chapter 11 lists specific implementation projects and actions for implementing the goals and policies set forth within the previous chapters. These are defined in the gray box at right: Goals GeneralBroad direction-setterssetting statements that present a long-term vision. Policies Support the stated goals by mandating, encouraging, or permitting desired actions. Implementation Projects and Actions Discrete tasks, categorized as either projects or actions that the City carries out in order to implement the vision of revitalizing Fresno’s core. Project One-time physical improvements to a part of the Plan Area (such as implementing traffic calming measures in a certain area). Action Specific activities that will be completed by a certain time or at regular intervals (such as creating an ordinance or updating a master plan). It should be noted that while the successful integration of the proposed High-Speed Rail (HSR) system into Downtown Fresno is of critical importance, there is not a chapter dedicated to this. Rather, the integration of HSR is disbursed throughout this document wherever is is appropriate in order to ensure that all aspects of the document reflect this priority. Farmers’ markets, like this one in the Mural District, provide access to locally grown fruits, vegetables, and nutritious foods. Downtown, with its pedestrian-oriented building fabric, serves as the retail, shopping, and entertainment center of Fresno. 1:3FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION KEY Existing Buildings KEY Existing Buildings Historic Buildings Potential Development Birds-eye view of Downtown as it could exist in 2035 as proposed by this Specific Plan. Birds-eye view of Downtown as it existed in 2010. N N 1:6 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.3 PLAN PURPOSE Figure 1.3A Relationship of FCSP to Existing Community Plans. A. PURPOSE Cities are dynamic and ever-changing places that experience many cycles of physical and economic growth and change over time. The General Plan (updated every decade or so) and associated communi- ty plans (historically updated every 20-30 years), provide policy guid- ance for this on-going evolution, while the day-to-day, neighborhood- by-neighborhood, lot-by-lot “steering mechanism” for changing the built environment is guided by the Development Code (also known as the zoning ordinance) and other related municipal standards. Prior to the adoption of the new Citywide Development Code in 2015, Fresno’s zoning standards focused mostly on land use, and included relatively generic, suburban physical design standards that are com- mon to many cities and towns. For managing routine changes in the use of existing buildings, tThe existing zoning regulations worked quite well, but could not successfully reshape and refurbish Down- town. Improved zoning standards from the new Development Code are temporarily being applied to Downtown, but a Specific Plan and form-based code will ultimately be necessary to achieve the desired revival of the area. This Specific Plan is enacted on the authority vested in the City of Fresno by the State of California, including but not limited to the State Constitution; the Planning and Zoning Law (Government Code Section 65000 et seq.), and the City’s Charter, Municipal Code, and General Plan. The specific plan enables a community to define a clear and specific vision for the future evolution of a specified planning area. This Specific Plan provides a road map for growth and change for the plan area until the year 2035 and beyond. It is comprised of unique and customized standards that enable the City to shape or reshape its streets and public spaces and property owners to develop or redevelop their properties according to the vision of the Specific Plan. It guides public and private reinvestment and construction in a highly coordinated and integrated way in order to yield specific types of urban places that are the result of discussion, debate, and ulti- mately consensus by a majority of the community. When development projects within the FCSP area are reviewed by the City, staff will use this Specific Plan as a means of evaluating them. Projects will be judged on their consistency with this Specific Plan’s policies and for conformance with its development standards as contained in the Citywide Development Code. For projects within the FCSP area, the policies and standards in this Specific Plan shall take precedence over more general policies and standards applied throughout the rest of the City, pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) Section 12-604. In situations where policies or standards relating to a particular subject have not been provided in this Specific Plan, the applicable policies and standards of the currently adopted City of Fresno General Plan, the Downtown Neighborhoods Commu- nity Plan, and the Development Code (which implements the goals and policies of this Specific Plan) shall govern. In addition, the noise and safety contour and aviation easement requirements of the Fresno Chandler Downtown Airport Specific Plan take precedence over the FCSP. The result of extensive community outreach, debate, and consensus building, this Specific Plan guides and focuses public investment over time on essential infrastructure and streetscape projects that, in turn, will incentivize private parties to improve their property with the certainty that they are supported by long-term public commitment. The primary purposes of this Specific Plan are to define: 1. A vision for the future of Downtown that recognizes the importance of history and tradition while embracing opportunities for continued reinvestment, growth, and beneficial change. 2. Goals and policies that work in tandem with and refine those of the General Plan and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan to achieve the revitalization of the Plan Area. 3. New land use policies for the Plan Area that will guide upcoming zoning regulations. These new policies are calibrated to deliver new development that is consistent with Fresno’s physical character, Community Plan Areas City of Fresno, California Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan 10 May, 2010 Fresno StreetVentura AvenueTulare Avenue Kings Canyon Road Butler Avenue California Avenue Church Street Whitesbridge Avenue Clinton Avenue McKinley Avenue Olive Avenue Belmont Avenue SR 180 SR 41SR 180 S R 9 9 Blackstone AvenueChestnut AvenueMarks AvenueFresno StreetBraodway StreetN FRESNO HIGH-ROEDING COMMUNITY PLANWEST AREA COMMUNITY PLAN EDISON COMMUNITY PLAN CENTRAL AREA COMMUNITY PLAN ROOSEVELT COMMUNITY PLAN MCLANE COMMUNITY PLAN V a n N e s s A v e n u e KEY Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Area Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Area 1:7FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Specific Plan Areas City of Fresno, California Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan 10 May, 2010 history, and culture, as well as the community’s vision for its future growth. 4. The implementation strategy for transforming the Plan Area’s streets, infrastructure, parks, and other public spaces. The above purposes provide private property owners with a clear understanding of the future context within which they are investing and reinvesting in their properties. B. RELATIONSHIP OF THIS SPECIFIC PLAN TO OTHER PLANS AND DOCUMENTS 1. General Plan. Concurrent with the development of this Plan and the DNCP, the City began preparing an update to the General Plan, which was adopted on December 18, 2014. The intent of this Specific Plan and the DNCP is to further refine and build upon the goals for these plan areas as set forth in the General Plan and provide specific policies, measures, and projects to implement the goals set forth in the General Plan. The Fresno General Plan is the City’s primary policy planning document. Through its twelve elements, the General Plan provides the framework for the management and utilization of the City’s physical, economic, and human resources. Each ele- ment contains goals, policies, and implementation measures that guide development within the City. The FCSP is designed to meet the goals established in the General Plan by providing a framework for future development within the Planning Area. The Specific Plan provides direct linkage between the City’s General Plan and detailed plans for development, and will direct the character and arrangement of future development and land uses within the Specific Plan Area, including: • Location and sizing of infrastructure; • Phasing of development and thresholds of development; • Financing methods of public improvements; and • In conjunction with the Citywide Development Code, establishing development standards. The FCSP implements the goals and policies of the General Plan that are guided by the following Overarching Principles of Resilience: • Quality-of-Life and Basic Services in All Neighborhoods; • A Prosperous City - Centered on a Vibrant Downtown; • Ample Industrial and Employment Land Ready for Job Creation; • Care for the Built and Natural Environment; and • Fiscally Responsible and Sustainable Land Use Policies and Practices. These principles are made tangible and ready to implement through the FCSP’s goals and policies that address five principal topics: • Building and Development (including Urban Form and Land Use); • Historic Preservation; • Public Realm; • Transportation; and • Utilities Infrastructure. By establishing policies and standards for the plan area, the FCSP is a valuable tool for implementing the General Plan at a site-specific level, as well as providing for orderly development within the planning area. The FCSP identifies such actions on the basis of being near-, mid-, or long-term priorities based on the community’s vision. Figure 1.3B Relationship of FCSP to Existing and Proposed Specific Plans. Fresno StreetVentura AvenueTulare Avenue Kings Canyon Road Butler Avenue California Avenue Church Avenue Whitesbridge Avenue V a n N e s s A v e n u e Clinton Avenue McKinley Avenue Olive Avenue Belmont Avenue SR 180 SR 41SR 180 S R 9 9 Blackstone AvenueChestnut AvenueMarks AvenueFresno StreetBraodway StreetN FRESNO CHANDLER DOWNTOWN AIRPORT SPECIFIC PLAN TOWER DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN YOSEMITE SCHOOL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN FRESNO YOSEMITE INT'L AIRPORT SPECIFIC PLAN BUTTON/WILLOW SPECIFIC PLAN FULTON/LOWELL SPECIFIC PLAN KEY Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Area Fulton Corridor Specific Plan AreaFresno StreetVentura AvenueTulare Avenue Kings Canyon Road Butler Avenue California Avenue Church Avenue Whitesbridge Avenue V a n N e s s A v e n u e Clinton Avenue McKinley Avenue Olive Avenue Belmont Avenue SR 180 SR 41SR 180 S R 9 9 Blackstone AvenueChestnut AvenueMarks AvenueFresno StreetBraodway StreetN FRESNO CHANDLER DOWNTOWN AIRPORT SPECIFIC PLAN TOWER DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN FRESNO YOSEMITE INT'L AIRPORT SPECIFIC PLAN BUTTON/WILLOW SPECIFIC PLAN KEY Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Area Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Area PROPOSED SOUTHWEST SPECIFIC PLAN 1:10 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Mayor Swearengin kicks-off the Design workshop by summarizing the community’s vision for Downtown. Credit: Ryan C. Jones. Community members review and discuss the various Fulton Mall options during the Fulton Corridor Design Workshop. Credit: Ryan C. Jones. 1.4 PLAN PREPARATION PROCESS The FCSP is the result of an intense public process which involved resi- dents, business owners, and property owners of the Fulton Corridor area in a series of public meetings and a six-day, open, participatory Design Workshop. The evolution of this plan was based on extensive commu- nity input throughout all phases of planning, including: Initial Outreach and Discovery, the Design Workshop, and Follow-up Outreach. February - September 2010 Initial Outreach and Discovery. The Initial Outreach and Discovery phase consisted of an extensive existing conditions analysis, interviews with a broad range of interested stakeholders (municipal officials, devel- opers, business owners, and community members), and input from the public during three Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Community Advisory Committee (Committee) meetings. During the March 9, 2010 Committee meeting, the consultant team outlined the upcoming process and described the place-based approach to revitalization that drives this Plan, including the principles of a Form Based Code. The Committee and public also shared their thoughts regarding priorities, issues, and concerns for the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area. During the April 20, 2010 Committee meeting, the consultant team presented the findings of its analysis of the planning issues involved, including the preliminary results of the site analysis, a summary of the input received in the departmental and stakeholder interviews, and a description of emerging development opportunities, constraints, and design themes. In addition, various consultant team members presented their initial findings on a variety of topics including the Public Realm (streets and open spaces), Transportation, Historic Resources, Infrastructure (water, sewer, storm drainage), and Economic Development. During the June 8, 2010 Committee meeting, the public and the consul- tant team commented on the work that was produced at the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Design Workshop and provided suggestions and recommendations for what policies and standards they would like incorporated in the Draft Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Draft Fulton Corridor Specific Plan. During the September 14, 2010 Committee meeting, the Committee, the City, and the project team began exploring alternative ways of revi- talizing the Fulton Mall. The Initial Outreach and Discovery phase was brought to a close during two Pre-Design Workshop presentations, one each to the Planning Commission and City Council, in which the consul- tant team presented its discovery findings. September 25 - October 2, 2010 Design Workshop. Building upon the input and findings of the Initial Outreach and Discovery phase, the Design Workshop brought the proj- ect team to Fresno and allowed focused interaction with all interested parties, including community groups and individual citizens, for seven intensive days of urban policy generation and design. The Design Workshop was interactive with recommendations on each of the design components (Public Realm, Transportation, Infrastructure, Form-Based Zoning Code) being developed simultaneously. Intended to maximize public input, the Design Workshop began with a Visioning Workshop, continued with evening and lunchtime presentations throughout the week, and finished with a final review. • Visioning Workshop (Day 1). On the morning of Saturday, September 25, 2010 the City and project team kicked-off the Design Workshop with a public meeting, facilitated by Travis Sheridan, in which the community developed a transformative vision for the future of Downtown: A vibrant destination at the core of Fresno and the central San Joaquin Valley that is built on commerce and culture, connects our community, is authentic to our past, and provides opportunities for the future. Approximately 150 people attended the meeting and agreed upon the vision for Downtown which is summarized and expanded upon in Chapter 2 of this Specific Plan. • Evening Presentations (Days 2-5). On the evening of Monday, September 27, 2010 (Day 2) the consultant team presented the existing conditions of the Fulton Mall’s (Mall) various elements (landscape, paving, fountains, artwork), the history of the Mall, the historic significance of the Mall, the economic conditions needed for retail to prosper there, and alternative visions for its future, ranging from doing nothing differently, to restoring the Mall, to introducing a traditional street, to keeping some portions pedestrian-only while allowing vehicular traffic on other portions. Workshop participants, comprised of approximately 400 commu- nity members, expressed their likes and dislikes about each option, and provided more than 1,300 written comments on the merits of the various Mall alternatives. The remainder of the Design Workshop focused on Downtown and its various subareas. On Days 3 and 5 (September 28 and 30), the design team presented the development strategy for each of these subareas: the Fulton District , the Mural District, the Civic Center, South Stadium, Chinatown, Armenian Town/Convention Center, and Divisadero Triangle. See Figure 3.2A on page 3:3. During 1:11FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION Workshop to the community. In addition, the City and project team presented the various Fulton Mall alternatives – including two new ones that were generated in response to comments that were presented at the Design Workshop – as well as the advantages, disadvantages, and probable construction and maintenance costs of each. City staff also provided an overview of the Mall’s current physical conditions. After substantial discourse and considerable input from the public, the Community Advisory Committee selected from among the ten initial Fulton Mall alternatives, recommending three for further study in the planning process. These alternatives, [will be]have been studied by the Environmental Impact Report, and are described in Chapter 4 of this Specific Plan. On October 14, 2011, the City released the Public Draft of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan for a 30-day public comment period. During this period, the City Manager initiated the Plan prior to the kick-off of the Environmental Impact Report. In addition, during this period, the Committee convened four public workshops in order to provide the Committee and the public an opportunity to voice their opinion regard- ing the nature and recommendations of the Plan. Additional opportu- nities for public comment were provided during an October 19, 2011 Planning Commission Workshop and an October 20, 2011 City Council Workshop. Fall 2015 - Spring 2016 General Plan Outreach (2010 to 2014). The Fresno General Plan was adopted following a process which lasted more than four years. The creation of the Plan involved significant public outreach, including over 160 interviews with stakeholders, over 20 public workshops, over 100 presentations to community groups, and over 20 meetings of a Citizens Advisory Committee. During this outreach process, policies and goals affecting the entire city were discussed, including many of the concepts in the FCSP. Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This phase is devoted to the gen- eration of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in order to address the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The EIR evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the FCSP, the DNCP, and the applicable sections of the Citywide Development Code. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was initially issued in April 2012. After the FCSP was put on hold in order for the General Plan Update to be adopted, a second NOP was issued in September 2015, which was fol- lowed by the release of the public draft EIR in Spring 2016on July 27, 2016. Summer 2016 Continued Ongoing Outreach. In advance of the release of the FCSP to the public on July 27, City staff resumed public outreach on June 15, 2016 by providing a summary of the plan to the Board of the Downtown Fresno Partnership and taking input from the board members. On June 30 and July 6 the plan was presented to Downtown property owners, business owners, and developers. On July 13, the FCSP steering com- mittee members participated in a community workshop, while on August 4 an open house on the plan was held during Art Hop, a monthly art exhibition in Downtown that attracts visitors from across the city. At the August Area Agency Executive luncheon the FCSP was presented to the heads of public agencies in the region to bring them up to date on what was being proposed and to provide input. Workshops were also held at the August 25 City Council meeting and the September 21 Planning Commission meeting. Finally, on September 29, City staff held a workshop for the Downtown Academy, a program run by the Fresno Downtown Partnership to educate the public on how Downtown works and how to participate in its revival. Plan Adoption. This phase is devoted to navigating the final Specific Plan and EIR through the public hearing and adoption process and includes consideration by the Committee, the Airport Land Use Commisison, the Planning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and the City Council. breakout sessions, community members discussed a variety of top- ics, including what they believed should be points of initial public and private investment and change, and what type of development is appropriate in each subarea. On Day 4 (September 29), the project team presented open space, landscape, and transportation strategies for Downtown – including incorporating the proposed High-Speed Rail station. • Lunchtime Presentations (Days 2-6). During the noon lunchtime hour, experts on the project team described the theory and prac- tice of each of their disciplines and how it applies to Downtown Fresno: On Day 2, Historic Resources Group provided a brief history of Fresno, the City’s legislative framework for preserving historical assets, and a summary of the team’s reconnaissance findings. On Day 3, Strategic Economics discussed the economics of jobs, housing, and business, presented the anticipated demand for each over the next 25 years, and proposed steps for revital- izing Downtown. On Day 4, Nelson\Nygaard and Fehr & Peers presented transportation-related city-building strategies, including creating a safe walking and biking environment, managing parking, making the right transit investments at the right time, and planning for the proposed High-Speed Rail service. On Day 5, Fong Hart Schneider described how the elements of the Public Realm (Streets and Open Spaces) can generate a more vital Downtown through the introduction of street trees, street furniture, and activated open spaces. On Day 6, Raimi + Associates described the basics of Form Based Codes, comparing them to conventional zoning codes, and describing the structure of a potential new development code for the DNCP and FCSP Plan areas. • Final Review (Day 7). On the last day of the Design Workshop (October 2), the project team presented development strategies and design interventions that had been identified, with commu- nity input, over the course of the previous week. Specific topics included economics, infrastructure, historic resources, transporta- tion, landscaping and open space strategies, as well as the form of buildings appropriate to each of Downtown’s subareas. The morn- ing meeting concluded with a panel discussion led by City Manager Mark Scott in which attendees posed questions to members of the project team as well as to City staff. October 2010 - April 2011 Follow-up Outreach. The Follow-up Outreach phase began with a Community Advisory Committee meeting on October 19, 2010, in which the City and project team presented the results of the Fulton Mall Design During the Design Workshop, approximately 400 community members expressed their likes and dislikes about each Fulton Mall option. Credit: Ryan C. Jones 2:1FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 2: A VISION FOR DOWNTOWN FRESNO IN 2035 2.1 INTRODUCTION A great downtown is more than the sum of its parts. This Specific Plan is written with the knowledge that if the City of Fresno, the private sector, and our community get the basics right, something phenomenal will happen: a great Downtown that makes everyone proud and is an economic engine for the San Joaquin Valley. Through an extensive public process that included a week-long Design Workshop and numerous meetings with the Community Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, a vision for the Fulton Corridor, and the values that should shape its revitalization were established. These statements form the basis for this document and the City of Fresno goals and policies it contains. The Community’s Vision Fulton is the vibrant destination at the core of Fresno and the central San Joaquin Valley. The vitality of Fulton is built on commerce and culture; it connects our community; it is authentic to our past; and it provides opportunities for the future. The key to making Downtown great is attracting many people to it: residents, workers, and visitors. This plan sets out to do just that by adding approximately 6,300 residential units, which in turn raises the Plan Area’s resident population from 3,877 people to approximately 16,00013,500 people. In addition, the introduction of up to 3.9 million square feet of office space, 1.5 million square feet of retail space, and 145,000 square feet of industrial space will bring in over 18,000 new jobs to Downtown. This translates into approximately 34,000 new non-visitor people in Downtown. The visitor popula- tion – restaurant and entertainment patrons, tourists on their way to Yosemite, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon, Fresno Convention Center attendees, proposed High-Speed Rail riders, to name a few – will raise the number of people in Downtown even more. More people translates into vibrancy, vitality, and increased income for the City. But new residents, workers, and visitors will not come to Downtown unless it is an attractive, appealing, vibrant place with beautiful tree- lined, multi-modal streets; inviting parks and plazas; and handsome buildings – both old and new – that face and are entered from the street and accommodate a variety of uses. This plan is a blueprint for transforming Downtown into such a place. 2.2 COMMUNITY VALUES FOR REVITALIZATION The community’s vision for revitalizing Downtown and transforming it back into a truly great place is based upon ten fundamental values. These values, generated by the community, are: 1. Getting the Basics Right A great downtown is more than the sum of its parts. But to be great, the basic parts must be in place. In many ways, our Downtown missed being great for decades because our community was missing the basics. This Specific Plan, with the applicable sections of the Citywide Development Code, brings Fresno back to the basics by introducing a clear vision for revitalization, easy-to-understand rules for urban development, a simplified permitting process, public improvements aligned with private sector investments, and the infrastructure needed for economic growth. This Specific Plan provides important incentives for investors and property owners to build new buildings, revitalize existing ones, start new businesses, and relocate businesses to Downtown. It guides the parts that make up the sum of what happens in our Downtown. Put it all together, and you have a downtown where investors feel confident about investing, where every taxpayer dollar produces the maximum benefit toward revitalization, and where the urban core becomes an asset rather than a drain on City finances. 2. A Regional Destination Since its beginning, Downtown Fresno has served the entire central San Joaquin Valley. In its heyday, Downtown was the center of government, banking, commerce, and entertainment. Even today, despite Fresno’s suburbanization, Downtown is still a place that offers services and activities that cannot be found elsewhere in the region. The Fresno community envisions a Downtown whose relationship with the Valley’s cities and towns runs two ways. In exchange for the amenity Downtown provides, all the people of the Valley – not just residents of Fresno – support Downtown with the dollars they choose to spend. To rekindle and nurture this economic relation- ship, Downtown must provide something of value to people throughout the surrounding area. Residents of the metropolitan area, nearby towns, and rural areas are all stakeholders in the revital- ization effort. The Downtown skyline with the Union Pacific right-of-way in the foreground. Chukchansi Park is to the right in the background. CHAPTER 2: A VISION FOR DOWNTOWN FRESNO 2:2 CHAPTER 2: A VISION FOR DOWNTOWN FRESNO IN 2035 The public and private sectors must both recognize that the market for almost anything that happens in Downtown extends well beyond Fresno. An event, concert, or other attraction on a weekend evening can and should draw people from the surrounding region – in the 2010 Census, the Counties of Fresno, Madera, Tulare, and Kings, had a combined population of almost 1.7 million people. This Specific Plan provides a blueprint for creating a Downtown that attracts people from this large area by being a unique place, a fun place, and a place where many different kinds of experiences – business, dining, entertainment – can all happen within a short walk in the same visit. In addition, the presence of Downtown’s various government offices, courts, and supporting businesses ensures that thousands of people come to Downtown to work or to conduct government business. This population is indispensable in transforming Downtown into an active, vibrant, popular place. Though currently the majority of this population leaves Downtown at the end of the work day, many are potential residents and after-work and weekend restaurant and enter- tainment patrons that, as Downtown transforms, will one day live, work, shop, and play in Downtown. Since the construction of the original Fresno County Courthouse and the original City Hall, governmental offices have been vital to the identity of Downtown Fresno. There is no other location in the City of Fresno or the Central Valley that has the same concentration of government offices. The central location and easy routes of travel into Downtown Fresno continue to be important reasons for various government entities to locate Downtown. 3. An International Destination Each year, thousands of visitors from all over the world pass through Fresno on their way to Yosemite, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon National Parks. Though they stay overnight in Downtown hotels, the primary reason they do so is that Fresno happens to be the closest big city to these parks. Similarly, thousands of Californians and some from farther afield attend various events and meetings at the Fresno Convention Center. When these visitors venture out of their hotels at night, the streets are virtually empty of people and cars and almost every store and restaurant is closed. The Fresno community envisions Downtown’s transformation into a vibrant, mixed-use place that offers unique restaurants and retail opportunities during the day and the night, making Downtown Fresno a destination that people want to visit on their way to these parks or as a place where they want to hold or attend conventions. 4. Vibrancy and Vitality The Fresno community envisions a Downtown full of life and energy. The goal of revitalization is to turn the Fulton Corridor back into a prosperous place where people live, work, shop, and have access to a variety of entertainment options. As in other great cities, our Downtown is a vibrant and exciting place of intensity, where even the ways to relax are exhilarating. Much of Downtown’s explosive energy comes from mixing extremes together. Downtown is to be a home for lively artistic expression – and a clean, orderly, well-maintained place where people feel comfortable walking around. Downtown is to be a hotbed for small local retail stores – as well as a place for big business that draws in national brands. Downtown is to be a prosperous urban center and a place where Valley residents of any means can enjoy the services that it provides. Downtown is to be a place for every ethnic group, income class, and age bracket to mix together. Under this Specific Plan, no activity is isolated, and every investment is turned into something larger than itself: a source of vitality for the Fulton Corridor, helping to create a Downtown that functions in a vibrant way. 5. Commerce Business activity is integral to Downtown’s past as well as its future. For many years Downtown was home to a wide variety of profes- sional services, administrative offices of prominent banks, broad retail opportunities from specialty shops to department stores, and entertainment venues that included several elaborately crafted com- mercial theaters. The Fresno community envisions a Downtown that once again attracts businesses new and old, large and small. Rather than rely- ing on large “silver bullet” projects, the revitalization of Downtown occurs on the scale of one business and one building at a time. Through the applicable sections of the Citywide Development Code, this Specific Plan makes it easier than ever before to understand the rules for development in order to obtain an entitlement, rehabilitate a historic structure, or build a new building. The Plan lifts the burden of providing for parking for each business by allowing dif- ferent buildings to share street parking and garage space. By mak- ing it less expensive and easier to invest, this Specific Plan makes Downtown an ideal place for entrepreneurship, while enabling the construction of high quality buildings. An event at the Fulton Mall brings vitality to Mariposa Plaza.Outdoor dining and pedestrian activity on Kern Street. 2.2 COMMUNITY VALUES FOR REVITALIZATION (continued) 2:6 CHAPTER 2: A VISION FOR DOWNTOWN FRESNO IN 2035 2.3 DESIGN PRINCIPLES Based on the community’s vision for the Fulton Corridor, this Specific Plan and the accompanying Downtown Districts sections of the Citywide Development Code apply the following ten principles to the design of the Plan Area’s buildings, public spaces, landscape, and infrastructure: infill development, mix of land uses, distinct character, quality of the public realm, interconnected street system, walkability and bikability, housing variety, effective transportation and parking, efficient building and site design, and urban agriculture. These principles mark a return to the kind of place-making design that has shaped Downtown Fresno for most of its history. The Plan empha- sizes designing dwellings, shops, offices, entertainment venues, schools, parks, and civic facilities that are not only within close proximity, but that also relate to one another. Buildings are not isolated objects. They are neighbors that form the public realm, provide “eyes on the street,” shape the skyline, create shadowsshade, and generate foot, vehicular, and transit traffic. In addition, when development projects are related to their surroundings, each new project builds value for surrounding land and buildings, encouraging spin-off development and hastening the build-out of complete, revitalized areas. These principles form the basis for the Downtown Districts sections of the Citywide Development Code as well as the goals, policies, and actions that are described in this Plan. 2. Mix of Land Uses. Synergistic relationships between a variety of destinations and activities. Downtowns and neighborhood centers that accommodate a variety of uses in close proximity to one another utilize land efficiently, provide neighborhood convenience, create a uniquely urban experi- ence, and encourage people to come and go throughout the entire day. The accompanying Downtown Districts section of the Citywide Development Code remove current restrictions and allow and encourage a compatible mix of uses at the neighborhood, district, or corridor scale, and promote shared parking. This yields a rich mix of building types and uses that are accessible in the same visit through many transportation modes. Key to creating this environment is focusing investment and concentrating businesses, offices, visitors, residents – i.e., people – in one area. As the initial area becomes vibrant, activity will expand to the rest of Downtown. 1. Infill Development. Effective use of existing private and public land and infrastructure investments. Development fills in available urban sites to create a more vibrant public realm. More people within walking distance of multiple uses support a more efficient utilization of services and resources, and create more opportunities for entrepreneurship and for shopping, working, and entertainment close to home. In addition, infill development takes advantage of existing infrastruc- ture, including streets, parks, and water, sewer, and storm drain pipes. A diverse mix of land uses within close proximity utilizes land efficiently, provides neighborhood convenience, and creates a unique urban experience. The Iron Bird Lofts District introduces higher density housing in the Mural District. 2:7FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 2: A VISION FOR DOWNTOWN FRESNO IN 2035 6. Walkability and Bikability. Compact urban form, environments designed primarily for people, not cars, and multiple pedestrian and bicycle destinations within close proximity. In urban areas, most daily uses are within a 5 minute walk from home or work. The Downtown Districts sections of the Citywide Development Code direct new building designs to define street edges and corners, enliven street frontages to enhance the pedes- trian experience, and create memorable urban places where people enjoy being. Pedestrian-scaled street lighting, street trees, and street furniture further enhance the pedestrian experience. An extensive network of bike lanes and trails and their associated amenities, such as bike racks and lockers, extend the reach of daily uses. 5. Interconnected Street System. Access to daily destinations that are reached by multiple routes. Interconnected streets reduce congestion by dispersing vehicular traffic rather than concentrating it only on major arteries. They encourage pedestrian activity, provide multiple routes for getting places, and increase the routes emergency personnel can use to reach distressed locations. When open to all – pedestrians, cyclists, and automobiles – they are more active, safer, and better for busi- nesses that line them. Alleys provide access to parking and services at the back of build- ing lots, reducing the number of conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles along sidewalks. 4. Quality of the Public Realm. Appealing and heavily used outdoor public spaces between buildings. A primary task of all urban architecture and landscape design is the physical definition of streets, squares and parks that serve as places of movement, gathering, and celebration for people. Public open space is designed as a series of outdoor rooms and a landscape that enables public interaction, provides a place to enjoy fresh air and exercise, and improves the physical and aesthetic quality of urban neighborhoods. Surrounding buildings naturally keep parks safe by providing eyes on what is happening. In return, parks boost the values of surrounding properties. 3. Distinct Character. Places with their own distinct identity. Preservation and renewal of Downtown’s unique buildings, districts, and landscapes affirm the continuity and evolution of urban society. New development enriches the quality of existing urban places. New design is a complement to such settings, creating a unique sense of place that reflects history, as well as changing market trends. Buildings define and enliven the street and sidewalk edge, enhance the pedestrian experience, and create memorable urban places. Interconnected streets reduce congestion by dispersing vehicular traffic. Buildings at Civic Center Square face an urban green that provides a place for office workers and convention visitors to gather. Preservation of Downtown’s unique buildings affirms the continuity and evolution of Fresno’s urban and cultural traditions. 3:5FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS Divisadero TriangleSouth Stadium Chinatown Armenian Town / Convention Center Armenian Town/Convention Center is roughly bounded by Inyo Street to the north, O Street to the east, SR 41 to the south, and the alley between L Street and Van Ness Avenue to the west. As its name suggests, it comprises the remaining half of what was Armenian Town and contains the Fresno Convention Center. The Divisadero Triangle is roughly bounded by Merced Street to the south, the BNSF railroad tracks to the east, Divisadero Street to the north, and the alley between L Street and Van Ness Avenue to the west. Chinatown, established in 1872, originally comprised the area bounded by what is now State Route 99 to the west, Ventura Avenue to the south, H Street to the east, and Fresno Street to the north. This Plan modi- fies the boundaries by extending the boundaries northward to include the properties just north of Stanislaus Street, southward to where Golden State Boulevard intersects State Route 41, and establishing the eastern boundary at the Union Pacific railroad tracks. South Stadium is bounded by SR 41 to the south, the Union Pacific railroad to the west, Inyo Street to the north, and the alley between Van Ness Avenue and L Street to the east. 4 5 6 7 Reference for Area’s InformationSee Section 3.2.1See Section 3.2.2See Section 3.2.3 See Section 3.2.4 See Section 3.2.5 See Section 3.2.6 See Section 3.2.7 a. Transform this area into a walk- able and bikable mixed-use place by infilling vacant parcels with pedestrian-friendly, mixed- use buildings. b. Introduce larger office buildings with local serving retail concen- trated along Ventura Avenue. c. Connect the Fresno Convention Center and RadissonDoubleTree Hotel to the Fulton Corridor with clear pedestrian linkages and wayfinding signage. a. Transform this area into a walk- able mixed-use place by infilling vacant parcels with shopper- friendly buildings. b. Introduce office and local- serving retail uses along M, Divisadero, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Streets. c. Consolidate and relocate iso- lated older buildings from throughout Downtown within the Divisadero Triangle. a. Revitalize Chinatown in con- junction with the proposed High-Speed Rail station. b. Infill Chinatown’s many vacant lots with sensitively scaled, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly buildings that accommodate a variety of uses. c. Establish F Street as Chinatown’s “Main Street,” a street that accommodates local- serving shops and restaurants and provides a safe and pleas- ant environment for shoppers. d. Continue to capitalize on Chinatown’s unique historic assets, including the former Fresno Buddhist Temple, the Bow On Tong Association Building, and its extensive underground basement net- work. e. Create a new park along Mariposa Street near the pro- posed HSR station. F. Create an intermodal transit center along G Street near the proposed HSR station. a. Transform South Stadium into a mixed-use district that intro- duces a diversity of new uses, including housing, creative businesses, and specialty retail businesses, while embracing its raw, industrial charm. b. Permit South Stadium busi- nesses to advertise their pres- ence by way of architectural design and signage that recalls the older automotive-related signs of Fresno’s early motoring era. c. Improve the image of gateway streets such as Ventura Avenue and Van Ness Avenue. d. Revitalize and reuse the existing older buildings that currently line Fulton Street. Introduce commercial and retail on grounds floors, and residential, office, and hospitality uses on upper floors. 3:6 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS 1. FULTON DISTRICT The Fulton District is comprised of rectangular blocks oriented parallel to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The historic interconnected street network is disrupted by the railroad tracks, and has been closed down to traffic at several locations, most notably Mariposa Street east of the County Courthouse. All of the streets within the Fulton District are two-way, with the exception of Tuolumne Street, which is one-way. This street and block pattern, coupled with inadequate way-finding signage, confuses many Downtown drivers, especially those not familiar with the Fulton District. A considerable amount of the Fulton District’s building fabric has been demolished and replaced by either vacant land or parking lots. An important exception to this is Fulton Street, where, with the exception of its northern end, the adjacent building fabric is well intact. Vacancies and blighted conditions persist throughout Downtown, and many of the area’s largest buildings remain shuttered and in poor disrepair. 3.2 DOWNTOWN SUBAREAS (Continued) View of a reopened Fulton Street looking south towards Tulare Street with a new mixed-use infill building with rooftop uses. View of the former Fulton Mall looking south towards Tulare Street. 3:11FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS KEY Existing Wilson Theater (Cornerstone Church) Existing Fresno Scottish Rite Temple Existing Arte Américas Existing First Presbyterian Church New mixed-use Development at North End of the former Fulton Mall New linear park adjacent to Union Pacific Railroad tracks New mixed-use buildings with retail, office, and residential New multi-family housing New housing Recently constructed housing New Mural District Park The Mural District is revitalized through infill of various sites, primarily along Van Ness Avenue. The Grand is seen at top right. 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 7 7 8 88 9 9 10 10 10 1 6 6 H StreetVan Ness AvenueVan Ness AvenueFulton SrteetMerced Street Tuolumne Street Stanislaus Street Calaveras Street San Joaquin Street Amador Street Sacramento Street Di v i s a d e r o S t r e e t BroadwayL StreetM StreetN StreetThis illustrative site plan shows one of many ways the Mural District could develop over time, based on the provisions of the Development Code. Opportunity sites are shown to infill in the general locations where development is likely to occur. A linear park that accommodates a number of open space uses is introduced adjacent to the Union Pacific railroad tracks (see Chapter 6 for more information). NN 11 11 KEY New Buildings Existing Buildings Historic Buildings Open Space Plaza 3:16 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS 5. CHINATOWN Over the years Chinatown harbored many of Fresno’s cultural and ethnic communities, including Japanese, Italian, German, Chinese, African-American, Armenian, Basque, and Mexican immigrants. Chinese immigrants, drawn to the area to work on the construction of the Central Pacific railroad, made up one-third of Fresno’s earliest population. It accommodated all the needs of neighboring residents, including a hospital, churches, schools, and more diverse retail. One of the oldest areas of Fresno, Chinatown truly represents the great ethnic, cultural and architectural diversity of Fresno. Although it is one of the most historically significant areas of Fresno, Chinatown has also experienced the greatest abandonment and dilapidation. Less than 20 percent of Chinatown’s original buildings remain, many in a very poor state of repair – although several are listed on the Local Register of Historic Resources. In addition, it is isolated from the Fulton District by the Union Pacific railroad tracks and from the Edison Neighborhoods by State Route 99. Chinatown is built upon a well-connected network of pedestrian- scaled blocks with alleys servicing most blocks. However, due to the freeway and railroad tracks, Chinatown is isolated from both Downtown and Edison’s residential neighborhoods. The original, historic portion of Chinatown between Fresno Street and Ventura Avenue consists of a patchwork of vacant lots, parking lots, and isolated buildings, although F Street, Chinatown’s main street, is relatively intact, particularly between Tulare Street and Inyo Street. From 1960 onwards, many of Chinatown’s older buildings were demolished, although nine structures are now listed on the Local Register of Historic Resources. In addition, many buildings are in disrepair and the upper floors of many buildings have been removed to conform to building safety requirements. Chinatown is also home to an extensive network of underground, interconnected basements. North of Fresno Street, Chinatown consists of relatively large-scale commercial and industrial buildings surrounded by parking lots. South of Ventura Avenue, it consists of a mix of single-family homes and industrial buildings. Chinatown does not have any public parks, although the abun- dance of vacant land and parking lots provides good opportuni- ties to be transformed into parks as the need arises. In recent years, Chinatown has hosted a number of annual events, including the Chinese New Year Parade and the Chinatown Music and Arts Festival. Recent revitalization efforts have resulted in improved street lighting, new street banners, facade and street improvements, new landscap- ing, and the preservation of several buildings. View of intersection of Mariposa Street and F Street. A park is proposed for Chinatown along Mariposa Street between E Street and G Street. Chinatown is revitalized through adaptively reusing notable older buildings and introducing new ones on an infill pattern. The Basque Hotel is seen at right in the foreground. View of the intersection of Mariposa Street and F Street in its present condition. 3.2 DOWNTOWN SUBAREAS (Continued) 3:19FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS 6. ARMENIAN TOWN/CONVENTION CENTER DISTRICT The Armenian Town/Convention Center’s street and block network is oriented to the railroad tracks and consists for the most part of rect- angular blocks, although the pedestrian-scale of its blocks has been compromised by the creation of several megablocks. Mono Street between L and P Streets and N Street between Capitol Street and Ventura Street have been closed in order to accommodate the Fresno Entertainment and Convention Center and the RadissonDoubleTree Hotel. As a consequence of applying suburban zoning standards on tra- ditional urban fabric, much of it has been developed with build- ings located at the center of the block, surrounded by large surface parking lots. In addition, several streets have been removed, creat- ing megablocks that inhibit both vehicular and pedestrian access. Meanwhile, the portion south of Ventura Avenue has been harmed by the construction of State Route 41, which cuts through what was once the heart of Armenian Town, and more recently by the delay of the Old Armenian Town redevelopment project. Portions south of Ventura Street consist primarily of 1- and 2-story commercial and light industrial buildings. Portions north of Ventura Street are pri- marily occupied by large-scale multi-story buildings that, together with their parking, occupy the entire block. A. Vision. The Armenian Town/Convention Center is transformed into a walkable and bikable, mixed-use place by infilling vacant parcels and parking lots with pedestrian-friendly buildings, intro- ducing pedestrian and bicycle amenities, and adaptively reusing older buildings throughout. It is infilled with larger scale build- ings that house office, residential, and retail uses. B. Plan. Armenian Town/Convention Center is infilled with buildings that accommodate housing, office, and retail. Buildings are built close to the sidewalk, are entered from the sidewalk, and have street-facing windows. Its streets, particularly Ventura Avenue, are improved through the introduction of new sidewalks, new street trees, and new pedestrian-scaled street lights. In addition, bike lanes are introduced along Inyo Street, transforming it into a key east-west bicycle corridor. 3 4 7 2 8 This illustrative site plan shows one of many ways Armenian Town/Convention Center could develop over time, based on the provisions of the Development Code. Opportunity sites are shown to infill in the general locations where development is likely to occur, particularly along Van Ness Avenue. Van Ness AvenueKern Street Tulare Street Inyo Street Mono Street Ventura Street Santa Clara Street SR 41L StreetFulton StreetFULTON MALLM StreetN Street1 5 8 KEY Existing Convention Center Existing Saroyan Theater Existing Valdez Hall Existing Selland Arena Existing Court of Appeals Building Existing Holy Trinity Armenian Church New Automobile-Oriented Retail New Mixed-Use Buildings w/ Office or Residential above Retail Revitalized Ventura Street Relocated Historic Armenian Homes New Hotel Existing Mixed-use with Affordable Housing and Retail New Cosmopolitan Restaurant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 6 9 11 9 N 10 11 10 12 12 13 13 3:22 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS As part of the preparation of this Specific Plan, a series of market and economic analyses were prepared to provide a solid foundation upon which to build a development program and public investment strat- egy for the FCSP Area. These included a regional demographic and economic analysis; a market analysis for housing, office, and retail/ entertainment uses; case studies of retail/entertainment districts; and a financial feasibility analysis. The principal findings of these work are summarized below. A. REGIONAL ECONOMIC CONTEXT Fresno County and the central San Joaquin Valley region – that is, Fresno, Madera, Tulare, and Kings Counties – are growing econo- mies. The region added approximately 120,000 jobs from 1990 to 2009, and Fresno County received approximately half of that job growth. The regional economy continues to shift from a resource-based to a service-based economy. Much of the economic growth in Fresno County has occurred in resident-serving sectors, while the agricul- ture-related industries experienced a significant decline. In addition to larger national and structural trends, these changes have been fueled in large part by the region’s expanding population, the conver- sion of agricultural land to housing development, and more efficient, less labor-intensive farming techniques. Downtown Fresno is the largest job center in the region, holding over 30,000 jobs, or approximately 14 percent of the total jobs in the Fresno/Clovis metropolitan area. B. HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Most development in Fresno in recent decades has consisted of detached single-family homes, predominantly in Fresno’s northern areas. During the housing boom, the market’s delivery of higher density units was limited to a small number of rental projects. As the Market Analysis shows, there is market demand for approxi- mately 4,000 to 7,000 units in the Specific Plan Area from 2016 to 2035, although this number could potentially increase if Downtown’s revitalization is successful. This is equivalent to an average annual absorption of 150 to 250 units. Though there has been recent development of multi-family units Downtown, nearly every residential project in Downtown has received some form of subsidy from local government sources. The bulk of recent development activity in the Plan Area has been con- centrated in the Mural District. The market for higher density buildings will take time. There are sig- nificant financial feasibility challenges to building housing in the Plan Area, due to the continued popularity and affordability of suburban detached single-family housing compared to higher cost multi-family units. C. OFFICE MARKET ANALYSIS The Plan Area continues to be an attractive location for government offices, legal firms, advertising agencies, other professional firms, and medical offices. Downtown Fresno features a stable base of employment due to its concentration of Municipal, State and Federal government office buildings. However, the Plan Area must increas- ingly compete with North Fresno and office parks for new office ten- ants and development. The Plan Area’s office market faces challenges including persistent high vacancy rates in its older and historic structures, perceptions of Downtown being unsafe, difficult access by car, a lack of amenities, a location distant from residential areas, and a perceived lack of parking. The vacancy rate for the designated historic office buildings along Fulton Street is estimated at over 70 percent. The reuse of these buildings is challenging due to limited auto access, the cost of renovation, and lack of maintenance. The Plan Area can potentially capture demand for between 2.5 mil- lion and 3.9 million square feet of new office space between 2016 and 2035, net absorption of new and vacant spaces. The ability of the Plan Area to be able to attract private development will depend on a host of factors such as the availability of amenities to support office workers, the successful rehabilitation and reuse of existing vacant office buildings, and the improvement of circulation and access throughout the Plan Area. With the reopening of Fulton Street to vehicular traffic, some of the aforementioned barriers have already started to be removed. There is strong potential in attracting “creative” businesses. These firms are often small and entrepreneurial, seek inexpensive space, and prefer the kinds of unique or raw interiors that can be pro- vided within rehabilitated older buildings. The success or Bitwise The historic Hotel Fresno currently sits across from a recently built office building that is leased to the Federal government. The proposed High-Speed Rail station will be a significant amenity for Downtown Fresno and the greater region. 3.3 DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY 3:23FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 3: PLAN FRAMEWORK AND GOALS Industries has shown that Downtown has tremendous potential to develop a strong technology sector. D. REGIONAL RETAIL/ENTERTAINMENT USES The Plan Area has the potential to become a regional retail and entertainment destination. Given the addition of new housing and office space in the Plan Area, as well as the considerable growth in population projected in the greater 45-minute drive time market area, there is an opportunity for the Plan Area to leverage its existing assets to draw more retail and entertainment uses. The Plan Area has the potential for the development of between 1.3 million and 1.6 million square feet of new retail and entertainment space in the next 25 years. The types of supportable retail that will help Downtown include food stores, eating and drinking places, general merchandise, and other retail. Regional retail entertainment development should be focused near existing anchors and attractors such as Chukchansi Park, Club One Casino, the proposed HSR sta- tion, the former Fulton Mall, and the Plan Area’s historic theaters. While Downtown must compete with other town centers, such as River Park, The Marketplace at El Paseo, Campus Pointe, and Fancher Creek, it is replete with historic, entertainment, and urban attributes that these other places do not have. E. ROLE OF HIGH-SPEED RAIL ON DEVELOPMENT The proposed HSR station offers an opportunity for higher-density, pedestrian-oriented development projects to be focused in the Plan Area. In addition to the train station, there have also been discus- sions about locating a maintenance facility for the rail cars within Fresno south of the Plan Area. The facility would create new jobs in Fresno, and create some ripple effects to suppliers of materials in the City and the central San Joaquin Valley region. The ability of the Plan Area to capitalize on the economic activity will largely depend on the proximity of the facility’s location to existing employment nodes, and the economic benefits to suppliers of locating near the facility. F. SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Table 3.3A summarizes the demand-based development program for the Specific Plan Area based on the market analysis. TABLE 3.3A - Market Demand in Specific Plan Area Through 20351 Land Use Development Potential Low High New Housing Units (units)4,060 6,960 New Housing Units (s.f.)4.9 million 8.4 million Office (gross s.f.) 2.5 million 3.9 million Regional Retail and Entertainment (s.f.)1.3 million 1.6 million Total Residential and Commercial (s.f.)8.7 million 13.9 million 1 Strategic Economics, “Market Analysis Report: Fulton Corridor Specific Plan,” April 25, 2011. The documented presence of a market for new housing, office, and retail and entertainment space is a point of departure for the revital- ization of Downtown Fresno. The numbers suggest that Downtown can grow substantially by taking advantage of its location, its urban character, and its many commercial, civic, and institutional assets. This projected demand for housing, office, and retail and entertain- ment space exists despite the currentpast state of disinvestment in Downtown and the development community’s preference in recentpast years for suburban sites. However, to achieve the desired results as quickly and efficiently as possible, efforts must be madethe City must continue to focus all possible investment towards Downtown and to be consistent in implementing this Plan’s development strategy for many years. A vacant, lifeless Downtown streetscape is pedestrian unfriendly and discourages commerce.Policies of the mid 20th century resulted in streetscapes that were lifeless, unfriendly to pedestrians, and which discouraged commerce. This view looking south on Fulton Street towards the former Fulton Mall. 6:3FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 6: BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT 6. Intensify the presence of government tenants within the Plan Area. Government services anchor the office market Downtown. Not only do government tenants occupy large privately- and publicly-owned buildings, but they also attract a base of related businesses such as law firms. Ongoing retention and attraction of government facilities provides a base of employment that contributes to the Plan Area’s office market. 7. Coordinate public and private interests to stimulate revitalization. Public investments in infrastructure reduce costs and uncertainty for individual projects, allowing private developers to operate at the volume and speed necessary to revitalize the Plan Area. Direct City financial assistance for private projects is unsustainable as a blanket strategy and shall only be provided as resources are available and in limited, specific, strategic ways to implement the vision of this Specific Plan. The policy direction set forth in this Plan involves many City departments, and the issues are often complex and multidisciplinary in nature. Public and private projects should be judged from each department’s perspective, but with the end goal of revitalization foremost in mind. 8. Coordinate public support of private sector efforts. Consistent with the vision and policies of this Plan, the City shall encourage businesses, government agencies, investors, and event promoters to locate and operate within the Plan Area as the most ideal place in the city and region for new investment and economic activity. The City shall, whenever possible, support privately and publicly- led efforts to attract the public from throughout the central San Joaquin Valley to patronize Downtown Fresno, and the Plan Area in particular, as the most important and ideal center for activity in the region. 9. Expand retail opportunities in the Plan Area for both residents and visitors. Fresno, like most U.S. cities experienced a severe decline in its Downtown over the past 50 years. As middle and upper income people moved out of urban neighborhoods, so too did retailers, who followed many of their customers to suburban developments far from Downtown. While it makes economic sense that retail development focuses on growth areas, this trend has left many Downtowns with little or no retail options for their remaining residents. Utilizing a variety of economic development strategies, including infrastructure improvements, streetscape improvements, and transportation improvements, this Plan seeks to bring more investment and more people back to Downtown. As more people come, retail development will follow. However, this growth will take time. Accordingly, the City will need to take an active role in attracting retail development to Downtown, especially in the short term. These strategies include: • Targeting and recruiting types of retailers that have been identified for growth such as food stores, eating and drinking places, general merchandise, and other retail; and • In order to ensure a critical mass of activity, which is essential to retail success, focusing major retail, dining, and entertainment uses in the Fulton District and in other limited areas with established retail or strong potential for such uses, as shown in Figure 6.2A (Retail Priority Streets). Figure 6.2A - Retail Priority Streets. KEY Retail Priority A. The ground floor of buildings should consist only of retail, dining, and entertainment uses. Retail Priority B. The ground floor of buildings may consist of retail, dining, and entertainment uses, as well as office and residential uses. Retail Priority C. The ground floor of buildings should consist primarily of office and residential uses, although small neighborhood-serving retail and dining uses may be allowed at corners. 6:8 CHAPTER 6: BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT private development projects in order to stimulate revitalization. Goal 6-9 Require high-quality building design. Policies 6-9-1 Permit new buildings with contemporary and innovative architectural designs, provided they utilize high-quality materials and contribute to a walkable attractive, urban enviornment. 6-9-2 Require new buildings or modifications to existing buildings to utilize a combination of materials and finishes which articulate a high quality appearance. Acceptable finishes and materials include stucco, brick, stone, corrugated metal, finished metal, concrete, and glass. Unacceptable materials include siding made of any unsustainable materials such as plywood or particle board (i.e., T-111). In addition, materials that unintentionally discolor due to weathering or corrosion are discouraged. Materials that discolor naturally, such as copper, are encouraged. 6-9-3 Require building renovations or alterations to use exterior building materials that are consistent with the building’s original design and construction. Prohibit “stucco wraps” of buildings originally designed with wood siding or shingles. 6-9-4 Require that all new buildings, additions, and renovations be compatible with surrounding buildings, maintain a similar scale, relate to Fresno’s historical and cultural context, and respond to Fresno’s climate through their massing, orientation, and use of building frontages (porches, arcades, etc.) and architectural elements (canopies, awnings, trellises, overhangs, etc.). 6-9-5 Promote infill development that is compatible with and complementary to existing older buildings, particularly those listed on the Local, State, and National registers. (FLSP Implementation Action 1-1-4) 6-9-6 Require building massing comprised of simple, well- proportioned volumes. 6-9-7 Avoid placeless, franchise or ‘formula’ architecture and signs that are not rooted in Fresno’s culture and traditions. 6-9-8 Screen service areas, storage areas, mechanical equipment, or garbage areas from public view from the street or pedestrian ways. 6-9-9 Require fence and wall design to be consistent with the architecture of the building. Avoid fencing that, through design or use of materials, promotes a “fortress” environment (barbed wire, wrought iron pickets with sharpened spears at top, electric fencing, blank concrete masonry unit walls, etc.). 6-9-10 Introduce new buildings that employ passive cooling and heating strategies, including frontage types (porches and arcades), architectural elements (overhangs, awnings, shutters, louvers, canopies, and trellises), and strategically-placed shade trees to minimize or increase solar heat gain according to the season. 6-9-11 When considering providing funding, letters of support for grant applications, other assistance to projects, give priority to projects with high quality workmanship, materials, articulation, and amenities. Goal 6-10 Generate high quality, pedestrian-oriented public space in Downtown. Policies 6-10-1 Require buildings to face and be accessed from the street and be pedestrian-scaled. 6-10-2 Encourage sidewalk cafes, small shops, and other pedestrian-oriented uses through a standardized permitting process. (FLSP Implementation Action 2-1-3, modified 2011) 6.3 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK (Continued) Theaters and playhouses of all sorts provide one of many forms of entertainment Downtown, visible by pedestrians, bicyclists, and automobiles passing by. A roof-top restaurant and bar encourages activity both day and night. 7:2 CHAPTER 7: HISTORIC PRESERVATION 7.1 INTRODUCTION (Continued) Hobbs-Parson Building (1903). The following terms are used in this chapter to describe proper- ties that may warrant consideration for their historic significance. The definitions are intended to be specific for this Specific Plan and may deviate from concepts that have been codified in stan- dards and guidelines developed by the National Park Service, the Department of the Interior, and professional practitioners, including historians, architects, archeologists, and urban plan- ners. Significant Resource means a resource that is one of the following: 1. Listed in the California Register of Historical Resources; 2. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places; 3. Determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources by the State Historical Resources Commission; 4. A Historic Resource as defined in Section 12-1603(o) of the Historic Preservation Ordinance (HPO), or a local historic district as defined in Section 12-1603(s)of the HPO, or a contributor to a local historic district, unless the resource has been found not to be historically or culturally significant by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant to Section 10(b)(2)(iv) of the Historic Environmental Review Ordinance (HERO), if/when it is adopted by the City Council; 5. Identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the resource has been found not to be historically or culturally significant by a preponderance of the evidence pursuant to Section 10(b)(2)(iv) of the HERO (if/when it is adopted by the City Council; or, 6. A Potential Significant Resource that, after fur- ther analysis and review, the City has determined should be treated as a Historically Significant Resource pursuant to the procedures in Section 9(b)(3) of the HERO (if/when it is adopted by the City Council. Potential Significant Resource means a resource that does not fall within the definition of Significant Resource but meets any or all of the following requirements: 1. It was identified as eligible or potentially eligible for listing in a national, state or local register of historical resources or it was identified as a potential contributor to a potential significant district in a survey that the city formally com- missioned or was officially accepted or officially adopted by the Council or the HPC, but the survey does not meet one or more of the require- ments of subsection (g) of Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code. 2. It is at least 45 years old; or 3. As determined by the Historic Preservation Project Manager, it meets the criteria for listing to the California Register of Historical Resources under subsection (j) of Section 5020.1 or Section 5024.1 of the Public Resources Code. Notwithstanding the above, a resource shall not be a Potential Significant Resource if within five years prior to submittal of the application for the Project under review: (i) the city in an adopted CEQA finding, determined that the resource was not historically significant for purposes of CEQA or (ii) the Council or the HPC accepted or offi- cially approved a survey that found the resource was not eligible for listing to a national, state or local register. Significant District is a type of Significant Resource that is a finite group of resources related to one another in a clearly distinguishable way or any geographically defin- able area which possesses a significant concentration, linkage or continuity of sites, buildings, structures or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. Potential Significant District is a type of Potential Significant Resource that if found to be a Significant Resource would be a Significant District. Historic Character refers to the general form, appear- ance, and impression of a neighborhood or area estab- lished by extant development from the past. The term is used generally to recognize development patterns from Fresno’s past and is not meant to imply officially recog- nized historic significance. “Historic-era Building, “Historic-era Resource” is used as a generic term to refer to a building or resource which was constructed in an earlier period in the City of Fresno (as described in sub-sections A though I) but which is not necessarily a “Significant Resource.” Local Historic Resource means, unless otherwise specifi- cally indicated, a resource on Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources pursuant to Fresno Municipal Code 12-1603(o). Nothing in this Specific Plan is intended to identify or designate any significant resources, potential significant resources, signifi- cant districts or potential significant districts. Identification and designation of resources and districts shall be done consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and State and Federal law. 8:7FRESNO FULTON CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN, CITY OF FRESNO, CALIFORNIA | PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER 7, 2016 CHAPTER 8: PUBLIC REALM G H EF A M P O C 99 R 180TULAREFRESNOBELMONTVAN NESS41VENTURAFIRSTFIFTHUQ BKERN EIGHTHLIOWASIXTH EAST-S PLATTORANGEKEARNEYT TUOLUMNEBUTLERCHINASTANISLAUSINYOFULTON MODOCPLUMASILLINOISN CALIFORNIATRINITYABBYALTAFRONTAGEIVYPARKAMADORSANTA FE BROADWAY MCKENZIEEFFIELE ENIELSEN HUNTINGTONFRUITMONOCALAVERASHAZELWOODTEILMANCLARKMAYOR GEARYPOTTLEDIANA HAMILTONFOURTHGOLDEN S T A T EKERCKHOFFPARALLELGLENN WHITES BRIDGE KLETTE ELMTOPEKA THORNEEDENEL MONTEDUNNPOPLARPALMNEVADABALCH/MONOFRANKLINLOWEFAGAN A/B MYERSSTROTHERSAN PABLOOLEANDERROSEMARIPOSAMONO/VENTURAVALERIAGEARHARTPOPPYBLACKSTONENAPAIRWIN NINTHMARYVERRUEWHITEFLORENCEWATERMAN JONESANGUS MONTECITOCOLLEGEABBY/EFFIEBRALYANNAPEARLEUNICEATCHISONDELNOCALLISCHRAILROAD ONEILDIANA/EFFIEHOLLYWAYTEDWIGHTSARAHHEATONBALCH/HUNTINGTONALTA/LOWEGRANTCHERRYHAWE S WALNUTVALENCIALORENAPACIFICFERGERLOS ANGELESORLEANSTHESTASTEPHENSLYELLCLARK/DIANASAN BENITO MARTIN MAUDHUNTINGTON/KERCKHOFFKERCKHOFF/PLATTAIRPORTYOSEMITESECONDWEBER D LOTUSTOWNSENDLIBERTY/LOWEFAIRVIEWB/CECHO RAISINACHANDLER GENEVAMADISONBALCHPARKWAYROOSEVELT PLATT/VERRUEREV CHESTER RIGGINSLILYPLATT/TULAREFRESNO/UCHURCHGLENN/SAN PABLOPICKFORDSEVENTHLIBERTY/LYELLPOPLAR/SAN PABLOMERCEDLIBERTYEL DORADO COLLINS GILBERTPR I V A T EARTHUR HUMBOLDTMADDY CLARAWOODWARDTUPMANCHANNIN G CAPITOL99/C THIRDFULTON/VAN NESSLEMONWASHINGTONBLACKSTONE/CALAVERASORCHARDARROYOCOLLEGE/VAN NESSLYMANHEATON/ORLEANSCOBB NICHOLASSANTA CLARAMARIPOSA/UCLARK/VALERIADIVISADEROHOME R U N SNOWDONAHOOTHESTA/VALERIAHAMILTON/ORLEANSDURANTHEATON/TOWNSENDWESLEYGRANT/MADISONSACRAMENTOILLINOIS/IOWACALAVERAS/GLENNKIRKFERGER/PALMMARTIN LUTHER KING JRBRALY/HAMILTONHERWALDTLANEFULTON/YOSEMITEVOORMANKASHIANGRANT/WASHINGTONWELLERBRALY/WOODWARDILLINOIS/NEVADABONDMONTEREYBELMONT/WHITEHOWARDBARDELLMCKENZIE/WASHINGTONMCKENZIE/NEVADASAN JOAQUIN41/ORCHARDIOWA/TULAREFISHERDIAMONDBROADWAY/YOSEMITEMILDREDAFARRISTULIPCOLLEGE/PARKEIGHTH/ORANGEMAINALTA/MONTECITOMILLBROOKWILSONAUGUSTAGRACEBUTLER/TOWNSENDKLONDIKEBELMONT/MADISONECHO/ROOSEVELTFRESNO/HOWARDSMITHEL MONTE/MONTECITOANGUS/DIAMONDSPALDINGDIAMOND/MARIPOSATHORNE- FAGAN LOTUS SECONDLORENAO SAN JOAQUIN 41 PLUMASSANTA CLARACHANDLERSAN JOAQUINNEVADAMILDREDAECHOMONTEREY41 FRUIT41LYELL41/ORCHARDMARIPOSAGRANT/MADISONCHINA ANNASECONDPRIVA T EGLENN LORENAFLORENCEMYERSMERCED41 ATCHISONALTALORENAFRONTAGEPEARL-FLORENCEWASHINGTONSARAHORCHARDDELNOORLEANSWOODWARDVOORMANBELMONT/WHITEWOODWARDFOURTHHAMILTONTEILMANPARALLELLIBERTY/LYELLLORENAPRIVATELOS ANGELESBARDELLC CALIFORNIAMARIPOSALFRANKLINGRANT WOODWARDNINTHCALIFORNIADIANAMARIPOSAVOORMANBALCHSEVENTHGRANTCLARAFIFTHMILDREDANINTHCHERRYMONOSECONDINYOPRIVATEPRIVATECHANNINGGEARYFRONTAGEEL MONTEFERGERSAN BENITOLORENALOWEFLORENCEILLINOISLIBERTY/LOWEEL DORADOEL DORADO N PRIVATECALIFORNIACHANNINGFLORENCEVOORMAN180MCKENZIE 180LORENAARTHURBRALYPRIVATELILYMERCEDLORENA99 CALIFORNIAFRONTAGE41/ORCHARDCLARKBELMONT/WHITENAPAN WELLERFOURTHNEVADAFAGANDIVISADERO GRANTSEVENTHF L MARIPOSAPRIVATESAN BENITOATCHISON-COLLEGEEL DORADOTEILMANMERCEDPPRIVATE YOSEMITEBROADWAY HEATONCHERRYLEMONF WEBER PRIVATE PARALLELINYOLORENAGOLDEN S T A T E WOODWARDL ILLINOISDURANTLORENAFULTON/VAN N E S S VALENCIABRALYFIFTHFLORENCEMONOMARIPOSAMADISONEIGHTHKERNNINTHCHERRYFIFTHDELNOTOWNSENDMONOHAWESSAN JOAQUINDIVISADEROECHOANNADIAMONDATCHISONTOWNSENDFULTON SAN BENITOKERCKHOFF/PLATTARTHURFOURTHFRUITE CHANNINGAMADORTHIRDTHIRDMONOFRANKLINPLUMASINYOMARIPOSAFLORENCEFRANKLINNINTHARTHURB-MONOGRANTATCHISONCOLLINS BROADWAY CALAVERASLORENAEDENWHITEROOSEVELTFULTON LIBERTYSANTA CLARAlegendFulton Corridor Specific Plan BdrySpecific Plan Aerial´05001,0001,5002,000250FeetCity of Fresno, CaliforniaFulton Corridor Specific Plan andDowntown Neighborhoods Community Plan17 August, 2010 4. Courthouse Park, owned by the County of Fresno, is the largest green space within Downtown. Dedicated as open space during the late 1800’s, Courthouse Park is the location of the County Courthouse and other County facilities. However, there are bar- riers along its edges that inhibit accessibility and views into the park. For example, access to Courthouse Park is hindered by the bus stop lanes along Van Ness Avenue and Fresno Street, as well as by the parking ramps that lead to and from the underground parking structure beneath the RadissonDoubleTree Hotel. These barriers could be removed in order to open up the park to sur- rounding streets, sidewalks, and buildings and create a more inviting environment for Downtown residents, workers, and visitors as shown in Figure 8.3D (Courthouse Park). Potential transformations, all of which must be pursued in coordination with the County of Fresno, include: • Reconfiguring the Downtown Transit Center in order to improve visibility into Courthouse Park and enhance pedes- trian connectivity; • In conjunction, with the opening of HSR service, relocate the transit center to G Street near the proposed HSR sta- tion. • Introducing a street level crossing at Van Ness Avenue and Mariposa Street that includes dual, high-visibility crosswalks, instead of requiring the use of the existing pedestrian underpass; • Adjust the garage ramp entry at the corner of Van Ness Avenue and Tulare Street so it is accessible only from Van Ness Avenue, removing the drive lane that provide access from Tulare Street; • Replacing the parking lots along Fresno and Tulare Streets with on-street parking; • Introducing continuous sidewalks and street trees around Courthouse Park’s entire perimeter including along the entire length of Van Ness Avenue; • Updating Courthouse Park’s landscape and hardscape by introducing enhanced paving, native landscapes, and pro- viding filtered shade via landscape or architectural trellises/ canopie;; and • Providing pedestrian lighting that continues along the Mariposa Street axis from M Street to Van Ness Avenue. The vehicular lanes that provide access to the parking garage beneath the Holiday Inn hotel along Van Ness Avenue hamper pedestrian access to Courthouse Park. Existing conditions. Proposed reconfiguration. Figure 8.3D - Courthouse Park. 7 6 4 4 44 5 6 6 8 9 Key Transit Center Existing Subterranean Garage Entry/Exit Existing Parking Lot New Sidewalk and Street Trees Reconfigured Corner New Landscape and Hardscape Mariposa Street New Van Ness Avenue Pedestrian Surface Crossing Removed pedestrian underpass (long- term) 1 4 3 1 3 22 2 2 33 5 7 8 9 6NN1 2 M StreetFresno StreetTulare StreetVan Ness Ave. M Street Fresno StreetTulare StreetVan Ness Ave. 8:28 CHAPTER 8: PUBLIC REALM This signage employs a simple design that is free of sign clutter, is easy to read, contributes to Downtown’s overall identity, and is designed for the first-time user. a.Mural placement and content shall be at the discretion of the artists and the building owner. b.Mural placement, design, and content should be mindful of surrounding businesses and residents. Murals are prohibited from includ- ing off-site advertising or product placement. c.A written contract between all parties involved, i.e. artist, building owner or leaser, and the funder if appropriate is highly recommended. The contract should, at the very least: •Designate the lifetime of the mural to be left undisturbed, after which the mural can be painted over; and •State who will maintain the mural if the work is damaged or needs touch-up. d.In order to ensure a long life for the mural, it is recommended that the wall surface be properly prepared prior to mural application and that durable paints be used. 8-12-3 Explore funding mechanisms to support cultural facilities and programs, including the placement of public art. Fresno’s many landmark buildings can help orient people as well as serve as gateways between Downtown’s various subareas. Public art, like this sculpture along the Fulton Corridor, is an integral part of Fresno’s tradition. Credit: Joe Moore 8.4 STREETSCAPE ENHANCEMENTS (continued) 8-11-7 Introduce over-street banner poles mid-block on: •Fresno Street between Van Ness Avenue and H Street; •Tulare Street between Van Ness Avenue and H Street; •Fulton Street between Ventura Avenue and Stanislaus Street; and •Van Ness Avenue between Ventura Avenue and Stanislaus Street. 8-11-8 Introduce signage or public art on the railroad trestle that crosses over Fresno Street in order to signal to motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians that they are entering Downtown. 8-11-9 Design all wayfinding signage to comply with ADA requirements. Goal 8-12 Weave art and culture into the fabric of Downtown everyday life by nurturing creative and artistic expression in the public realm. Policies 8-12-1 Support cultural facilities and programs, including the placement of public art. 8-12-2 Allow the installation of murals on Downtown’s buildings, particularly within the Mural District. Mural installations should take into account the following: Fulton District DowntownStadium Mapiposa Plaza Cultural Arts District Downtown Stadium Mapiposa Plaza Cultural Arts District Cultural ArtsDistrict DowntownStadium FultonDistrict DowntownStadium Fulton District Kern Plaza Mariposa Plaza Fulton District DowntownStadium Errata #1 9:20 CHAPTER 9: TRANSPORTATION City of Fresno, California Fulton Corridor Specific Plan 27 September, 2010 E. Kings Canyon Blvd E. Huntington Blvd E. Tulare Avenue Divisadero Mono StreetVentura StreetSanta Clara StreetV a n N e s s A v e n u e F u l t o n S t r e e t B r o a d w a y H S t r e e t P S t r e e t Q S t r e e t S a n t a F e A v e n u e R S t r e e t M S t r e e t O S t r e e t L S t r e e t HW Y 9 9 HWY 41G S t r e e t F S t r e e t E S t r e e tFresno StreetMerced StreetTulare StreetKern StreetInyo StreetMariposa StreetToulumne StreetStanislaus StreetCalaveras StreetSan Joaquin StreetAmador StreetEl Dorado StreetFresno StreetU StreetMariposa StreetBlackstone AvenueAbby StreetEffie StreetDiana StreetClark StreetCalaveras StreetVan Ness AvenueCollege AvenuePark AvenuePoplar AvenueSan Pablo AvenueGlenn AvenueBroadwayYosemite AvenueFulton StreetEcho AvenueFigure 9.5A - Proposed Transit Plan Key Amtrak Station Proposed High-Speed Rail Station and Bus Station Amtrak Route Proposed High-Speed Rail Route Intermodal Transit Center Bus Rapid Transit Route N 9.5 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS (Continued) Exhibit D DDC Redline Amendments to Chapter 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code Downtown Development Code PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT OCTOBER, 2016 Downtown and Mixed Use Districts Downtown Core Downtown General Downtown Neighborhood Residential Districts Corridor/Center Mixed Use Neighborhood Mixed Use Downtown General Employment and Public Districts RS-3 Low Density RS-5 Medium Density Apartment House Overlay Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay Open Space Heavy Industrial Light Industrial Public and Institutional Urban Campus Overlay INTRODUCTION TO THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE The Downtown Development Code is a form-based code. Form-based codes create an urban structure of centers, neighborhoods, and corridors and de-emphasize density in favor of standards for building form and streetscapes. Form-based codes recognize that uses may change over time, but the building and its physical environment will endure. In addition, a form-based code provides greater flexibility in the range of land uses that can occur in a building to make buildings sustainable and able to respond to changing economies. Finally, form-based codes recognize the high importance of public spaces in defining and creating a sense of place. In October of 2012 a draft Downtown Development Code was released for public comment. This code was designed to implement the vision articulated by the draft Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, which were released at the same time. Following the public comment period, finalization of the Downtown plans and code were paused in order to allow the General Plan and Citywide Development Code to be completed and adopted first. In the intervening period, the Citywide Development Code evolved into a comprehensive document, creating new zoning districts for every part of the city outside of Downtown and restructuring all terminology, procedures, and standards for land use and development. The Citywide Development Code was adopted on December 3, 2015, and on February 4, 2016 all land in the city, with the exception of Downtown, was rezoned to be consistent with that document. While this resulted in a much better Development Code for Fresno, the fact that the Citywide Development Code and the Draft Downtown Development Code stood apart as two separate documents created some redundancies and conflicts with the Draft Downtown Development Code. The Downtown Development Code has thus been completely reformatted and reorganized to work in harmony with the Citywide Development Code. No longer a separate document, it will now be a part of the comprehensive Citywide Code. The Citywide Code includes provisions for procedures, subdivisions, non- conforming uses, etc. that will apply to the Downtown Planning Area and are not shown here because they Development in Downtown will be dense, urban, and will promote a great pedestrian experience. The character of Downtown neighborhoods will be preserved as high-quality infill projects are introduced. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 Intro-1 are already in effect and will not change. The districts formerly known as CBD 1, CBD 2, Civic Center, Chinatown, Cultural Arts, and South Stadium/South Van Ness have been regrouped and renamed as Downtown Core, Downtown General, and Downtown Neighborhood for ease of use, and their regulations have been restructured and placed into the new Article 15 of the Citywide Development Code. The basic pattern of uses and building form, however, is the same. All other areas covered by the previous version of the Downtown Development Code will be governed by zoning districts which were previously adopted with the Citywide Development Code, such as RS-3, RS-5, NMX, CMX, IL, IH, and PI as shown on the Downtown Development Code Zoning Map. These Citywide Code districts create similar patterns of urbanism that were to be created by districts in the previous version of the Downtown Development Code, and using them reduced a great deal of redundancy and potential confusion. Where an extra level of design controls were needed, overlay districts such as Neighborhood Revitalization and Urban Campus were created to ensure continuity with the vision for specific areas. Additionally, the earlier version of the Downtown Development Code was formatted in 11 x 17 inches, and this document has been reformatted to 8.5 x 11 inches, which matches the Citywide Development Code of which it will now be a part. Finally, all terminology and land use classifications were standardized to match the Citywide Code. Please Note: In the following pages, text in blue italics will not be adopted as part of the code and is not regulatory; it is narrative that is intended to orient the reader and explain how sections of this document will be added to Chapter 15 of the Municipal Code. When an entirely new article or section is being added, all text is black for greater readability. When an existing section is being modified, all changes are in red, with insertions being underlined and deletions being struck through. To get a complete understanding of how these new regulations fit into the broader regulatory framework, view the Citywide Development Code at www.fresno.gov/code. Under the guidance of the Urban Campus overlay district, Community Regional Medical Center can expand in a way that is complimentary to surrounding urban and residential areas. Many major streets in the Downtown neighborhoods will be gradually transformed into walkable, mixed use corridors. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 Intro-2 Article 3 Rules of Measurement Section 15-317 already exists within the Citywide Development Code for the purpose of determining frontage coverage. It is being revised for clarity. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. No changes were proposed to this Article in the July 27 Public Review Draft. All changes shown are new and therefore are highlighted in yellow. 15-317 Determining Frontage Coverage Frontage coverage is the portion of the primary enclosed ground floor linear building façade that is located within the area between the minimum and maximum front setback. The following exceptions shall apply: A. Sites with frontage on multiple streets may not be required to meet the frontage coverage requirement along the streets with the lowest functional classification or the least visual prominence, at the discretion of the Review Authority, except in districts in which a minimum frontage coverage for the side street is specified. B. Required side and rear setbacks and residential transition setbacks shall be excluded from this calculation. C. Public plazas, parks, pedestrian passages, alleys, and cross streets (public or private) shall be excluded from this calculation. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 1 Article 15 Downtown Districts When the Citywide Development Code was adopted in December of 2015, Article 15 was reserved for future use, site design, and façade design standards for the Downtown Districts. All of the following content is new and will be added to the Citywide Development Code to regulate the DTN, DTG, and DTC districts, which are all located within the area bounded by Divisidero, Highway 41, and Highway 99. All other areas covered by the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan will be governed by Base Districts which were previously adopted with the Citywide Development Code, such as RS-3, RS-5, NMX, CMX, IL, IH, and PI as shown on the Downtown Development Code Zoning Map. Black text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-1501 Purpose A. The purposes of the Downtown (DT) Districts are to: 1. Ensure that buildings, renovations, and additions are consistent with the goals of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DCNP) and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) for pedestrian-oriented streetscapes, building form, physical character, and quality. 2. Promote pedestrian-oriented infill development, intensification, and reuse of land consistent with the General Plan. 3. Develop a mixed-use Downtown with a vibrant concentration of goods and services, housing, community gathering spaces, and regionally-serving employment, cultural, This Code promotes pedestrian-oriented infill development, intensification, and reuse of land. Downtown’s streets will be vibrant, diverse, and attractive places. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 2 and entertainment offerings. 4. Transform Downtown’s streets into vibrant, diverse, and attractive places that support a mix of pedestrian-oriented retail, office, and residential uses in order to achieve an active social environment within a revitalized streetscape. 5. Provide options which reduce the need for private automobile use to access shopping, services, and employment and minimize air pollution from vehicle miles traveled. 6. Offer additional housing opportunities for residents seeking to live in an urban environment. 7. Create a vibrant, unique Downtown that offers different kinds of experiences – business, dining, culture, and entertainment – for workers, residents, and visitors alike. 8. Establish Downtown development and design standards that will create a unified, yet distinctive, and attractive urban character that respects Fresno’s past and serves the city for the long term. 9. Facilitate compact mixed-use development in key locations such as along Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors and near Fresno’s train stations. B. Additional purposes of each Downtown District are as follows: 1. DTN Downtown Neighborhood. The DTN District will create lively, walkable, mixed-use urban neighborhoods surrounding the Downtown Core. 2. DTG Downtown General. The DTG District will support a high concentration of regional activity generators such as governmental buildings and convention centers within a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use urban setting. 3. DTC Downtown Core. The DTC District will foster the enhancement of Fresno’s business, shopping, and cultural heart by guiding the development of the densest, most active, and most interesting mixed-use urban center in the region. C. Activity Classifications. Some standards, as specified in this article, shall apply based on the Activity Class B and C streets may feature ground floor residential units with stoops and porches, or storefront offices. On B streets ground floor retail is also allowed. Activity Class A streets feature ground floor retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 3 Activity Classification of the adjacent street, as shown in Figure 15-1501. The purposes of the Activity Classifications are as follows: 1. Activity Class A. Streets in Activity Class A have the greatest pedestrian activity or the greatest potential for pedestrian activity. Ground floor retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses are required as put forth in Table 15-1502. 2. Activity Class B. Streets in Activity Class B are walkable urban corridors with moderate pedestrian activity. As put forth in Table 15-1502, retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses are appropriate in these areas, but ground floor residential or office uses are also appropriate. 3. Activity Class C. Streets in Activity Class C are walkable and comfortable for pedestrians, but are not the most active streets within Downtown. Ground floor residential or office uses are appropriate, but retail uses should be small and restricted to corners as put forth in Table 15-1502. 4. Corners. When a project is located at the intersection of two streets with different FIGURE 15-1501 ACTIVITY CLASSIFICATIONS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 4 Activity Classifications, the requirements of the higher activity class shall wrap the corner and prevail over the lower order classification for a distance determined by the Review Authority. 15-1502 Use Regulations A. Table 15-1502 prescribes the proposed land use regulations for Downtown Districts. The regulations for the districts are established by letter designations listed below. These designations apply strictly to the permissibility of land uses; applications for buildings or structures may require discretionary review. “P” designates permitted uses. “C” designates uses that are permitted after review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. “(#)” numbers in parentheses refer to specific limitations listed at the end of the table. “‒” designates uses that are not permitted. B. Land uses are defined in Article 67, Use Classifications. C. In cases where a specific land use or activity is not defined, the Director shall assign the land use or activity to a classification that is substantially similar in character per Section 15-5020, Director’s Classification. D. All permitted uses are allowed either alone or in combination with other permitted uses unless otherwise stated in this Code. E. Use classifications and subclassifications not listed in the table or not found to be substantially similar to the uses below are not permitted. F. The table also notes additional regulations that apply to various uses. Section numbers in the right hand column refer to other sections of this Code. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 5 TABLE 15-1502: USE REGULATIONS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations Activity Class A B C A B C A B C See Figure 15-1501 for Activity Classifications Map Use Classification Residential Use Classifications Residential Housing Types Single-Unit Dwelling, Attached ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ ‒ ‒ Second Dwelling Unit ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2754, Second Dwelling Units, Backyard Cottages, and Accessory Living Quarters Duplex ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ P P Multi-Unit Residential P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Adult Family Day Care Small (6 clients or less) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Large (7 to 12 clients) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Caretaker Residence P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Domestic Violence Residence P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Elderly and Long-Term Care P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Family Day Care Small (8 children or less) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2725, Day Care Centers and Family Child Care Homes Large (9 to 14 children) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Group Residential Small (6 persons or less) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Large (7 persons or more) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Re-Entry Facility P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Residential Care Facilities Residential Care, General P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Residential Care, Limited P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Residential Care, Senior P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Single Room Occupancy P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2756, Single Room Occupancy Hotels and Boarding Homes Public and Semi-Public Use Classifications Colleges and Trade Schools, Public or Private P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Community and Religious Assembly (less than 2,000 square feet) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2719, Community and Religious Assembly Facilities Community and Religious Assembly (2,000 square feet or more) P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Community Garden P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2720, Community Gardens / Urban Farms DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 6 TABLE 15-1502: USE REGULATIONS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations Activity Class A B C A B C A B C See Figure 15-1501 for Activity Classifications Map Use Classification Conference/Convention Facility P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Cultural Institutions P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Day Care Centers P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2725, Day Care Centers and Family Child Care Homes Emergency Shelter P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2729, Emergency Shelters Government Offices P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Hospitals and Clinics Hospital ‒ C C ‒ C C ‒ C C Clinic P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Instructional Services P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Park and Recreation Facilities, Public P P P P P P P P P Parking, Public or Private P P P P P P P P P §15-1504-G, Parking Buffering; §15-1504-H, Parking Access and Entrance Design Public Safety Facilities ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ P P Schools, Public or Private P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Social Service Facilities ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ P P Commercial Use Classifications Adult-Oriented Business ‒ C C ‒ C C ‒ C C §15-2705, Adult-Oriented Businesses; §9-2001, Picture and Live Arcades Animal Care, Sales and Services Grooming and Pet Stores P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) Veterinary Services P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Artist’s Studio P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Automobile/Vehicle Sales and Services Automobile Rentals ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2709, Automobile and Motorcycle Sales and Leasing Automobile/Vehicle Sales and Leasing ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ Automobile/Vehicle Service and Repair, Minor ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2710, Automobile/Vehicle Service and Repair, Major and Minor Service Station ‒ C(5) C(5) ‒ C(5) C(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2755, Service Stations Banks and Financial Institutions DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 7 TABLE 15-1502: USE REGULATIONS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations Activity Class A B C A B C A B C See Figure 15-1501 for Activity Classifications Map Use Classification Banks and Credit Unions P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Business Services P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Banquet Hall P P P P P P P P P §15-2712, Banquet Hall Eating and Drinking Establishments Bars/Nightclubs/Lounges P(3) P(3) P(4) P(3) P(3) P(4) P(3) P(3) P(4) §15-2751, Restaurants with Alcohol Sales; Bars, Nightclubs, and Lounges; §15-2744, Outdoor Dining and Patio Areas Restaurant, with Alcohol Sales P(3) P(3) P(4) P(3) P(3) P(4) P(3) P(3) P(4) Restaurant, without Alcohol Sales P(3) P(3) P(4) P(3) P(3) P(4) P(3) P(3) P(4) Entertainment and Recreation Cinema/Theaters P ‒ ‒ P ‒ ‒ P P P Cyber/Internet Café P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) §15-2724, Cyber/Internet Cafés Motorcycle/Riding Club P(5) P(5) P(5) P(5) P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2742, Motorcycle/Riding Clubs Large-Scale ‒ C C ‒ C C ‒ C C §15-2708, Arcades, Video Games, and Family Entertainment Centers Small-Scale P P P(4) P P P(4) P P P(4) §15-2708, Arcades, Video Games, and Family Entertainment Centers; § 9-1801, Billiard Rooms Food and Beverage Sales Farmer’s Markets P P P P P P P P P §15-2730, Farmer’s Markets General Market P P P P P P P P P §15-2744, Outdoor Dining and Patio Areas; §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales Healthy Food Grocer P P P P P P P P P Liquor Stores ‒ C(3) C(3) ‒ C(3) C(3) ‒ C(3) C(3) §15-2706, Alcohol Sales ; §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales Food Preparation ‒ P(1) P(1) ‒ P(1) P(1) ‒ ‒ ‒ Funeral Parlors and Internment Services ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2714, Body Preparation and Funeral Services Live/Work P P P P P P P(1) P P Lodging Bed and Breakfast P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P §15-2714, Bed and Breakfast Lodging Hotels and Motels P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 8 TABLE 15-1502: USE REGULATIONS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations Activity Class A B C A B C A B C See Figure 15-1501 for Activity Classifications Map Use Classification Maintenance and Repair Services P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Offices Business and Professional P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Medical and Dental P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Walk-In Clientele P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Personal Services General Personal Services P P P P P P P P P Fortune Telling Service P P P P P P P P P Massage Establishments P P P P P P P P P Tattoo or Body Modification Parlor P P P P P P P P P §15-2758, Tattoo or Body Modification Parlors Retail Sales Building Materials and Services ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales Convenience Retail P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales; 15-2761 Tobacco and Vapor Sales General Retail P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) §15-2733, Hobby Stores; §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales Large-Format Retail ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ P P P §15-2737, Large-Format Retail; §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales Nurseries and Garden Centers P(7) P(7) P(7) P(7) P(7) P(7) P(7) P(7) P(7) §15-2745, Outdoor Retail Sales Pawn Shops ‒ P ‒ ‒ P ‒ ‒ P P Second Hand / Thrift Stores P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) P(2) P(2) P(4) Swap Meet / Flea Market ‒ P ‒ ‒ P ‒ ‒ P P §15-2730, Flea Markets Industrial Use Classifications Custom Manufacturing P(1) P P P(1) P P P(1) P P Limited Industrial ‒ P(1) (5) P(5) ‒ P(1) (5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ Recycling Facility Reverse Vending Machine ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ P P §15-2750, Recycling Facilities Research and Development ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ Warehousing, Storage, and Distribution Personal Storage ‒ C(5) C(5) ‒ C(5) C(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ §2747, Personal (Mini) Storage DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 9 TABLE 15-1502: USE REGULATIONS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations Activity Class A B C A B C A B C See Figure 15-1501 for Activity Classifications Map Use Classification Transportation, Communication, and Utilities Use Classifications Communication Facilities Antenna and Transmission Towers §15-2759, Telecommunications and Wireless Facilities Facilities within Buildings ‒ C C ‒ C C ‒ C C Light Fleet-Based Services ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ P(5) P(5) ‒ ‒ ‒ Transportation Passenger Terminals P P P P P P P P P Utilities, Major ‒ C C ‒ C C ‒ C C Utilities, Minor ‒ C C ‒ C C ‒ C C Agricultural and Extractive Use Classifications Produce Stand P P P P P P P P P §15-2752, Roadside Fruit Stands / Grower Stands Tasting Room P P P P P P P P P Urban Farm ‒ P P ‒ P P ‒ P P §15-2720, Community Gardens / Urban Farms Other Applicable Types Accessory Uses and Structures §15-2703, Accessory Uses Animal Keeping §15-2707, Animal Keeping Drive-In and Drive-Through Facilities ‒ C(6) C(6) ‒ C(6) C(6) ‒ C(6) C(6) §15-2728, Drive-In and Drive-Through Facilities Home Gardens §15-2734, Home Gardens and Edible Landscaping Home Occupations §15-2735, Home Occupations Nonconforming Use Article 4, Nonconforming Uses, Structures, Site Features, and Lots Temporary Use §15-2760, Temporary Uses Transitional and Supportive Housing §15-2762, Transitional and Supportive Housing Walk-Up Facilities §15-2766, Walk-Up Facilities Specific Limitations: 1. Permitted only on upper floors and rear portions of the ground floor, no closer than 30 feet from a public street, public plaza, or park. Exception: Lobbies may occupy ground floor space adjacent to a public street, public plaza, or park. Lobbies may not occupy more than 25 feet of frontage. 2. Permitted only on ground floor. Prohibited on upper floors. 3. Permitted only on ground floor. Prohibited on upper floors. Exception: Also permitted on uppermost floors of buildings over 4 stories in height. 4. Permitted only on ground floor at intersection of two public streets. May not exceed 2,500 square feet in floor area. 5. Permitted south of Inyo Street only. 6. Not allowed between a building and a sidewalk. 7. Permitted if located entirely within a building. When located outdoors, permitted south of Inyo Street only. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 10 15-1503 Density, Intensity, and Massing Development Standards Table 15-1503 prescribes the density, intensity, and massing development standards for the Downtown Districts. Additional regulations are denoted in a right hand column. Section numbers in this column refer to other sections of the Code, while individual letters refer to subsections that directly follow the table. The numbers in each illustration below correspond to the “#” column in the associated table. Drawings are for illustrative purposes and are not drawn to scale. Storefront glazing and sidewalk-oriented entrances promote pedestrian comfort, convenience, and safety. The Downtown Districts promote an urban massing of buildings that is similar to the area’s early development. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 11 TABLE 15-1503: BUILDING AND PARKING PLACEMENT AND BUILDING MASSING STANDARDS— DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS District DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations # Floor Area Ratio (min./max.) No Limit No Limit No Limit Residential Density, du/ac (min./max.) No Limit No Limit No Limit Setbacks (ft.) Front, Activity Class A (min./max.) 0/2 0/2 0/2 Figure 1504-A: Activity Classifications ① Front, Activity Class B and C (min./max.) 0/10 0/10 (1) 0/10 Interior Side (min.) 0 0 0 §15-313, Determining Setbacks and Yards, §15-1504-E, RS Transition Standards, and §15-1504-G, Parking Buffering ② Street Side (min./max.) 0/10 0/10 (2) 0/10 ③ Rear (min.) 0 0 0 ④ Alley (min.) 0 0 0 Parking Buffering, from back of sidewalk or curb (min.) 30 30 30 ⑤ Front Street Minimum Frontage Coverage (%) 60 75 90 §15-317, Determining Frontage Coverage ⑥ Side Street Minimum Frontage Coverage (%) 50 50 50 §15-317, Determining Frontage Coverage ⑦ Corner Frontage (ft., measured from property corner) 30 50 75 §15-1504-F, Corner Frontage ⑧ Building Size and Massing Maximum Height (floors/ft.) 6/90 10/140 15/190 §15-1504-E , RS Transition Standards and §15-2012, Heights and Height Exceptions ⑨ Max. Tower Height (floors/ft.) n/a 10/140 15/190 Max. Base Height (floors/ft.) 6/90 6/90 6/90 ⑩ Tower Length (ft.) n/a 200 200 ⑪ DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 12 TABLE 15-1503: BUILDING AND PARKING PLACEMENT AND BUILDING MASSING STANDARDS— DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS District DTN DTG DTC Additional Regulations # Tower Width (ft.) n/a 120 120 ⑫ Minimum On-Site Open Space (% of Lot Area) 10 8 5 §15-1504-I, On-Site Open Space Specific Limitations: 1. Front setback along Mariposa Street between M Street and P Street (min./max.): 10/18 ft. 2. Street Side setback along Mariposa Street between M Street and P Street (min./max.): 10/15 ft. 15-1504 Site Design Development Standards A. Active Uses Adjacent to Sidewalks. In order to promote activity on all sidewalks, and to focus the highest activity levels in the most beneficial areas, the following standards shall apply to all ground-floor building space located within 30 feet of a public street: 1. Activity Classifications. Uses shall be Permitted, Conditionally Permitted, or Prohibited based on the adjacent street’s activity classification as identified in Figure 1501 and Table 15-1502. 2. Active to Inactive Space Ratio. Activity Class A. No less than 90 percent of the length of building frontage a. along public streets shall be designed to be occupied by active spaces, such as lobbies, dining areas, living areas, and sales floors. The remaining 10 percent may consist of inactive spaces, such as kitchens, hallways, utility rooms, storage, emergency exits, display cases, etc. Activity Class B and C. No less than 60 percent of the length building frontage b. along public streets shall be designed to be occupied by active spaces, such as lobbies, dining areas, living areas, and sales floors. The remaining 40 percent may consist of inactive spaces, such as kitchens, hallways, utility rooms, storage, emergency exits, display cases, etc. Sites with Multiple Frontages. The street of highest pedestrian importance, c. as determined by the Review Authority, shall comply with subparagraphs a and b above. Other street frontages may provide reduced active spaces as determined by the Review Authority. B. Mixed-Use Configurations. Buildings shall be designed to minimize the potential conflicts between residential and non-residential uses adjacent to one another or within the same building to the satisfaction of the Review Authority. Potential techniques include: 1. Sound attenuation/transmission requirements of the California Building Code; 2. Distinct entries for non-residential and residential suites/units; 3. Ventilation of ground floor uses so as not to disrupt upper floor tenants. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 13 C. Required Minimum Height. 1. Required minimum heights are applicable only in the DTC District as put forth by the following diagram. FIGURE 1504-C: REQUIRED MINIMUM HEIGHTS 2. New structures shall meet both the minimum number of floors and the minimum height in feet. No more than the front 30 feet of lot depth, measured from all streets on which the project has frontage, shall be subject to Required Minimum Height regulations. 3. Existing structures which are remodeled or otherwise modified shall not be required to comply with Required Minimum Height regulations unless the gross floor area is increased by more than 100 percent. 4. Additions to designated historic resources shall not be required to comply with Required Minimum Height regulations. 5. Portions of the building that are not part of the primary building mass, such as entrance porticos, bays and stoops, are not required to meet minimum height requirements. Parking podiums, garages, and accessory buildings are not required to meet minimum height requirements. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 14 D. Special Noise Standards. Within the portion of the DTN District that is south of Inyo Street, the following special noise standards apply. 1. Stationary Noise Standards. This area is exempted from Subsection 15-2605-D. The following maximum noise levels in Table 15-1504-D apply. TABLE 15-1504-D: MAXIMUM NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS FOR SOUTH OF INYO STREET Daytime 7am - 10pm Nighttime 10pm - 7am Maximum Sound Level (Lmax), dBA 70 60 2. Residential Uses. New residential development shall anticipate maximum allowable noise levels and provide noise protection to maintain an interior noise level at 45 Leq, dB or lower. E. RS Transition Standards. Where a DT district abuts an RS District, the following standards apply: 1. Height. The maximum height within 40 feet of an RS District is limited to 30 feet. The maximum height within 100 feet of an RS District is 40 feet. 2. Setbacks. The following additional setback requirements shall be applied to all structures, including accessory structures, on parcels which are adjacent to an RS District: Front and Street Side Yard. The front setback shall not be less than the required a. front yard on the abutting RS District lot within 50 feet of the RS District. Interior Side and Rear. The interior side and rear setback abutting an RS District b. boundary shall be 20 feet. 3. Landsca pe. See Section 15-2305, Areas to be Landscaped. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 15 FIGURE 15-1504-E: RS TRANSITION STANDARDS—DT DISTRICTS F. Corner Frontage. Buildings on corner lots must be located within a minimum of five feet of the back of the sidewalk for the minimum length specified in Table 15-1503. As determined by the Review Authority, plazas maybe located at the street corner provided the plaza meets the requirements of Section 15-1504-I.1.c and buildings are built to the edge of the plaza. FIGURE 15-15 04-F: CORNER FRONTAGE STANDARDS G. Parking Buffering. All parking facilities, whether public or private, shall be buffered as shown on Table 15-1503 based on the adjacent street activity classification as shown in Figure 15-1501 and the physical form of the parking as provided below: DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 16 1. Activity Class A. Surface Parking and Tuck-Under Parking. Surface and tuck-under (one row of a. surface parking with building area over it) parking must be located entirely behind a building space which is occupied by a permitted use or uses, which conforms to all applicable development standards, and which is no less than 30 feet deep. Accessory structures, sheds, parking attendant booths, and other such buildings shall not satisfy this requirement. Above Grade Structured Parking. All above grade levels of the parking structure b. must be located behind active, occupied building space for a depth of no less than 30 feet. Partially Submerged Podium Parking. Parking that is partially below the street c. grade must be located behind active, occupied space for a depth of no less than 30 feet. Underground Parking. Parking that is fully underground and below the street d. grade may extend from lot line to lot line 2. Activity Class B. Surface Parking and Tuck-Under Parking. Surface and tuck-under parking (one a. row of surface parking with building area over it) must be located entirely behind a building space which is occupied by a permitted use or uses, which conforms to all applicable development standards, and which is no less than 30 feet deep. Accessory structures, sheds, parking attendant booths, and other such buildings shall not satisfy this requirement. Above Grade Structured Parking. The ground floor of the parking structure must b. be located behind active, occupied building space for a depth of no less than 30 feet. Upper floors of the parking structure are not required to be located behind non-parking uses or to be set back more than is required by the building setbacks. Partially Submerged Podium Parking. Parking that is partially below the street c. grade shall be buffered in the same manner as above grade structured parking, however it will not be subject to a buffering requirement if the following conditions are met: Buffering all levels of structured parking on Activity Class A and B streets balances parking and placemaking goals. On Activity Class A and B streets, surface parking must be set back from the street and located behind a building. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 17 i. No more than four feet of the partially submerged parking podium may extend above the street grade. ii. The partially submerged parking podium shall be screened along street facing elevations by foundation plant materials. Gates need not be screened. Underground Parking. Parking that is fully underground and below the street d. grade may extend from lot line to lot line 3. Activity Class C. Surface Parking and Tuck-Under Parking. Surface and tuck-under parking (one a. row of surface parking with building area over it) shall be set back no less than 30 feet. For no less than 60 percent of the length the lot frontage along public streets, surface parking must be located behind a building space which is occupied by a permitted use or uses and which conforms to all applicable development standards and which is no less than 30 feet deep. Accessory structures, sheds, parking attendant booths, and other such buildings shall not satisfy this requirement. For the remainder of the lot frontage, the setback may be landscaped, a public plaza, an outdoor dining area, or similar treatment as determined by the Review Authority. Above Grade Structured Parking. The ground floor of the parking structure must b. be located behind active, occupied building space for a depth of no less than 30 feet. Upper floors of the parking structure are not required to be located behind non-parking uses or to be set back more than is required by the building setbacks. Partially Submerged Podium Parking. Parking that is partially below the street c. grade shall be buffered in the same manner as above grade structured parking, however it will not be subject to a buffering requirement if the following On Activity Class C streets, most surface parking must be behind a building, but some may be behind landscaping. On Activity Class C streets, only the ground floor or above grade structured parking must be buffered with active uses. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 18 conditions are met: i. No more than four feet of the partially submerged parking podium may extend above the street grade. ii. The partially submerged parking podium shall be screened along street facing elevations by foundation plant materials. Gates need not be screened. Underground Parking. Parking that is fully underground and below the street d. grade may extend from lot line to lot line 4. Sites with Multiple Frontages. Building frontage along the street(s) of highest pedestrian importance, as determined by the Review Authority, shall comply with applicable subsections 1, 2, and/or 3 above. Along the street of lowest pedestrian importance, frontages may provide reduced buffering if a satisfactory pedestrian environment is maintained, as determined by the Review Authority. H. Parking Access and Entrance Design. The following standards shall apply to vehicular access to off-street parking areas: 1. Access. Lots with Alley Access. Service areas shall be accessed through the alley, and a. access from a street shall not be permitted. For the redevelopment of sites with existing curb cut access from a street, the access shall be taken from the alley and the curb cut on the street shall be removed. Corner Lots without Alley Access. Service areas shall be accessed from the street b. with the lowest Activity Classification per Figure 15-1501. If all adjacent streets have the same Activity Classification, the parking and service areas shall be accessed from the street with the least potential for pedestrian activity as determined by the Review Authority. Interior Lots without Alley Access. Service areas may be accessed from the street. c. 2. Entrance Design. Private parking garage entrance openings shall be composed as an integral part of the building facade and shall be designed as doorways secured by gates or doors and scaled in proportion to the overall form of the building. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 19 I. On-Site Open Space. 1. Minimum Open Space Required. On-site open space shall be required for projects with more than four dwelling units. The minimum amount of on-site open space required shall be based on the size of the lot, as shown in Table 15-1503. This requirement may be met through a combination of private open space, common open space, or public plazas as follows: Private Open Space Requirements. Private open spaces are those which are a. attached to a dwelling unit and are available only for the private use of the residents of the dwelling unit, such as balconies, porches, and patios. No fewer than 50 percent of the dwelling units on a site shall have a private open space. The following standards shall apply to private open space: i. The minimum dimension of any private open space shall be five feet. ii. The minimum area of any private open space shall be 50 square feet. iii. When located within 30 feet of a public street and located on the ground floor, private open spaces shall follow the requirements for Porches as put forth in Table 15-1505-E-2. iv. When located within 30 feet of a public street and located above the ground floor, private open spaces shall follow the requirements for Balconies as put forth in Table 15-1505-F. Common Open Space Requirements. Common open spaces are those which are b. available for active or passive use by all tenants, but use by the general public may be restricted. To the extent that common open space is provided, the following standards shall apply: i. The minimum dimension of any common open space shall be 20 feet. ii. The minimum area of any common open space shall be 1,000 square feet. The calculation of the common open space area shall exclude structures which are unusable as open space, but shall include structures that enhance its usability, such as swimming pools, changing facilities, fountains, planters, benches, and landscaping. iii. For sites greater than one acre in size, a minimum of 40 percent of the required common open space shall be developed with gardens, play fields, hard-surfaced game courts, recreation rooms, swimming pools, or other features designed for the active recreational use of residents of the development. iv. Common open space may be located at grade, on rooftops, on top of parking podiums, or any other such location that is accessible to tenants. Common open space may not be located within required setbacks or parking areas. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 20 FIGURE 15-1504-I.1.B: MINIMUM REQUIRED COMMON OPEN SPACE DIMENSION DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 21 Public Plaza Requirements. Public plazas are those which are available for use by c. the general public, as well as tenants of the project. To the extent that public plazas are provided, the following standards shall apply: i. The minimum dimension of any public plaza shall be 20 feet. ii. The minimum area of any public plaza shall be 500 square feet. The calculation of the public plaza area shall exclude structures which are unusable as open space, but shall include structures that enhance its usability, such as fountains, planters, benches, and landscaping. iii. Public plazas shall include benches or other seating, and paving shall be of high-quality materials. Amenities provided shall enhance the comfort, aesthetics, or usability of the space and include, but not be limited to, trees and other landscaping, shade structures, drinking fountains, water features, public art, or performance areas. Landscaping or other aspects of the design shall not discourage the use of the space by the general public, except in conjunction with an outdoor dining area for an adjacent restaurant or other Eating and Drinking Establishment. iv. Public plazas shall be fully accessible from the public right-of-way, shall be located in front of project buildings and shall not be located where public views into the space are obstructed by buildings or other structures. v. Public plazas may be located within required front setbacks. vi. A public access easement shall be provided for the space. vii. Building walls and façades which face a Public Plaza shall be regulated in the same manner as a street-facing façade. Permitted uses along the Public Plaza frontage shall be based on the Activity Classification of the nearest street. FIGURE 15-1504-I.1.C: MINIMUM REQUIRED PUBLIC PLAZA DIMENSION DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 22 2. Minimum Open Space Reduction. The minimum amount of open space required shall be reduced by 25 percent in the following circumstances: Any portion of the lot is located within 400 feet of a transit stop with regular, a. scheduled service during the weekday hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. There is a public park within 400 feet of the site, and b. i. Said park is located on the same side of the street and provides an improved pedestrian path to and from the site; or ii. The public park is across a local street and the site provides an improved pedestrian path to and from the site. The parcel is 15,000 square feet or less in area. c. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 23 J. Pedestrian Access. On-site pedestrian circulation and access must be provided according to the California Building Code and the following standards. Along all public streets, public plazas, and parks, pedestrian entrances from the public sidewalk into structures and/or the site shall be provided as follows: 1. Residential Unit Sidewalk Connections. Direct entrances from the sidewalk into individual ground-floor dwelling units which are adjacent to streets shall be provided at a rate of no less than one per 50 feet of linear street frontage. Such entrances shall be accessed through a permitted frontage per Table 15-1505-E-2. 2. Commercial Sidewalk Connections. Direct entrances from the sidewalk into ground- floor commercial establishments which are adjacent to streets shall be provided at a rate of no less than one per 50 feet of linear street frontage. When establishments with a greater length occupy a site, they shall be set back and wrapped with smaller spaces that will satisfy this requirement. See Figure 15-1504-J.1.c. 3. Common Area Sidewalk Connections. Residential and commercial areas which aren’t directly accessed from the sidewalk as put forth in items 1 and 2 above shall be accessed by a common entrance from the sidewalk into lobbies or internal pedestrian paths. 4. Emergency exits, entrances into utility rooms, and other such features shall not count toward to the satisfaction of this requirement. 5. Pedestrian Access Design. If there is a yard between the sidewalk and the building, a paved path six feet in a. width shall be provided from the public sidewalk to the entrance. Entry doors shall not swing out to the sidewalk unless the door when fully open b. does not encroach into the sidewalk. Handrails or other such improvements shall not block visibility of the building c. entry or direct access from the sidewalk. Direct entrances into individual ground-floor residential units ensure pedestrian comfort on less active streets. Orienting pedestrian entrances to the sidewalk is an essential ingredient of Downtown revitalization. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 24 FIGURE 1504-J.1.C: WRAPPING OF LARGE USES Large department stores can be wrapped with smaller shops, as with the Macy’s at River Park. Retail uses along the ground floor of the Warnor’s Theater conceal the large, windowless auditorium. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 25 K. Sidewalk and Public Frontage Standards. 1. Applicability. Notwithstanding Chapter 13, Section 208 of the Municipal Code, all projects a. shall be required to bring adjacent sidewalk conditions into conformance with the standards of this section, subject to the following exceptions: i. Applications for signs only. ii. Additions, remodels, or tenant improvements of less than 50 percent of the current value of the property. iii. Accessory structures less than 1,000 square feet in size. New development that is below the thresholds noted in item ‘a’, above, shall b. replace and maintain missing and/or dead street trees and any other missing or dead landscaping in the public frontage (public right-of-way). In no case shall an existing sidewalk, or portion thereof, be vacated, even if the c. minimum width required in the applicable Public Frontage Type is less than the existing sidewalk. When a public frontage of the subject property is improved to meet the d. applicable requirements of this section and the adjacent property does not physically align with the new improvement, the improvement shall be designed to the satisfaction of the Review Authority to result in a safe and smooth transition between properties. 2. Public Frontage Types. Required sidewalks shall be provided and designed as follows: Public frontage is an indispensable component of comfortable, safe, and convenient pedestrian experience. Appealing public frontage enhances commercial viability, sociability, and civic pride. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 26 TABLE 15-1504-K-2: PUBLIC FRONTAGE TYPES—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS A. Sidewalk with Tree Wells 1. Applicable Locations: Adjacent to mixed-use or non-residential projects. 2. Basic Standards ⓐ Total Sidewalk Width: 12 ft. min. ⓑ Well Width: 5 ft. min. ⓒ Well Depth: 5 ft. min. ⓓ Clear Walkway Width: 7 ft. min. ⓔ Tree Spacing: 20 ft. min, 40 ft. max. B. In-Street Tree Planter 1. Applicable Locations: Areas with narrow sidewalk conditions. 2. Basic Standards ⓐ Total Sidewalk Width: Less than 12 ft. ⓑ Well Width: 6 ft. min. ⓒ Well Depth: 4 ft. min. ⓓ Tree Spacing: between every two parallel parking spaces or between every five angled or perpendicular spaces (approximately 40 to 50 feet apart) 3. Other Standards a. Where the existing sidewalk is located immediately adjacent to the curb and where the distance between the curb and the R.O.W. line is too narrow to accommodate both a sidewalk and a parkway strip or tree well, tree planters may be introduced in the parking lane to maximize pedestrian space while providing shade and greenery as determined by the Review Authority. b. Planters should be placed outside of the gutter to avoid interference with drainage. Planter dimensions shall be least 6 feet by 4 feet with curbs provided on all four sides of the planter, although the side facing the sidewalk may be curbless to permit stormwater to drain into the planter. c. Planters must contain street trees and may be landscaped or covered with metal tree grates. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 27 C. Raised Sidewalk 1. Applicable Locations: Projects with ground floor commercial uses on sites which must be raised due to potential flooding issues. 2. Basic Standards ⓐ Total Sidewalk Width: 12 ft. min. ⓑ Lower Walkway/Well Width: 5 ft. min. ⓒ Well Depth: 5 ft. min. ⓓ Raised Walkway Width: 7 ft. min. ⓔ Tree Spacing: 20 ft. min, 40 ft. max. 3. Other Standards a. The walkway nearest to the building shall be raised to match the level of the finished floor of the first story so that it is flush with entrances into commercial spaces. b. The upper walkway shall be buffered from the lower walkway with a curb, hedge, raised planter, or other method as determined by the Review Authority. c. Steps from the lower walkway to the upper walkway shall be provided every 100 feet or less as determined by the Review Authority. d. At block corners the raised walkway shall, via a straight ramp, drop to meet the level of the lower walkway. e. This sidewalk design shall only be used if the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District or other public agency mandates that the lot be raised above the existing sidewalk level due to potential flooding issues and when authorized by the Review Authority. In-street tree planters can provide shade and beauty while maximizing the pedestrian walkway in areas with space constraints. A raised sidewalk can allow for proper urban retail frontage, while still mitigating flood risk. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 28 3. Sidewalk Width. Sidewalks shall be no less than 12 feet in width. If the current distance between the right-of-way boundary and the face of the adjacent curb is less than 12 feet, the method by which this requirement shall be satisfied shall be determined by the Review Authority. The available methods shall be as follows: Set Back. The building may be set back from the right-of-way boundary the a. distance that is necessary to achieve the required sidewalk width. The portion of the sidewalk which lies within the private parcel shall be guaranteed for public access by the enactment of a pedestrian easement. Reconstruction. The applicant may demolish and reconstruct the sidewalk for the b. entirety of the block frontage(s) which the project occupies to the extent necessary to satisfy the requirements of this section. Parklet. The sidewalk may be expanded into the roadway by a metal or wood c. deck which does not interfere with the drainage of the street. In such instances the applicant shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City in which the applicant accepts full responsibility for the maintenance and repair of the parklet, as well as providing the indemnification and insurance as required by the City’s Risk Manager. The design of the parklet shall be attractive and compatible with its surroundings, as determined by the Director. Width Exemption. For unusually challenging site conditions, or in instances in d. which the existing building and sidewalk pattern warrants it, the Director may exempt the applicant providing the full sidewalk width required above. Examples include instances in which setting the building back would cause a break in a uniform row of aligned facades, and moving the curb or adding a parklet would interfere with important roadway improvements such as a bike lane. In such instances all other sidewalk requirements, such as for trees and lighting, shall be met. When a narrow sidewalk is exempted from the width requirement, the standards of the In-Street Tree Planter Public Frontage Type shall be followed if the design of the adjacent roadway permits, at the discretion of the Director. L. Block, Street, and Alley Standards. 1. Maximum Block Length. No block shall exceed 400 feet in length. For the purposes of this section, block length shall be measured along a street frontage from an intersecting street to the next intersecting street. Such measurements shall not begin nor end at an alley. 2. Design of New and Modified Streets. New streets and modifications to existing streets shall be designed in conformance with the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP). Designs may deviate from the FCSP if necessitated by site constraints, at the discretion of the Director. 3. Vacation of Existing Streets and Alleys. Existing streets and alleys shall not be removed or vacated, except for street or alley fragments that no longer connect to adjacent streets or provide access to adjacent properties. Such fragments may be DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 29 vacated with Director approval, provided that such vacation will not result in a block which exceeds 400 feet in length. 15-1505 Façade Design Development Standards A. Building Articulation and Massing. 1. Building Length Articulation. All building facades over 50 feet in length which face a street, public plaza, or park shall be designed with a minimum of two of the following façade articulation strategies: Material Articulation. Utilize different materials to divide building façades into a. vertical and/or horizontal increments. Structural Expression. Express building bays, structural elements such as b. columns and/or beams, or underlying structural elements with pilasters and lintels that project several inches from the façade and/or are clad in a different material from the façade. Horizontal Articulation. Setback a portion of the street-facing façade a minimum c. of two feet for a minimum distance of 25 feet. Architectural Projections. Append or project façade elements such as balconies, d. bay windows, cantilevered rooms, and/or awnings. Architectural Recessions. Recess architectural elements or spaces – such as e. recessed porches, covered passages, recessed balconies, and windows – into the plane of the façade. 2. Building Height Articulation. In order to maintain a human scale for multi-story buildings, the height of façades which face a street, public plaza, or park shall be broken into smaller increments as follows: Ground Floors. A substantial horizontal articulation of the façade shall be applied a. at the top of the first story. On buildings of five stories or taller, this articulation may be applied at the top of the second story. This element shall be no less than 18 inches tall, and shall project no less than four inches from the adjacent wall plane. It shall be designed as a cornice, belt course, or other such architectural element which is appropriate to the style of the building. Top Floor. Buildings or portions of buildings which are four stories in height or b. taller shall also provide articulation for the top story of the building. This can be accomplished by a color change, material change, a cornice/belt course at the bottom of the uppermost story, or by stepping the uppermost story back at least five feet. On buildings of 8 stories or taller, this articulation may be applied to the top two stories. Ground Floor/Upper Floor Differentiation. Ground floor facades shall be distinct c. from upper floors through the use or finish of materials, colors, window sizes, or architectural details. Exception. Civic and Cultural buildings located in the Downtown General d. (DTG) District may be excepted as determined by the Review Authority. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 30 FIGURE 15-1505-A.2: BUILDING HEIGHT ARTICULATION B. Building Materials and Finishes. 1. General Standards. Each side of a building that is visible from a street, public plaza, park, or a. passenger railway shall be designed with a complementary level of detailing and quality of materials. Each side of a parking structure that is visible from a street, public plaza, park, b. or passenger railway shall be designed to be compatible with the architectural character, materials, and colors of the overall development. Durability of Materials. Exterior materials shall be durable and promote c. permanence and longevity. Applicants must demonstrate that materials will not unintentionally discolor due to weathering or corrosion. Materials that discolor Many of Fresno’s cherished historic buildings have articulated upper and lower floors. Contemporary buildings can also exhibit building height articulation. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 31 naturally, such as copper, are encouraged. Design Consistency. d. i. Finishes, fixtures, and other architectural details shall be designed to be consistent throughout the building. ii. Attached architectural elements and details such as lighting fixtures, attic vents, custom signage, awnings, hand rails, balconies, and trellises shall be designed to be consistent with other elements throughout the building. Such elements shall relate to the elements or intended general character of surrounding significant resources, potentially significant resources, and other historic-era buildings. Multiple Materials. e. i. Two or more wall materials may be combined on one façade. ii. A minimum of two exterior wall finish materials shall be used for all mixed-use buildings with a commercial ground floor. iii. If located one above the other, lighter appearing materials shall be placed above more substantial materials (e.g. wood above stucco or masonry, or stucco and glass above masonry). iv. In general, vertical joints between different materials shall occur only at inside corners. 2. Stucco. Finishes should be smooth and troweled. a. The pattern of joints should be architecturally coordinated with the overall b. façade composition, and sealant colors should be coordinated with surface and other building colors. 3. Expose d Wood. Exterior walls that are or were originally clad in exposed wood shall not be a. covered with a non-wood material. Wood-like materials, such as cementitious siding, may be used. Exposed wood (or wood-like materials) shall be finished in a manner that b. minimizes maintenance and promotes the material's longevity. 4. Reflective Materials. Reflective materials, such as polished metal cladding or chrome, are allowed only if: The material is applied to small areas such as to highlight signage. a. It can be demonstrated that the material will not result in an incompatible b. adjacency or cause a nuisance to pedestrians, vehicles, and neighboring buildings. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 32 5. Masonry and Stone. Masonry veneer walls shall be detailed with structural integrity, appearing a. thicker and heavier, especially at corners and window and door openings. Brick and cut stone shall be laid in true bonding patterns. Mortar joints shall b. be struck. River and rubble stone shall be laid from large closest to the ground to small c. farthest from the ground, with smooth or beaded mortar joints. Masonry detailing shall transition from stone to other materials through d. moldings, caps, and other trim elements. 6. Veneers. Veneers should turn corners, avoiding exposed edges and continue down the side of a building to a logical break, such as a change in wall plane. Corner pieces should be mitered to hide the joint. 7. Trim. Trim materials and finishes shall be differentiated from adjacent wall cladding materials and finishes. Acceptable trim materials shall be wood, precast concrete, stone, tile, or similar materials. Stucco trim shall be permitted at the determination of the Review Authority, and in such instances it shall feature a smooth finish that contrasts significantly from adjacent stucco wall cladding. 8. Synthetic Materials. The use of synthetic materials is allowed when the Review Authority determines that the material: Adequately simulates the appearance of the natural material it imitates. a. Demonstrates an ability to age similar to or better than the natural material it b. imitates. Has a permanent texture, color, and character that is acceptable for the c. proposed application. Can be pressure washed and, in general, withstand anti-graffiti measures. d. 9. Prohibited Materials. Prohibited exterior materials include the following: T1-11. a. Rough-sawn wood. b. Vertical siding. c. Board and batten. d. Metal siding, except in the DTN zone. e. Concrete block as an exterior finish material, except in the DTN zone. f. Plywood, particle board, press board, and similar materials. g. 10. Signage Design. Building signage shall be designed to complement the building while providing adequate visibility from and maintaining compatibility with adjacent suites/units on upper floors near the signage. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 33 11. Renovations and Alterations. Modifications to existing buildings shall be architecturally compatible with the a. existing building as determined by the Review Authority. Exterior walls that are or were originally clad in wood, masonry, or stone shall b. not be covered with a different material such as stucco. Renovations or alterations to “modernized” pre-World War II buildings shall c. restore the original façade materials, textures, fenestration, and ornamentation to the extent possible as determined by the Review Authority. 12. Exception. Civic and Cultural buildings located in the Downtown General (DTG) District may be excepted from the standards of this subsection as determined by the Review Authority. C. Window and Door Opening Design. 1. Consistency with Architectural Style. The orientation and proportion of openings shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building and shall relate to one another proportionally and according to a rational system of design. For example, buildings designed according to traditional architectural styles typically have window openings and panes that are vertically oriented or square or composed of groupings of vertically oriented windows. Mixed-use buildings can have second floor windows that are grouped and centered above the ground floor storefront doors and windows. 2. Glazing Ratio. Upper floor façades, and non-commercial portions of ground floor street-facing a. façades, which face a street, public plaza, or park shall comply with the following requirements for openings: TABLE 15-1505-C-2-A: GLAZING STANDARDS Standard DTN DTG DTC Min. percentage of upper floor façades that shall consist of openings such as windows and doors to balconies or roofdecks. 25 25 25 Max. percentage of upper floor façades that shall consist of openings such as windows and doors to balconies or roofdecks. Curtain wall systems are allowed as a primary cladding system in the DTG district, and as an accent in the DTN and DTC districts. 70 100 70 DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 34 Ground Floor Commercial Transparency. b. i. For ground floor façades which face a street, public plaza, or park on portions of a structure occupied by commercial uses, exterior walls facing a front or street side lot line shall include windows, doors, or other openings with transparent glazing for at least 60 percent of the building wall area located between 1.5 and seven feet above the level of the sidewalk. ii. Openings fulfilling this requirement shall have transparent glazing without reflective glass frosting or dark tinting (to the maximum extent permitted by Title 24 and other energy efficiency regulations) and provide views into work areas, display areas, sales areas, lobbies, or similar active spaces, or into window displays that are at least two feet deep. FIGURE 15-1505-C-2-B: GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL TRANSPARENCY 3. Vertical Proportion. On upper stories, window openings shall have a vertical proportion, in which their height exceeds their width by 25 percent or more. Openings divided by muntins of four inches or more in width shall constitute separate openings. 4. Window Depth. Trim at least one inch in depth must be provided around all upper story windows, or windows must be recessed at least two inches from the plane of the surrounding exterior wall. For double-hung and horizontal sliding windows, at least one sash shall achieve the two-inch recess. 5. Bay Windows. Bay windows, if provided, shall be habitable spaces. 6. Window and Door Materials and Detailing. Allowed window and door materials include wood, fiberglass, steel, or a. aluminum. Muntins, if used, shall be true and divide one pane from the adjoining pane, be b. of substantial dimension, and not be flat. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 35 Flush "nail-on" aluminum windows, and horizontal aluminum sliding windows c. are prohibited. Vinyl and vinyl clad windows shall be consistent with the architectural style of d. the building. For example, windows of Craftsman style buildings should be brown or hunter’s green, not white. Glazing shall be clear glass (to the maximum extent permitted by Title 24 and e. other energy efficiency regulations), particularly in storefront and primary window applications. Transom, clerestory, and other specialty windows are not required to be clear and may be decorative. Window sills shall be detailed to properly shed water. f. Head casing shall be equal in width to or wider than jamb casing. g. Accessories may include operable shutters sized to match their openings, h. opaque canvas awnings and other shading devices, and planter boxes supported by visible brackets appropriate to each design. Security bars and roll down security doors are prohibited on the outside of i. windows and doors which face a street, public plaza, or park. Retractable interior security bars or gates may be used. 7. Exception. With the exception of Section 1505-C.2.b, Civic and Cultural buildings located in the Downtown General (DTG) District may be excepted from the standards of this subsection as determined by the Review Authority. D. Façade Alignment. 1. Vertical Alignment. With the exception of mansard roofs, cornices, and other such features, façades shall be oriented vertically and shall have no slope. 2. Horizontal Alignment. With the exception of bay windows and similar features, façades that are located within 30 feet of a public street or public plaza shall run parallel or perpendicular to said street or plaza. 3. Exception. Civic and Cultural buildings located in the Downtown General (DTG) District may be excepted from the standards of this subsection as determined by the Review Authority. E. External Stairs and Corridors. 1. External Stairways. With the exception of stoops and similar steps intended for access for ground-floor spaces, external stairways shall not be located between the primary façade of the building and a public street. Within 30 feet of a public street, stairs shall be architecturally integrated into the building and shall not have open risers. 2. External Corridors. External upper-floor corridors located within 30 feet of a public street shall be architecturally integrated into the building. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 36 F. Private Frontage. Uses shall be accessed through frontage types as follows. “P” means the frontage type is permitted. “-” means the frontage type is not permitted. TABLE 15-1505-E-1: PERMITTED PRIVATE FRONTAGE TYPES Use Classification Front Yard Porch Stoop Loading Dock/ Terrace Shop- front Fore- court Grand Entry None Residential, Individual Entry P P P ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ Residential, Common Entry P ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ P P ‒ Public and Semi-Public P ‒ ‒ ‒ P P P ‒ Commercial, Individual Entry ‒ ‒ ‒ P P ‒ ‒ ‒ Commercial, Common Entry ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ P P P ‒ Industrial ‒ ‒ ‒ P P P P P Transportation, Communication, and Utilities ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ P P P Service Areas ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ ‒ P DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 37 TABLE 15-1505-E-2: PRIVATE FRONTAGE STANDARDS A. Front Yard 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 5 ft. min. ⓑ Length: 15 ft. min. ⓒ Height above Sidewalk: 3 ft. max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. Planters, garden walls, fences and hedges are permitted at the sidewalk to a maximum height of 3 ft.. Materials and design shall be compatible with the architectural style of the building. b. Water features, shade structures, seating, and gardens are encouraged in this area. c. Vehicular parking, trash collection and storage are not permitted in this area. d. When Front Yards are raised from the level of the sidewalk, the resulting retaining wall shall be decorative and clad in brick or stone. B. Porch 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 5 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 8 ft. min. ⓒ Height above adjacent grade: 18 in. min., 4 ft. max. ⓓ Height: 8 ft. min. clear from the finish floor 2. Supplemental Standards a. Provide landscaping in front of and around porch. b. Railings should be no higher than required by the building code. c. The porch may extend around to encroach into the street sideyard up to 1/2 of the required setback. If insufficient distance exists, the minimum porch depth shall be achieved by moving back the façade the necessary distance. d. Awnings may be attached to the face of the porch if the awning is adequately supported and if the awning is compatible with the architectural style of the porch and building. e. Porches shall not be enclosed except for insect screens between the structural members of the porch if: i. Visibility is not reduced between the adjacent sidewalk and the porch. ii. The insect screen is recessed from the front face of the columns on the porch. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 38 TABLE 15-1505-E-2: PRIVATE FRONTAGE STANDARDS C. Stoop 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 6 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 4 ft. min., 10 ft. max. ⓒ Height: Max. 4 ft. elevation above finish sidewalk grade 2. Supplemental Standards a. Landscaping encouraged in front, around and/or within walls of stoop. b. Minimum 3 ft. to maximum 4 ft. high garden wall and gate may be provided at entry to stoop. c. Entry gates to swing in a direction away from sidewalk. d. Use of other frontage types at entry stoop (e.g., awning, bay window, arcade) allowed. e. Exterior stairs may be located perpendicular or parallel to the adjacent sidewalk. f. The landing may be covered or uncovered, but shall not be enclosed beyond the building façade (e.g., stoop landings may be recessed into the building façade and be enclosed by the walls of the recess). D. Loading Dock/Terrace 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 7 ft. min. ⓑ Length: no min./no max. ⓒ Height: Max. 4 ft. elevation above finish sidewalk grade ⓓ Railing Height: no higher than required by the Building Code 2. Supplemental Standards a. Exterior stairs may be perpendicular or parallel to the adjacent sidewalk but shall not encroach into the right-of-way. The landing may be covered or uncovered. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 39 This diagram shows how the various components of a storefront can be arranged. TABLE 15-1505-E-2: PRIVATE FRONTAGE STANDARDS E. Storefront 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Depth of Recessed Storefront Dining Area: 12 ft. max. ⓑ Depth of Shop: 30 ft. min. ⓒ Length: min. 75% of required façade length ⓓ Height above sidewalk: must be at sidewalk grade ⓔ Bulkhead Height: 18 in. min., 3 ft. max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. A physical transition or 'bulkhead' shall be provided between the glazing of any storefront and the adjacent sidewalk. The bulkhead shall not consist of aluminum storefront or spandrel panel. b. Storefront windows may have clerestory windows between the storefront and second floor/top of single-story parapet. Glass in clerestory windows may be of a character to allow light, while moderating it such as stained glass, glass block, painted glass, or frosted glass. c. Storefronts shall provide clear views of merchandise displays within the shop space and/or maintained and lighted merchandise display(s) within a display zone of at least two feet in depth from the glass. d. The storefront may be directly illuminated from the sidewalk side of the glass by externally mounted lights. e. Planter boxes, containers or vine pockets may be located adjacent to storefronts. Such landscape areas shall not be located within required ADA access ways along any public sidewalk. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 40 H. Forecourt 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 15 ft. min.; 50% of lot depth max. ⓑ Length: 12 ft. min.; 50% of lot depth max.. ⓒ Height: 4 ft. max. above adjacent sidewalk 2. Supplemental Standards a. Elevated forecourts shall meet the accessibility code for access to the building and the sidewalk. Railings shall not visually obstruct views to or from the street and shall be designed to match the architectural style of the main building. b. Arcades, galleries, awnings, or canopies may encroach into the forecourt for a distance of 1/4 of the forecourt width or depth with a cumulative encroachment not to exceed a combined distance of 1/2 of the forecourt width and depth, respectively. c. Planters, garden walls, fences and hedges are permitted at the entrance to the forecourt to a maximum height of 3 ft. per Section 15-2006, Fences, Walls, and Hedges. d. Water features, shade structures, seating, and gardens are encouraged in this area. e. Vehicular parking, trash collection and storage are not permitted in this area. I. Grand Entry 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 6 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 10 ft. min., 25 ft. max. ⓒ Height: May be at sidewalk grade, or max. 4 ft. elevation above finish sidewalk grade 2. Supplemental Standards a. The entrace shall be clearly differentiated from entrances into individual commercial or residential spaces through the use of decorative columns or similar ornamentation flanking the entrance, by aligning the entrace with prominent architectural features on upper floors, or through color and material changes. b. The entrace shall be covered by an awning or canopy or shall be recessed into the building. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 41 G. Façade Elements. The following development types shall incorporate a minimum of two of the Façade Elements shown in Table 15-1505-F into front and street-side building façades. 1. New buildings. 2. Building additions (façade elements are not required on the existing part of the structure if it is not being altered). 3. Façade remodels. 4. Exceptions: Projects or parts of projects involving designated historic resources, or the a. restoration of historic façades, shall not be required to incorporate Façade Elements if such elements were not part of the historic façade. Civic and Cultural buildings located in the Downtown General (DTG) District b. may be excepted from the standards of this subsection as determined by the Review Authority. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 42 TABLE 15-1505-F: FAÇADE ELEMENTS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS A. Gallery 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 10 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 50% to 100% of building length ⓒ Height: 8 ft. min. clear from the finish floor ⓓ Encroachment into R.O.W.: Galleries may encroach over the sidewalk in the public right-of-way, subject to an encroachment permit prior to issuance of a building permit as follows: • 10-12 ft. wide sidewalk: 6 ft. max. • 12-14 ft. wide sidewalk: 8 ft. max. • 14+ ft. wide sidewalk: 2/3 width of sidewalk max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. Planter boxes or pots may be placed in between the columns to provide enclosure for uses such as café seating. A Gallery must be a minimum 50% open on two sides. b. Balconies, awnings, bay windows, verandas, or other structures are allowed above the gallery. c. Except on residential and civic buildings, Galleries shall be combined with the Storefront frontage type. d. Column spacing and colonnade detailing, including lighting, shall be consistent with the style of the building to which it is attached. e. Columns shall be placed in relation to curbs so as to allow passage around and to allow for passengers of cars to exit the vehicle. B. Arcade 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 10 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 50% to 100% of building length ⓒ Height: 8 ft. min. clear from the finish floor 2. Supplemental Standards a. Planter boxes or pots may be placed in between the columns to provide enclosure for uses such as café seating. b. Arcade to be a minimum 50% open on two sides. c. Balconies, awnings, bay windows, verandas, or other structures are allowed above the arcade. d. Column spacing and colonnade detailing, including lighting, shall be consistent with the style of the building to which it is attached. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 43 TABLE 15-1505-F: FAÇADE ELEMENTS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS C. Bay Window 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Depth: 2 ft. min., 4 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 15 ft. max. ⓒ Height: 2nd fl.: 10 ft. min. clear from the ground ⓓ Encroachment into R.O.W.: 3 ft. max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. Bay windows are permitted on the ground floor of buildings with residential ground floors. b. Provide landscape in front and around bay windows on the ground floor. c. Bay windows to have a minimum 25% glazing. D. Balcony 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Depth: 5 ft. min., 10 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 8 ft. min. ⓒ Height: 8 ft. min. clear, 12 ft. max. clear from the finish floor ⓓ Encroachment into Setback or R.O.W.: 4 ft. max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. Balcony may be covered but should be a minimum 50% open on three sides. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 44 TABLE 15-1505-F: FAÇADE ELEMENTS—DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS E. Awning, Canopy, Marquee, Sun Shade, Trellis 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Depth: 2 ft. min., 10 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 25% to 75% of building frontage ⓒ Height: 8 ft. min. clear from the ground ⓓ Encroachment into Setback or R.O.W.: within 2 ft. clear of curb 2. Supplemental Standards a. Awnings, Canopies, Sun Shades, and Trellises shall not cover the entire length of the facade. They may cover individual storefronts and openings or multiple openings as follows: • Storefront(s) within 5 feet of another storefront. • Up to 2 doors or windows not associated with a storefront if the distance between them does not exceed 3 feet. b. Awnings, Canopies, Sun Shades, and Trellises shall not obscure architectural features such as moldings above the storefront. c. Awnings shall match the shape of the opening they are shading (simple shed shaped awnings for rectangular openings) except for odd shaped awnings. Odd shaped and bubble awnings are prohibited except where a photograph shows they have been previously allowed on the building and were not in conflict with an applicable requirement. d. Awnings, Canopies, Sun Shades, and Trellises may be constructed of metal, wood or fabric. Highly reflective materials should be avoided. e. Lights that illuminate the pedestrian way or sidewalk dining beneath the awning are only allowed upon review and determination by the Director that the proposed lighting is appropriate for the context and consistent with the intended physical character of the zoning district. f. Internally illuminated awnings that glow are prohibited. 15-1506 Right to Downtown Operations As Downtown Fresno continues its evolution into a compact, mixed-use center, it is essential that new property owners and tenants understand the present and future nature of the area so that they may function together as harmoniously as possible. Toward that end, this section will ensure that property owners, tenants, and users of property within the Downtown Districts are notified of the vibrant, active Downtown environment, the revitalization efforts and public improvements occurring Downtown, the special events and community and business activities that are part of the vitality of the Downtown, and the expectations and responsibilities associated with owning, purchasing, renting or making other use of property within Downtown. A. Definitions. 1. The following definitions shall apply to the Right to Downtown Operations section: • Downtown Operations: Any activity, use, facility or operation associated with a permitted temporary or permanent use occurring within the boundaries of the Downtown Districts, as well as any lawful public uses. Downtown operations and DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 45 their associated impacts include, but are not limited to, the following: music, dancing, singing, and voices associated with permitted uses and Downtown activities; odors associated with operation of restaurants, breweries, coffee roasters, urban wineries, and other businesses; high levels of traffic and traffic congestion; increased vehicular traffic from special events and other activities; street construction, closures and traffic re-routing, including exclusion of vehicle access during certain times due to festivals, parades or other special events; railroad operations, including increased rail activity associated with passenger rail operations; outdoor sales of merchandise and outdoor restaurant seating; festivals, parades and/or cultural events which may result in gatherings of large groups of people, street closures, parking impacts, noise, odors and other impacts; increased levels of pedestrian activity; operation of delivery trucks and vans, trash and recycling collection trucks, and other such vehicles; impacts associated with artists’ studios and spaces, including noise, odors, and vibration; general increases in activity levels occurring on a 24-hour basis, including increases in noise and other impacts during late night and early morning hours; high levels of nighttime lighting and illumination; and trash collection, including trash collection before 6:00 a.m. • Property: Any real property located within the Downtown Districts, including property intended for residential, commercial, business, public purposes, and other uses. • Tenant: Any renter or lessee of property. • Transfer: The sale, lease, trade, exchange, rental, or gift of property. • Transferee: Any person or entity acquiring an interest in real property in the Downtown Districts from another person or entity, including, but not limited to, a purchaser of property or a person taking possession of property pursuant to a lease or rental agreement. • Transferor: Any person transferring an interest in real property in the Downtown Districts to another person, including the seller of property or a landlord granting possession of property pursuant to a lease or rental agreement. B. Downtown Operations Notification Requirements. 1. As a condition of approval of any Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision Map, Conditional Use Permit, or similar entitlement relating to property located within the For all housing that is entitled under the Downtown Districts, every property owner shall record the deed notification provided in Section 15-1506-B.3 of this Code on the property for which the Zone Clearance, Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision Map, Conditional Use Permit, or similar entitlement is issued. The Notice of Right to Downtown Operations shall be included in all subsequent deeds and leases for this property until such time as the property is no longer located within the Downtown Districts. 2. Every transferor of property, as transferor is defined herein, subject to the requirements of 15-1506-B.1 shall, upon transfer, also provide to any transferee the Notice of Right to Downtown Operations recited in 15-1506-B.3. The Notice of Right to Downtown DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 46 Operations may be contained in any form of agreement or contract; however, the notice need be given only once in any transaction. The transferor and transferee shall provide each other with written acknowledgement of delivery and receipt of the notice. 3. The notice provided in this section is intended to advise property owners, tenants and users of property within the Downtown Districts of the inherent impacts and inconveniences associated with purchase, tenancy or use of property in the Downtown Districts. This notice shall be provided as required by 15-1506-B.1 and 15-1506-B.2. NOTICE OF RIGHT TO DOWNTOWN OPERATIONS The City of Fresno permits the operation of a variety of residential, commercial, civic, and cultural activities within the Downtown zoning districts. You are hereby notified that the property you own, or are renting, leasing, using, occupying, or acquiring an interest in is located within the Downtown zoning districts. You may be subject to impacts, including inconvenience and discomfort, from lawful activities occurring within the Dow ntown zoning districts. Impacts may include, but are not limited to, noise, odor, glare, and transportation congestion resulting from permitted uses such as, but not limited to, civic, commercial, cultural, public and institutional, recreational, and transportation-related activities. Specific impact- causing sources might include, but are not limited to, music, dancing, talking, singing, laughter, restaurants and bars, outdoor dining/seating, outdoor sales, festivals, parades, special events, street closures, high volumes of traffic, high volumes of pedestrian activity, emergency services, waste collection, commercial and business operations, railroad operations and rail activity, and other permitted Downtown activities. These impacts might occur late at night, early in the morning, or on a 24- hour basis. One or more of the inconveniences described above might occur as a result of Downtown operations and activities which are in compliance with existing laws and regulations and accepted customs and standards. If you own, lease, rent, or otherwise utilize property within the Downtown zoning districts, you are expected to be prepared to accept such inconveniences or discomfort as a normal and necessary aspect of owning, living in, operating a business in, or otherwise utilizing an area with an active Downtown character. The City of Fresno’s Development Code does not exempt Downtown businesses or other participants in Downtown activities from compliance with the law. Should any business or person not comply with appropriate state, federal, or local laws, legal recourse may be possible by, among other ways, contacting the appropriate agency. This notification is given in compliance with the Fresno Municipal Code §15-1506. 4. The failure to give the notice required by this section shall not invalidate any transfer. C. Nuisances, Resolution of Disputes, and Contact Persons. 1. Normal Downtown operations are presumed to not constitute a nuisance, unless such operations are deemed to be a nuisance under California Civil Code Section 3479 or the Fresno Municipal Code. Downtown operations shall comply with all state, federal, and local laws and regulations applicable to the operations, including applicable noise and DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 47 other operational standards contained in the Fresno General Plan and/or Fresno Municipal Code. 2. Every developer or owner of commercial, residential, or other property within the Downtown Districts, consisting of two or more residences, businesses or tenant spaces, shall, as a condition of approval of any Development Permit, Tentative Subdivision Map, Conditional Use Permit, or similar entitlement relating to property located within the Downtown Districts, designate an information contact person. The information contact person shall be available to disperse information distributed by the City, PBID, non-profit organizations, or other public or quasi-public organizations, to tenants and property owners within the development. The information contact person role may be undertaken by the property owner, a homeowner’s association, a property management company or other similar organization. 15-1507 Additional Standards A. Projects shall incorporate all relevant mitigation measures required pursuant to applicable environmental assessments prepared pursuant to CEQA that encompass the project area. “Applicable Environmental Assessments” shall include, but may not be limited to the following: 1. A MEIR prepared for the General Plan in effect at the time of project approval; 2. A Program or Project EIR prepared for either a Community Plan or Specific Plan that includes the project area, in effect at the time of project approval. B. The proposed design shall not lead to an overburdening of existing or planned infrastructure capacities, including, but not limited to, capacities for water, runoff, storm water, wastewater, and solid waste systems. The determination of whether or not the proposed design can be accommodated within existing infrastructure shall be made by the Review Authority in consultation with the Directors of Public Works and Public Utilities. C. The project shall comply with all applicable Public Works standards. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 48 Article 16 Overlay Districts The Apartment House Overlay District already exists within the Citywide Development Code, but requires the following edits in order to fully implement the vision of the Downtown Plans. These changes are very compatible with the areas outside of Downtown in which this overlay district is used, all of which are located within the Tower District. It applies primarily to land along major streets which was originally developed with large homes and apartment houses, and which partially converted to offices and other commercial uses during the mid-20th century. Examples include Fulton Street and Van Ness Avenue in the Lowell neighborhood, and Mariposa Street in the St. John’s neighborhood. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Red strikethrough text will be deleted from the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-1609 Apartment House (AH) Overlay District A. Purpose. The Apartment House (AH) Overlay District is intended to preserve and enhance the pattern of pedestrian-oriented small-footprint apartment houses, grand homes, and small commercial buildings that exist in some pre-World War II neighborhoods. B. Use Regulations. Those uses permitted in the Base District, subject to the limitations and conditions set forth therein, except as follows: 1. Permitted Uses. The uses permitted by the provisions of the Base District. a. Single Unit Dwelling, Attached and Multi-Unit Residential shall be permitted b. in all locations, including the ground floor along major streets. Office uses, including Business and Professional, Medical and Dental, and c. Walk-In Clientele, shall be permitted in all locations, including the ground floor along major streets. Base District restrictions on the size of such establishments shall not apply. 2. Uses Subject to a Conditional Use Permit. Those uses permitted in the Base District, subject to the limitations and conditions set forth therein. 3. Uses Not Permitted. Those uses not permitted in the Base District or listed above, subject to the limitations and conditions set forth therein. C. Development Standards. Development Standards shall be as required by the Base District, except as follows: 1. Maximum Lot Size. 15,000 square feet. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 49 2. Setbacks. Front Setback. The front setback for new structures shall not be greater than 110 a. percent nor less than 90 percent of the average of the actual front setbacks of all residential structures on the blockface which were constructed prior to 1945, nor shall it be less than 90 percent of the average of the actual front setbacks of all improved lots on the blockface. The following exceptions shall apply: i. In no instance shall the front setback be less than 10 feet. ii. In no instance shall the setback for a new structure be less than the setback of an adjacent structure which is a designated historic resource. Side Setback. Four feet. b. 3. Parking. Garage Encroachment into Rear and Side Setbacks. Where 50 percent or more of a. the residential properties on a block have detached garages which encroach into the minimum side and/or rear setbacks, new detached garages shall be permitted to encroach into the minimum side and/or rear setback in a similar manner. In such instances the minimum side and rear setback for a detached garage shall each be equal to the average of the equivalent setbacks of the detached garages on the block, unless the average is less than two feet in which case the setback shall be zero feet. This provision shall also apply to properties which abut an RS District. In no instance shall parking be located in front of the primary building, between b. the primary building and the street, or within the required front setback. Surface parking may not be covered with a carport within 50 feet of a public street unless it is designed as a porte cochere that is attached to architecturally integrated with the structure. 4. Façade Design Compatibility. The following standards shall apply to all structures, with the exception of Public and Semi-Public uses. Building Materials and Finishes. Cladding and trim materials and finishes shall be a. similar to adjacent apartment houses and single-family homes. Windows. The size, location, and proportions of windows shall be similar to b. adjacent apartment houses and single-family homes. Balconies and Porches. For new residential structures, the size, location, and c. proportions of balconies and porches shall be similar to adjacent apartment houses and single-family homes. Massing. New structures shall have roof forms and massing articulation which is d. residential in character and is similar to residential structures on the same blockface which were constructed prior to 1945. 5. Pedestrian Access. Direct entrances shall be provided into all individual ground-floor dwelling units or commercial spaces which are adjacent to a public street. If the building is set back from the sidewalk, a paved path no less than five feet in width shall be provided from the sidewalk to each entrance. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 50 6. Height. Structures shall not exceed 35 feet in height. 7. Landscaping. The design of front yard landscaping shall be residential in character and shall be similar to adjacent apartment houses and single-family homes. 8. Signs. Signs shall not be permitted in the AH Overlay District, except as follows: Maximum Number and Location. a. i. Monument Sign. One monument sign per building shall be permitted in the front yard setback, if applicable. Such signs shall be set back from the back of the sidewalk by no less than two feet. ii. Porch Sign. One sign per building shall be permitted to be suspended under the roof of a porch. iii. Wall Sign. One sign per building may be mounted on the façade near the primary pedestrian entrance. iv. Other Signs. Not permitted. Maximum Size. b. i. Monument Sign. Monument Signs shall not exceed six square feet in area and shall not exceed five feet in height. ii. Porch Sign. Porch Signs shall not exceed eight square feet in area. iii. Wall Sign. Wall Signs shall not exceed 10 square feet in area. Illumination. If illuminated, external illumination is required and shall be c. mounted in a manner that does direct glare toward adjacent uses. FIGURE 15-1609-C-8: AH OVERLAY MONUMENT AND PORCH SIGNS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 51 9. Renovations and Alterations. Modifications to existing buildings shall be architecturally compatible with the a. existing building as determined by the Review Authority. Exterior walls that are or were originally clad in wood, masonry, or stone shall b. not be covered with a different material such as stucco. Renovations or alterations to “modernized” pre-World War II buildings shall c. restore the original façade materials, textures, fenestration, and ornamentation to the extent possible as determined by the Review Authority. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 52 The Urban Campus Overlay District is new and, in combination with the Public and Institutional (PI) base district, will implement the vision for the Community Regional Medical Center in the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan. Black text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-1610 Urban Campus (UC) Overlay District A. Purpose. The Urban Campus (UC) Overlay District is intended to provide for large, centrally planned and operated campuses which integrate well into a dense, mixed-use, walkable urban environment. B. Use Regulations. Those uses permitted in the Base District, subject to the limitations and conditions set forth therein. C. Development Standards. Development Standards shall be as required by the Base District, except as follows: 1. Setbacks. Front. a. i. Minimum. Zero feet. ii. Maximum. 20 feet. Side. No requirement, unless the site abuts an R District, in which case the side b. setback shall be no less than 20 feet. Rear. No requirement, unless the site abuts an R District, in which case the rear c. setback shall be no less than 20 feet. Parking: 30 feet from perimeter streets. The following types of parking shall be d. exempted from this requirement: i. Surface parking which is located behind a building. ii. Structured parking above the first floor, provided that the façade is treated with similar materials and ornamentation as non-parking structures on the campus. iii. Underground parking. 2. Frontage Coverage. 75 percent along public streets at the perimeter of the campus. This requirement shall not apply to streets which run through the campus. 3. Pedestrian Access. Each building located within 50 feet of a public street at the perimeter of the campus shall provide pedestrian entrances from the public street into the building at a rate of no less than one per 400 feet of linear street frontage, however in no instance shall there be fewer than one. Such entrances shall be protected by a portico, canopy, or alcove of no less than four feet in depth. If there is a yard between the sidewalk and the building, a paved path six feet in width shall be provided from the public sidewalk to the entrance. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 53 4. Façade Design. Street facing facades of buildings located within 50 feet of a public street at the perimeter of the campus shall comply with the following standards: Exterior walls facing a front or street side lot line shall include windows, doors, a. or other openings with transparent glazing for at least 25 percent of the building wall area located between 2.5 and seven feet above the level of the sidewalk. Openings fulfilling this requirement shall have transparent glazing and provide views into work areas, lobbies, or similar active spaces. FIGURE 15-1610-C.4 .A: BUILDING TRANSPARENCY Where buildings are located within two feet of a public sidewalk at the b. perimeter of the campus, the sidewalk shall be shaded by awnings or canopies as follows: i. Awning or canopy depth shall be no less than four feet and no more than 10 feet. ii. Clearance shall be no less than eight feet and no more than 12 feet from the finished floor. 5. Parki ng Access. Driveways shall be located at the furthest feasible point from nearby residential uses. 6. Building Height. The maximum height within 100 feet of an RS District is 45 feet. Exceptions a. shall be made for parking structures which meet all of the following criteria: i. Height of 75 feet or less; ii. Adjacent to a railroad; iii. South of Illinois Avenue; and iv. A design which incorporates a “green screen or a similar treatment that buffers the appearance of the structure with ivy or other vegetation. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 54 The maximum height within 300 feet of an RS District is 75 feet. b. In all other locations the maximum height shall be 210 feet. Buildings of c. exemplary, landmark design may be 235 feet at the discretion of the Review Authority. Buildings of exemplary, landmark design may be 275 feet at the discretion of the Review Authority within the area bounded by Clark Street, Illinois Avenue, Thesta Street, and Divisidero Street, as well as all of the area south of Divisidero. 7. Lot Coverage. No requirement. 8. Sidewalks. New buildings or additions of 50 percent or more in floor area shall improve adjacent sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be provided per Public Works standards except that sidewalks on Fresno Street shall be provided as follows: Sidewalks shall be no less than 12 feet in width. If the current distance between a. the right-of-way boundary and the face of the adjacent curb is less than 12 feet, the building shall be set back from the right-of-way boundary the distance that is necessary to achieve the required sidewalk width. The portion of the sidewalk which lies within the private parcel shall be guaranteed for public access by the enactment of a public access easement. Street trees shall be provided as follows: b. i. Street trees should be located no more than three feet from the back of curb, and whenever possible should be aligned with other trees on the block. ii. Street trees should generally be evenly spaced, no less than 20 feet apart, and not more than 40 feet apart. iii. Whenever possible, trees should not be located directly in front of building entrances. iv. Trees should be placed in tree wells measuring five feet by five feet. To maximize usable sidewalk area, tree wells shall be covered by grates of a design which is approved by the Review Authority. Larger tree wells may be required by the Public Works Director for species requiring more space. The property owner shall assume maintenance responsibilities for the tree grates. v. Street trees should be deciduous, fast growing, drought tolerant, and should eventually form a tall canopy. Not more than one species should be planted per block. Whenever nearby pre-existing trees are in good condition and meet the intent of this section, new trees should be of the same species. Pedestrian-scaled street lights shall be provided as follows: c. i. Street lights should be located no more than three feet from the curb, and whenever possible should be aligned with street trees and other lights on the block. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 55 ii. Street lights should be generally evenly spaced, no less than 30 feet apart, and not more than 80 feet apart. Whenever possible, street lights should be no less than 15 feet from nearby street trees. iii. Street lights should not be of the type commonly known as Cobra Heads or other types which are intended primarily for the illumination of the vehicular roadway. Lights should be ornamental and designed primarily for the illumination of the sidewalk. Whenever nearby pre- existing lights are in good condition and meet the intent of this section, new lights should be of the same type. Intersection safety lights shall be typical cobra-head design, while mid-block lighting should be ornamental and scaled for the pedestrian environment. Lighting shall meet Public Works standards. If a Community Facilities District is not established to maintain sidewalks, d. street trees, and lighting, the applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement to ensure the maintenance of said facilities. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 56 The Neighborhood Revitalization Overlay District is new and, in combination with RS-3 and RS-5 base districts, will implement the design vision for residential areas within the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan. Black text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-1611 Neighborhood Revitalization (NR) Overlay District A. Purpose. The Neighborhood Revitalization (NR) Overlay District is intended to preserve the unique character of neighborhoods near Downtown, enhance their walkability, and promote a diverse population. B. Use Regulations. Those uses permitted and conditionally permitted in the Base District, subject to the limitations and conditions set forth therein, with the following exceptions. 1. Duplex - a neighborhood meeting shall not be required. 2. Multi-Unit Residential at a density of 16 dwelling units per acre or less. A neighborhood meeting shall not be required. 3. Instructional Services which are 3,000 square feet or less and which occupy 30 percent of the building or less. 4. Parks and Recreation Facilities shall not be subject to any size restriction of the Base District. 5. Medical and Dental Offices, which are 3,000 square feet or less and which occupy 30 percent of the building or less shall be permitted. 6. General Retail, which is located within 100 feet of a corner and which is 3,000 square feet in area or less shall be permitted. C. Development Standards. Development Standards shall be as required by the Base District, except as follows: 1. Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of the street. Notwithstanding a. Chapter 13, Section 208 of the Municipal Code, all projects shall be required to bring adjacent sidewalk conditions into conformance with Public Works standards, subject to the following exceptions: i. Applications for signs only. ii. Additions, remodels, or tenant improvements of less than 50 percent of the current value of the property. iii. Accessory structures less than 1,000 square feet in size. New development that is below the thresholds noted in item ‘a’, above, shall b. replace and maintain missing and/or dead street trees and any other missing or dead landscaping in the public frontage (public right-of-way). DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 57 In no case shall an existing sidewalk, or portion thereof, be vacated, even if the c. minimum width required is less than the existing sidewalk. When a sidewalk of the subject property is improved to meet the applicable d. requirements of this section and the adjacent property does not physically align with the new improvement, the improvement shall be designed to the satisfaction of the Review Authority to result in a safe and smooth transition between properties. 2. Pedestrian Access. Direct entrances shall be provided into all individual ground-floor dwelling units or commercial spaces which are adjacent to a public street. If the building is set back from the sidewalk, a paved path no less than five feet in width shall be provided from the sidewalk to each entrance. 3. Front Setback. The front setback for new structures shall not be greater than 110 percent nor less than 90 percent of the average of the actual front setbacks of all residential structures on the blockface which were constructed prior to 1945. The following exceptions shall apply: In no instance shall the front setback be less than 10 feet. a. In no instance shall the setback for a new structure be less than the setback of b. an adjacent structure which is a designated historic resource. 4. Parking. In no instance shall parking be located in front of the primary building, between the primary building and the street, or within the required front setback. Surface parking may not be covered with a carport within 50 feet of a public street unless it is designed as a porte cochere that is attached to architecturally integrated with the residential structure. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 58 5. Building Size and Massing. Table 15-1611-C.1 prescribes additional development standards for areas governed by the NR Overlay District. Additional regulations are denoted in the right hand column. Section numbers in this column refer to other sections of the Code, while individual letters refer to subsections that directly follow the table. The numbers in each illustration below correspond to the “#” column in the associated table. Drawings are for illustrative purposes and are not drawn to scale. TABLE 15-1611-C.1: BUILDING SIZE AND MASSING STANDARDS District RS-3 RS-5 # Maximum Building Length along Primary Street (ft.) 60 60 ① Maximum Space between buildings along Primary Street (ft.) 15 10 ② Maximum Building Depth along Street Side (ft.) 60 120 ③ 6. Building Articulation. Street-Facing Façade Articulation. All street-facing building facçades over 35 feet a. in length shall be designed with a minimum of one of the following façade articulation strategies: i. Horizontal Articulation. Setback a portion of the street-facing facade a minimum of two feet for a minimum distance of 25 feet. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 59 ii. Vertical Articulation. Step a portion of the façade upward or downward a minimum two feet higher or lower than adjacent portions of the façade for a minimum distance of 25 feet. iii. Architectural Projections. Append or project facade elements such as porches, balconies, bay windows, cantilevered rooms, and/or awnings. iv. Architectural Recessions. Recess architectural elements or spaces – such as recessed porches, covered passages, recessed balconies, and windows – into the plane of the façade. Roof Forms. New structures shall have roof forms which are residential in b. character, such as gabled, hipped, mansard, gambrel, and pyramidal roofs. 7. Building Materials and Finishes. General Standards. a. i. Each side of a building that is visible from a street, park, or passenger railway shall be designed with a complementary level of detailing and quality of materials. ii. Building Entrances and Common Areas. Building entrances and common areas shall include finishes and materials that are durable and high quality and distinguish these spaces from other elements of the building. iii. Parking. Parking structures shall be designed to be compatible with the architectural character, materials, and colors of the overall development. iv. Durability of Materials. Exterior materials shall be durable and promote permanence and longevity. They shall not unintentionally discolor due to weathering or corrosion. Materials that discolor naturally, such as copper, are encouraged. v. Design Consistency. (1) Architectural materials and constructional assemblies shall be designed to be consistent with the building’s architectural style in terms of structural expression, scale, and proportion. (2) Finishes, fixtures, and other architectural details shall be designed to be consistent throughout the building’s exterior. (3) Attached architectural elements and details such as lighting fixtures, attic vents, custom signage, awnings, hand rails, balconies, and trellises shall be designed to be consistent with other elements throughout the building’s exterior. Multiple Materials. b. i. Two or more wall materials may be combined on one façade. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 60 ii. If located one above the other, lighter appearing materials shall be placed above more substantial materials (e.g. wood above stucco or masonry, or stucco and glass above masonry). iii. In general, vertical joints between different materials shall occur only at inside corners. Exposed Wood. c. i. Exterior walls that are or were originally clad in exposed wood shall not be covered with a non-wood material. Wood-like materials, such as cementitious siding, may be used. ii. Exposed wood (or wood-like materials) shall be finished in a manner that minimizes maintenance and promotes the material's longevity. Reflective Materials. Reflective materials are prohibited. d. Masonry and Stone. e. i. Brick and cut stone shall be laid in true bonding patterns. Mortar joints shall be struck. ii. River and rubble stone shall be laid from large stones closest to the ground to small stones farthest from the ground, with smooth or beaded mortar joints. iii. Masonry detailing shall transition from stone to other materials through moldings, caps, and other trim elements. Veneers. Veneers should turn corners, avoiding exposed edges and continue f. down the side of a building to a logical break, such as a change in wall plane. Trim. Trim materials and finishes shall be differentiated from adjacent wall g. cladding materials and finishes. Acceptable trim materials shall be wood, precast concrete, stone, tile, or similar materials. Stucco trim shall be permitted at the discretion of the Review Authority, and in such instances it shall feature a smooth finish that contrasts significantly from adjacent stucco wall cladding. Synthetic Materials. The use of synthetic materials is allowed when the Review h. Authority determines that the material: i. Adequately simulates the appearance of the natural material it imitates. ii. Demonstrates an ability to age similar to or better than the natural material it imitates. iii. Has a permanent texture, color, and character that is acceptable for the proposed application. iv. Can be pressure washed and, in general, withstand anti-graffiti measures. Prohibited Materials. Prohibited exterior materials include the following: i. i. T1-11. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 61 ii. Rough-sawn wood. iii. Vertical siding, except board and batten. iv. Metal siding. v. Concrete block as an exterior finish material. Renovations and Alterations. j. i. Modifications to existing buildings shall be architecturally compatible with the existing building as determined by the Review Authority. ii. Exterior walls that are or were originally clad in wood, masonry, or stone shall not be covered with a different material such as stucco. iii. Renovations or alterations to “modernized” pre-World War II buildings shall restore the original façade materials, textures, fenestration, and ornamentation to the extent possible as determined by the Review Authority. 8. Window and Door Opening Design. Window Hierarchy. Building elevations shall exhibit a hierarchy between a. window sizes to differentiate between public rooms (larger windows) and private rooms (smaller windows). Glazing Ratio. Street-facing facades, shall have an overall wall composition of at b. least 20 percent glazing, but not more than 60 percent glazing. Vertical Proportion. 75 percent or more of window openings shall have a vertical c. proportion, in which their height exceeds their width by 25 percent or more. Openings divided by muntins of four inches or more in width shall constitute separate openings. Window Depth. Trim at least three-quarters inch in depth must be provided d. around all windows, or windows must be recessed at least two inches from the plane of the surrounding exterior wall. For double-hung and horizontal sliding windows, at least one sash shall achieve the two-inch recess. The recess depth shall be specific to the architectural style being utilized. Relationship to Surrounding Buildings. Windows shall be placed on a wall in a e. manner that maintains existing privacy with neighbors. Window and Door Materials and Detailing. f. i. Allowed window and door materials include wood, fiberglass, steel, or aluminum. ii. Muntins, if used, shall be true and divide one pane from the adjoining pane, be of substantial dimension, and not be flat. iii. Flush "nail-on" aluminum windows, and horizontal aluminum sliding windows are prohibited. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 62 iv. The color of vinyl and vinyl clad windows shall be consistent with the overall color scheme of the building. For example, white windows should be used with window trim that is painted a deep color. v. Glazing shall be clear glass, particularly in storefront and primary window applications. Transom and other specialty windows are not required to be clear and may be decorative. vi. Window sills shall be detailed to properly shed water. vii. Head casing shall be equal in width to or wider than jamb casing. viii. Accessories may include operable shutters sized to match their openings, opaque canvas awnings and other shading devices, and planter boxes supported by visible brackets appropriate to each design. Security bars are prohibited on façade windows. 9. Façade Alignment Vertical Alignment. With the exception of roofs, cornices, and other such a. features, façades shall be oriented vertically and shall have no slope. Horizontal Alignment. With the exception of bay windows and similar features, b. facades that are located within 30 feet of a public street shall run parallel or perpendicular to said street. Civic buildings are exempt from this requirement. 10. Façade Elements. Applicability. Street-facing façades shall incorporate a minimum of two of the a. Façade Elements shown in Table 15-1611-C.6. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 63 TABLE 15-1611-C.6: FAÇADE ELEMENTS—NR OVERLAY DISTRICT A. Front Yard 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 5 ft. min. ⓑ Length: 15 ft. min. ⓒ Height above Sidewalk: 3 ft. max. 1. Supplemental Standards a. Planters, garden walls, fences and hedges are permitted at the sidewalk to a maximum height of 3 ft. per Section 15-2006. Materials and design shall be compatible with the architectural style of the building. b. Water features, shade structures, seating, and gardens are encouraged in this area. c. Vehicular parking, trash collection, and storage are not permitted in this area. d. When Front Yards are raised from the level of the sidewalk, the resulting retaining wall shall be decorative and clad in brick or stone. B. Porch 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 5 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 8 ft. min. ⓒ Height above adjacent grade: 18 in. min., 4 ft. max. ⓓ Height: 8 ft. min. clear from the finish floor 2. Supplemental Standards a. Provide landscaping in front of and around porch. b. Railings should be no higher than required by the building code. c. The porch may extend around to encroach into the street sideyard up to 1/2 of the required setback. If insufficient distance exists, the minimum porch depth shall be achieved by moving back the façade the necessary distance. d. Awnings may be attached to the face of the porch if the awning is adequately supported and if the awning is compatible with the architectural style of the porch and building. e. Porches shall not be enclosed, including by insect screens. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 64 TABLE 15-1611-C-6: FAÇADE ELEMENTS—NR OVERLAY DISTRICT C. Stoop 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 6 ft. min., 15 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 4 ft. min., 10 ft. max. ⓒ Height: Max. 4 ft. elevation above finish sidewalk grade 2. Supplemental Standards a. Landscaping encouraged in front, around and/or within walls of stoop. b. Minimum 3 ft. to maximum 4 ft. high garden wall and gate may be provided at entry to stoop. c. Entry gates to swing in a direction away from sidewalk. d. Use of other frontage types at entry stoop (e.g., awning, bay window, arcade) allowed. e. Exterior stairs may be located perpendicular or parallel to the adjacent sidewalk. f. The landing may be covered or uncovered, but shall not be enclosed beyond the building façade (e.g., stoop landings may be recessed into the building façade and be enclosed by the walls of the recess. D. Terrace 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Clear Depth: 7 ft. min. ⓑ Length: no min./no max. ⓒ Height: Max. 4 ft. elevation above finish sidewalk grade ⓓ Railing Height: no higher than required by the building code 2. Supplemental Standards a. Use of other frontage types (e.g., awning, bay window) allowed. b. Exterior stairs may be perpendicular or parallel to the adjacent sidewalk but shall not encroach into the right-of-way. The landing may be covered or uncovered. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 65 TABLE 15-1611-C-6: FAÇADE ELEMENTS—NR OVERLAY DISTRICT E. Bay Window 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Depth: 2 ft. min., 4 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 15 ft. max. ⓒ Height for 2nd fl.: 10 ft. min. clear from the ground ⓓ Encroachment into Setback.: 3 ft. max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. Bay windows are permitted on the ground floor of buildings with residential ground floors. b. Provide landscape in front and around bay windows on the ground floor. c. Bay windows to have a minimum 25% glazing. F. Balcony 1. Basic Standards ⓐ Depth: 5 ft. min., 10 ft. max. ⓑ Length: 8 ft. min. ⓒ Height: 8 ft. min. clear, 12 ft. max. clear from the finish floor ⓓ Encroachment into Setback: 4 ft. max. 2. Supplemental Standards a. Balcony may be covered but should be a minimum 50% open on three sides. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 66 General Site Regulations Article 20 Section 15-2006 already exists within the Citywide Development Code for the purpose or regulating fences, hedges, and walls. Section 15-2006-E was reserved for fencing requirements for Downtown Districts. The following content for Section 15-2006-E is new and will regulate fences in the DT and other mixed use districts. The pre-existing fence regulations will apply in the remainder of the Downtown Planning Area. Changes to 15-2006-M are proposed in order to clarify permitted and prohibited materials in all areas. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-2006 Fences, Walls, and Hedges E. Fence Requirements for DT, MX, and CMS Districts. In Downtown and other pedestrian- oriented areas it is of critical importance to create an attractive, active, and comfortable pedestrian environment. It is equally important to secure property and to keep unauthorized people out of private areas. This subsection has been structured to balance these two needs by allowing the entire perimeter of a block or property to be secured by a combination of buildings and fences, while not allowing for suburban-style fenced complexes. Buildings should visually dominate private frontage, with taller fencing filling in the gaps along the street and securing sides and rears of properties as put forth below. 1. Identifying the Front Yard Line. For the purposes of this subsection only, the Front Yard will be considered to be the area between the Front Yard Line and the back of the sidewalk. The Front Yard Line shall be identified as follows: a. For sites which abut two or more streets, the Front Yard Line for each street frontage shall be measured individually. b. The Front Yard shall be the entire area between the back of the sidewalk and a straight parallel line which is located 12 inches behind the façade of the primary building and which extends along the entire frontage (the “front yard line”). c. For complex or highly articulated buildings the front yard line shall be measured from the furthest point back on the street-facing façade of the building, at the discretion of the Review Authority. d. When there is more than one building along a lot’s frontage (as determined by the Review Authority), the front yard line shall be measured from the façade of the building (excluding accessory buildings) along the frontage which is set back the greatest distance. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 67 e. Front yard fence standards shall apply to all fences within the Front Yard, including those which are parallel or perpendicular to the street and including those which enclose porches, patios, and other such spaces. f. A frontage shall not have a Front Yard Line, and all fences on that frontage shall be considered Interior/Rear Yard Fences, if the following circumstances apply: i. The building sits directly at the back of the sidewalk, and no other building exists on that frontage of the lot. ii. The site is occupied by a legal non-conforming parking lot without a building on site. iii. The site is occupied by legal non-conforming buildings which are set back more than 50 feet. 2. Front Yard. a. Minimum Setback. All fences shall be set back no less than 12 inches from the back of the sidewalk and may not be located in the public right-of-way. No setback is required from side and rear property lines. FIGURE 15-2006-E.1: IDENTFYING THE FRONT YARD LINE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 68 b. Maximum Height. Three feet. c. Transparency. Fences must be open a minimum of 80 percent (e.g., no more than 20 percent opaque) to allow for the passage of light and air. d. Materials. i. Front yard fence materials shall consist only of wood, tubular steel, wrought iron, or other decorative metal. Brick, stone, or stucco piers may be used in combination with these materials. New chain link front yard fences are prohibited. ii. Retaining walls shall be designed consistent with the architectural style of the main building. Retaining walls shall consist only of decorative concrete, masonry, stone, or brick. Timber may be permitted unless it is in conflict with the Building Code or applicable Public Works standards. iii. Veneer or synthetic materials simulating the actual, natural material (e.g., brick or stone veneer in place of actual brick or stone) shall only be allowed upon demonstrating to the Review Authority that the substitute material: (1) Adequately simulates the natural material; and (2) Is organized visually to simulate actual construction using the natural material (e.g., organization of brick rows, larger stones at the bottom and smaller stones toward the top). 3. Interior and Rear Yards. a. Minimum Setback. All fences shall be set back no less than 12 inches from the back of the sidewalk and may not be located in the public right-of-way. No setback is required from side and rear property lines. b. Maximum Height. Six feet. c. Transparency. No requirement. Fences and walls may be up to 100 percent opaque. d. Materials. i. Interior and side yard fence and wall materials shall consist only of wood, tubular steel, wrought iron, other decorative metal, brick, stone, stucco, concrete block. Chain link may be used when it is not visible from a public street as determined by the Review Authority. ii. Interior and side yard fences and walls shall be designed to be consistent with the architectural style of the main building when they are visible from a public street as determined by the Review Authority. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 69 iii. When visible from a public street, veneer or synthetic materials simulating the actual, natural material (e.g., brick or stone veneer in place of actual brick or stone) shall only be allowed upon demonstrating to the Review Authority that the substitute material: (1) Adequately simulates the natural material; and (2) Is organized visually to simulate actual construction using the natural material (e.g., organization of brick rows, larger stones at the bottom and smaller stones toward the top). 4. Through Lots. All street frontages shall be considered Front Yards. 5. Private Patios, Yards, Etc. a. Facing Front Yard or Common Open Space. Fences, walls, or hedges enclosing private patios, yards, or porches that face the Front Yard or the Common Open Space are subject to the requirements of section 15-2006.E.2 above. b. Interior Yard and Rear Yards. Fences and walls up to six feet in height may enclose private patios or yards. M. Additional Materials Standards. 1. Limitation on Chain-Link Fencing. Chain-link fencing is not permitted in: a. Single-Family Districts. Along a Major Street, unless it is three feet or less in height. b. Multi-Family Districts and Mixed-Use Districts. i. Along a Major Street. ii. Local Streets. Along street-facing yards in developments that contain six or more units. (1) Exception. A fence that is three feet or less in height and located within the Pinedale Neighborhood Plan. c. Office and Commercial Districts. Along Major Street-facing yards, or when the parcel shares a street that also serves a Residential District. d. Industrial Districts. When abutting a residential use or when located across a Local Street from a residential use. 2. Limitation on Concrete/Masonry Block. Plain concrete block shall not be the primary material along Major Streets or other situations when block walls are required as part of project approval, such as at the rear of landscape easements. Concrete block or precast concrete walls shall be split face or finished with stucco, and capped with a decorative cap, or other decorative material as may be approved by the Director. Other materials may be approved by the Director should the design provide for an enhanced DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 70 appearance. For continuity, walls should incorporate similar styles, colors, etc., when located on the same side of the street. 3. Limitation on Wire Mesh Fencing. Wire mesh fencing shall be permitted in the following circumstances: a. Commercial Districts, O Districts, BP Districts, and RBP districts when not visible from a public street. b. Industrial Districts. 4. Permitted Materials. The following materials shall be permitted in all districts, except when a district has a more restrictive list of permitted materials: a. Materials specifically permitted elsewhere in this Section; b. Wood pickets; c. Split rail wood; d. Wrought iron and tubular steel; e. Brick and stone; f. Stucco; g. Shade cloth when used in combination with permitted fencing such as chain link, wrought iron, or tubular steel, provided it consists of materials specifically manufactured for such a purpose; and h. Privacy slats when in combination with chain link fencing (when chain link is allowed) provided it consists of materials specifically manufactured for such a purpose. 5. Prohibited Materials. The following materials shall not be permitted to be used as a fence material in any district: a. Plywood, oriented strand board, pressboard, and similar wood products; b. Chicken wire or similar wire products; c. Corrugated metal or corrugated plastic; d. Piping (including metal, PVC, and other materials); e. Hazardous fencing shall only be allowed as put forth in Section 15-2009, and when allowed shall not consist of improved materials, such as broken glass or nails. f. Improvised materials, including but not limited to wood scraps, doors, garage doors, refrigerator doors, and mattresses; g. Improvised screening materials, including but not limited to blankets and tarps; and h. Any material not listed unless approved by the specifically Review Authority. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 71 6. Fence Construction. a. All fences must be built with a professional and durable appearance and must be maintained in good condition. b. Permitted materials may be combined (for example, brick columns combined with wrought iron panels), but combinations shall not be haphazard or random in appearance. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 72 Parking and Loading Article 24 Section 15-2407 was reserved for parking requirements for Downtown Districts. The following content is a new section which will be added to the Citywide Development Code to regulate the DTN, DTG, and DTC districts. The pre-existing parking regulations will apply in the remainder of the Downtown Planning Area. Other regulations which are already present within the Citywide Development Code already apply to Downtown and help to implement the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, such as the ability to create in-lieu parking districts, a mechanism to reduce parking requirements, etc. Black text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-2407 Required Parking for Downtown Districts A. The required number of on-site parking spaces are stated in Table 15-2407, Required Parking for Downtown Districts. The parking requirement for any use not listed in Table 15-2407 shall be the same as required for the land use in other districts as stated in Table 15-2409, Required Parking, Other Districts. TABLE 15-2407: REQUIRED ON-SITE PARKING SPACES, DOWNTOWN DISTRICTS Use Required Parking Spaces Residential Studio, and one-bedroom units 0.5 space per unit Two bedrooms 0.5 space per unit Three or more bedrooms 0.5 space per unit Non-Residential Office None Required Retail None Required Restaurant None Required All other Non-Residential uses None Required DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 73 Signs Article 26 Sign regulations already exist within the Citywide Development Code, but they require the following revisions and additions in order to fully implement the vision of the Downtown plans. Unaltered sections and subsections of the Citywide Development Code sign regulations are not included here. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Red strikethrough text will be deleted from the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. Permitted Sign Types by District 15-2608 The following table establishes the types of signs allowed by district. TABLE 15-2608: PERMITTED SIGN TYPES BY ZONING DISTRICT Zoning District (Frontage) Permitted Sign Types Awning Monument Pole Projecting Roof Wall Window Buffer, Residential, and Public and Semi-Public Districts All Districts See Section 15-2609, Signage Allowances for Specific Uses Downtown Districts DTC Permitted - - Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted DTG Permitted Permitted (1) - Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted DTN Permitted - - Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Mixed-Use Districts NMX Permitted - - Permitted - Permitted Permitted CMX Permitted Permitted - Permitted - Permitted Permitted RMX Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted Commercial Districts CMS Permitted - - Permitted - Permitted Permitted CC Permitted Permitted - Permitted - Permitted Permitted CR Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted CG Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted CH Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted CRC Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted Employment Districts O Permitted Permitted - Permitted - Permitted Permitted BP Permitted Permitted - Permitted - Permitted Permitted DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 74 Main Panel Street facing valence TABLE 15-2608: PERMITTED SIGN TYPES BY ZONING DISTRICT Zoning District (Frontage) Permitted Sign Types Awning Monument Pole Projecting Roof Wall Window RBP Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted - Permitted Permitted IL Permitted Permitted - Permitted - Permitted Permitted IH Permitted Permitted - Permitted - Permitted Permitted Notes: 1. Only permitted within the Downtown General (DTG) District along Mariposa Street between M Street and P Street or in conjunction with a legal non-conforming building that is set back from the sidewalk 30 feet or more. Standards for Specific Sign Types 15-2610 This section establishes location and other general standards for specific sign types that apply to all areas where such signs are permitted. Additional standards applicable to these signs in specific zoning districts or associated with specific uses are located in Sections 15-2608, Standards for Signs by District, and 15-2609, Signage Allowances for Specific Uses. A. Awning and Canopy Signs. Signs painted or printed on awnings, mounted to canopies, arcades, or similar features or structures are subject to the following standards: 1. Locatio n. Awnings/canopies that display signage shall be located on the ground floor of buildings. 2. Maximum Sign Area Per Sign. 10 square feet or 25 percent of the surface area of the awning, whichever is less. Signs mounted to canopies shall be no taller than 24 inches. 3. Minimum Sign Clearance. Eight feet. 4. Illumination. Internal illumination of awnings is prohibited. FIGURE 15-2610-A: AWNING SIGN DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 75 FIGURE 15-2610-B: CANOPY SIGN C. Monument Signs. Monument signs are subject to the following standards: 1. Maximum Number. One per 600 feet of street frontage. 2. Maximum Sign Area per Sign. a. RMX, CR, CG, CH, and RBP districts: 60 square feet. b. Other permitted districts: 32 square feet. 3. Minimum Separation. Monument signs shall have a minimum separation of 50 feet from any other monument sign. 4. Required Setback. a. Five feet from the property line. b. No monument sign is permitted within 660 feet of the nearest edge of any travel lane of Freeway 41 or any future freeway which may be opened to public travel, if any said sign is visible from any part of such travel lane. 5. Height Limit. Eight feet. a. Exception. When permitted within a Downtown (DT) District: five feet. 6. Lighting. Lighting systems shall not exceed 100 foot Lamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal foot candles. When adjacent to streets with a greater average light intensity, systems shall not exceed 500 FT-L. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 76 E. Wall Signs. Wall signs are subject to the following standards: 1. Maximum Number. One per building frontage or tenant space plus one building identification sign per building frontage located on the uppermost story of a building with four or more stories. 2. Maximum Sign Area Per Sign. Five percent of the wall area or 100 square feet, whichever is less. 3. Height Limit. The top of Wall Signs shall be no higher than the following: a. Downtown Districts. Wall Signs shall not be located closer than 12 inches to the eve or parapet. b. Other Districts, Buildings Which Include Residential Uses. 20 feet or the height of the wall of the building to which the sign is attached, whichever is lower. Building identification signs located on the uppermost story of a building shall be no higher than the wall of the building to which the sign is attached. c. Other Districts, Buildings Which Do Not Include Residential Uses. The height of the wall of the building to which the sign is attached. 4. Projection Allowed. Wall signs shall not extend more than 12 inches beyond the face of the wall to which they are attached. 5. Placement. a. No wall sign may cover, wholly or partially, any wall opening. b. Wall signs shall not occupy more than 80% percent of any architectural element that they occupy (frieze, pilaster, etc.). c. Buildings within Downtown Districts. Wall Signs shall not be located closer than 24 inches from openings or the edge of the building façade. 6. Orientation. Unless a different orientation is specifically authorized, each wall-mounted sign shall be placed flat against the wall of the building. 7. Illumination within Downtown Districts. If illuminated, Wall Signs may be only illuminated by one of the following methods: a. External Illumination. Externally illuminated with decorative lamps mounted in a manner that does not block the view of the sign from the street or sidewalk. b. Exposed Neon. Individual letters may be internally illuminated with exposed neon tubes or a similar light source, but shall not have a translucent panel, lens, or face. c. Halo. The illumination of a sign by projecting light behind an opaque letter or emblem which results in the appearance of ring of light around the unilluminated letter or emblem. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 77 FIGURE 15-2610-E: WALL SIGN DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 78 Article 49 Planning Authorities The following table is not regulatory, but provides an overview of permits and actions for ease of reference. The change identified below would make this table consistent with the changes being proposed in article 51. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. No changes were proposed to this Article in the July 27 Public Review Draft. All changes shown are new and therefore are highlighted in yellow. TABLE 15-4907: PLANNING PERMITS AND ACTIONS Proposed Activity Permit or Action Required Type of Decision Use-Only Proposals Establishment of a (P) Permitted use, not associated with development of property Zone Clearance Ministerial Establishment of a (C) Conditional use Conditional Use Permit Discretionary Quasi-Judicial Establishment of a Temporary use Temporary Use Permit Discretionary Quasi-Judicial Establishment of use which is not listed in this Code Director's Determination Ministerial Development Proposals Development of one single-family home, or duplex, or qualifying Downtown housing which complies with all provisions of this Code Zone Clearance Ministerial Development of property to a greater extent than is covered by a Zone Clearance Development Permit (Formerly Site Plan Review) Discretionary Quasi-Judicial Request for relief from property development standards due to unique conditions in conjunction w/a Development Permit Variance Discretionary Quasi-Judicial Request for relief from property development standards of 10% or less in conjunction with a Development Permit Minor Deviation Discretionary Quasi-Judicial Innovative development proposal which does not comply with the provisions of any zone district within this Code Planned Development Permit Discretionary Quasi-Judicial DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 79 Article 51 Zone Clearance The Zone Clearance already exists within the Citywide Development Code, but requires the following edits in order to implement streamlined review of certain Downtown housing projects. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. No changes were proposed to this Article in the July 27 Public Review Draft. All changes shown are new and therefore are highlighted in yellow. 15-5101 Purpose This article establishes procedures for conducting a Zone Clearance to verify that each new or expanded use or structure complies with all of the applicable requirements of this Code and with any applicable policies or standards of the General Plan and any operative plans. 15-5102 Applicability A. Establishment of a Permitted Use. A Zone Clearance is required to confirm that the establishment of a new use is permitted as a matter of right and that no Conditional Use Permit or other entitlements are required prior to securing a tax certificate and commencing operations. B. Development of One Single-Family Home or One Duplex. A Zone Clearance is required to confirm that the construction of one single-family house or one duplex is permitted as a matter of right and that such a project is being proposed in a manner which is compliant with, and without any deviations from, all applicable development standards prior to securing a building permit. If a proposed development project does not meet the threshold for a Zone Clearance it shall be required to secure a Development Permit. C. Signs. Unless a Master Sign Program is required per Section 15-2612, a Zone Clearance is required to confirm that proposals for new signage are consistent with all applicable regulations of this Code. D. Downtown Housing. 1. Downtown projects which meet all of the following criteria shall require a Zone Clearance to confirm that their construction is permitted as a matter of right and that such a project is being proposed in a manner which is compliant with, and without any deviations from, all applicable development standards prior to securing a Building Permit: a. Located within a DT District; b. A minimum of 16 total dwelling units in the project; c. A residential density of no less than 20 du/ac; DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 80 d. Residential uses must occupy 50% or more of the total floor area; and e. No historic resources or potential historic resources are located on the site. 2. Downtown projects which do not meet the threshold for a Zone Clearance shall be required to secure a Development Permit. DE. Other Activities. A Zone Clearance shall be required for any other activity for which a Zone Clearance is specifically required elsewhere in this Code. EF. Exceptions. 1. No Zone Clearance shall be required for the continuation of previously approved or permitted uses and structures, or uses and structures that are not subject to any Building Code or Development Code regulations. 2. A change in building use that complies with this Code shall require a Building Permit if the use is in a different Building Code occupancy group class, such as conversion of a retail building to public assembly or residential use. 15-5103 Review Authority If the Director determines that the proposed use or building is allowed as a matter of right by this Code, and conforms to all the applicable development and use standards, the Director shall issue a Zone Clearance. 15-5104 Application Requirements A. Applications for a Zone Clearance shall be submitted in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 15-5002, Application and Fees. B. The Director may request that the Zone Clearance application be accompanied by a written narrative, operational statement, plans, and other related materials necessary to show that the proposed development, alteration, or use of the site complies with all applicable provisions of this Code. The Director may require attachments of other written or graphic information, including, but not limited to, statements, numeric data, site plans, floor plans, and building elevations and sections, as a record of the proposal’s conformity with the applicable regulations of this Code. 15-5105 Public Notice Public notice shall not be required. DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 81 Article 55 Terms and Definitions The Terms and Definitions already exist within the Citywide Development Code, but they require the following revisions and additions in order to fully implement the vision of the Downtown plans. Unaltered portions are not included here. Black text is presently in the Citywide Development Code. Red strikethrough text will be deleted from the Citywide Development Code. Underlined red text is new language that will be added to the Citywide Development Code. Text which is highlighted in yellow has been revised since the released of the July 27 Public Review Draft. 15-5501 List of Terms City Council Clear Conditionally Permitted Mixed-Use Development Muntin Noise-Related Definitions Security Grate or Grilles Service Areas Setback 15-5502 Definitions City Council. The City Council of the City of Fresno. Clear. Measured depth of frontage elements such as porches, arcades, galleries are free of encroachments other than allowed signs, light fixtures, sidewalk dining and allowed furnishings, and outdoor display of merchandise. Conditionally Permitted. Permitted subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Mezzanine. An intermediate floor within a building interior without walls, partitions, closets, screens, or other complete enclosing interior walls or partitions that is open to the floor below and has a floor area that is no greater than one-third of the total floor area of the floor below. When the total floor area of a mezzanine exceeds one-third of the total floor area of the floor DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 82 below it constitutes an additional story. In some instances, mezzanine may be defined differently by the Building Code. Muntin. A bar or rigid supporting strip between adjacent panes of glass. Mixed-Use Development. The development of a parcel or building with two or more different land uses such as, but not limited to, a combination of residential, office, manufacturing, retail, public, or entertainment in a single or physically integrated group of structures. Security Grate or Grilles. A metal grate that rolls up over, or slides across, a window or door to provide protection against unwanted entry. It also can be a fixed metal fixture over window openings. Service Areas. Portions of a building which are utilitarian in nature and are not typically frequented by the general public or occupants of the building, such as utility equipment rooms, freight loading areas, trash/recycling rooms, and emergency exit stairways/hallways. Setback. The distance between the parcel line and a building, not including permitted projections, that must be kept clear or open. See also Section 15-304, Measuring Distances, and Section 15-313, Determining Setbacks (Yards). DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT CODE Public Hearing Draft (Revised): October, 2016 83 Exhibit E Comments Letters/Response to Comments on Plans and Code Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 1/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Insert preamble statement about the "look" and "feel" that the City expects the standards to address. This would provide the needed clarity to offer suitable alternate solutions that can achieve the desired effect. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Intended review process for the UC Overlay District needs to be clearly identified. Is it a Development Permit (formerly Site Plan Review)? If so, then state that it will be Director Approval. No Each zoning district doesn't have a separate explanation of the Development Permit and other entitlements, so adding it here would be confusing. Standard Development Code procedures will apply. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 It might also be useful if the Overlay District expressly allow for modifications at the Director's Approval. No Projects which propose creative solutions outside of the parameters of their base and overlay districts may apply for a Planned Development (PD) permit. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Front Setback: 20 foot maximum front setback is too rigid. Need greater setback at per miter locations for better pedestrian experience. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Front Setback: Is setback measured from edge of ROW or face of curb? Recommend face of curb. No Per Section 15-313, front setbacks are measured from the back of the sidewalk. No change necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Front Setback: No distinction offered between setback along a private street or public street. No There are not setback requirements for private streets. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Side and Rear Setbacks: Not clear how side/rear setback applies if R district is across a public or private street. Maximum of 20 feet is okay, but flexibility for something different or less would be preferred. No Along a street, front setback standards shall apply. Side and rear setbacks apply to abutting parcels on the same block. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Side and Rear Setbacks: Maximum of 20 feet is okay, but flexibility for something different or less would be preferred. No The Residential district setback will not apply when it is located across the street, only if/when the R district abuts the UC overlay. With the currently proposed boundaries, this would not apply, however if the boundaries change, and the UC overlay directly abuts an R district, this setback will be very important. Also, please note that the 20 foot is a minimum, not a maximum. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Parking Setback: It is assumed this provision is directed at surface parking in front of a building, but it's not completely clear. A 30-ft setback is too much and again is more rigid. A perfo1mance standard, keeping with Form Based coding would be preferred. A 30-ft setback is wasting valuable real estate in the downtown area. A 20-ft. setback from FOC would provide room for a 12-ft. curb pattern plus a landscape performance requirement for the remaining 8ft. between sidewalk and parking lot would be more appropriate. Please keep in mind that CRMC will function as a "campus" with centralized parking and large buildings and intense land use for medical and support services. In this model, there are not individual parking lots for each building, with the exception of limited surface parking for ADA, ambulance, medical transport and support staff adjacent to buildings. As the campus builds out, there will be more structured parking, and less surface lots. No This only applies to perimeter streets, not to the interior of the campus. It does not apply to surface parking located behind a building. It also does not apply to parking structures, as long as the portion along a perimeter street has non-parking uses. No change is necessary. Downtown Development Code Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 2/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Parking Setback: The reference to structured parking above the first floor could imply that ground floor space within a parking structure would be required as a mixed use and or retail, as opposed to parking. This will not be the case on the CRMC campus. The parking structures are intended to be parking only. Parking structures are expensive and unique in their design, and certainly are not adept for mixed uses, especially for medical and support services. The structures are likely to be painted and perimeter landscaping provided to shield the massing of the structure. We welcome a review of our existing parking structure at the intersection of E. Illinois Avenue and N. Wayte Lane. This landscaping provides a pleasant buffer between the structure and the adjacent campus streets. No There is no requirement for mixed use or ground floor retail per se. Any permitted use would be allowed in the ground floor of a garage along a perimeter street, such as clinics, pharmacies, administrative offices, etc. Or, parking garages with full ground floor parking are allowed as long as they are 30 feet front perimeter streets--this means that roughly 90% of the campus is exempt from this requirement. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Frontage Coverage: The proposed code requires minimum frontage coverage to 75% along public streets at perimeter of campus. We interpret this code requirement as guidance for building densification downtown along the pedestrian corridors, as opposed to build-out of significant amount of surface parking and open space on-site. CRMC agrees with this approach for permanent buildings along the public streets. As noted above, CRMC will function as "campus" with centralized parking and large buildings and intense land use. With the density that will be provided, there will also be strategically located pockets of open space relative to building functions and campus activities. This coverage limit may be too rigid to be efficient for some building uses and their functional relationship, locations, and square footage needs on the campus. Performance flexibility more in keeping with Form Based coding applicable to the campus operating/functioning as a single parcel would be preferred. Yes The calculation of the Frontage Coverage has been clarified to exclude parks, plazas, and cross streets. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Pedestrian Access: For a very large building footprint, dictating a public entrance every 400 ft isn't practical from a security standpoint and would impose unnecessary design and functionality limitations for the interior activity and use areas. Yes The text has been clarified; this is only required along perimeter streets. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 48 Façade Design: Rigid requirements for window placements along street frontage facades is not practical for hospital uses and is not acceptable. CRMC understands that building facades along public streets are important. However, each building may have different lighting, energy, and ingress/egress standards based on their use to make meeting this standard difficult and in some instances, potentially impossible. A performance flexibility that recognizes that buildings will be oriented to the center of the campus, yet requiring street frontage facades with landscape buffers that are appealing to the pedestrian perspective is an appropriate Form Based code approach. Yes The text has been clarified; this is only required along perimeter streets. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 49 Façade Design: Requirements for awnings to shade sidewalks is impractical. Taller buildings are likely to provide the needed shade to the sidewalk areas. Yes The text has been clarified; this is only required along perimeter streets. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 3/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Community Regional Medical Center DDC 49 Building Height: Allow 60 feet in height within 100 feet of an RS district. Please keep in mind that the RS Districts that are adjacent to the campus are on opposite sides of the perimeter streets. Therefore, the nearest structures are typically set back from the campus by the width of the adjacent right-of-way plus building setbacks, typically at least 70' to 80', before considering any building setbacks on the CRMC property. No Comment noted. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 49 Building Height: The height setback limitation of 75 ft. within 300 ft. of an RS District is too restrictive. There are existing and approved projects under construction that exceed this requirement. Propose that this second tier height requirement be removed. No Comment noted. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 49 Building Height: The standard has a limitation of 235 ft. for exemplary, landmark design. The hospital will propose such exemplary, landmark design, and as such requests a height limit of 300 ft. Yes A provision which allow buildings up to 275' in height on portions of the campus which are farthest from residential areas has been added. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 49 Lot Coverage: See comments above regarding frontage coverage.No The UC overlay removes the lot coverage requirement. There is no relation to frontage coverage. No change is necessary. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 49 Sidewalks: The standard defines that sidewalks on internal streets shall conform to City PW standards. Since the campus is an on-going redevelopment of a former residential area, the re-constructed sidewalks on campus follow a residential curb pattern that includes a landscaped park strip with shade trees and a minimum 5-ft. sidewalk, which exceeds PW standards for residential streets. Yes The text has been clarified; the 12 foot urban sidewalk is only required along Fresno Street. Public Works standards apply on other streets. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 50 Sidewalks: The section also defines a minimum 12-ft. width for sidewalks along perimeter streets. For the purpose of this campus, the perimeter streets are E. McKenzie Avenue to the north and N. Fresno Street to the east and south. CRMC concurs with the requirement for a 12-ft. pattern. However, previously constructed sidewalk on E. McKenzie Avenue north of the Ambulatory Care Building and previously approved street plans for other portions of E. McKenzie Avenue include a 6-ft. landscape park strip and 6 ft. sidewalk within the 12 ft. curb pattern is a better design that blends with the RS District on the n01th side of E. McKenzie Avenue. Yes The text has been clarified; the 12 foot urban sidewalk is only required along Fresno Street. Public Works standards apply on other streets. Community Regional Medical Center DDC 50 Street Trees: This section provides suitable flexibility, however the spacing of street trees is tied to the location and spacing of street lights in order to achieve minimum level of illumination necessary for public safety. The Public Works department needs to develop a comprehensive downtown streetscape standard, and this section should be limited to a reference to the said standard. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 4/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Community Regional Medical Center DDC 50 Pedestrian Scaled Street lights: The intent of this design standard is not clear; the mixing of "pedestrian-scaled" with the term "street lights" is confusing. Since both of these type of lights will be owned and maintained by the City Public Works Department, we expect that there will be new Public Works standards that will define the location, spacing and illumination requirements for these lights. Further, it is expected that Public Works will develop a comprehensive streetscape standards that will address curb pattern improvements such as pedestrian lights, street lights, safety lights, street tree spacing, tree well grates and street furniture (if any), and concrete finishing details for the sidewalk. This entire section C.8 should be limited to defining the requirement for a 12-ft. sidewalk pattern, which may require the dedication of a public pedestrian easement to achieve this width. Beyond this requirement, the section should refer to Public Works standards. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 3 Simplify and clarify descriptions of the Activity Classes.Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 16 Define "Tuck Under."Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 20 Separate the Common Open Space graphic from the Public Plaza text--it looks like they belong together, but they are separate. Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 31 Veneers should be mitered at corners to hide the seam.Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 31 Renovations and Alterations section needs to be broken into smaller subsections with headings for calrity. Overall clarity and specificity needs to be improved. For modernized pre-WWII buidldngs, also match textures. Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 33 Graphic doesn't match text.Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 34 Item e: glass should be clear to the extend permitted by Title 24.Yes Change has been made. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) DDC 37 Storefront: Identify when storefronts can be recessed (ie: dining).Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 3 Define fenestration. Yes This term was replaced with more widely understood terminology. Craig Scharton DDC 4 Define Review Authority No This term is already defined elsewhere in the Development Code. Craig Scharton DDC 5 Group Residence have been clustered in Lowell. I know that we can’t regulate homes with 6 and other occupants. We should have CUPs for homes over 6. No Most of Lowell is proposed to be zoned RS-5. Group Residential, Large (7 persons or more) is not permitted in RS-5. No change is necessary. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 5/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Craig Scharton DDC 5 Storefront churches should not be allowed on designated ground floor retail streets. They are closed most of the week and do not add to sidewalk vitality. Especially 2,00o sq. ft. or less. They take up valuable retail spaces. Yes Restriction on ground floor use on Activity Class A streets was added. Craig Scharton DDC 6 Government uses should not be permitted on ground floor retail designated corridors. No Government Offices are not allowed on ground floor along Activity Class A streets. Craig Scharton DDC 7 Banks should not be located on designated ground floor retail streets. They are 9-5 M-F uses that create dead areas for night time and weekend entertainment areas. No Banks are not allowed on ground floor along Activity Class A streets. Craig Scharton DDC 7 Food preparation will likely be a part of the Fresno Public Market and should be allowed as a commercial kitchen. Yes This use has been changed to P[1] for Activity Class A, which makes it permissible on the rear portion of the ground floor, or on upper floors. Craig Scharton DDC 7 Nursery and garden centers should be allowed if they fit within a traditional retail building. Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 7 Second hand/vintage stores should be allowed in DT retail areas if they operate in a traditional retail store. Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 8 Urban farms should be allowed in all DTN areas. No Urban Farms should not be allowed on Activity Class A streets, which are our primary retail, dining, and entertainment areas. Urban Farms are allowed on all other streets, however. Craig Scharton DDC 8 Transitional and Supportive housing should be regulated so that they do not negatively impact a neighborhood revitalization area. South Fresno neighborhoods have more than their fair share of these uses. Maybe a CUP or a review of the number of these uses should be required. No The City defers to State legislation in this matter. Craig Scharton DDC 21 Public Plazas should allow outdoor dining with tables reserved for customers for adjoining restaurants. I’ve seen this use in many downtowns. Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 27 Parklets should allow outdoor dining for adjoining restaurants. No Parklets will be considered part of the sidewalk, and will allow dining in the same way as the rest of the sidewalk. Craig Scharton DDC 30 I have concerns with stucco as an allowed exterior finish. This often looks like a suburban style, it often weathers poorly, especially with sprinklers. Can this be defined more clearly to get the best finishes? Yes Language was added to require appropriate finishes Craig Scharton DDC 31 In prohibited materials can we list plywood, particle board and press board? Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 31 Can we be clearer about where signs go on a traditional storefront? In a traditional downtown storefront there is usually a sign area on the top half of the façade. Also hanging pedestrian oriented signs. Maybe a diagram of a traditional storefront with display windows, sign placement, bulkhead… Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 32 Page 32 and following pages- When I see exceptions for civic buildings I wonder if the County would look for exceptions for a jail. I’m not sure if they are under city design guidelines, but it would be good to call this use out. Also, Civic buildings should have clear glass and urban setbacks. No Some flexibility for civic buildings is appropriate. Urban churches, schools, courthouses, and other civic buildings often have plazas in front and stand out architecturally from their surroundings. Craig Scharton DDC 33 define muntins Yes A definition has been added to Article 55. Craig Scharton DDC 39 potential typo on Gallery basic standards item d. An extra apace “gallery may encroach” No Comment noted. No change necessary. This is a formatting quirk that is caused by the "d" in the circle. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 6/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Craig Scharton DDC 41 awning materials should not allow plastic.No Currently only wood, metal, and fabric are allowed. Craig Scharton DDC 42 Odors should include coffee roasting, beer brewing Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 43 you guys are my heroes!No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton DDC 44 add Downtown Fresno Partnership, nonprofits and private event promoters to the list after “public or quasi public” Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 53 What do we think about car ports in multifamily developments? Should they be banned? Yes Carports at the front of the site are inappropriate, however staff feels they are acceptable when they are located away from a public street. Language has been added to the AH and NR overlay districts to clarify this. Craig Scharton DDC 54 stucco wraps of historic homes are a big problem in our older neighborhoods. Should this be more clearly prohibited? Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 56 a common problem in multifamily properties are the lack of window screens and appropriate interior window coverings. This is probably a code issue but could be spelled out here as well. No sheets or blankets of towels for interior window covering and all windows should have screens. No Comment noted. No change necessary. This is a Code Enforcement issue. Craig Scharton DDC 57 I don’t think screened in porches should be allowed. Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 58 Page 58 and following pages- Is there a way to make sure that stairs are built with higher quality materials? Historically they were solid construction without spaces between the steps. Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC 45, 46 Setbacks & Design Compatibility. Existing setbacks and other features might not be a good measurement because so many bad developments have been built in the past few decades. In older neighborhoods could rooflines and setbacks be measured from pre-world war two houses and buildings? Yes This change has been made. Craig Scharton DDC Intro 2 Bottom right photo-Will the picture showing Children’s Hospital be confusing? There is a bit of a battle between CRNC and Valley Children’s’ Hospital currently. Yes Picture has been changed. Craig Scharton DDC Canvas awnings should not be a solid color, stripes are historic and hide dust and bird droppings. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Staff recommends not regulating design to this degree. Caltrans DNCP 3:8 Policy 3.3.3: The City of Fresno should also implement a Transportation Management Association (TMA) once the impacted Caltrans intersections reach LOS D operations during either the AM or PM peak hour and funded to actively implement feasible Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak-hour vehicle trips to/from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT-2-g. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Caltrans DNCP Chpt 8 The mitigation in the plan provides sufficient detail in the funding matrix No Comment noted. No change necessary. Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 7/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Fresno County DNCP 3:10- 3:11 Downtown Neighborhood Street Network: County roads within the fringe area of the plan include Belmont Avenue (Hughes to Marks), Olive Avenue (Hughes to Marks), Hughes Avenue (Olive to Belmont), and Marks Avenue (Olive to Belmont). The City has classified Belmont, Hughes, and Olive as collector streets, and Marks as an arterial. The classification of Belmont as a collector road is in conflict with the County General Plan, which classifies Belmont as an arterial. Collector street widths in the City plan are shown as 80 feet in width and Arterials as 100 feet in width, which differs from County General Plan standards for collectors and arterials, which are 84 feet in width and 106 feet in width, respectively. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Fresno County DNCP 3:10- 3:11 Downtown Neighborhood Street Network: County roads at the edge of this plan, Belmont Avenue (Hughes to Marks), Olive Avenue (Hughes to Marks), Hughes Avenue (Olive to Belmont) and Marks Avenue (Olive to Belmont), are depicted as boulevards, which would include bike lanes and landscaped sidewalk areas; the difference between a collector boulevard and an arterial boulevard, according to the plan, is the addition of on- street parking for the arterial. The cross sections for collector and arterial boulevards both depict those streets as undivided four lane roads with center turn lanes. The County cross section for an arterial typically includes a median. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Karana Hattersley- Drayton, DARM Historic Preservation DNCP 6:2 Chandler Field is one of four officially designated historic districts (not three) Yes Change has been made. Karana Hattersley- Drayton, DARM Historic Preservation DNCP 6:4 Remove the word potential from "One potential historic district has been identified to date" Yes Change has been made. Karana Hattersley- Drayton, DARM Historic Preservation DNCP 6:4 Key Deficits: "Many potential historic resources that have not been formally designated by the City are absent from the database." Database includes all properties that have been designated but additionally, any property which has been included in any historic survey or entitlement, whether the property is designated, eligible or not. Yes Change has been made. Karana Hattersley- Drayton, DARM Historic Preservation DNCP 6:5 Figure 6.1: what is the large light purple area?Yes Change has been made. Karana Hattersley- Drayton, DARM Historic Preservation DNCP 6:6 6.1.2 The historic Preservation Database is already on-line Yes Change has been made. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 8/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Karana Hattersley- Drayton, DARM Historic Preservation DNCP 6:7 6.5.1 The New Deal Walking Tour is available on the City's Historic Preservation Page Yes Change has been made. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 1:4 Multi-Modal Transportation Network: Public investment and infrastructure improvements must support active transportation in order to create such a multi-modal network. The vision statement for the Jane Addams neighborhood, which increases access to pedestrian facilities, is an example of supporting active transportation. The Draft Plan anticipates that it will remain consistent with the ATP Plan (p. 7). If inconsistencies arise, the Plan should be amended to reflect the ATP Plan. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 1:6 Public Investment that Supports and Attracts Private Investment: requires the City to target public investment to locations that have the greatest potential to attract private investment. This policy would continue to leave behind many low-income neighborhoods that lack basic infrastructure, such as sidewalks, street lights, and stormwater drainage. No Comment noted. No change is necessary. Prioritizing public investments which leverage private investments is a sensible strategy in a community with limited resources. Furthermore, the DNCP proposes a wide array of future investments spread throughout all parts of the DNCP area. Past investments have also been focused on disadvantaged neighborhoods. Through the No Neighborhood Left Behind program, the City has made great investments in neighborhoods in the southern half of Fresno. For example, $35.5 million dollars were spent from 2005 to 2012 for important infrastructure improvements in neighborhoods south of Bullard. To meet additional needs, other options include amending the tax sharing agreement with the County of Fresno, being strategic with current funding mechanisms, and working with residents to support for voter-backed financing mechanisms. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:6 Policy 2.2.4 Must be clarified to ensure that such attention extend to all downtown neighborhoods, not just the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area. The DNCP, and the City’s actions to implement it, must ensure that all downtown neighborhoods benefit from the City’s renewed focus on investing in existing central core communities. While we understand and applaud the City’s interest in attracting private investment, the DNCP must facilitate investment and revitalization in areas and neighborhoods surrounding the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area in addition to the subset of downtown neighborhoods in the FCSP area. An exclusive, or almost exclusive focus, on the FCSP area will undermine the goals and policies included in the broader DNCP area and adjacent neighborhoods. Given that projected household size in the FCSP area is fewer than 2 individuals, and projected average household size in the broader downtown area is more than 4 individuals a preference for investment in the FCSP as compared to the broader Downtown Neighborhoods have a disproportionate and negative impact on families, in particular lower income families and non-white families. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Goal 2.2 focuses on Downtown, but other goals in this section address the neighborhoods. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 9/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:6 Affordable Housing: The policies in the DNCP include broad support for affordable housing but lack strong and clear policies to facilitate its preservation and development. At the same time, the Plan contains various policy and vision statements supporting the creation of market- rate housing. The Plan’s emphasis on the development of market rate housing, focusing public investment to attract private investment, and support for high speed rail are all likely to drive up housing costs in the plan area, along with other factor such as population growth and movement inland from the coast. The Final plan and the Final DEIR must include clear and specific protections for lower income residents from dislocation due to rising rent prices. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:6 The Draft Plan is devoid of any mention of the housing needs of extremely- low (“ELI”) and very-low income (“VLI”) residents. ELI and VLI residents experience the highest rates of housing-cost burden in the City, are at high risk of homelessness, and are most vulnerable to the impact of increased housing costs and costs of living. ELI and VLI residents in the Plan Area are at risk of displacement due to focused and prolonged investment in the Downtown Neighborhoods, the introduction of High Speed Rail, and the introduction of market-rate housing to the Plan Area as projected by the Plan No A new goal and related policies were created that would create a task force to monitor displacement and develop ways to reduce it if it emerges. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:6 Large Household Needs: Thousands of lower-income households in Fresno face over-crowding, due to the lack of affordable units large enough for large families. According to the Draft Plan, households in the Community Plan Area are larger than households in the City on average and are predominantly comprised of children. Households in the Plan Area, due to their size and the prevalence of poverty, can be expected to face even greater over-crowding than households in other areas of the City. The Draft Plan does not identify the prevalence of over-crowding in the Plan Area or include policies to facilitate the maintenance and development of housing appropriately sized for large households. The Final Plan must do so. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:8 High Speed Rail: The Draft Plan, and related plans must ensure that all negative impacts of the High Speed rail are mitigated. The Draft Plan identifies potential impacts yet does not include physical and economic displacement, or relocation of industrial uses to areas already overly burdened by such uses. The investment in High Speed Rail must also directly benefit communities adjacent to the downtown core through increased transit access and connectivity between and among neighborhoods. No The plans include many measures to ensure the least disruptive, and most beneficial, integration of HSR and the nearby neighborhoods that is possible. Examples include proposed bike and pedestrian improvements, enhanced street grid connectivity, the multimodal transit center, and Chinatown Park. The City will continue to work cooperatively with the HSR authority to improve this spatial relationship, and will continue to seek funding for the measures that have been identified. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:10 Policy 2.1.3 must apply to all Downtown Neighborhoods, not just Edison.No 2.1.3 is tailored for specific conditions in Edison. The other neighborhoods have similar policies that are tailored to their conditions. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 10/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:10 As the Draft Plan notes, the Jane Addams neighborhood has several mobile home parks. The City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element states that mobile homes are an important source of affordable housing for lower- income residents, but that they are at risk of conversion as land values increase. Land values are likely to increase significantly over the life of the Plan, as the City directs resources towards Plan implementation, High- Speed Rail becomes a reality, and population growth reduces available land for housing. The Draft Plan includes no discussion of the risk of conversion of mobile home parks and no policies to promote and facilitate the preservation of affordable and high quality mobile home units. The Final Plan must do so in order to ensure that existing residents are not displaced and the City’s scarce sources of affordable housing are maintained. Yes Most existing mobile home parks are proposed to be zoned RM-MH. However, two were identified for RS-2 zoning. These have been changed to RM-MH. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:15 Policy 2.2.9 [typo: actually 2.9.9] calls on the City to create “a coordinated program to acquire, demolish, and rebuild blighted, non-traditional multi- family residential buildings.” This policy must be revised to include protections for any tenants of such buildings, including protections to prevent displacement and to support relocation of residents in the same neighborhood. Yes Relocation support language has been added. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:16 Goal 2.12 We support goals and policies designed to increase access to goods, services and groceries at a neighborhood scale and suggest targeted investment to realize that goal. Additionally, community based organizations should work with food vendors and the City to ensure quality and affordable healthy foods and locally sourced produce. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:16 Policy 2.12.5 We are concerned that Policy 2.12.5 could have a negative impact on small, lower income and minority owned mobile food vendors. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:17 Policy 2.13..4 We support policies in the DNCP for proactive code- enforcement and to prioritize code enforcement resources to address health and safety issues in rental housing. These policies however do not but must include explicit protections against displacement of renters and support to low-income homeowners in maintaining their properties, including resources for rehabilitation for lower-income property owners. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:17 Policy 2.13.6 states that, “As resources become available, require owners to maintain all portions of their properties, including buildings, yards, and service areas, as well as adjacent sidewalks and alleys.” p. 2:17. This policy should be pursued through education but must not be exercised in a manner that targets low-income residents and/or residents of color, which would result in violations of federal and state fair housing and civil rights laws. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 11/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:17 Policy 2.13.1 requiring owners to maintain property, risks triggering displacement of lower-income property owners through the imposition of fines. The City should instead create and expand programs to assist low- income homeowners with home maintenance and code compliance. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:19 Policy 2.17.7 and Policy 2.17.8 call for a regulatory environment and development process that makes development decisions predictable, fair, and transparent and limits the use of CUPs and other discretionary approvals. To the extent that industrial zoning continues to be located in and adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses, these policies threaten to deny residents the opportunity know about and provide feedback on new industrial proposals that could impact their neighborhoods, lower their property values, and create toxic air emissions. Accordingly, until the ICA is conducted and implemented and industrial zoning is located away from sensitive land uses, Policies 2.17.7 and 2.17.8 should not apply to industrial and business park land uses. No Comment noted. No change necessary. The areas shown as industrial will be zoned to IL and IH, both of which already exist in the Citywide Development Code. Intensive Industrial uses are not allowed in IL and require a CUP in IH. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:22 Policy 2.18 places importance on interconnecting the Downtown Neighborhoods with great streets and beautiful public spaces. There should also be a policy about promoting interconnectedness among neighborhoods through multimodal transportation options and infrastructure and reversing isolating impacts of highway constructions. No Comment noted. No change necessary. This is already accomplished through proposed bike, pedestrian, transit, and land use improvements. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:24 Figure 2-9 We recommend that the Draft DNCP be revised to replace industrial land use designations along McKinley Avenue with multi-family and mixed-use housing designations and replace single-family housing designations on Olive Avenue with multi-family and mixed-use housing. Yes Land in the Jane Addams with industrial designations were reconfigured. Some of the peripheral Light Industrial land was re-designated as NMX or RM-1, as appropriate, and all of the remaining IL land north of Olive was changed to Business Park. The westward expansion of NMX on Olive is inappropriate, however. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 2:24 Figure 2-9 The Planned Land Use map must be changed to eliminate industrial and business park land use designations within or next to neighborhoods and replace them with parks, neighborhood commercial, houses, and mixed use zoning as appropriate. Yes Industrial designations have been replaced in the Jane Addams area. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:5 Figure 3-1 Residents want to see more investment to support safe bicycling prioritizing routes to schools and major community centers like shopping centers, parks, and medical centers, including segregated bike lanes. In addition to the Class 1 on Belmont in the Jane Addams neighborhood, should also consider on McKinley, both directions from the school No Belmont and McKinley are both shown as Class II through the entire length of Jane Addams. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 12/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:6 Policy 3.1.3 advises to focus transit service and investments on the Transit Corridors identified in Figure 3-2. Policy 3.1.10 advises to prioritize reducing transit delay along these corridors. Policy 3.1.11 states to focus initial improvements on areas with the greatest ridership, including the Downtown Neighborhoods, as well as to increase rider safety and comfort. However, areas should be prioritized according to the greatest need, like Jane Addams. This focus on high ridership excludes neighborhoods that have historically struggled with deficient infrastructure, and continues inequitable investment. Generally, the needs of existing disadvantaged neighborhoods are ignored. No The High Priority Transit Corridors map in the DNCP was developed in coordination with the Strategic Services Evaluation, currently being undertaken by Fresno Area Express. This comment by the Leadership Counsel proposes a significantly different approach to transit service than the Strategic Services Evaluation has identified. However, prior to implementing any changes to the existing service, FAX is required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to complete a service equity analysis as part of the Title VI requirements, which at a minimum, will include an extensive public outreach effort to identify any disparate or disproportionate impacts on minority or low income populations. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:7 Figure 3:2 does not propose primary or secondary routes in the Jane Addams neighborhood. The vision page for Jane Addams includes upgrading transit stops, and should also include expanded transit service No The High Priority Transit Corridors map in the DNCP was developed in coordination with the Strategic Services Evaluation, currently being undertaken by Fresno Area Express. This comment by the Leadership Counsel proposes a significantly different approach to transit service than the Strategic Services Evaluation has identified. However, prior to implementing any changes to the existing service, FAX is required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to complete a service equity analysis as part of the Title VI requirements, which at a minimum, will include an extensive public outreach effort to identify any disparate or disproportionate impacts on minority or low income populations. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:7 Policy 3.1.5 [correct policy is 3.1.4] supports incentives for potential Downtown transit riders. Incentives must also be available to low-income residents to allow for affordable transit. Yes The policy has been modified to add "residents of Downtown neighborhoods" to the list of people that should be eligible for transit incentives. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:8 Policy 3.3.6 requires new developments in the Downtown Neighborhood do not result in the worsening of transportation related facilities, but for other neighborhoods it only requires mitigation. All new developments, regardless of neighborhood, should not result in the worsening of transportation related facilities. In the alternative, the City should, at a minimum, set mitigation thresholds. No This project protects pedestrian, bike, and pedestrian facilities, which the City feels is good policy. Areas outside of this plan's boundaries are not subject to this plan. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:9 Policy 3.4. Alleys. While the Draft Plan includes broad policies to address alleys, we recommend aggressive actions and implementation measures including, transformation of alleys into a network of paths and green infrastructure, transferring ownership of alleys to adjacent homeowners, and extending regular alley cleaning services to problem areas throughout the downtown neighborhoods. No Staff disagrees with this suggestion. Transferring ownership to adjacent property owners could inhibit use of alleys as paths and green infrastructure. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:9 Policy 3.4.6 identifies the need to install curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on McKinley between SR 99 and Marks and along Golden State to the mobile home park. The sidewalk improvements should be extended from McKinley between SR99 and Golden State Yes This change has been made. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:19 Diverting Truck Routes: We support policies designed to divert traffic from sensitive sites including Policy 3.8.1, 3.8.2, and 7.7.1 No Comment noted. No change necessary. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 13/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 3:21 Figure 3-5 does not propose road diets and bike lanes for Jane Addams.Yes Streets with the red line will receive bike lanes, which includes Clinton, McKinley, Olive, Belmont, Hughes, and Parkway in the Jane Addams area. This will be clarified in the legend. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 4:4 We are supportive of policies to increase tree coverage in the Plan area recommend prioritizing investment in communities that are particularly park poor such as the Jane Addams Neighborhood. We also recommend implementation measures, such as proactively seeking funds and work with HSR and Caltrans. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 4:11 Figure 4-6: We recommend that the City acquire the vacant plot at the southwest corner of Olive Avenue and Marks Avenue for a park and small library. No This site is outside of the boundaries of the DNCP. This idea will be passed along to the Parks Master Plan team, however. The city also owns a site nearby which may be suitable. Finally, the Parks Master Plan has identified the areas of greatest need, and this area was not identified as such. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 4:11 Figure 4-6 Unfortunately the Land Use Map does not include any new parks in the Southeast neighborhood area. We recommend the City identify new park opportunities and include them in the map, for example the vacant lot in front of Roosevelt High School. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Parks Master Plan is identifying opportunities. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 4:11 Figure 4-6 Southeast neighborhood residents suggest the following locations immediately adjacent to the Plan area for acquisition for the development of new parks and recreational facilities including 1. The Hanoian building, which is for sale, and the adjacent vacant lot at the corner of Cedar and Butler. The City could also consider relocating the police department located on the lot to increase the space available for a recreational center. 2. The lot in front of the Mosqueda Center is ideal for a new park. It is a large lot; FAX routes 33 and 26 pass by the site; it is near a grocery store. The historic WW-II building should be made into a museum, not left in disrepair. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Parks Master Plan is identifying opportunities. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 7:4 Policy 7.2.1 We are supportive of the proposed public participation policies included in the draft DNCP to engage the public as key partners in the City’s decision making processes. We recommend the City add policies to work directly with residents and stakeholders to identify and address barriers to civic engagement. We also recommend the City include implementation measures in the DNCP focused on ensuring resident and community stakeholder participation in implementation of the plan, including for allocation of resources. The City can draw upon implementation strategies found in the FCSP, such as convening interdisciplinary working groups, to ensure ongoing community engagement. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 7:5 Policy 7.6.4 We are very supportive of this policy and wish to confirm that it applies to all neighborhoods in the Plan area and suggest an implementation timeline that includes identification of funding resources available to facilitate implementation No Comment noted. No change necessary. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 14/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP 8:2-8:3 Funding Sources: The DNCP does not identify opportunities to pursue many available public and private grants and loans to implement the Plan’s goals and policies, including but not limited to state Cap and Trade funds, including the CalFire Urban Forestry Grants, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, weatherization programs, EOC support for solar and community-solar projects. In contrast, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out in detail public and private funding sources available for each priority project and even includes cost projections for some components. The lack of detail in the DNCP undermines our confidence that some of the stronger goals and policies will be implemented. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Chapter 8 puts forth a detailed implementation strategy, including an at-depth analysis of potential funding sources Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 1 Prioritization: The City should prioritize investments to maximize health outcomes and ensure the safety of children walking to and from school, community centers and parks. Such prioritization policies include Policy 2.1.2 (installation of new sidewalks near schools), Policy 3.9.3 (identify priority corridors between residential areas and schools and pursue grants to facilitate this through traffic calming), Policy 5.7.2 (maintenance of public facilities), and Policy 5.7.3 (funding and timely construction of needed public facilities). For example, Hamilton Avenue & South Maple Avenue, just South of Mosqueda Center, needs street lights, flashing stop lights for pedestrians, and sidewalks. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 2 Displacement: there must be safeguards in place to protect existing residents from displacement and other undesirable impacts from land use decisions. No A new goal and related policies were created that would create a task force to monitor displacement and develop ways to reduce it if it emerges. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 2 Jobs and Employment: The Draft Plan must include more aggressive policies to protect existing and promote quality jobs and employment opportunities. For example the Draft Plan should incentivize local hire policies and workforce development investments that will allow for upward financial mobility No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 2 Jobs and Employment: given that rents are expected to increase downtown, the City should support existing small and minority owned businesses against displacement. No A new goal and related policies were created that would create a task force to monitor displacement and develop ways to reduce it if it emerges. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 3 BRT: The City must also secure and allocate funding for extension of the BRT to Edison Neighborhoods. No This plan reflects current BRT plans in order to coordinate various infrastructure improvement plans. Potential BRT extensions are outside of the scope of this document. However, California is considered to be a potential expansion route for BRT and the land uses proposed along California are intended to support that. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 3 Road Quality: Many roads in the Downtown Neighborhoods have deteriorating, pot-holed roads and roads that serve as truck routes for industrial facilities are especially impacted. The Plan must include policies and implementation measures to restore and protect these resources. No Comment noted. No change necessary. A robust system of street improvements is proposed. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 15/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 3 Transportation Routes: throughout the Jane Addams neighborhood, and those that connect the neighborhood to other parts of the city, must be improved with sidewalks, lighting, trees, and the like, as they are incomplete and unsafe for both children and adults. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 4 In general, the DNCP should include policies and implementation measures aimed at converting vacant parcels and abandoned property into parks and community facilities as well as policies and implementation measures to pursue grants such as CalFire Urban Forestry grants for park space acquisition and development and HCD Housing-Related Parks Grants. The DNCP should contain language focused on seamless integration to policies, programs and implementation measures identified through the City’s efforts to update the Parks Master Plan. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 5 There are places in and adjacent to the planning area, for example parts of the Jane Addams neighborhood that do not have City drinking water or wastewater services. The DNCP must include policies and implementation measures to address these critical deficiencies. The City has existing policies and procedures in place to provide for the extension of water and sewer services to properties located within the municipal corporate limits of the City. If a property owner has a desire to connect their property to the City’s water and sewer systems, the property owner can schedule a meeting with representatives from the Department of Public Utilities to identify points of connection to the systems, the design standards required for system connections, and the costs associated with connecting to the system. Additionally, the City has a financial assistance program that property owners can use to finance a portion of the costs associated with connecting their property to the public water and sewer systems. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 5 Infrastructure for Safe Drinking Water and Wastewater: the Plan identifies the need to improve conservation measures and diversify water resources to address the increasing scarcity of water in the region. The Plan must also include policies and implementation measures to protect dwindling water resources from suburban sprawl development and industrial development. We recommend the City update the draft DNCP to include policies and implementation measures similar to those found in the draft FCSP to ensure adequate infrastructure necessary to support infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. On December 14, 2014, the Fresno City Council adopted the 2035 General Plan. The 2035 General Plan describes a balanced city with an appropriate proportion of its growth and reinvestment focused in the central core, Downtown, established neighborhoods, and along Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors. The 2035 General Plan stipulates that a successful and vibrant Downtown is necessary to attract investment needed for infill development and rehabilitation of established neighborhoods, which are priorities for the Plan. In accordance with the Urban Water Management Plan Act, urban water suppliers such as the City of Fresno are required to prepare Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs), and to update their UWMPs every 5 years. A key component of the UWMP is for urban water suppliers to provide a description of the service area, including forecasts of future population growth and development for the service area. In the State’s guidance for preparing UWMPs, the State recommends coordinating the UWMP with local General Plans. On June 23, 2016, the Fresno City Council adopted the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, which was updated from the 2010 UWMP to fulfill the objectives of the 2035 General Plan, which include supporting infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 16/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP Chpt 7 the DNCP must assess the potential air impacts of drive-thru establishments, especially to the extent that there is an increase in such establishments in communities impacted by poor air quality and traffic. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP p. 15 Infrastructure to prevent flooding and pooled water would also facilitate public health. “The Downtown Area is characterized by large impervious areas, is susceptible to localized flooding, and could benefit from additional local stormwater retention facilities to mitigate flood hazards.” p. 15. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP p.5 While the DNCP notes that neighborhood integration is important, the Plan fails to include policies and implementation measures that will ensure integration among Downtown Neighborhoods and integration with neighborhoods beyond the area covered in the DNCP. Additionally, the Plan should include goals and policies designed to ensure that the Plan is harmonized with other plans and planning efforts, including the FCSP, City’s Active Transportation Plan, Fresno Council of Government Active Transportation Plan, Parks Master Plan, Southwest Specific Community Plan, Southeast Specific Community Plan and additional plans noted in the introductory section of the DNCP. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability DNCP p.8-9 Community Engagement: The Draft Plan describes community engagement activities performed by the City during the initial development of the Plan in 2010 but does not identify any activities following that period or between release of the DEIR and adoption that the City will do to engage the public and ensure public input informs the final plan. Especially given that 6 years have passed since the City conducted public engagement in developing the draft plan, it is critical that the City ensure that residents can provide input at the final stages of the process. Accordingly, the City should develop an outreach plan in coordination with community leaders and CBOs and work collaboratively to implement it. The City must demonstrate how feedback on the draft plan provided in 2011 and during the above suggested outreach efforts is incorporated into the final plan and informs development of an implementation section of the plan. Yes Narrative has been added which explains the outreach that was done this year, as well as the General Plan outreach that was related to the Downtown plans and code. Caltrans FCSP 9:4 Policy 9.1.13 recommends that the loop entrance ramp from Broadway Street to southbound SR 41 should be removed and replaced with a direct entrance ramp from Van Ness A venue. In addition to removing and replacing the loop entrance ramp with a direct ramp, Caltrans would recommend removing and replacing the existing direct on-ramp from Broadway Street to northbound SR 41 with a direct on-ramp from Van Ness A venue to northbound SR 41. This would complete a full interchange at Van Ness Avenue rather than leaving a single isolated on-ramp from Broadway Street. No This will be proposed in the next Regional Transportation Plan. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 17/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Caltrans FCSP 9:4 Policy 9.1.13: it is recommended that a partial clover leaf interchange should be explored for SR 41 at Van Ness Avenue as this may also increase capacity at the interchange and be beneficial to the City's downtown plans. No This will be proposed in the next Regional Transportation Plan. Caltrans FCSP Chpt 11 The mitigation in the plan provides sufficient detail in the funding matrix No Comment noted. No change necessary. Cliff Tutelian (Verbal Comments) FCSP 6:8 Create new policy: When considering providing funding, letters of support for grant applications, other assistance to projects, give priority to projects with high quality workmanship, materials, articulation, and amenities. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:2 Goals, gray box. What does "General direction-setters that present a long- term vision." mean? Is there a clearer way to explain this? It doesn't seem clear to me. Yes Changed to "Broad, direction-setting statements that present a long-term vision." Craig Scharton FCSP 1:3 Rendering: the colors in the key are incorrect Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:6 A. Purpose. "For managing routine changes in the use of existing buildings, the existing zoning regulations worked quite well." I don't believe this is accurate. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:7 Figure 1.3B Remove proposed "Proposed Southwest Specific Plan," replace with "(In Progress)" No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:7 Figure 1.3B Text illegible in blue box Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:9 6 Merge no.1 Redevelopment Plans. Should we mention that RDA is dead? No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:9 8. High-Speed Rail Station Area Master Plan. "Many of its recommendations have been incorporated into this plan." is very ambiguous. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:10 Evening Presentations: "...alternative visions for its future, ranging from doing nothing different, to restoring the Mall..." should read "..alternative visions for its future, ranging from doing nothing differently, to restoring the Mall…" Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 1:11 Follow-up Outreach: " These alternatives, [will be] studied by the Environmental Impact Report, and are described in Chapter 4 of this Specific Plan." the alternatives have been studied in the EIP. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 2:1 Getting the Basics Right: "In many ways, our Downtown missed being great for decades because our community was missing the basics." Should code enforcement, or lack of, be added to this section? No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 2:1 The Communities Vision. 6,300 residential units and 16,000 people. These numbers do not match with table 1.3A Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 2:2 Vibrancy and Vitality: "As in other great cities, our Downtown is a place of intensity, where even the ways to relax are exhilarating." Intensity is not the right description, try fun, vibrant, etc. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 2:3 Caption: change "Upper floor awnings shade upper floor rooms." to "Upper floor awnings shade windows of upper floor rooms." No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 2:6 Design Principles: "They are neighbors that form the public realm, provide “eyes on the street,” shape the skyline, create shadows and generate foot, vehicular, and tran-sit traffic." should be changed to create shade. Shade is a good thing, shadows are negative. Yes Change has been made. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 18/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Craig Scharton FCSP 2:6 Caption: remove highlight from caption Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 2:7 Walkability and Bikeability: "Compact urban form, environments designed for people, not cars…" Instead of not cars, I would say people, cars, bikes, etc. Or say complete streets. Yes Changed to "…designed primarily for people…" Craig Scharton FCSP 3:3 Figure 3.2A Should include the High-Speed Rail district.No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:5 Divisadero Triangle photo: This home has been restored. We should insert a new photograph. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:6 Fulton District: "Vacancies and blighted conditions persist throughout Downtown, and many of the area’s largest buildings remain shuttered and in poor disrepair." Poor disrepair is a double negative, just disrepair. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:9 The Next two projects reconnect Fulton Street to the Mural District: Add public market No Comment noted. No change necessary. This level of detail doesn't fit this section. Chapter 5 covers this. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:16 Chinatown: "Chinatown is also home to an extensive network of underground, interconnected basements." Delete the word extensive; it is not accurate. Yes Change has been made. Also deleted underground, which is redundant. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:17 Rendering: move southern boundary to Ventura Street No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:19 Armenian Town/Convention Center District: The Radisson Hotel is now the Double Tree. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:20 Divisadero Triangle: Some of the homes in this area have burned, make sure the ones listed in the first paragraph still exist. No This was checked. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:22 Housing Market Analysis: "Though there has been recent development of multi-family units Downtown, nearly every residential project in Downtown has received some form of subsidy from local government sources. The bulk of recent development activity in the Plan Area has been con- centrated in the Mural District. The market for higher density buildings will take time. There are sig- nificant financial feasibility challenges to building housing in the Plan Area, due to the continued popularity and affordability of suburban detached single-family housing compared to higher cost multi-family units." Initially these housing projects were subsidized, but more recently they are being built without subsidy. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:22 Office Market Analysis: With the addition of Bitwise, this market analysis has changed and the creative and technology market needs to be added Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:22 Office Market Analysis: "There is a strong potential in attracting creative business." It is already happening. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:22 Regional Economic Context: "Much of the economic growth in Fresno County has occurred in resident-serving sectors, while the agricul-ture- related industries experienced a significant decline. " This is not accurate. Yes Change has been made. Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 19/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Craig Scharton FCSP 3:23 Summary of Development Program: "The documented presence of a market for new housing, office, and retail and entertainment space is a point of departure for the revitalization of Downtown Fresno. The numbers suggest that Downtown can grow substantially by taking advantage of its location, its urban character, and its many commercial, civic, and institutional assets. This projected demand for housing, office, and retail and entertain-ment space exists despite the current state of disinvestment in Downtown and the development community’s preference in recent years for suburban sites. However, to achieve the desired results as quickly and efficiently as possible, efforts must be made to focus all possible investment towards Downtown and to be consistent in implementing this Plan’s development strategy for many years." This sounds out of date. Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP 3:23 Photo: The left photo is out of date, this intersection has been developed. Tioga-Sequoia and Beer Garden exist. Yes Caption updated to say "Policies of the mid 20th century resulted in streetscapes that were lifeless, unfriendly to pedestrians, and which discouraged commerce." Craig Scharton FCSP Letter Change "Well over a century on," to "Well over a century" or "For over a century" Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP Preface Change "Businesses and important institutions, such as Fresno State University, followed" to "Businesses and important institutions, such as Fresno State University, churches, and hospitals." Yes Change has been made. Craig Scharton FCSP Preface Change "There many found they could live in new houses, move more freely, and exercise a greater range of working, retail, and entertainment choices." to "There many found they could live in new houses, move more freely, and exercise a greater range of work, retail, and entertainment choices." Yes Change has been made. Fresno County FCSP 4:12 Rendering: the drawing at the top of page 12 (section 4.5 Design of Fulton Street, continued) does not appear to depict the relocated artwork per the design maps preceding this drawing, on pages 4:1 O and 4:11. It may be helpful to depict the relocated artwork in illustrations to reflect what is shown on the design maps of the Fulton Mall project. No Comment noted. No change necessary. The new locations for the artwork are identified on the drawing. Fresno County FCSP Chpt 9 Ridesharing Drop-off/pick-up: Within the proposed Fulton Street Design and surrounding public transportation and parking facilities, there is no mention or provision included for ridesharing drop-off and pick-up. It is suggested that the plan incorporate into its design features designated ride share drop-off and pick-up locations. Additionally, tourists, convention attendees and other visitors utilizing the proposed HSR station may want to use the ridesharing option in lieu of public transit or personal vehicle. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Page 5:2 describes a proposed intermodal transit center adjacent to the HSR station as a priority development project. Fresno County FCSP Preface; 4:8 Photos: In the preface to the Fulton Street Corridor Specific Plan, there is a photo of downtown Fresno with the caption "View of Fulton Street at Tulare Street (1936)" credit Pop Laval collection. An identical photo is shown on page 4:8 with the caption ("Fulton Street in the 1920's"). The two photos should be credited with the same consistent date and location. Yes The caption for the bottom left photo on the Preface page will change the date from "1936" to "1920s." Downtown Plans and Code - Responses to Public Review Draft Comments 20/20 Commenter Document Page Synopsis of Comment Change Made?Notes Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability FCSP 5:2 Prioritization: The FCSP contains language that effectively prioritizes projects in the planning area to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods. The draft states that in the case of near, mid and long term identified priority projects for both public infrastructure and public- private partnerships, the City will direct all relevant resources and departmental actions (in transportation, public utilities, transit and other fiscal incentives, public realm design etc.) to support their implementation.” The draft FCSP further identifies goals with supporting policy and implementation programs that focus on transforming downtown into a vibrant set of neighborhoods yet fails to incorporate policies and implementation measures focused on addressing inherent poverty, health, housing, transportation and economic challenges of families living below the poverty line identified in the draft DNCP. In comparison to the DNCP, the FCSP contains specific implementation measures that target limited City resources to planning area that many adjacent and surrounding neighborhoods should be able to drawn upon to effectively spur revitalization. No The DNCP includes a robust implementation chapter, and improvements in the FCSP area do not preclude improvements from being made in the DNCP area. Furthermore, being adjacent to a struggling Downtown has caused problems for the neighborhoods for decades, and being adjacent to a thriving Downtown will be beneficial to the neighborhoods. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability FCSP 11:3 Prioritization: The draft FCSP includes strategies that call for the formation of an interdisciplinary working group focused on the FCSD; tying of FCSD implementation framework to annual individual work plans of all departments and to Capital Improvement Plans; and focus of financial resources and physical improvements in concentrated areas of the Fulton Corridor. While these strategies may be well intended, they provide for explicit prioritization of city resources and personnel solely to the FCSP area without directing such attention to surrounding neighborhoods. No Comment noted. No change necessary. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability FCSP Overall Prioritization: While the draft FCSP contains policies, programs and implementation measures focused on creating resilient, healthy neighborhoods, the draft fails to incorporate similar policies, programs and implementation measures for low income communities and communities of color currently residing in the FCSP area. Instead of protecting and building upon the culture and resiliency found in such neighborhoods, the City is accelerating displacement and gentrification risk and further perpetuating a cycle of poverty that has long plagued neighborhoods in the southern part of the City. No A new goal and related policies were created that would create a task force to monitor displacement and develop ways to reduce it if it emerges. Downtown Development Code Comments Craig Scharton Second Page (not page 2) Bottom right photo-Will the picture showing Children’s Hospital be confusing? There is a bit of a battle between CRNC and Valley Children’s’ Hospital currently. Page three-define fenestration. Page 4- define Review Authority Page 5- Group Residence have been clustered in Lowell. I know that we can’t regulate homes with 6 and other occupants. We should have CUPs for homes over 6. Page 5- Storefront churches should not be allowed on designated ground floor retail streets. They are closed most of the week and do not add to sidewalk vitality. Especially 2,00o sq ft or less. They take up valuable retail spaces. Page 6- Government uses should not be permitted on ground floor retail designated corridors. Page 7- Banks should not be located on designated ground floor retail streets. They are 9-5 M-F uses that create dead areas for night time and weekend entertainment areas. Page 7-Food preparation will likely be a part of the Fresno Public Market and should be allowed as a commercial kitchen. Page 7- Nursery and garden centers should be allowed if they fit within a traditional retail building. Page 7- Second hand/vintage stores should be allowed in DT retail areas if they operate in a traditional retail store. Page 8- Urban farms should be allowed in all DTN areas Page 8- Transitional and Supportive housing should be regulated so that they do not negatively impact a neighborhood revitalization area. South Fresno neighborhoods have more than their fair share of these uses. Maybe a CUP or a review of the number of these uses should be required. Page 21- Public Plazas should allow outdoor dining with tables reserved for customers for adjoining restaurants. I’ve seen this use in many downtowns Page 27- Parklets should allow outdoor dining for adjoining restaurants. Page 30- I have concerns with stucco as an allowed exterior finish. This often looks like a suburban style, it often weathers poorly, especially with sprinklers. Can this be defined more clearly to get the best finishes? Page 31-In prohibited materials can we list plywood, particle board and press board? Page 31- Can we be clearer about where signs go on a traditional storefront? In a traditional downtown storefront there is usually a sign area on the top half of the façade. Also hanging pedestrian oriented signs. Maybe a diagram of a traditional storefront with display windows, sign placement, bulkhead… Page 32 and following pages- When I see exceptions for civic buildings I wonder if the County would look for exceptions for a jail. I’m not sure if they are under city design guidelines, but it would be good to call this use out. Also, Civic buildings should have clear glass and urban setbacks. Page 33- define muntins Page 39- potential typo on Gallery basic standards item d. An extra apace “gallery may encroach” Page 41- awning materials should not allow plastic. Canvas awnings should not be a solid color, stripes are historic and hide dust and bird droppings. Page 42- Odors should include coffee roasting, beer brewing Page 43- you guys are my heroes! Page 44- add Downtown Fresno Partnership, nonprofits and private event promoters to the list after “public or quasi public” Page 45 & 46 Setbacks & Design Compatibility. Existing setbacks and other features might not be a good measurement because so many bad developments have been built in the past few decades. In older neighborhoods could rooflines and setbacks be measured from pre-world war two houses and buildings? Page 53- What do we think about car ports in multifamily developments? Should they be banned? Page 54- stucco wraps of historic homes are a big problem in our older neighborhoods. Should this be more clearly prohibited? Page 56- a common problem in multifamily properties are the lack of window screens and appropriate interior window coverings. This is probably a code issue but could be spelled out here as well. No sheets or blankets of towels for interior window covering and all windows should have screens. Page 57- I don’t think screened in porches should be allowed. Page 58 and following pages- Is there a way to make sure that stairs are built with higher quality materials? Historically they were solid construction without spaces between the steps. 1 Daniel Zack From:Debra McKenzie <debbeem@live.com> Sent:Saturday, August 27, 2016 9:28 AM To:Codecomments Subject:Example of cool idea between business and streets Saw this in San Francisco. Park let was used by small restaurant for outdoor seating.       http://pavementtoparks.org/parklets/    Debra   Sent from my iPhone  County of Fresno DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND PLANNING STEVEN E. WHITE, DIRECTOR September 9, 2016 City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department Attn: Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager 2600 Fresno Street, Third Floor, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721 Dear Ms. Pagoulatos: Subject: Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and the Downtown Development Code The County of Fresno appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the City of Fresno's Draft EIR for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DNCP), the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP), and the Downtown Development Code. The Department of Public Works and Planning has completed its review and has the following comments with respect to this project: Road Maintenance and Operations Division: County roads within the fringe area of the plan include Belmont Avenue (Hughes to Marks), Olive Avenue (Hughes to Marks), Hughes Avenue (Olive to Belmont), and Marks Avenue (Olive to Belmont). The City has classified Belmont, Hughes, and Olive as collector streets, and Marks as an arterial. The classification of Belmont as a collector road is in conflict with the County General Plan, which classifies Belmont as an arterial. Collector street widths in the City plan are shown as 80 feet in width and Arterials as 100 feet in width, which differs from County General Plan standards for collectors and arterials, which are 84 feet in width and 106 feet in width, respectively. Additionally, the previously listed County roads are depicted as boulevards, which would include bike lanes and landscaped sidewalk areas; the difference between a collector boulevard and an arterial boulevard, according to the plan, is the addition of on-street parking for the arterial. The cross sections for collector and arterial boulevards both depict those streets as undivided four lane roads with center turn lanes. The County cross section for an arterial typically includes a median. Community Development Division/Fresno County Office of Tourism: Within the proposed Fulton Street Design and surrounding public transportation and parking facilities, there is no mention or provision included for ridesharing drop-off and pick-up. It is suggested that the plan incorporate into its design features designated ride share drop-off and pick-up locations. Additionally, tourists, convention attendees and other visitors utilizing the DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION 2220 Tulare Street, Sixth Floor I Fresno, California 93721 I Phone (559) 600-4497 / 600-4022 / 600-4540 I FAX 600-4200 The County of Fresno is an Equal Employment Opportunity Employer City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department September 9, 2016 Page 2 of 2 proposed HSR station may want to use the ridesharing option in lieu of public transit or personal vehicle. In the preface to the Fulton Street Corridor Specific Plan, there is a photo of downtown Fresno with the caption "View of Fulton Street at Tulare Street (1936)" credit Pop Laval collection. An identical photo is shown on page 4:8 with the caption ("Fulton Street in the 1920's"). The two photos should be credited with the same consistent date and location. Lastly, the drawing at the top of page 12 (section 4.5 Design of Fulton Street, continued) does not appear to depict the relocated artwork per the design maps preceding this drawing, on pages 4:1 O and 4:11. It may be helpful to depict the relocated artwork in illustrations to reflect what is shown on the design maps of the Fulton Mall project. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the project. If you have any questions, you may contact me at jshaw@co.fresno.ca.us or (559) 600-4207. SinceouYh � Jeremy Shaw, Plan" Development Services Division JS:jem G:\4360Devs&Pln\EnvPlan\OAR\City of Fresno\Downtown Plans and Code Draft EIR\Agency Comments\Comment Ur.doc c: Chris Motta, Principal Planner Frank Daniele, Supervising Engineer Gigi Gibbs, Division Manager, Director of Tourism DEVELOPMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT August 23, 2016 To: Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager From: Karana Hattersley-Drayton, Historic Preservation Project Manager Re: Comments for EIR, Downtown, Fulton Corridor Plans and Downtown Code The Historic Preservation Commission at its public hearing August 22nd, 2016 reviewed the EIR. Assistant Director Dan Zack gave a Power Point Presentation that was focused on the plans and Code. One of the Commission architects raised a concern about the Neoclassical form of base/shaft/cornice for commercial buildings from the form based code and wondered whether this rule will stifle modernism and creativity in general. The archaeologist on the Commission wanted to ensure that contractors properly trained their construction crews on archaeological protocols (as Will and I did for the zoo team). I think it would be prudent to add a sentence about this to MM CUL-3, perhaps, “The archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archaeological resources.” She was also concerned that if encapsulation of a site is approved as a mitigation measure, that there should be some monitoring plan adopted as well. Another Commissioner appreciated the two mitigation measures MM-CUL-1 and 2 for historic resources (which we lobbied for following the Administrative Draft). The following staff recommendations were supported by the Commission: 1) Correction: Block 50 not Block 51 is the area of Chinatown that was called out in the Greenwood Archaeological report as particularly sensitive (5.5-43). 2) Pursuant to MM CUL-1, resources evaluated during development projects should also be evaluated for their potential for listing on Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources and not just for the California and National Registers (5.5-40). 3) The verb for MM CUL-1 needs to be revised from “should” to “shall,” which has greater potency in an environmental document. Additionally, there are a few minor typos in the EIR, page 5.5-33 Archaeological Assessment prepared (“d” missing off of two paragraphs. P. 5.5-34 Third sentence purpose of these maps was to “aid”… p. 5.5=36 Proposed “L” Street Historic District (“L” is missing). Also, in reviewing the two plans I found that several corrections from my memo of July 11th 2016 (for the Downtown Neighborhoods Plan) were not incorporated: p. 6.2 Downtown Neighborhoods--- Chandler Field is one of four officially designated historic districts…. p. 6:4 Huntington Boulevard… change out the “potential…” Historic map on 6:5… what is the large light purple area? p. 6.4 The City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance has also been amended in 2009, 2012 and 2015. p. 6.4 City of Fresno Historic Preservation Database. Sentence makes no sense: “Many potential historic resources that have not been formally designated by the City are absent from the database.” Database includes all properties that have been designated but additionally, any property which has been included in any historic survey or entitlement, whether the property is designated, eligible or not. 6.6 The Historic Preservation Database is already on line. 6.5.1 As is the New Deal Walking Tour (on the City’s Historic Preservation page). I just wonder about continuing to repeat recommendations from four years ago that have already been addressed. 2 | Page September 12, 2016    Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager  City of Fresno  Development and Resource Management Department  2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065  Fresno, CA 83721  Attn: Long Range Planning    Sent via Email      Re:Comments on the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan & Associated   Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)    Dear Ms. Pagoulatos:    We are writing to provide comments on the City of Fresno’s Draft Downtown  Neighborhoods Communities Plan (“DNCP”, “Draft Plan” or “Plan”), Draft Downtown  Development Code (“Draft DDC” or “Draft Code”), Fulton Specific Corridor Plan (“FSCP”) and  associated Draft Environmental Impact Report  (“DEIR”).   Thank you for the opportunity to  submit comments.    Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability works alongside residents of  disadvantaged communities throughout the San Joaquin Valley and Coachella Valley to  eliminate injustice and secure equal access to opportunity regardless of wealth, race, income or  place.  Our comments on the Draft DNCP, Code, and EIR are based upon our extensive work  alongside residents in the Plan Area in Southeast, Southwest,  Downtown, and Jane Addams  neighborhoods and those neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the the Plan Area.     These comments build upon comments we submitted to the City on Draft 2035 General  Plan and Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (“DMEIR”) respectively dated August 8 and  October 9, 2014. While the Draft DNCP, FCSP and DEIR contain many strengths, they also, as  drafted, replicate and build upon flawed policies, analysis, and mitigation measures contained in  the General Plan and MEIR that would further entrench disparities in access to opportunity and  a healthy environment in the City. We therefore incorporate our comments on the 2035 General  Plan DMEIR herein by reference and are providing you with a copy of those comments along  with this letter as Exhibit A.    The Draft Plan contains many policies reflective of the desires of existing residents for a  healthy neighborhoods with basic amenities and services needed for residents to thrive.  Through these comments we emphasize our support  for investment in the Downtown area but  urge the City to ensure that all downtown related planning documents target policies, programs  1  and investment across all neighborhoods within and adjacent to the Planning Area. While the  Draft DNCP so eloquently identifies key deficits related to the health and wellbeing of the  downtown neighborhoods ­  including but not limited to high levels of poverty, disparities in  health outcomes, lack of quality and affordable housing, high asthma and other respiratory  diseases, lack of access to healthy foods, etc. ­  it completely fails to identify strong goals,  policies and implementation measures focused on ameliorating such deficits. Further as we will  note throughout our comments there is strong preference, through policies, statements  regarding resource allocation and implementation measures, for sub areas located within the  FCSP that serve to the detriment of adjacent neighborhoods.   Prioritization of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan at the Expense of Downtown  Neighborhoods  The lack of detail in the DNCP as compared to the FCSP demonstrates that the City’s  prioritization of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Area may come at the expense of  improvements and improved connectivity in the surrounding Downtown Neighborhoods.   The FCSP contains language that effectively prioritizes projects in the planning area to  the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods. The draft states that in the case of near, mid and  long term identified priority projects for both public infrastructure and public­private partnerships,  the City will direct all relevant resources and departmental actions (in transportation, public  utilities, transit and other fiscal incentives, public realm design etc) to support their  implementation.” The draft FCSP further identifies goals with supporting policy and  implementation programs that focus on transforming downtown into a vibrant set of  neighborhoods yet fails to incorporate policies and implementation measures focused on  addressing inherent poverty, health, housing, transportation and economic challenges of  families living below the poverty line identified in the draft DNCP. While the draft FCSP contains  policies, programs and implementation measures focused on creating resilient, healthy  neighborhoods, the draft fails to incorporate similar policies, programs and implementation  measures for low income communities and communities of color currently residing in the FCSP  area. Instead of protecting and building upon the culture and resiliency found in such  neighborhoods, the City is accelerating displacement and gentrification risk and further  perpetuating a cycle of poverty that has long plagued neighborhoods in the southern part of the  City.   In comparison to the DNCP, the FCSP contains specific implementation measures that  target limited City resources to planning area that many adjacent and surrounding  neighborhoods should be able to drawn upon to effectively spur revitalization. Additionally, the  draft FCSP includes strategies that call for the formation of an interdisciplinary working group  focused on the FCSD;  tying of FCSD implementation framework to annual individual workplans  of all departments and to Capital Improvement Plans; and focus of financial resources and  physical improvements in concentrated areas of the Fulton Corridor.  While these strategies  2  may be well intended, they provide for explicit prioritization of city resources and personnel  solely to the FCSP area without directing such attention to surrounding neighborhoods.   Public Participation Prior to Downtown Neighborhoods Plan Adoption  The Draft Plan describes community engagement activities performed by the City during  the initial development of the Plan in 2010 but does not identify any activities following that  period or between release of the DEIR and adoption that the City will do to engage the public  and ensure public input informs the final plan. Especially given that 6 years have passed since  the City conducted public engagement in developing the draft plan, it is critical that the City  ensure that residents can provide input at the final stages of the process. Accordingly, the City  should develop an outreach plan in coordination with community leaders and CBOs and work  collaboratively to implement it. The City must demonstrate how feedback on the draft plan  provided in 2011 and during the above suggested outreach efforts is incorporated into the final  plan and informs development of an implementation section of the plan.  Integrating Neighborhoods and Conformance with other Plans  While the DNCP notes that neighborhood integration is important, the Plan fails to  include policies and implementation measures that will ensure integration among Downtown  Neighborhoods and integration with neighborhoods beyond the area covered in the DNCP.  Additionally, the Plan should include goals and policies designed to ensure that the Plan is  harmonized with other plans and planning efforts, including the FCSP,  City’s Active  Transportation Plan, Fresno Council of Government Active Transportation Plan, Parks Master  Plan, Southwest Specific Community Plan, Southeast Specific Community Plan and additional  plans noted in the introductory section of the DNCP.  Lack of information related to the Available of  Public and Private Grants and Loans while  the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out with specificity funding opportunities.  The DNCP does not identify opportunities to pursue many available public and private  grants and loans to implement the Plan’s goals and policies, including but not limited to state  Cap and Trade funds, including the CalFire Urban Forestry Grants, Affordable Housing and  Sustainable Communities Program, weatherization programs, EOC support for solar and  community­solar projects. In contrast, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out in detail public  and private funding sources available for each priority project and even includes cost projections  for some components. The lack of detail in the DNCP undermines our confidence that some of  the stronger goals and policies will be implemented.   Revitalization Focus Should Ensure that All Downtown Neighborhoods Benefit  The DNCP, and the City’s actions to implement it, must ensure that all downtown  neighborhoods benefit from the City’s renewed focus on investing in existing central core  3  communities. For example, Goals and Policies: 2.2: Ensure that City­wide policies encourage  development in the Downtown and discourage subsidized development in outlying areas of  Fresno ­ must be clarified to ensure that such attention extend to all downtown neighborhoods,  not just the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area. While we understand and applaud the City’s  interest in attracting private investment, the DNCP must facilitate investment and revitalization in  areas and neighborhoods surrounding the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area in addition to to  the subset of downtown neighborhoods in the FCSP area. An exclusive, or almost exclusive  focus, on the FCSP area will undermine the goals and policies included in the broader DNCP  area and adjacent neighborhoods. Given that projected household size in the FCSP area is  fewer than 2 individuals, and projected average household size in the broader downtown area is  more than 4 individuals a preference for investment in the FCSP as compared to the broader  Downtown Neighborhoods have a disproportionate and negative impact on families, in particular  lower income families and non­white families.   The Plan Must Provide Adequate Housing Opportunities to Meet the Needs of Existing  and Future Low­Income Households  As we have explained to the City in detail in previous written and oral comments, the City  and the Downtown Neighborhoods has a severe shortage of affordable housing to meet the  housing needs of lower­income residents.  According to the City’s Adopted 2015­2023 Housing  Element, over 50% of residents in Fresno are “housing­cost burdened”, paying over ⅓ of their  income on housing costs.  Lower­income residents, and lower­income renters in particular, are  hit the hardest by the City’s lack of affordable housing, with 88% of Extremely­Low Income  (“ELI”) and 76% of Very­Low Income (“VLI”) households overpaying on rent and 93% of ELI and  83% of VLI renter households overpaying on rent.  Due to the shortage of affordable housing  options for lower­income residents in Fresno, many lower­income residents are forced to live in  substandard housing, live over­crowded housing, and are vulnerable to displacement due to  small increases in housing costs and costs of living.  Given this context, it is critical that the DNCP, FCSP, and Downtown Code contain  protections to ensure that lower­income residents have access to adequate safe and affordable  housing options in the Draft Plan Area. As currently drafted, the Drafts fail to identify to do so  and in fact, threaten to result in significant displacement of the existing lower­income resident  population.  A. The Plan Fails to Include Strong and Clear Policies to Prevent Displacement of Lower­Income Residents i. The Plan Must Include Strong and Clear Policies to Preserve and Create Affordable Housing Opportunities for Lower­Income Residents  4  The policies in the DNCP include broad support for affordable housing but lack strong  and clear policies to facilitate its preservation and development. At the same time, the  Plan contains various policy and vision statements supporting the creation of market­rate  housing.  The Plan’s emphasis on the development of market rate housing, focusing  public investment to attract private investment, and support for high speed rail are all  likely to drive up housing costs in the plan area, along with other factor such such as  population growth and movement inland from the coast.  The Final plan and the Final DEIR must include clear and specific protections for lower  income residents from dislocation due to rising rent prices.  ii. The Draft Plan Does Not Discuss or Plan to Address the Housing Needs of Extremely­Low and Very­Low Income Residents The Draft Plan is devoid of any mention of the housing needs of extremely­low (“ELI”)  and very­low income (“VLI”) residents.  ELI and VLI residents experience the highest rates of  housing­cost burden in the City, are at high risk of homelessness, and are most vulnerable to  the impact of increased housing costs and costs of living.  ELI and VLI residents in the Plan  Area are at risk of displacement due to focused and prolonged investment in the Downtown  Neighborhoods, the introduction of High Speed Rail, and the introduction of market­rate housing  to the Plan Area as projected by the Plan  iii. Preservation of Affordable, High Quality Mobile Home Units As the Draft Plan notes, the Jane Addams neighborhood has several mobile home  parks.  The City’s 2015­2023 Housing Element states that mobile homes are an important  source of affordable housing for lower­income residents, but that they are at risk of conversion  as land values increase.  Land values are likely to increase significantly over the life of the Plan,  as the City directs resources towards Plan implementation, High­Speed Rail becomes a reality,  and population growth reduces available land for housing.  The Draft Plan includes no discussion of the risk of conversion of mobile home parks  and no policies to promote and facilitate the preservation of affordable and high quality mobile  home units.  The Final Plan must do so in order to ensure that existing residents are not  displaced and the City’s scarce sources of affordable housing are maintained.  iii. The Plan Must Include Additional Multi­Family Zoning in the Neighborhoods Outside of Downtown  Outside of the Downtown Neighborhood and especially in the Jane Addams neighborhood, the  Plan lacks significant opportunities for the development of higher­density multi­family housing.  5  The Plans must identify additional higher density housing opportunities outside of the Downtown  in order to meet the need for housing affordable to lower­income households and in order to  qualify for state grants for affordable housing development which have minimum density  requirements.  In particular, we recommend that the Draft DNCP be revised to replace industrial  land use designations along McKinley Avenue with multi­family and mixed­use housing  designations and replace single­family housing designations on Olive Avenue with multi­family  and mixed­use housing.  B. The Draft Plans Fail to Facilitate the Maintenance and Development of Affordable Housing for Large Households Thousands of lower­income households in Fresno face over­crowding, due to the lack of  affordable units large enough for large families.  According to the Draft Plan, households in the  Community Plan Area are larger than households in the City on average and are predominantly  comprised of children.  Households in the Plan Area, due to their size and the prevalence of  poverty, can be expected to face even greater over­crowding than households in other areas of  the City.  The Draft Plan does not identify the prevelance of over­crowding in the Plan Area or  include policies to facilitate the maintenance and development of housing appropriately sized for  large households. The Final Plan must do so.  D. The Plan Must Ensure that City Code Enforcement Activities Do Not Displace and/or Disproportionately Impact Low­Income Residents and Residents of Color We support policies in the DNCP for proactive code­enforcement and to prioritize code  enforcement  resources to address health and safety issues in rental housing (Policy 2.13..4).  These policies however do not but must include explicit protections against displacement of  renters and support to low­income homeowners in maintaining their properties, including  resources for rehabilitation for lower­income property owners.   Policy 2:17, requiring owners to maintain property, risks triggering displacement of lower­income  property owners through the imposition of fines.  The City should instead create and expand  programs to assist low­income homeowners with home maintenance and code compliance.  Policy 2.13.6 states that, “As resources become available, require owners to maintain all  portions of their properties, including buildings, yards, and service areas, as well as adjacent  sidewalks and alleys.” p. 2:17. This Policy should be pursued through education but must not be  exercised in a manner that targets low­income residents and/or residents of color, which would  result in violations of federal and state fair housing and civil rights laws.  Policy 2.9.9 calls on the City to create “a coordinated program to acquire, demolish, and rebuild  blighted, non­traditional multi­family residential buildings.” p. 2:15.  This policy must be revised  6  to include protections for any tenants of such buildings, including protections to prevent  displacement and to support relocation of residents in the same neighborhood.  Parks, Recreational, and Community Facilities  While the DCSP identifies the need for parks, recreational and community facilities  throughout the planning area, there are insufficient programs and policies designed to address  those needs, especially in the most park deficient neighborhoods. In general, the DNCP should  include policies and implementation measures aimed at converting vacant parcels and  abandoned property into parks and community facilities as well as policies and implementation  measures to pursue grants such as CalFire Urban Forestry grants for park space acquisition  and development and HCD Housing­Related Parks Grants. The DNCP should contain language  focused on seamless integration to policies, programs and implementation measures identified  through the City’s efforts to update the Parks Master Plan.   Specifically for the Jane Addams and Southeast neighborhoods the draft DNCP notes  that these neighborhoods are especially park space deficient. Figure 4­6 of the DNCP identifies  potential areas for park space and recreational facilities in the Jane Addams area. We  recommend that the City acquire the vacant plot at the southwest corner of Olive Avenue and  Marks Avenue for a park and small library. Unfortunately the Land Use Map does not include  any new parks in the Southeast neighborhood area. We recommend the City identify new park  opportunities and include them in the map, for example the vacant lot in front of Roosevelt High  School.  Additionally, Southeast neighborhood residents suggest the following locations  immediately adjacent to the Plan area for acquisition for the development of new parks and  recreational facilities including:  1. The Hanoian building, which is for sale, and the adjacent vacant lot at the corner of Cedar and Butler.  The City could also consider relocating the police department located on the lot to increase the space available for a recreational center. 2. The lot in front of the Mosqueda Center is ideal for a new park. It is a large lot; FAX routes 33 and 26 pass by the site; it is near a grocery store.  The historic WW­II building should be made into a museum, not left in disrepair. Create a Multi­Modal Transportation Network that Meet Needs of All Downtown Neighborhoods  The Draft Plan identifies creating a “multi­modal transportation network” as a strategy (p.  1:4).  Public investment and infrastructure improvements must support active transportation in  order to create such a multi­modal network.  The vision statement for the Jane Addams  neighborhood, which increases access to pedestrian facilities, is an example of supporting  active transportation. The Draft Plan anticipates that it will remain consistent with the ATP Plan  (p. 7).  If inconsistencies arise, the Plan should be amended to reflect the ATP Plan.  7  Public Investments and Infrastructure Improvements to Support Active Transportation  Investment priorities should emphasize public health and safety of children and access  to key amenities and services.   Policy 1:6 requires the City to target public investment to locations that have the greatest  potential to attract private investment.  This policy would continue to leave behind many  low­income neighborhoods that lack basic infrastructure, such as sidewalks, street lights, and  stormwater drainage.  The City should prioritize investments to maximize health outcomes and ensure the  safety of children walking to and from school, community centers and parks.  Such prioritization  policies include Policy 2.1.2 (installation of new sidewalks near schools), Policy 3.9.3 (identify  priority corridors between residential areas and schools and pursue grants to facilitate this  through traffic calming), Policy 5.7.2 (maintenance of public facilities), and Policy 5.7.3 (funding  and timely construction of needed public facilities).  For example, Hamilton Avenue & South  Maple Avenue, just South of Mosqueda Center, needs street lights, flashing stop lights for  pedestrians, and sidewalks.  Infrastructure to prevent flooding and pooled water would also facilitate public health.  “The Downtown Area is characterized by large impervious areas, is susceptible to localized  flooding, and could benefit from additional local stormwater retention facilities to mitigate flood  hazards.” p. 15.  The Plan must ensure adequate infrastructure to support connectivity with other  neighborhoods, including active transit across railway and freeway segments that cut off  neighborhoods from key amenities.  The Draft Plan recognizes that the high rates of  concentrated poverty in the Downtown neighborhoods is likely due in part to the geographic  isolation of neighborhoods by freeways and railroad tracks.  (p. 1.)  “The introduction of the  freeway system after World War II, created impenetrable barriers that isolated neighborhoods  from one another and the Downtown area, and diminished the livability of the entire center of  the city.”  (p. 16.)  Policy 2.18 places importance on interconnecting the Downtown Neighborhoods with great  streets and beautiful public spaces.  There should also be a policy about promoting  interconnectedness among neighborhoods through multimodal transportation options and  infrastructure and reversing isolating impacts of highway constructions.  The Plan identifies the need to plan for safe, aesthetically pleasing, and green routes  between neighborhoods and across freeway and railway track barriers to connect  neighborhoods to rest of City, allow them to access key resources lacking in those  neighborhoods, and mitigate air quality, sound, and visual impacts of those barriers.  For  example, the Jane Addams neighborhood is isolated from the rest of the city by SR 99 and 180,  Union Pacific railroad right of way. “ Crossings of these transportation corridors and few and far  8  between, hampering vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian connections to other parts of town.” Draft  Plan, p. 20.  The Vision for Jane Addams includes building a pedestrian bridge across State  Route 99 to provide easier access to Roeding Park (p. 1:8) and building a pedestrian bridge  across Highway 99 at Harvey Ave. to improve pedestrian access within the neighborhood (p.  3.9.9).  Policy 3.4.6 also identifies the need to install curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on  Mickely between SR 99 and Marks (though this should go to Golden State) and along Golden  State to the mobile home park.  Routes throughout the Jane Addams neighborhood, and those  that connect the neighborhood to other parts of the city, must be improved with sidewalks,  lighting, trees, and the like, as they are incomplete and unsafe for both children and adults.  Residents want to see more investment to support safe bicycling prioritizing routes to  schools and major community centers like shopping centers, parks, and medical centers,  including segregated bike lanes.  Figure 3­1, “Proposed Bicycle Facilities,” identifies few Class 1  bike facilities in DNCP; only includes a Class 1 on Belmont in the Jane Addams neighborhood,  but should also consider on McKinley, both directions from the school; and Southeast has no  Class 1 facilities.  Figure 3­5 does not propose road diets and bike lanes for Jane Addams.    Access to Efficient and Affordable Public Transit Options  For neighborhoods that lack access to essential amenities and services, like grocery  stores and medical facilities, affordable and efficient public transit options are essential.  Existing transit in the Downtown neighborhoods is often unreliable and has service gaps that  mean residents have to walk significant distances and take several buses to get to their  destination.  Comparatively low rates of car ownership by residents in many of the Downtown  Plan neighborhoods due to high poverty levels (34% in Jane Addams, 67% in Lowell, Draft  Plan) are also reason for improved public transit options.  Additionally, the summary of existing  conditions does not discuss transit needs.   Policy 3.1.3 advises to focus transit service and investments on the Transit Corridors  identified in Figure 3­2.  Policy 3.1.10 advises to prioritize reducing transit delay along these  corridors.  Policy 3.1.11 states to focus initial improvements on areas with the greatest ridership,  including the Downtown Neighborhoods, as well as to increase rider safety and comfort.  However, areas should be prioritized according to the greatest need, like Jane Addams.  This  focus on high ridership excludes neighborhoods that have historically struggled with deficient  infrastructure, and continues inequitable investment.  Generally, the needs of existing  disadvantaged neighborhoods are ignored.  Additionally, the focus on high priority corridors is that these corridors are generally not  in residential areas which is problematic when seeking funding, including grants.  Such a focus  makes it difficult to connect with ATP plan efforts.  Figure 3­2, High Priority Transit Corridors,  does not propose primary or secondary routes in the Jane Addams neighborhood.  The vision  page for Jane Addams includes upgrading transit stops, and should also include expanded  9  transit service.  P. 1:10.  The City must also secure and allocate funding for extension of the  BRT to Edison Neighborhoods.  Policy 3.3.6 requires new developments in the Downtown Neighborhood do not result in  the worsening of transportation related facilities, but for other neighborhoods it only requires  mitigation.  All new developments, regardless of neighborhood, should not result in the  worsening of transportation related facilities.  In the alternative, the City should, at a minimum,  set mitigation thresholds.  Policy 3.1.5 supports incentives for potential Downtown transit riders.  Incentives must  also be available to low­income residents to allow for affordable transit.  It bears restating that It is absolutely critical that the DNCP, and implementation thereof,  increases transit access to and connectivity between and among neighborhoods in Plan area.   Mitigate Impacts and Enhance the Benefits of High­Speed Rail for All Downtown Neighborhoods  The Draft Plan includes a general statement to introduce HSR in a manner that has least  possible impact on surrounding existing land uses, while preserving Downtown’s interconnected  street network to the greatest extent possible. 2:8. The Draft Plan, and related plans must  ensure that all negative impacts of the High Speed rail are mitigated. The Draft Plan identifies  potential impacts yet does not include physical and economic displacement, or relocation of  industrial uses to areas already overly burdened by such uses. The investment in High Speed  Rail must also directly benefit communities adjacent to the downtown core through increased  transit access and connectivity between and among neighborhoods.    Infrastructure for Safe Drinking Water and Wastewater  There are places in and adjacent to the planning area, for example parts of the Jane  Addams neighborhood that do not have City drinking water or wastewater services. The DNCP  must include policies and implementation measures to address these critical deficiencies.   The Plan identifies the need to improve conservation measures and diversify water  resources to address the increasing scarcity of water in the region. The Plan must also include  policies and implementation measures to protect dwindling water resources from suburban  sprawl development and industrial development.   We recommend the City update the draft DNCP to include policies and implementation  measures similar to those found in the draft FCSP to ensure adequate infrastructure necessary  to support infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods.   Road Quality  10  Many roads in the Downtown Neighborhoods have deteriorating, pot­holed roads and  roads that serve as truck routes for industrial facilities are especially impacted. The Plan must  include policies and implementation measures to restore and protect these resources.   Neighborhood Greening  We are supportive of policies to increase tree coverage in the Plan area recommend  prioritizing investment in communities that are particularly park poor such as the Jane Addams  Neighborhood (“In the Jane Addams Neighborhoods, however, street trees are noticeably  absent.” p. 13). We also recommend implementation measures, such as proactively seeking  funds and work with HSR and CalTrans.   Safe and Clean Alleys  Many alleys throughout the planning area are filled with trash and abandoned furniture.  Sometimes residents find old medical products or decaying animals in alleys. While the Draft  Plan includes broad policies to address alleys, we recommend aggressive actions and  implementation measures including, transformation of alleys into a network of paths and green  infrastructure, transferring ownership of alleys to adjacent homeowners, and extending regular  alley cleaning services to problem areas throughout the downtown neighborhoods.   Healthy Environment: Industrial Land and Other Polluting Land Uses  The Draft Draft Plan Land Use Map notes that residents identified industrial land uses  located next to residences, parks, and other sensitive land uses as a conflict. (“Numerous  incompatibilities with the types and location of industrial uses were identified through the  planning process.  The issues include the proximity of industrial uses to residential areas,  schools and parks, areas where industrial uses are located on parcels intended for residential  uses and truck traffic from industrial areas impacting local streets.” p. 26)  However, the DNCP  maintains existing industrial zoning in several neighborhoods immediately adjacent to residential  and other sensitive uses.   The Plan recognizes that industrial buildings and complexes are located in many  instances adjacent to homes (p. 20) yet the Plan maintains industrial zoning and does not  include any policies to address incompatible land uses in that neighborhood. For South Van  Ness the draft plan recommends continuation of industrial uses near residential areas. Policy  2.1.3 for the Edison Neighborhood: “Plan for the relocation of industrial uses that negatively  impact nearby residential, public, and other similar uses.” must apply to all Downtown  Neighborhoods.  Additionally, the Land Use Map must be changed to eliminate industrial and  business park land use designations within or next to neighborhoods and replace them with  parks, neighborhood commercial, houses, and mixed use zoning as appropriate.   11  While the importance of segregating industrial uses from sensitive receptors forms the  foundation of land use planning and is supported by common sense it has also been identified  as a principal priority of residents living among industrial uses. Furthermore, communities most  impacted by concentrated industrial uses are also those neighborhoods ranked as the most  vulnerable by CalEnviroScreen due to high asthma rates, poor air quality and proximity to  polluting land uses.   The DNCP acknowledges this, and includes Policy 7.7.3. That call for the City to locate  sensitive uses ­ such as housing, schools, health facilities, and parks ­ away from building uses  that generate toxic pollutants.” As noted above, the City must also apply the converse: locate  building that generate toxic pollutants away from homes and other sensitive uses. We are very  supportive of Policy 7.6.4 which calls for the City to  “complete the Industrial Compatibility Study  and work towards implementation” and wish to confirm that it applies to all neighborhoods in the  Plan area and suggest an implementation timeline that includes identification of funding  resources available to facilitate implementation.   Policy 2.17 calls for a regulatory environment and development process that makes  development decisions predictable, fair, and transparent and limits the use of CUPs and other  discretionary approvals. To the extent that industrial zoning continues to be located in and  adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses, these policies threaten to deny residents the  opportunity know about and provide feedback on new industrial proposals that could impact  their neighborhoods, lower their property values, and create toxic air emissions. Accordingly,  until the ICA is conducted and implemented and industrial zoning is located away from sensitive  land uses, Policies 2.17.7 and 2.17.8 should not apply to industrial and business park land uses.  Additionally, there must be safeguards in place to protect existing residents from displacement  and other undesirable impacts from land use decisions.   We support policies designed to divert truck traffic from sensitive sites including  residential neighborhoods, including:   1. 3.8.1 Designate streets that are suitable for truck delivery routes in order to divert truck traffic away from sensitive sites, particularly the residential neighborhoods. Truck routes should be limited to arterials and expressways specifically designated for the purpose or to collector and local industrial streets which directly service planned industrial areas.” 2. 3.8.2 Locate industrial uses such that industrial truck and vehicular traffic will not route through local residential streets. 3. 7.7.1 Do not locate truck routes on primarily residential streets or near parks, playgrounds, schools or other sensitive uses and create a map that highlights how existing truck routes impact existing and future development patterns. Finally, the DNCP must assess the potential air impacts of drive­thru establishments, especially to the extent that there is an increase in such establishments in communities  impacted by poor air quality and traffic.   12  Increase Access to Retail, Grocery Stores, Banks, and Other Necessary Day­to­Day Services  We support goals and policies designed to increase access to goods, services and  groceries at a neighborhood scale and suggest targeted investment to realize that goal.  Additionally, community based organizations should work with food vendors and the City to  ensure quality and affordable healthy foods and locally sourced produce. We are concerned that  Policy 2.12.5 could have a negative impact on small, lower income and minority owned mobile  food vendors.   Jobs and Employment  The Draft Plan must include more aggressive policies to protect existing and promote  quality jobs and employment opportunities. For example the Draft Plan should incentivize local  hire policies  and workforce development investments that will allow for upward financial  mobility. Additionally, given that rents are expected to increase downtown, the City should  support existing small and minority owned businesses against displacement.   Public Participation in Local Government and Plan Implementation  We are supportive of the proposed public participation policies included in the draft  DNCP to engage the public as key partners in the City’s decision making processes (7.2.1). We  recommend the City add policies to work directly with residents and stakeholders to identify and  address barriers to civic engagement. We also recommend the City include implementation  measures in the DNCP focused on ensuring resident and community stakeholder participation  in implementation of the plan, including for allocation of resources. The City can draw upon  implementation strategies found in the FCSP, such as convening interdisciplinary working  groups, to ensure ongoing community engagement. We suggested similar recommendations in  our 2014 General Plan comment letter.   The Draft Environmental Impact Report Fails to Analyze and Mitigate Potentially  Significant Impacts of the DNCP, FCSP, and Downtown Development Code  The DEIR fails to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act  (“CEQA”) to disclose, analyze, and propose all feasible mitigation measures for potentially  significant environmental impacts related to the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan,  the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Downtown Development Code (collectively, “Project”).  The DEIR relies heavily on the Master Environmental Impact Report (“MEIR”) for City of Fresno  2035 General Plan for its analysis and to reach conclusions that various impacts are significant  and unavoidable or less than significant and then cursorily dismisses without evidentiary basis  the feasibility of additional mitigation measures beyond implementation of General Plan policies.  As we explained in detail in our October 9, 2014 comments, the Draft MEIR was a  fundamentally flawed document which did not satisfy the requirements of CEQA and its  13  implementing guidelines.  The Final MEIR fails to correct many of the DMEIR’s inadequacies,  including the DMEIR’s reliance on vague, voluntary and otherwise unenforceable policies  contained in the 2035 General Plan as mitigation measures and its failure to consider and  propose all feasible mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts as required by CEQA.  Pub. Res. Code ​§§​ 21002; 21081.6(b); Cal. Code of Reg. (C.C.R.) ​§§  15091(a)(1)(15126.4(a)(2); ​see id.​ § 15126.2(b); ​See Napa Citizens for Honest Gov’t v. Napa  County Bd. of Sup.​ (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 358.​ The DEIR too is fundamentally flawed for  relying upon inadequate analysis, conclusions and mitigation measures of the MEIR and for  failing to identify and identify feasible mitigation options for the MEIR’s project­specific and  cumulative impacts.  The DEIR’s failings will most directly impact low­income disadvantaged residents and  communities in the Downtown Plan Area.  These communities and residents are the most  vulnerable to the impacts the DEIR fails to adequately analyze or effectively mitigate.  Thus, the  DEIR not only violates CEQA but results in violations of state and federal fair housing and civil  rights laws, including but not limited to 42 U.S.C. ​§§ 2000d, 3601 ​et seq​., 5304(b)(2),  5306(s)(7B), 1205; Cal. Gov. Code §§ 11135, 12955, ​et seq.  The City must revise and recirculate the DEIR to provide the public an accurate  assessment of the environmental issues at stake and a mitigation strategy that fully addresses  the Project’s significant impacts ​prior to adoption of the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC.​  The revised  DEIR should include the changes to the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan proposed  in these comments above.  The proposed revisions to the DNCP are feasible mitigation  measures that can effectively reduce the Project’s impacts.  1. The DEIR Ignores Feasible Mitigation, Such as Changes to the Land Use Designations and Densities and Intensities Proposed in the General Plan P. 5. 2. The DEIR Fails to Assess the Environmental, Social and Economic Impacts of Inadequate Affordable Housing and Displacement A. Lack of Consideration of Impact of City’s Failure to Adopt and Implement a Legally Adequate 5th Cycle Housing Element The DEIR states that the City’s Housing Element has been adopted by City Council and is  “currently awaiting certification by the state”. 5.12­8. In fact, the State Department of Housing  and Community Development issued a letter on August 11, 2016 finding that the Housing  Element does not substantially comply with state law.  See Exhibit C.  Among other things, HCD  found that the City’s Adopted Housing Element:  14  ●Fails to account for the unmet need for housing affordable to lower­income households  in Fresno as a result of the City’s failure to rezone adequate sites for multi­family  housing to address the City’s shortfall of 6,228 units under its previous housing element.  ●Fails to include adequate programs that will result in a beneficial impact on the City’s  housing goals during the planning period, including with respect to maintaining and  preserving affordable mobile home units in Fresno and with respect to creating  affordable housing opportunity in higher income and higher opportunity neighborhoods.  ●Identify sites and include programs as appropriate to make sites available to meet the  current City’s 2013­2023 Regional Housing Need Allocation based on an accurate  calculation of the City’s unmet need under its previous housing element.    The City must revise the DEIR to disclose the State’s finding that the Housing Element does not  comply with state law and assess how its failure to comply with state law impacts the DEIR’s  related analyses, including but not limited to impacts on population and housing, air quality and  greenhouse gas emissions.     B.The DMEIR Fails to Adequately Analyze the Project’s Potential to Displace  Existing Housing    The DEIR’s analysis of the Project’s potential to displace significant numbers of existing  housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, consists of a brief  paragraph that concludes that the Project will have less than a significant impact because it is  projected to result in a net increase in housing units.  Missing from this assessment is a  discussion of the affordability of units that will be constructed in the Downtown Plan Areas to  residents that will need replacement housing as a result of displacement due to the loss of  existing housing.     According to the DNCP, neighborhoods in the Downtown Plan Area have high rates of  concentrated poverty and are comprised of a relatively high proportion of renters compared to  home­owners.  The City’s 2015 Consolidated Plan indicates that high percentages of  lower­income residents and renters in Fresno exceeding 70% are housing cost burdened,  paying over a third of their income on rent.  Therefore, the loss of existing housing currently  used by lower­income residents in the Downtown Neighborhoods, as projected by the DEIR, will  necessitate the construction of alternative housing affordable to those residents.  Construction   of new market­rate housing is unlikely to be affordable to lower­income residents.    While the Draft DNCP includes broad vision statements and policy aims in support of a  “diverse” housing stock and maintaining existing affordable housing, neither it nor the DEIR  identify any specific actions the City will take or resources that will be dedicated to facilitate the  creation and maintenance of affordable housing in the Downtown Neighborhoods.  As noted in  section A above, the City does not even have a legally­compliant housing element in place with  a strategy to provide for the housing needs of lower­income residents and residents with special  housing needs and has failed to accurately calculate and identify adequate sites to  15  accommodate the City’s shortfall of 6,228 units from the previous housing element planning  period and the City’s lower­income RHNA of 11,923 for the 2013­2023 planning period.   Thus,  “build out” of the DNCP and General Plan without mitigation measures to ensure the creation  and preservation of affordable housing has the potential to displacement significant numbers of  lower­income residents without providing alternative financially­accessible housing options.    The DEIR states that according to data contained in the DNCP, the vacancy rates in the  Downtown Neighborhoods is high.  According to Draft DNCP Table 5, the vacancy rates in the  Downtown neighborhoods range from 8% in Southeast Fresno to 15% in the Downtown.  Table  5 does not support the DEIR’s conclusion that the Project will not have a significant impact  resulting from the displacement of existing housing.  First, the Southeast Fresno vacancy rate  identified of 8% is not a “high” vacancy rate.  Second, the DNCP does not identify the source or  timeframe of collection of the vacancy rates included in Table 5.  Tables 3 and 4, immediately  above Table 5 in the Draft DNCP, indicate that the housing and population that they contain  were generated between 2008 and 2010 ­­ the time period when vacancy rates reached their  peaks at the height of the recession.  If the data from Table 5 was drawn from a similar time  period, it is an inadequate reference for existing vacancy rates in the Downtown Neighborhoods,  given the ongoing recovery of the housing market and decline in vacancy rates over the past six  years.    The DEIR must be revised to accurately reflect the potential for the displacement of  housing to result in significant environmental impacts, including due to the loss of housing  affordable to lower­income residents, and identify and include all feasible mitigation measures.     ******    Thank you for your consideration of our comments.    Sincerely,    Ashley Werner  16  Exhibit F Final Program EIR H AMERICA | E FIRSTCARBON ty of Fres Co EUROPE | AFR SOLUTIONS.CO sno Down orridor Sp ICA | AUSTRA OM  ntown Ne pecific Pla Ci LIA | ASIA R Final  eighborh an, and D ity of Fre Developm Co   Response Environm hoods Com Downtow sno, Fres ent and Reso ontact: Sophia Contact: Jas e to Comm mental Im mmunity wn Develo sno Count ource Manage 2 a Pagoulatos,  FirstC 7265 N. Firs son Brandma Kim Burnel Dat ments on  mpact Rep y Plan, Fu opment C ty, Califo Prepare City of Fr ement Depart 2600 Fresno S Fresno, CA 9 559.621 Planning Ma Prepare Carbon Solu st Street, Suit Fresno, CA 9 an, Project Dir ll, Project Ma te: October 7,  the   port  lton  Code   rnia  ed for:        resno  tment  Street  93721  1.8003  nager  ed by:  utions  te 101  93720  rector  nager  , 2016  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents FirstCarbon Solutions iii Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 00-01 TOC.docx Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1-1 Section 1: List of Commenters ..................................................................................................... 2-1 Section 2: Responses to Comments ............................................................................................. 3-1 Section 3: Errata.......................................................................................................................... 4-1 Section 4: List of Exhibits Exhibit 5.10-3a: Proposed DNCP Land Use and Zoning Designations ................................................. 4-7 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Introduction FirstCarbon Solutions 1-1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 01-00 Introduction.docx INTRODUCTION SECTION 1: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088, the City of Fresno has evaluated the comments received on the City of Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and Downtown Development Code Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Draft EIR was released for public review and comment from August 5, 2016 through September 12, 2016. This Response to Comments (including the Errata) comprise the Final EIR for use by the City of Fresno and responsible agencies in their review of the proposed project. This Response to Comments document is organized as follows: • Section 1: Introduction. • Section 2: List of Commenters. Provides a list of agencies, organizations, and individuals that commented on the Draft EIR. • Section 3: Responses to Comments. Includes a copy of all of the letters received and provides responses to comments on environmental issues describing the disposition of the issues, explaining the Draft EIR analysis, supporting the Draft EIR conclusions, and/or providing clarifying information or corrections, as appropriate. This section is organized with a copy of the comment letter followed by the corresponding responses. • Section 4: Errata. Includes the errata, clarifications, and additions to the Draft EIR. Additionally, these Responses to Comments and Errata clarify, amplify, and expand on the fully adequate analysis and significance conclusions that were already set forth in the Draft EIR for public review. CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 makes clear that such clarifications and amplifications are appropriate under CEQA and do not require recirculation of the EIR. Specifically, Section 15088.5 states: a) A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term “information” can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that: 1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Introduction Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 1-2 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 01-00 Introduction.docx 2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it. 4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. b) Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. As set forth in more detail in these Responses to Comments and Errata, none of the clarifications or amplifications set forth herein change the significance conclusions presented in the Draft EIR or substantially alter the analysis presented for public review. Furthermore, the Draft EIR circulated for public review was fully adequate under CEQA such that meaningful public review was not precluded. Thus, the clarifications provided in these Responses to Comments and Errata do not constitute significant new information that might trigger recirculation. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report List of Commenters FirstCarbon Solutions 2-1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 02-00 Commenters.docx LIST OF COMMENTERS SECTION 2: A list of public agencies, organizations, and individuals who provided comments on the Draft EIR through the close of the public review period ending September 12, 2016 is presented below. Each comment has been assigned a code. Individual comments within each correspondence have been numbered so comments can be crossed-referenced with responses. The text of the correspondence is reprinted in Section 3, Responses to Comments, immediately followed by the corresponding response. Table 2-1: List of Commenters Code Commenter Comment Date A Caltrans, District 6, Michael Navarro September 12, 2016 B California Public Utilities Commission, Ken Chiang August 2, 2016 C California Public Utilities Commission, Marvin Kennix August 2, 2016 D Department of Public Works and Planning, Jeremy Shaw September 9, 2016 E Fresno Irrigation District, Laurence Kimura September 8, 2016 F Fresno’s Historic Preservation Program, Karana Hattersley-Drayton August 23, 2016 G.1 Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, Ashley Werner September 12, 2016 G.2 Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, Ashley Werner October 9, 2014 G.3 Department of Housing and Community Development, Glen A. Campora August 11, 2016 H Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Wendell Lum September 13, 2016 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of F Respons     FirstCar Y:\Publicatio SECT In acc City o Neigh Code, the D the EI   Fresno – DNCP, FC se to Comments o rbon Solutions ons\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\316 RTION 3:  cordance with of Fresno (City hborhoods Co , and the Draf raft EIR.  Mor IR are addres CSP, and DDC on the Final Enviro 680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\3168001 ESPONSES h Section 150 y), as the lead ommunity Pla ft EIR (State C re detailed re sed under se onmental Impact R 17 Sec 03‐00 Response to Com S TO  COM 88 of the Cali d agency, eval n, the Fulton Clearinghouse sponses to co parate cover  Report mments.docx  MMENTS  ifornia  Enviro luated the co  Corridor Spe e No. 201204 omments on t with the staff onmental Qua mments rece ecific Plan, the 1009).  The re the Plans and f report.  ality Act (CEQ eived on the D e Downtown  esponses pro d Code that a Responses to Com QA) Guidelines Downtown  Developmen ovided focus o re not directe mments 3‐1  s, the  nt  on  ed at  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK A-1 A-2 Letter A Page 1 of 3 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-2 Letter A Page 2 of 3 A-7 A-8 A-9 Letter A Page 3 of 3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐7  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter A: Department of Transportation, Michael Navarro, September 12, 2016 Response to Comment A‐1  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the specific plan includes  creating a quality walking experience by improving transit, parking, regions air quality, and  prioritizing economic development over traffic congestion concerns.  Response to Comment A‐2  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the proposed transportation  improvements mitigate impacts to the environment and to the state highway system.   Response to Comment A‐3  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the proposed plan provides real  mitigation measures that encourages mode shift and encourage and considers as mitigation  reduction of headways, addition of transit routes, ride share incentives, and other trip reduction  strategies that would result in improving air quality and real reduction in trips to the state highway  system.  Response to Comment A‐4  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the City will monitor AM and PM  peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at regular intervals as determined by the  City Traffic  Engineer.  In addition, DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g will implement  feasible Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips  to/from the project area.  Response to Comment A‐5  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the City will implement feasible  Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to/from the  project area.  Comment acknowledged.  The City of Fresno will consider including the nine (9)  additional downtown locations identified in Comment A‐6 in the next (2018) update to the TSMI fee  program.  Response to Comment A‐6  Comment acknowledged.  The City of Fresno should also consider including the nine (9) additional  downtown locations identified in Comment A‐6 in a future update to the TSMI fee program.  Response to Comment A‐7  Comment acknowledged.  The City of Fresno wholly supports the Smart Growth Principles of the  “California Interregional Blueprint” and the “San Joaquin Valley Regional Blueprint; Vision for the  Valley.”  Response to Comment A‐8  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that on pages 6 and 8 of the DEIR  Section in 5.14, it is indicated that FCSP Policy 9‐1‐13 recommends that the loop entrance from  Broadway Street to southbound SR‐41 should be removed and replaced with a direct entrance ramp   City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐8 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment A‐9  The commenter’s proposed modifications to provide a full interchange at Van Ness Avenue will be  considered as a project alternative when the City of Fresno and Caltrans undertake a Project Study  Report/Project Development Support (PSR/PDS) for the SR‐41/Van Ness Avenue interchange.    STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 320 WEST 4TH STREET, SUITE 500 LOS ANGELES, CA 90013 (213) 576-7083 August 2, 2016 Sophia Pagoulatos City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721 Dear Sophia: Re: SCH 2012041009 Fresno (FRESNO) Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan - DEIR The California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) has jurisdiction over the safety of highway- rail crossings (crossings) in California. The California Public Utilities Code requires Commission approval for the construction or alteration of crossings and grants the Commission exclusive power on the design, alteration, and closure of crossings in California. The Commission Rail Crossings Engineering Branch (RCEB) has received the Draft Environment Import Report (DEIR) from the State Clearinghouse for the proposed City of Fresno (City) Downtown Neighborhoods Community, Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Development Code project. According to the DEIR, the project area includes active railroad tracks. RCEB recommends that the City add language to the project plan so that any future development adjacent to or near the rail right- of-way (ROW) is planned with the safety of the rail corridor in mind. New developments may increase traffic volumes not only on streets and at intersections, but also at at-grade crossings. This includes considering pedestrian circulation patterns or destinations with respect to railroad ROW and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Mitigation measures to consider include the planning for grade separations for major thoroughfares, improvements to existing at-grade crossings due to increase in traffic volumes, and continuous vandal resistant fencing or other appropriate barriers to prevent trespassers onto the railroad ROW. If you have any questions in this matter, please contact me at (213) 576-7076, ykc@cpuc.ca.gov. Sincerely, Ken Chiang, P.E. Utilities Engineer Rail Crossings and Engineering Branch Safety and Enforcement Division C: State Clearinghouse B-1 Letter B Page 1 of 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐11  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter B: California Public Utilities Commission, Ken Chiang, August 2, 2016 Response to Comment B‐1  Impact TRANS‐8 and Mitigation TRANS‐8 identify that implementation of the DNCP and FCSP would  include improvements to the existing at‐grade railroad crossings to ensure that they have adequate  vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and that the crossing gates meet PUC standards.  The  implementation of these improvements would improve conditions at at‐grade railroad crossings and  lessen potential project impact to less than significant.  The FCSP includes the following policies related to transportation and circulation near railroad  crossings:   Policy 9‐14‐1: Add sidewalks and enhance existing pedestrian facilities and safety at all  railroad crossings.   Policy 9‐14‐2: Provide safe and well‐designed bicycle crossings of the railroad right‐of‐way at  all places identified in the Fresno Bicycle Master Plan.    The DNCP includes the following policies related to transportation and circulation near railroad  crossing:   Policy 3.3.4: Utilize to the extent feasible, a tiered system of flexible, multi‐modal Level of  Service (LOS) criteria to evaluate the transportation performance of streets while generally  striving to provide for an automobile level of service (LOS) of “D” or better for street segments  and intersections located outside of the Core Area (bound by State Routes 99, 41, and 180).   Policy 3.9.5: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission, ensure that  equipment and design strategies used in railroad crossing improvements integrate  appropriately with their surrounding location.  (FSCP 7‐13‐3).   Policy 3.9.6: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission and as situations  allow and funding becomes available, support an increase in the number of pedestrian,  bicycle, and vehicle crossings of railroads and enhance existing crossings in order to improve  safety for all modes and access for pedestrians and cyclists.  (FSCP 7‐13‐4) (FCSP 7‐13‐1).      THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 1 From:Kennix, Marvin L. <marvin.kennix@cpuc.ca.gov> Sent:Tuesday, August 02, 2016 3:04 PM To:Sophia Pagoulatos Subject:Downtown Plans and Code Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2012041009) Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged HelloSophia: IamtheUtilitiesEngineer(CPUC)whoisresponsibleforrailcrossingsafetyintheFresnoarea.I’djustliketo “piggyͲback”onmycoͲworker’scommentsandspecificallyemphasizetheinstallationofsidewalksacrossthe trackswhendevelopmentcausesrailcrossingsorsurroundingareastobemodified.Inthepast,wehaveseen thattheCityhasendedsidewalksjustbeforethetracksratherthanhavethemcrossthetracks.Wewouldlike theCitytorefrainfromthepracticeofendingsidewalksjustbeforethetracks. Thanks, Marvin L. Kennix MarvinKennix UtilitiesEngineer RailCrossingsandEngineeringBranch SafetyandEnforcementDivision CPUC (916)928Ͳ3809 C-1 Letter C Page 1 of 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐15  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter C: California Public Utilities Commission, Marvin Kennix, August 2, 2016 Response to Comment C‐1  Comment acknowledged.  The FCSP includes the following policies related to transportation and  circulation near railroad crossings:   Policy 9‐14‐1: Add sidewalks and enhance existing pedestrian facilities and safety at all  railroad crossings.   Policy 9‐14‐2: Provide safe and well‐designed bicycle crossings of the railroad right‐of‐way at  all places identified in the Fresno Bicycle Master Plan.    Impact TRANS‐8 and Mitigation TRANS‐8 identify that implementation of the DNCP and FCSP would  include improvements to the existing at‐grade railroad crossings to ensure that they have adequate  vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and that the crossing gates meet PUC standards.  The  implementation of these improvements would improve conditions at at‐grade railroad crossings and  lessen potential project impact to less than significant.  The DNCP includes the following policies related to transportation and circulation near railroad  crossing:   Policy 3.3.4: Utilize to the extent feasible, a tiered system of flexible, multi‐modal Level of  Service (LOS) criteria to evaluate the transportation performance of streets while generally  striving to provide for an automobile level of service (LOS) of “D” or better for street segments  and intersections located outside of the Core Area (bound by State Routes 99, 41, and 180).   Policy 3.9.5: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission, ensure that  equipment and design strategies used in railroad crossing improvements integrate  appropriately with their surrounding location.  (FSCP 7‐13‐3).   Policy 3.9.6: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission and as situations  allow and funding becomes available, support an increase in the number of pedestrian,  bicycle, and vehicle crossings of railroads and enhance existing crossings in order to improve  safety for all modes and access for pedestrians and cyclists.  (FSCP 7‐13‐4) (FCSP 7‐13‐1).      THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK D-1 D-2 D-3 Letter D Page 1 of 2 D-3 CONT D-4 D-5 Letter D Page 2 of 2 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐19  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter D: Count of Fresno Department of Public Works and Planning, Jeremy Shaw, September 9, 2016 Response to Comment D‐1  This comment notes that the City has classified Belmont, Hughes, and Olive as collector streets, and  Marks as arterial, and suggests that the classification of Belmont as a collector road is in conflict with  the County General Plan, which classifies Belmont as an arterial.  The roadway classifications  proposed in the plan would only apply to the roadways within the City of Fresno.    Response to Comment D‐2  The roadway design and cross sections proposed in the plan for collector and arterial roadways  would only apply to the roadway segments located within the City of Fresno.  Response to Comment D‐3  The City of Fresno High Speed Rail (HSR) Station Area Master Plan includes provisions for ridesharing  drop‐off and pick‐up.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment D‐4  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment D‐5  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Letter E Page 1 of  E-1 E-2 Letter E Page 2 of  E-3 E-4 E-5 E-6 E-7 E-8 E-9 Letter E Page 3 of  E-9 CONT E-10 E-11 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐25  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter E: Fresno Irrigation District, Laurence Kimura, September 8, 2016 Response to Comment E‐1  The City understands and acknowledges that Fresno Irrigation District (FID) would be a “Responsible  Agency” for projects that encompass FID facilities or when project infrastructure requirements  require modification of off‐site FID facilities.  The City considers FID to be a “partnering” agency and  has established a practice of routing all development project applications to FID so that there is  adequate opportunity for the irrigation district to review and comment on specific projects that  potentially impact FID canals and easements.  Response to Comment E‐2  The City understands and acknowledges that Fresno Irrigation District (FID) would be a “Responsible  Agency” for projects that encompass FID facilities or when project infrastructure requirements  require modification of off‐site FID facilities.  The City considers FID to be a “partnering” agency and  has established a practice of routing all development project applications to FID so that there is  adequate opportunity for the irrigation district to review and comment on specific projects that  potentially impact FID canals and easements.  Response to Comment E‐3  The Fresno General Plan MEIR includes policies and mitigation measures to reduce impacts to water  supply to less than significant through implementation of water conservation measures (required  through implementation of MM HYD‐2a and MM HYD‐2b) to decrease future demand.  Response to Comment E‐4  The commenter accurately states that Fresno Irrigation District (FID) shall supply the City an  estimated 108,200 acre‐feet per year (afy) from 2010 increasing to 132,400 afy by 2035.  The  estimates are consistent with the City’s Urban Water Management Plan.  In 2014, FID supplied the  City with approximately 62,000 acre‐feet and in 2015 the supply decreased to approximately 43,000  acre‐feet.  The commenter identifies a potentially significant impact to water supplies as the yearly  water supply depends heavily on the amount of precipitation produced for each year particularly in  wet years, FID can supply more water, and in dry years, the number can be significantly less.  FID  would like to see the City keep progressing towards the goal of a balanced water supply, as there are  concerns about the rate of development relative to the progress in balancing the water usage if the  necessary offsets for the increased water demands are not accomplished consistent with water  conservation goals.  At  the point where water supply needs would exceed the supply capacity of  Fresno’s portfolio, additional supplies would need to be developed and/or additional conservation  measures would need to be implemented.  As a further protection in the currently adopted General  Plan, the City would be required to implement Mitigation Measure HYD‐2a part of Impact USS‐4,  which would alleviate future water supply demand through conservation, and ensure that adequate  water supply capacity is provided in order to accommodate future demand prior to approval of new  projects.  The commenter also suggested recommended changes in the document.  The second to last  paragraph on page 5.15‐2 has been revised as follows:  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐26 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  The Surface Water Treatment Facility (SWTF) located in northeast Fresno receives supplies from the  United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), FID contract for Kings River Water, and a wastewater  recycle exchange agreement with the Fresno Irrigation District.  The USBR would supply 60,000 acre‐ feet per year (afy) in year 2010 through year 2025, and the FID would supply an estimated 108,200  afy in year 2010 (125,543 afy actual) (increasing to 132,400 afy by 2035) for the Kings River  contracted water., and the FID wastewater exchange agreement would supply 13,800 afy in year  2010 through year 2025 (City of Fresno 2016).  Response to Comment E‐5  This comment noted a factual error in this EIR.  The third sentence of the last paragraph on page  5.15‐3 has been revised as follows:  Surface water obtained under this agreement is treated at the City’s SWTF along with its other  surface supplies, and pumped into the potable distribution system.  Response to Comment E‐6  This comment describes the history and prior rights of the Fresno Irrigation District.  Comment  acknowledged.  Response to Comment E‐7  The commenter states that many FID canals will be impacted by future road improvements.  The City  acknowledges that future development in accordance with the Plans and Code could impact FID  canals.  The City intends to work with FID to address these potential impacts as development is  proposed.  Comment acknowledged.  Response to Comment E‐8  The City acknowledges that FID would have a right to review projects involving a crossing of an FID  facility, and would apply FID requirements within its jurisdiction.  Response to Comment E‐9  The City acknowledges that FID would have a right to review projects involving a crossing of an FID  facility, and would apply FID requirements within its jurisdiction.  Response to Comment E‐10  The City acknowledges FIDs water routings and construction window.  Response to Comment E‐11  The City acknowledges that FID’s prohibition of discharged into its canals.    DEVELOPMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT August 23, 2016 To: Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager From: Karana Hattersley-Drayton, Historic Preservation Project Manager Re: Comments for EIR, Downtown, Fulton Corridor Plans and Downtown Code The Historic Preservation Commission at its public hearing August 22nd, 2016 reviewed the EIR. Assistant Director Dan Zack gave a Power Point Presentation that was focused on the plans and Code. One of the Commission architects raised a concern about the Neoclassical form of base/shaft/cornice for commercial buildings from the form based code and wondered whether this rule will stifle modernism and creativity in general. The archaeologist on the Commission wanted to ensure that contractors properly trained their construction crews on archaeological protocols (as Will and I did for the zoo team). I think it would be prudent to add a sentence about this to MM CUL-3, perhaps, “The archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archaeological resources.” She was also concerned that if encapsulation of a site is approved as a mitigation measure, that there should be some monitoring plan adopted as well. Another Commissioner appreciated the two mitigation measures MM-CUL-1 and 2 for historic resources (which we lobbied for following the Administrative Draft). The following staff recommendations were supported by the Commission: 1) Correction: Block 50 not Block 51 is the area of Chinatown that was called out in the Greenwood Archaeological report as particularly sensitive (5.5-43). 2) Pursuant to MM CUL-1, resources evaluated during development projects should also be evaluated for their potential for listing on Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources and not just for the California and National Registers (5.5-40). 3) The verb for MM CUL-1 needs to be revised from “should” to “shall,” which has greater potency in an environmental document. Additionally, there are a few minor typos in the EIR, page 5.5-33 Archaeological Assessment prepared (“d” missing off of two paragraphs. P. 5.5-34 Third sentence purpose of these maps was to “aid”… p. 5.5=36 Proposed “L” Street Historic District (“L” is missing). Also, in reviewing the two plans I found that several corrections from my memo of July 11 th 2016 (for the Downtown Neighborhoods Plan) were not incorporated: p. 6.2 Downtown Neighborhoods--- Chandler Field is one of four officially designated historic districts…. p. 6:4 Huntington Boulevard… change out the “potential…” Historic map on 6:5… what is the large light purple area? F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 F-6 F-7 F-8 F-9 F-10 Letter F Page 1 of 2 p. 6.4 The City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance has also been amended in 2009, 2012 and 2015. p. 6.4 City of Fresno Historic Preservation Database. Sentence makes no sense: “Many potential historic resources that have not been formally designated by the City are absent from the database.” Database includes all properties that have been designated but additionally, any property which has been included in any historic survey or entitlement, whether the property is designated, eligible or not. 6.6 The Historic Preservation Database is already on line. 6.5.1 As is the New Deal Walking Tour (on the City’s Historic Preservation page). I just wonder about continuing to repeat recommendations from four years ago that have already been addressed. 2|Page F-12 F-13 F-11 F-14 F-15 Letter F Page 2 of 2 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐29  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter F: Historic Preservation Project Manager, Karana Hattersley‐Drayton, August 23, 2016 Response to Comment F‐1  This comment questions whether or not modernism and creativity in general will be stifled, based on  the form‐based code.  This concern does not alter the environmental evaluations and findings  identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐2  The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL‐3.  The following addition has been  made to MM CUL‐3:  Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas  determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this  Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City‐ approved archaeologist.  The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction  crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archeological  measures.  The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a  “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archeological measures  prior to the initiation of any ground‐disturbing activities at these locations.  The  archaeologist will discuss the project‐specific sensitivity potential to encounter both  prehistoric and historic materials; present (verbally or graphically) examples of  potential types of prehistoric and historic materials that may be encountered;  discuss the responsibilities and empowerments of the cultural resources monitor(s);  and briefly address the procedures to address inadvertent finds.    Response to Comment F‐3  This comment states that the commenter appreciates considerations for cultural resources  mitigation measures.  This comment is noted.  Since there is no specific comment on the  environmental conclusions of the Draft Master EIR, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐4  The commenter noted an error regarding locations used.  The first sentence following MM CUL‐5 on  page 5.5‐43 has been revised as follows:  Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any  ground‐disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 5150 Site,  Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the  current investigations.    Response to Comment F‐5  The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL‐1.  The following edit is located at  second bullet point under MM CUL‐1 on page 5.5‐40.   City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐30 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx   Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and  potential standing with Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources, the CRHR or NRHP, as  necessary.  Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be  summarized in the Phase I report.    Response to Comment F‐6  The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL‐1.  The following edits are located  under MM CUL‐1 on page 5.5‐40.   In accordance with Objective HCR‐2 (specifically HCR‐2‐a through HCR‐2‐c) of the  Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all specific  development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should shall undergo a  standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment,  Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review.     This CEQA‐level evaluation should shall include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for  the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography  and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic‐ age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object  evaluations.  The report should shall also address any project‐specific archaeological  sensitivity determinations and additional project‐specific proposed mitigation measures,  as necessary.    Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should shall be evaluated for  significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local register of Historic Resources, the  CRHR or NRHP, as necessary.  Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures  should shall be summarized in the Phase I report.   To  ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings,  the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are required to be  completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information  Center with the completed Phase I report.    Completed Phase I reports should shall be submitted to the City for incorporation into  their local databases.    Response to Comment F‐7  The commenter noted typographical errors.  The second sentence under Project‐specific Impact  Analysis on page 5.5‐33 has been revised as follows:   The most recent review of cultural resources (both historic and prehistoric) within  the DNCP and FCSP areas is contained in the Archaeological Resources Assessment  Report prepared by Greenwood and Associates in February of 2012.    The first sentence under Records Search Results on page 5.5‐33 has been revised as follows:  As part of the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepared by Greenwood  and Associates, a records search was conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley  Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐31  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  The second sentence on page 5.5‐34 was been revised as follows:   The purpose of these maps was to aid insurance agents in assessing the degree of  fire risk associated with a particular property.    The second sentence on page 5.5‐34 and the second bullet point on page 5.5‐36 have been revised  as follows:   Proposed: “L” Street Historic District.  Boundaries: Van  Ness, Amador, Divisadero, N Street,  Stanislaus, M Street to Calaveras (FCSP/DNCP)    Response to Comment F‐8  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐9  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐10  This comment questioned an issue that is not applicable to this document.  This comment has been  noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental evaluations and findings  identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐11  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐12  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐13  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐32 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment F‐14  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐15  The commenter identified concerns that not applicable to this document.  This comment has been  noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).    September 12, 2016 Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 83721 Attn: Long Range Planning Sent via Email Re: Comments on the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan & Associated Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Dear Ms. Pagoulatos: We are writing to provide comments on the City of Fresno’s Draft Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan (“DNCP”, “Draft Plan” or “Plan”), Draft Downtown Development Code (“Draft DDC” or “Draft Code”), Fulton Specific Corridor Plan (“FSCP”) and associated Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”). Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability works alongside residents of disadvantaged communities throughout the San Joaquin Valley and Coachella Valley to eliminate injustice and secure equal access to opportunity regardless of wealth, race, income or place. Our comments on the Draft DNCP, Code, and EIR are based upon our extensive work alongside residents in the Plan Area in Southeast, Southwest, Downtown, and Jane Addams neighborhoods and those neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the the Plan Area. These comments build upon comments we submitted to the City on Draft 2035 General Plan and Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (“DMEIR”) respectively dated August 8 and October 9, 2014. While the Draft DNCP, FCSP and DEIR contain many strengths, they also, as drafted, replicate and build upon flawed policies, analysis, and mitigation measures contained in the General Plan and MEIR that would further entrench disparities in access to opportunity and a healthy environment in the City. We therefore incorporate our comments on the 2035 General Plan DMEIR herein by reference and are providing you with a copy of those comments along with this letter as Exhibit A. The Draft Plan contains many policies reflective of the desires of existing residents for a healthy neighborhoods with basic amenities and services needed for residents to thrive. Through these comments we emphasize our support for investment in the Downtown area but urge the City to ensure that all downtown related planning documents target policies, programs 1 LETTER G.1 Page 1 of 16 G.1-1 G.1-2 and investment across all neighborhoods within and adjacent to the Planning Area. While the Draft DNCP so eloquently identifies key deficits related to the health and wellbeing of the downtown neighborhoods - including but not limited to high levels of poverty, disparities in health outcomes, lack of quality and affordable housing, high asthma and other respiratory diseases, lack of access to healthy foods, etc. - it completely fails to identify strong goals, policies and implementation measures focused on ameliorating such deficits. Further as we will note throughout our comments there is strong preference, through policies, statements regarding resource allocation and implementation measures, for sub areas located within the FCSP that serve to the detriment of adjacent neighborhoods. Prioritization of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan at the Expense of Downtown Neighborhoods The lack of detail in the DNCP as compared to the FCSP demonstrates that the City’s prioritization of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Area may come at the expense of improvements and improved connectivity in the surrounding Downtown Neighborhoods. The FCSP contains language that effectively prioritizes projects in the planning area to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods. The draft states that in the case of near, mid and long term identified priority projects for both public infrastructure and public-private partnerships, the City will direct all relevant resources and departmental actions (in transportation, public utilities, transit and other fiscal incentives, public realm design etc) to support their implementation.” The draft FCSP further identifies goals with supporting policy and implementation programs that focus on transforming downtown into a vibrant set of neighborhoods yet fails to incorporate policies and implementation measures focused on addressing inherent poverty, health, housing, transportation and economic challenges of families living below the poverty line identified in the draft DNCP. While the draft FCSP contains policies, programs and implementation measures focused on creating resilient, healthy neighborhoods, the draft fails to incorporate similar policies, programs and implementation measures for low income communities and communities of color currently residing in the FCSP area. Instead of protecting and building upon the culture and resiliency found in such neighborhoods, the City is accelerating displacement and gentrification risk and further perpetuating a cycle of poverty that has long plagued neighborhoods in the southern part of the City. In comparison to the DNCP, the FCSP contains specific implementation measures that target limited City resources to planning area that many adjacent and surrounding neighborhoods should be able to drawn upon to effectively spur revitalization. Additionally, the draft FCSP includes strategies that call for the formation of an interdisciplinary working group focused on the FCSD; tying of FCSD implementation framework to annual individual workplans of all departments and to Capital Improvement Plans; and focus of financial resources and physical improvements in concentrated areas of the Fulton Corridor. While these strategies 2 LETTER G.1 Page 2 of 16 G.1-2 CONT G.1-3 G.1-4 may be well intended, they provide for explicit prioritization of city resources and personnel solely to the FCSP area without directing such attention to surrounding neighborhoods. Public Participation Prior to Downtown Neighborhoods Plan Adoption The Draft Plan describes community engagement activities performed by the City during the initial development of the Plan in 2010 but does not identify any activities following that period or between release of the DEIR and adoption that the City will do to engage the public and ensure public input informs the final plan. Especially given that 6 years have passed since the City conducted public engagement in developing the draft plan, it is critical that the City ensure that residents can provide input at the final stages of the process. Accordingly, the City should develop an outreach plan in coordination with community leaders and CBOs and work collaboratively to implement it. The City must demonstrate how feedback on the draft plan provided in 2011 and during the above suggested outreach efforts is incorporated into the final plan and informs development of an implementation section of the plan. Integrating Neighborhoods and Conformance with other Plans While the DNCP notes that neighborhood integration is important, the Plan fails to include policies and implementation measures that will ensure integration among Downtown Neighborhoods and integration with neighborhoods beyond the area covered in the DNCP. Additionally, the Plan should include goals and policies designed to ensure that the Plan is harmonized with other plans and planning efforts, including the FCSP, City’s Active Transportation Plan, Fresno Council of Government Active Transportation Plan, Parks Master Plan, Southwest Specific Community Plan, Southeast Specific Community Plan and additional plans noted in the introductory section of the DNCP. Lack of information related to the Available of Public and Private Grants and Loans while the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out with specificity funding opportunities. The DNCP does not identify opportunities to pursue many available public and private grants and loans to implement the Plan’s goals and policies, including but not limited to state Cap and Trade funds, including the CalFire Urban Forestry Grants, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, weatherization programs, EOC support for solar and community-solar projects. In contrast, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out in detail public and private funding sources available for each priority project and even includes cost projections for some components. The lack of detail in the DNCP undermines our confidence that some of the stronger goals and policies will be implemented. Revitalization Focus Should Ensure that All Downtown Neighborhoods Benefit The DNCP, and the City’s actions to implement it, must ensure that all downtown neighborhoods benefit from the City’s renewed focus on investing in existing central core 3 LETTER G.1 Page 3 of 16 G.1-4 CONT G.1-5 G.1-6 G.1-7 G.1-8 communities. For example, Goals and Policies: 2.2: Ensure that City-wide policies encourage development in the Downtown and discourage subsidized development in outlying areas of Fresno - must be clarified to ensure that such attention extend to all downtown neighborhoods, not just the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area. While we understand and applaud the City’s interest in attracting private investment, the DNCP must facilitate investment and revitalization in areas and neighborhoods surrounding the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area in addition to to the subset of downtown neighborhoods in the FCSP area. An exclusive, or almost exclusive focus, on the FCSP area will undermine the goals and policies included in the broader DNCP area and adjacent neighborhoods. Given that projected household size in the FCSP area is fewer than 2 individuals, and projected average household size in the broader downtown area is more than 4 individuals a preference for investment in the FCSP as compared to the broader Downtown Neighborhoods have a disproportionate and negative impact on families, in particular lower income families and non-white families. The Plan Must Provide Adequate Housing Opportunities to Meet the Needs of Existing and Future Low-Income Households As we have explained to the City in detail in previous written and oral comments, the City and the Downtown Neighborhoods has a severe shortage of affordable housing to meet the housing needs of lower-income residents. According to the City’s Adopted 2015-2023 Housing Element, over 50% of residents in Fresno are “housing-cost burdened”, paying over ⅓ of their income on housing costs. Lower-income residents, and lower-income renters in particular, are hit the hardest by the City’s lack of affordable housing, with 88% of Extremely-Low Income (“ELI”) and 76% of Very-Low Income (“VLI”) households overpaying on rent and 93% of ELI and 83% of VLI renter households overpaying on rent. Due to the shortage of affordable housing options for lower-income residents in Fresno, many lower-income residents are forced to live in substandard housing, live over-crowded housing, and are vulnerable to displacement due to small increases in housing costs and costs of living. Given this context, it is critical that the DNCP, FCSP, and Downtown Code contain protections to ensure that lower-income residents have access to adequate safe and affordable housing options in the Draft Plan Area. As currently drafted, the Drafts fail to identify to do so and in fact, threaten to result in significant displacement of the existing lower-income resident population. A. The Plan Fails to Include Strong and Clear Policies to Prevent Displacement of Lower-Income Residents i. The Plan Must Include Strong and Clear Policies to Preserve and Create Affordable Housing Opportunities for Lower-Income Residents 4 LETTER G.1 Page 4 of 16 G.1-8 CONT G.1-9 G.1-10 G.1-11 The policies in the DNCP include broad support for affordable housing but lack strong and clear policies to facilitate its preservation and development. At the same time, the Plan contains various policy and vision statements supporting the creation of market-rate housing. The Plan’s emphasis on the development of market rate housing, focusing public investment to attract private investment, and support for high speed rail are all likely to drive up housing costs in the plan area, along with other factor such such as population growth and movement inland from the coast. The Final plan and the Final DEIR must include clear and specific protections for lower income residents from dislocation due to rising rent prices. ii. The Draft Plan Does Not Discuss or Plan to Address the Housing Needs of Extremely-Low and Very-Low Income Residents The Draft Plan is devoid of any mention of the housing needs of extremely-low (“ELI”) and very-low income (“VLI”) residents. ELI and VLI residents experience the highest rates of housing-cost burden in the City, are at high risk of homelessness, and are most vulnerable to the impact of increased housing costs and costs of living. ELI and VLI residents in the Plan Area are at risk of displacement due to focused and prolonged investment in the Downtown Neighborhoods, the introduction of High Speed Rail, and the introduction of market-rate housing to the Plan Area as projected by the Plan iii. Preservation of Affordable, High Quality Mobile Home Units As the Draft Plan notes, the Jane Addams neighborhood has several mobile home parks. The City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element states that mobile homes are an important source of affordable housing for lower-income residents, but that they are at risk of conversion as land values increase. Land values are likely to increase significantly over the life of the Plan, as the City directs resources towards Plan implementation, High-Speed Rail becomes a reality, and population growth reduces available land for housing. The Draft Plan includes no discussion of the risk of conversion of mobile home parks and no policies to promote and facilitate the preservation of affordable and high quality mobile home units. The Final Plan must do so in order to ensure that existing residents are not displaced and the City’s scarce sources of affordable housing are maintained. iii. The Plan Must Include Additional Multi-Family Zoning in the Neighborhoods Outside of Downtown Outside of the Downtown Neighborhood and especially in the Jane Addams neighborhood, the Plan lacks significant opportunities for the development of higher-density multi-family housing. 5 LETTER G.1 Page 5 of 16 G.1-11 CONT G.1-12 G.1-13 G.1-14 The Plans must identify additional higher density housing opportunities outside of the Downtown in order to meet the need for housing affordable to lower-income households and in order to qualify for state grants for affordable housing development which have minimum density requirements. In particular, we recommend that the Draft DNCP be revised to replace industrial land use designations along McKinley Avenue with multi-family and mixed-use housing designations and replace single-family housing designations on Olive Avenue with multi-family and mixed-use housing. B. The Draft Plans Fail to Facilitate the Maintenance and Development of Affordable Housing for Large Households Thousands of lower-income households in Fresno face over-crowding, due to the lack of affordable units large enough for large families. According to the Draft Plan, households in the Community Plan Area are larger than households in the City on average and are predominantly comprised of children. Households in the Plan Area, due to their size and the prevalence of poverty, can be expected to face even greater over-crowding than households in other areas of the City. The Draft Plan does not identify the prevelance of over-crowding in the Plan Area or include policies to facilitate the maintenance and development of housing appropriately sized for large households. The Final Plan must do so. D. The Plan Must Ensure that City Code Enforcement Activities Do Not Displace and/or Disproportionately Impact Low-Income Residents and Residents of Color We support policies in the DNCP for proactive code-enforcement and to prioritize code enforcement resources to address health and safety issues in rental housing (Policy 2.13.4). These policies however do not but must include explicit protections against displacement of renters and support to low-income homeowners in maintaining their properties, including resources for rehabilitation for lower-income property owners. Policy 2:17, requiring owners to maintain property, risks triggering displacement of lower-income property owners through the imposition of fines. The City should instead create and expand programs to assist low-income homeowners with home maintenance and code compliance. Policy 2.13.6 states that, “As resources become available, require owners to maintain all portions of their properties, including buildings, yards, and service areas, as well as adjacent sidewalks and alleys.” p. 2:17. This Policy should be pursued through education but must not be exercised in a manner that targets low-income residents and/or residents of color, which would result in violations of federal and state fair housing and civil rights laws. Policy 2.9.9 calls on the City to create “a coordinated program to acquire, demolish, and rebuild blighted, non-traditional multi-family residential buildings.” p. 2:15. This policy must be revised 6 LETTER G.1 Page 6 of 16 G.1-14 CONT G.1-15 G.1-16 to include protections for any tenants of such buildings, including protections to prevent displacement and to support relocation of residents in the same neighborhood. Parks, Recreational, and Community Facilities While the DCSP identifies the need for parks, recreational and community facilities throughout the planning area, there are insufficient programs and policies designed to address those needs, especially in the most park deficient neighborhoods. In general, the DNCP should include policies and implementation measures aimed at converting vacant parcels and abandoned property into parks and community facilities as well as policies and implementation measures to pursue grants such as CalFire Urban Forestry grants for park space acquisition and development and HCD Housing-Related Parks Grants. The DNCP should contain language focused on seamless integration to policies, programs and implementation measures identified through the City’s efforts to update the Parks Master Plan. Specifically for the Jane Addams and Southeast neighborhoods the draft DNCP notes that these neighborhoods are especially park space deficient. Figure 4-6 of the DNCP identifies potential areas for park space and recreational facilities in the Jane Addams area. We recommend that the City acquire the vacant plot at the southwest corner of Olive Avenue and Marks Avenue for a park and small library. Unfortunately the Land Use Map does not include any new parks in the Southeast neighborhood area. We recommend the City identify new park opportunities and include them in the map, for example the vacant lot in front of Roosevelt High School. Additionally, Southeast neighborhood residents suggest the following locations immediately adjacent to the Plan area for acquisition for the development of new parks and recreational facilities including: 1. The Hanoian building, which is for sale, and the adjacent vacant lot at the corner of Cedar and Butler. The City could also consider relocating the police department located on the lot to increase the space available for a recreational center. 2. The lot in front of the Mosqueda Center is ideal for a new park. It is a large lot; FAX routes 33 and 26 pass by the site; it is near a grocery store. The historic WW-II building should be made into a museum, not left in disrepair. Create a Multi-Modal Transportation Network that Meet Needs of All Downtown Neighborhoods The Draft Plan identifies creating a “multi-modal transportation network” as a strategy (p. 1:4). Public investment and infrastructure improvements must support active transportation in order to create such a multi-modal network. The vision statement for the Jane Addams neighborhood, which increases access to pedestrian facilities, is an example of supporting active transportation. The Draft Plan anticipates that it will remain consistent with the ATP Plan (p. 7). If inconsistencies arise, the Plan should be amended to reflect the ATP Plan. 7 LETTER G.1 Page 7 of 16 G.1-16 CONT G.1-17 G.1-18 G.1-19 G.1-20 Public Investments and Infrastructure Improvements to Support Active Transportation Investment priorities should emphasize public health and safety of children and access to key amenities and services. Policy 1:6 requires the City to target public investment to locations that have the greatest potential to attract private investment. This policy would continue to leave behind many low-income neighborhoods that lack basic infrastructure, such as sidewalks, street lights, and stormwater drainage. The City should prioritize investments to maximize health outcomes and ensure the safety of children walking to and from school, community centers and parks. Such prioritization policies include Policy 2.1.2 (installation of new sidewalks near schools), Policy 3.9.3 (identify priority corridors between residential areas and schools and pursue grants to facilitate this through traffic calming), Policy 5.7.2 (maintenance of public facilities), and Policy 5.7.3 (funding and timely construction of needed public facilities). For example, Hamilton Avenue & South Maple Avenue, just South of Mosqueda Center, needs street lights, flashing stop lights for pedestrians, and sidewalks. Infrastructure to prevent flooding and pooled water would also facilitate public health. “The Downtown Area is characterized by large impervious areas, is susceptible to localized flooding, and could benefit from additional local stormwater retention facilities to mitigate flood hazards.” p. 15. The Plan must ensure adequate infrastructure to support connectivity with other neighborhoods, including active transit across railway and freeway segments that cut off neighborhoods from key amenities. The Draft Plan recognizes that the high rates of concentrated poverty in the Downtown neighborhoods is likely due in part to the geographic isolation of neighborhoods by freeways and railroad tracks. (p. 1.) “The introduction of the freeway system after World War II, created impenetrable barriers that isolated neighborhoods from one another and the Downtown area, and diminished the livability of the entire center of the city.” (p. 16.) Policy 2.18 places importance on interconnecting the Downtown Neighborhoods with great streets and beautiful public spaces. There should also be a policy about promoting interconnectedness among neighborhoods through multimodal transportation options and infrastructure and reversing isolating impacts of highway constructions. The Plan identifies the need to plan for safe, aesthetically pleasing, and green routes between neighborhoods and across freeway and railway track barriers to connect neighborhoods to rest of City, allow them to access key resources lacking in those neighborhoods, and mitigate air quality, sound, and visual impacts of those barriers. For example, the Jane Addams neighborhood is isolated from the rest of the city by SR 99 and 180, Union Pacific railroad right of way. “ Crossings of these transportation corridors and few and far 8 LETTER G.1 Page 8 of 16 G.1-21 G.1-22 G.1-23 G.1-24 between, hampering vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian connections to other parts of town.” Draft Plan, p. 20. The Vision for Jane Addams includes building a pedestrian bridge across State Route 99 to provide easier access to Roeding Park (p. 1:8) and building a pedestrian bridge across Highway 99 at Harvey Ave. to improve pedestrian access within the neighborhood (p. 3.9.9). Policy 3.4.6 also identifies the need to install curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on Mickely between SR 99 and Marks (though this should go to Golden State) and along Golden State to the mobile home park. Routes throughout the Jane Addams neighborhood, and those that connect the neighborhood to other parts of the city, must be improved with sidewalks, lighting, trees, and the like, as they are incomplete and unsafe for both children and adults. Residents want to see more investment to support safe bicycling prioritizing routes to schools and major community centers like shopping centers, parks, and medical centers, including segregated bike lanes. Figure 3-1, “Proposed Bicycle Facilities,” identifies few Class 1 bike facilities in DNCP; only includes a Class 1 on Belmont in the Jane Addams neighborhood, but should also consider on McKinley, both directions from the school; and Southeast has no Class 1 facilities. Figure 3-5 does not propose road diets and bike lanes for Jane Addams. Access to Efficient and Affordable Public Transit Options For neighborhoods that lack access to essential amenities and services, like grocery stores and medical facilities, affordable and efficient public transit options are essential. Existing transit in the Downtown neighborhoods is often unreliable and has service gaps that mean residents have to walk significant distances and take several buses to get to their destination. Comparatively low rates of car ownership by residents in many of the Downtown Plan neighborhoods due to high poverty levels (34% in Jane Addams, 67% in Lowell, Draft Plan) are also reason for improved public transit options. Additionally, the summary of existing conditions does not discuss transit needs. Policy 3.1.3 advises to focus transit service and investments on the Transit Corridors identified in Figure 3-2. Policy 3.1.10 advises to prioritize reducing transit delay along these corridors. Policy 3.1.11 states to focus initial improvements on areas with the greatest ridership, including the Downtown Neighborhoods, as well as to increase rider safety and comfort. However, areas should be prioritized according to the greatest need, like Jane Addams. This focus on high ridership excludes neighborhoods that have historically struggled with deficient infrastructure, and continues inequitable investment. Generally, the needs of existing disadvantaged neighborhoods are ignored. Additionally, the focus on high priority corridors is that these corridors are generally not in residential areas which is problematic when seeking funding, including grants. Such a focus makes it difficult to connect with ATP plan efforts. Figure 3-2, High Priority Transit Corridors, does not propose primary or secondary routes in the Jane Addams neighborhood. The vision page for Jane Addams includes upgrading transit stops, and should also include expanded 9 LETTER G.1 Page 9 of 16 G.1-24 CONT G.1-25 G.1-26 G.1-27 transit service. P. 1:10. The City must also secure and allocate funding for extension of the BRT to Edison Neighborhoods. Policy 3.3.6 requires new developments in the Downtown Neighborhood do not result in the worsening of transportation related facilities, but for other neighborhoods it only requires mitigation. All new developments, regardless of neighborhood, should not result in the worsening of transportation related facilities. In the alternative, the City should, at a minimum, set mitigation thresholds. Policy 3.1.5 supports incentives for potential Downtown transit riders. Incentives must also be available to low-income residents to allow for affordable transit. It bears restating that It is absolutely critical that the DNCP, and implementation thereof, increases transit access to and connectivity between and among neighborhoods in Plan area. Mitigate Impacts and Enhance the Benefits of High-Speed Rail for All Downtown Neighborhoods The Draft Plan includes a general statement to introduce HSR in a manner that has least possible impact on surrounding existing land uses, while preserving Downtown’s interconnected street network to the greatest extent possible. 2:8. The Draft Plan, and related plans must ensure that all negative impacts of the High Speed rail are mitigated. The Draft Plan identifies potential impacts yet does not include physical and economic displacement, or relocation of industrial uses to areas already overly burdened by such uses. The investment in High Speed Rail must also directly benefit communities adjacent to the downtown core through increased transit access and connectivity between and among neighborhoods. Infrastructure for Safe Drinking Water and Wastewater There are places in and adjacent to the planning area, for example parts of the Jane Addams neighborhood that do not have City drinking water or wastewater services. The DNCP must include policies and implementation measures to address these critical deficiencies. The Plan identifies the need to improve conservation measures and diversify water resources to address the increasing scarcity of water in the region. The Plan must also include policies and implementation measures to protect dwindling water resources from suburban sprawl development and industrial development. We recommend the City update the draft DNCP to include policies and implementation measures similar to those found in the draft FCSP to ensure adequate infrastructure necessary to support infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Road Quality 10 LETTER G.1 Page 10 of 16 G.1-27 CONT G.1-28 G.1-29 Many roads in the Downtown Neighborhoods have deteriorating, pot-holed roads and roads that serve as truck routes for industrial facilities are especially impacted. The Plan must include policies and implementation measures to restore and protect these resources. Neighborhood Greening We are supportive of policies to increase tree coverage in the Plan area recommend prioritizing investment in communities that are particularly park poor such as the Jane Addams Neighborhood (“In the Jane Addams Neighborhoods, however, street trees are noticeably absent.” p. 13). We also recommend implementation measures, such as proactively seeking funds and work with HSR and CalTrans. Safe and Clean Alleys Many alleys throughout the planning area are filled with trash and abandoned furniture. Sometimes residents find old medical products or decaying animals in alleys. While the Draft Plan includes broad policies to address alleys, we recommend aggressive actions and implementation measures including, transformation of alleys into a network of paths and green infrastructure, transferring ownership of alleys to adjacent homeowners, and extending regular alley cleaning services to problem areas throughout the downtown neighborhoods. Healthy Environment: Industrial Land and Other Polluting Land Uses The Draft Draft Plan Land Use Map notes that residents identified industrial land uses located next to residences, parks, and other sensitive land uses as a conflict. (“Numerous incompatibilities with the types and location of industrial uses were identified through the planning process. The issues include the proximity of industrial uses to residential areas, schools and parks, areas where industrial uses are located on parcels intended for residential uses and truck traffic from industrial areas impacting local streets.” p. 26) However, the DNCP maintains existing industrial zoning in several neighborhoods immediately adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses. The Plan recognizes that industrial buildings and complexes are located in many instances adjacent to homes (p. 20) yet the Plan maintains industrial zoning and does not include any policies to address incompatible land uses in that neighborhood. For South Van Ness the draft plan recommends continuation of industrial uses near residential areas. Policy 2.1.3 for the Edison Neighborhood: “Plan for the relocation of industrial uses that negatively impact nearby residential, public, and other similar uses.” must apply to all Downtown Neighborhoods. Additionally, the Land Use Map must be changed to eliminate industrial and business park land use designations within or next to neighborhoods and replace them with parks, neighborhood commercial, houses, and mixed use zoning as appropriate. 11 LETTER G.1 Page 11 of 16 G.1-30 G.1-31 G.1-32 G.1-33 While the importance of segregating industrial uses from sensitive receptors forms the foundation of land use planning and is supported by common sense it has also been identified as a principal priority of residents living among industrial uses. Furthermore, communities most impacted by concentrated industrial uses are also those neighborhoods ranked as the most vulnerable by CalEnviroScreen due to high asthma rates, poor air quality and proximity to polluting land uses. The DNCP acknowledges this, and includes Policy 7.7.3. That call for the City to locate sensitive uses - such as housing, schools, health facilities, and parks - away from building uses that generate toxic pollutants.” As noted above, the City must also apply the converse: locate building that generate toxic pollutants away from homes and other sensitive uses. We are very supportive of Policy 7.6.4 which calls for the City to “complete the Industrial Compatibility Study and work towards implementation” and wish to confirm that it applies to all neighborhoods in the Plan area and suggest an implementation timeline that includes identification of funding resources available to facilitate implementation. Policy 2.17 calls for a regulatory environment and development process that makes development decisions predictable, fair, and transparent and limits the use of CUPs and other discretionary approvals. To the extent that industrial zoning continues to be located in and adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses, these policies threaten to deny residents the opportunity know about and provide feedback on new industrial proposals that could impact their neighborhoods, lower their property values, and create toxic air emissions. Accordingly, until the ICA is conducted and implemented and industrial zoning is located away from sensitive land uses, Policies 2.17.7 and 2.17.8 should not apply to industrial and business park land uses. Additionally, there must be safeguards in place to protect existing residents from displacement and other undesirable impacts from land use decisions. We support policies designed to divert truck traffic from sensitive sites including residential neighborhoods, including: 1. 3.8.1 Designate streets that are suitable for truck delivery routes in order to divert truck traffic away from sensitive sites, particularly the residential neighborhoods. Truck routes should be limited to arterials and expressways specifically designated for the purpose or to collector and local industrial streets which directly service planned industrial areas.” 2. 3.8.2 Locate industrial uses such that industrial truck and vehicular traffic will not route through local residential streets. 3. 7.7.1 Do not locate truck routes on primarily residential streets or near parks, playgrounds, schools or other sensitive uses and create a map that highlights how existing truck routes impact existing and future development patterns. Finally, the DNCP must assess the potential air impacts of drive-thru establishments, especially to the extent that there is an increase in such establishments in communities impacted by poor air quality and traffic. 12 LETTER G.1 Page 12 of 16 G.1-33 CONT G.1-34 G.1-35 Increase Access to Retail, Grocery Stores, Banks, and Other Necessary Day-to-Day Services We support goals and policies designed to increase access to goods, services and groceries at a neighborhood scale and suggest targeted investment to realize that goal. Additionally, community based organizations should work with food vendors and the City to ensure quality and affordable healthy foods and locally sourced produce. We are concerned that Policy 2.12.5 could have a negative impact on small, lower income and minority owned mobile food vendors. Jobs and Employment The Draft Plan must include more aggressive policies to protect existing and promote quality jobs and employment opportunities. For example the Draft Plan should incentivize local hire policies and workforce development investments that will allow for upward financial mobility. Additionally, given that rents are expected to increase downtown, the City should support existing small and minority owned businesses against displacement. Public Participation in Local Government and Plan Implementation We are supportive of the proposed public participation policies included in the draft DNCP to engage the public as key partners in the City’s decision making processes (7.2.1). We recommend the City add policies to work directly with residents and stakeholders to identify and address barriers to civic engagement. We also recommend the City include implementation measures in the DNCP focused on ensuring resident and community stakeholder participation in implementation of the plan, including for allocation of resources. The City can draw upon implementation strategies found in the FCSP, such as convening interdisciplinary working groups, to ensure ongoing community engagement. We suggested similar recommendations in our 2014 General Plan comment letter. The Draft Environmental Impact Report Fails to Analyze and Mitigate Potentially Significant Impacts of the DNCP, FCSP, and Downtown Development Code The DEIR fails to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) to disclose, analyze, and propose all feasible mitigation measures for potentially significant environmental impacts related to the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Downtown Development Code (collectively, “Project”). The DEIR relies heavily on the Master Environmental Impact Report (“MEIR”) for City of Fresno 2035 General Plan for its analysis and to reach conclusions that various impacts are significant and unavoidable or less than significant and then cursorily dismisses without evidentiary basis the feasibility of additional mitigation measures beyond implementation of General Plan policies. As we explained in detail in our October 9, 2014 comments, the Draft MEIR was a fundamentally flawed document which did not satisfy the requirements of CEQA and its 13 LETTER G.1 Page 13 of 16 G.1-36 G.1-37 G.1-38 G.1-39 implementing guidelines. The Final MEIR fails to correct many of the DMEIR’s inadequacies, including the DMEIR’s reliance on vague, voluntary and otherwise unenforceable policies contained in the 2035 General Plan as mitigation measures and its failure to consider and propose all feasible mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts as required by CEQA. Pub. Res. Code §§ 21002; 21081.6(b); Cal. Code of Reg. (C.C.R.) §§ 15091(a)(1)(15126.4(a)(2); see id. § 15126.2(b); See Napa Citizens for Honest Gov’t v. Napa County Bd. of Sup. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 358. The DEIR too is fundamentally flawed for relying upon inadequate analysis, conclusions and mitigation measures of the MEIR and for failing to identify and identify feasible mitigation options for the MEIR’s project-specific and cumulative impacts. The DEIR’s failings will most directly impact low-income disadvantaged residents and communities in the Downtown Plan Area. These communities and residents are the most vulnerable to the impacts the DEIR fails to adequately analyze or effectively mitigate. Thus, the DEIR not only violates CEQA but results in violations of state and federal fair housing and civil rights laws, including but not limited to 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d, 3601 et seq., 5304(b)(2), 5306(s)(7B), 1205; Cal. Gov. Code §§ 11135, 12955, et seq. The City must revise and recirculate the DEIR to provide the public an accurate assessment of the environmental issues at stake and a mitigation strategy that fully addresses the Project’s significant impacts prior to adoption of the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC. The revised DEIR should include the changes to the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan proposed in these comments above. The proposed revisions to the DNCP are feasible mitigation measures that can effectively reduce the Project’s impacts. 1. The DEIR Ignores Feasible Mitigation, Such as Changes to the Land Use Designations and Densities and Intensities Proposed in the General Plan P. 5. 2. The DEIR Fails to Assess the Environmental, Social and Economic Impacts of Inadequate Affordable Housing and Displacement A. Lack of Consideration of Impact of City’s Failure to Adopt and Implement a Legally Adequate 5th Cycle Housing Element The DEIR states that the City’s Housing Element has been adopted by City Council and is “currently awaiting certification by the state”. 5.12-8. In fact, the State Department of Housing and Community Development issued a letter on August 11, 2016 finding that the Housing Element does not substantially comply with state law. See Exhibit C. Among other things, HCD found that the City’s Adopted Housing Element: 14 LETTER G.1 Page 14 of 16 G.1-39 CONT G.1-40 G.1-41 G.1-42 G.1-43 ●Fails to account for the unmet need for housing affordable to lower-income households in Fresno as a result of the City’s failure to rezone adequate sites for multi-family housing to address the City’s shortfall of 6,228 units under its previous housing element. ●Fails to include adequate programs that will result in a beneficial impact on the City’s housing goals during the planning period, including with respect to maintaining and preserving affordable mobile home units in Fresno and with respect to creating affordable housing opportunity in higher income and higher opportunity neighborhoods. ●Identify sites and include programs as appropriate to make sites available to meet the current City’s 2013-2023 Regional Housing Need Allocation based on an accurate calculation of the City’s unmet need under its previous housing element. The City must revise the DEIR to disclose the State’s finding that the Housing Element does not comply with state law and assess how its failure to comply with state law impacts the DEIR’s related analyses, including but not limited to impacts on population and housing, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. B. The DMEIR Fails to Adequately Analyze the Project’s Potential to Displace Existing Housing The DEIR’s analysis of the Project’s potential to displace significant numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, consists of a brief paragraph that concludes that the Project will have less than a significant impact because it is projected to result in a net increase in housing units. Missing from this assessment is a discussion of the affordability of units that will be constructed in the Downtown Plan Areas to residents that will need replacement housing as a result of displacement due to the loss of existing housing. According to the DNCP, neighborhoods in the Downtown Plan Area have high rates of concentrated poverty and are comprised of a relatively high proportion of renters compared to home-owners. The City’s 2015 Consolidated Plan indicates that high percentages of lower-income residents and renters in Fresno exceeding 70% are housing cost burdened, paying over a third of their income on rent. Therefore, the loss of existing housing currently used by lower-income residents in the Downtown Neighborhoods, as projected by the DEIR, will necessitate the construction of alternative housing affordable to those residents. Construction of new market-rate housing is unlikely to be affordable to lower-income residents. While the Draft DNCP includes broad vision statements and policy aims in support of a “diverse” housing stock and maintaining existing affordable housing, neither it nor the DEIR identify any specific actions the City will take or resources that will be dedicated to facilitate the creation and maintenance of affordable housing in the Downtown Neighborhoods. As noted in section A above, the City does not even have a legally-compliant housing element in place with a strategy to provide for the housing needs of lower-income residents and residents with special housing needs and has failed to accurately calculate and identify adequate sites to 15 LETTER G.1 Page 15 of 16 G.1-43 CONT G.1-44 G.1-45 accommodate the City’s shortfall of 6,228 units from the previous housing element planning period and the City’s lower-income RHNA of 11,923 for the 2013-2023 planning period. Thus, “build out” of the DNCP and General Plan without mitigation measures to ensure the creation and preservation of affordable housing has the potential to displacement significant numbers of lower-income residents without providing alternative financially-accessible housing options. The DEIR states that according to data contained in the DNCP, the vacancy rates in the Downtown Neighborhoods is high. According to Draft DNCP Table 5, the vacancy rates in the Downtown neighborhoods range from 8% in Southeast Fresno to 15% in the Downtown. Table 5 does not support the DEIR’s conclusion that the Project will not have a significant impact resulting from the displacement of existing housing. First, the Southeast Fresno vacancy rate identified of 8% is not a “high” vacancy rate. Second, the DNCP does not identify the source or timeframe of collection of the vacancy rates included in Table 5. Tables 3 and 4, immediately above Table 5 in the Draft DNCP, indicate that the housing and population that they contain were generated between 2008 and 2010 -- the time period when vacancy rates reached their peaks at the height of the recession. If the data from Table 5 was drawn from a similar time period, it is an inadequate reference for existing vacancy rates in the Downtown Neighborhoods, given the ongoing recovery of the housing market and decline in vacancy rates over the past six years. The DEIR must be revised to accurately reflect the potential for the displacement of housing to result in significant environmental impacts, including due to the loss of housing affordable to lower-income residents, and identify and include all feasible mitigation measures. ****** Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Ashley Werner 16 LETTER G.1 Page 16 of 16 G.1-45 CONT G.1-46 G.1-47 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐49  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter G.1: Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, Ashley Werner, September 12, 2016 Response to Comment G.1‐1  This comment notes that the letter builds upon comments that were submitted to the City regarding  the Draft 2035 General Plan and Drafter Master Environmental Impact Report (DMEIR).  This  comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐2  This comment suggests that the lack of detail in the DNCP as compared to the FCSP demonstrates  that the City has a prioritization for the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area at the expense of  improvements and improved connectivity in the surrounding downtown Neighborhoods.  This  suggestion is inaccurate, as a community plan provides less detail than a specific plan.  According to  the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, a community plan is a part of the General Plan.   Specific plans differ from area and community plans in the following ways:   A specific plan is not a component of a general plan.  It is a separately adopted general plan  implementation document.     Specific plans are described by statute (§65450 et seq.).  There are no statutes that specify the  contents of area and community plans.    The purpose of a specific plan is the “systematic implementation” (Section 65450) of the general  plan.  Neither community plans nor area plans have an emphasis on implementation.  They are used  to refine the policies of the general plan relating to a defined geographic area.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐3  This comment suggests that the FCSP contains language that effectively prioritizes projects in the  planning area to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods, and that the City is accelerating  displacement and gentrification risks.  This suggestion is inaccurate as the purpose of a specific plan  is the “systematic implementation” (Section 65450) of the general plan.  Neither community plans  nor area plans have an emphasis on implementation.  Specific plans are used to refine and  implement the policies of the general plan relating to a defined geographic area.  Regarding displacement due to gentrification, preemptive displacement measures are not necessary  at this time.  Cities that have experienced significant displacement tend to have extremely high  demand, low vacancy rates, low amounts of vacant of underdeveloped land, restrictive zoning, and  difficult entitlement processes, all of which contribute to a high degree of competition for an  artificially restricted amount of space.  This combination of factors does not currently exist in the  plan area.  Regarding displacement due to demolition of existing housing, although unlikely,  protections already exist in the Management of Real Property Ordinance (FMC section 10‐702, et  seq.) and the California Health and Safety Code section 17975, et seq.  No further response required.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐50 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐4  This comment suggests that strategies of the planning areas may be well intended, but they will  provide for explicit prioritization of city resources and personnel solely to the FCSP area without  directing such attention to surrounding neighborhoods.  Please refer to response to comment G.1‐2  and G.1‐3.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐5  The comment recommends that community engagement activities be identified following the period  of initial engagement or between the release of the DEIR and its adoption.  Comment noted.  Since  no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is  required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐6  This comment notes that the plan fails to include policies and implementation measures that will  ensure integration among Downtown Neighborhoods and integration with neighborhoods beyond  the area covered in the DNCP.  Please refer to the discussion in response G.1.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐7  This comment suggests that the DNCP does not identify opportunities to pursue many available  public and private grants and loans to implement the Plan’s goals and policies, and that the lack of  detail in the DNCP undermines the commenter’s confidence that some of the stronger goals and  policies will be implemented.  Please refer to the discussion in response G.1‐2.  Since no comment  on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐8  This comment requests that Goal and Policies: 2.2 must be clarified to ensure that such attention  extends to all downtown neighborhoods, not just the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area.  Please refer  to the discussion in response G.1‐2.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on the  environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐9  This comment notes that the plan must provide adequate housing opportunities to meet the needs  to existing and future low‐income households.  This comment is noted.  The City adopted a 5th Cycle  Housing Element within the deadline established by the Government Code.  The City is working with  the Department of Housing and Community Development to process revisions in accordance with  the Government Code.  With regard to meeting Housing Element requirements, a by right procedure  proposed in the DDC incentivizes and streamlines residential development at minimum densities of  20 dwelling units per/acre and above.  In addition, the dwelling unit capacity proposed in the DNCP  and FCSP meets or exceeds the dwelling unit capacity required by the Housing Element.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐51  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  The City will determine whether further policies are required to ensure adequate access to  affordable housing.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐10 through G.1‐13.  These comments suggests that the Draft plan does not discuss or plan to address the housing needs  of extremely‐low and very‐low income residents, the preservation of affordable, high‐quality mobile  home units, the displacement of existing lower‐income resident population, and the plan failing to  include strong and clear policies to prevent displacement of lower‐income residents.  Please refer to  the discussion in responses G.1‐3 and G.1‐9 above.  Response to Comment G.1‐14  This comment suggests that the plan must include additional multi‐family  zoning in the neighborhoods  outside of downtown.  This comment is noted.  Within the residential neighborhoods, zones capable of  accommodating higher densities were located along the DNCP’s corridors.  Most of the parcels along  the major corridors are zoned Neighborhood Mixed‐Use (NMX), which requires a minimum of 50%  residential, a minimum density of 12 du/acre, and a maximum density of 16 du/acre.  In addition, parcels along Kings Canyon, Blackstone, and Abbey are zoned  Center/Corridor Mixed‐ Use which requires a minimum of 40% residential, a minimum density of 16 du/acre, and a  maximum density of 30 du/acre, a density above the Department of Housing’s qualifying minimum  density of 20 du/acre.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Please also refer to the discussion  in response G.1‐9 above.  Response to Comment G.1‐15 and comment G 1‐16   This comment suggests that the draft plan fails to facilitate the maintenance and development of  affordable housing for large households, and that the plan must ensure that City Code enforcement  activities do not displace and/or disproportionality impact low‐income residents and residents of  color.  Noted on page 5.12‐6, the EIR is subject to federal and state relocation regulations related to  relocation.  Please refer to the discussion in responses G.1‐3 and G.1‐9 above.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐17  This comment suggests that there are insufficient programs and policies designed to address park,  recreational, and community facilities in the most park deficient neighborhoods.  This comment is  noted.  An important strategy of the DNCP is to form joint‐use agreements with schools to open up  during after‐school hours and on weekends.  This strategy is already being implemented in the DNCP  area.  Further policies related to parks and recreation will be developed as part of the Parks Master  Plan process, currently underway.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR  was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  That said, at the City’s discretion, policies/strategies such as identifying funding sources such as  CalFire Urban Forestry grants for park acquisition can be added to the DNCP as well as references to  Parks Master Plan update.   City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐52 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐18  This comment recommends that the City acquire the vacant plot at the southwest corner of Olive  Avenue and Marks Avenue for a park and small library, and recommends the City to identify new  park opportunities and include them Figure 4‐6 of the DNCP.  This comment is noted.  Please refer to  discussion in response G.1‐17, above.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the  EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐19  This comment notes various buildings, including the Hanoian building and the adjacent vacant lot at  the corner of Cedar and Butler as well as the lot in front of the Mosqueda Center, that could be  acquired for the development of new parks and recreational facilities.  Please refer to the discussion  in response G.1‐17 above.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was  provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐20  The comment notes that the Draft plan anticipates that it will remain consistent with the ATP  Plan,  and that if inconsistencies arise, the plan should be amended to reflect the ATP  Plan.  This comment  is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐21  This comment suggests that investment priorities should emphasize public health and safety of  children and access to key  amenities and services through various policies.  This comment is noted.   The City will have discretion in determining whether any of the policies and implementation  strategies will be added to the plan.  Figure 2‐1‐8 on page 2‐11 of the DNCP Downtown  Neighborhoods Community Plan shows where sidewalk installation should be prioritized in the Jane  Addams neighborhood.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was  provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐22  The comment recommends infrastructure that would help prevent flooding and pooled water, and  would also facilitate public health.  This comment is noted.  The City is in considering introducing  storm water detention basins between H Street, the railroad tracks, Divisadero, and just north of the  HSR station.  The DEIR, on pages 5.9‐25–32, calls out existing regulations and plan policies that  minimize localized flooding, such as conformance with FMFCD’s Storm Drainage Master Plan and the  use of LID (Low Impact Development) Design in the public realm and at building sites.  Since no  comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required  (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐23  This comment notes that the Plan must ensure adequate infrastructure to support connectivity with  other neighborhoods, and does so with proposing policy and implementation measures.  This  comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐53  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐24  This comment identifies the need to plan for safe, aesthetically pleasing and green routes between  neighborhoods, and notes various locations and policies that would do so.  This comment is noted.   Figure 2‐1‐8 on page 2‐11 of the DNCP Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan shows where  sidewalk installation should be prioritized in the Jane Addams neighborhood.  Street Sections on  DNCP pages 3‐13 through 3‐18 show street/sidewalk/street tree designs for streets throughout the  DNCP as well.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐25  This comment notes that there are deficiencies relative to bicycling in the DNCP.  This comment has  been noted.  This comment does not alter the environmental evaluations and findings identified in  the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required.  Response to Comment G.1‐26  This comment notes that existing transit in the Downtown neighborhoods is often unreliable and has  service gaps, and that areas should be prioritized according to the greatest need.  This comment is  noted.  Response to Comment G.1‐27  This comment notes that the focus on high priority corridors is generally not in residential areas,  which is problematic when seeking funding.  It also recommends policies and implementation  strategies.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR  was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐28  This comment recommends that plans must ensure that all negative impacts of the High Speed Rail  are mitigated, and that investment must also directly benefit communities adjacent to the  downtown core through increased transit access and connectivity between and among  neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  The High Speed Rail project is under the purview of the  State of California, and more specifically the High Speed Rail Authority.  Potential impacts as a result  of either rail construction or operation of the system are subject to conditions and/or mitigation  measures outlined in the EIR prepared for that project (more information can be obtained at  www.hsr.ca.gov).  The City of Fresno is a Responsible Agency and implements mitigation measures  from the HSR EIR as appropriate.  The City will determine whether the policies and implementation  strategies suggested should be included in the plan.  Response to Comment G.1‐29  This comment recommends the City update the draft DNCP to include policies and implementation  measures similar to those found in the FCSP to ensure adequate infrastructure necessary to support  infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  Both  the DNCP and the FCSP are consistent with the Urban Water Management Plan and include the  same conservation measures as the General Plan.  This EIR tiers off the General Plan MEIR with  regard to ensuring adequate infrastructure and requiring water conservation.  In addition, the plans  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐54 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  protect against suburban sprawl by promoting infill development that is higher density and more  water efficient.  Response to Comment G.1‐30  This comment recommends the City include policies and implementation measures to restore and  protect the roads in the Downtown Neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐31  This comment recommends the City include implementation measures such as proactively seeking  funds and work with HSR and Caltrans to increase tree coverage in the Plan area.  This comment is  noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐32  This comment recommends the City take aggressive actions and implementation measures such as  transformation of alleys into a network of paths and green infrastructure, transferring ownership of  alleys to adjacent homeowners, and extending regular alley cleaning services to problem areas  throughout the downtown neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on the  environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐33  This comment raises issues including the proximity of industrial uses to residential areas, schools and  parks, areas where industrial uses are located on parcels intended for residential uses and truck  traffic from industrial areas affecting local streets.  The comment also recommends changes to  various policies and implementation strategies in the plans.  The City is proposing land use changes  to address this comment.  See Section 4—Errata.  Since no comment on the environmental  conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section  15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐34  This comment recommends that Policies 2.17.7 and 2.17.8 should not apply to industrial and  business parkland uses, and that there must be safeguards in place to protect existing residents from  displacement and other undesirable impacts from land use decisions.  Since no comment on the  environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐35.   This comment recommends that the DNCP must assess the potential air impacts of drive‐thru  establishments, especially to the extent that there is an increase in such establishments in  communities impacted by poor air quality and traffic.  This comment is noted.  Drive‐throughs would  be allowed as a conditional use in the plan area, and would only be allowed on “B” and “C” classified  streets in the DTN, DTG, and DTC zone districts.  They are also allowed conditionally in mixed use  zone districts.  All drive‐through facilities are subject to Section 15‐2728 of the Development Code,  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐55  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Drive‐In and Drive‐Through Facilities, which requires that aisles be designed to reduce idling.  Finally,  drive aisles are not allowed between the building and the sidewalk, further protecting pedestrians  from any potential air quality impacts.  Policy HC‐3‐f: New Drive‐Through Facilities on page 5.3‐28 of  the EIR aims to incorporated design review measures in the Citywide Development Code to reduce  vehicle emissions resulting from queued idling vehicles at drive‐through facilities in proximity to  residential neighborhoods.  The City will determine whether the comment’s suggestion should be  included in the plan.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐36  This comment notes community based organizations should work with food vendors and the City to  ensure quality and affordable health foods and locally sourced produce, and that Policy 2.12.5 could  have a negative impact on small, lower income and minority owned mobile food vendors.  This  comment is noted.  The City will determine whether the comment’s suggestion should be included in  the plan.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088). Response to Comment G.1‐37  This comment recommends the Draft plan must include more aggressive policies to protect existing  and promote quality jobs and employment opportunities, and includes strategies in doing so.  This  comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐38  This comment recommends policies and implementation measures for the City to work directly with  residents and stakeholders to identify and address barriers to civic engagement.  This comment is  noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐39  This comment states that the Draft Environmental Impact report fails to meet the requirements of  the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) to disclose, analyze, and propose all feasible  mitigation measures for potentially significant environmental impacts related to the Downtown  Neighborhoods Communities Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Downtown  Development Code (collectively, “Project”) because it relies on the MEIR certified for the Fresno  General Plan.  The MEIR was certified in December 2014 and was not challenged within the  applicable statute of limitations.  This EIR does not propose any changes to the MEIR and as such, a  challenge to the MEIR is now untimely.    Response to Comment G.1‐40  This comment refers to the impacts to low‐income disadvantaged residents and communities in the  Downtown Plan area.  The City is currently working with the California Department of Housing and  Community Development (HCD) to make revisions to its adopted Housing Element, which addresses  the provision of residential capacity throughout the City for all income levels.  Please also refer to  the discussion in response G.1‐9 and G.1‐39.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐56 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐41  This comment suggests that the DEIR should be recirculated to provide the public an accurate  assessment of the environmental issues at stake and a mitigation strategy that fully assesses the  impacts.  Refer to discussion in response G.1‐39, above.  This comment raised a concern that the  Document should be re‐circulated public review.  This comment period reflects the designated time  period for public comment and review.  Since the comment period was closed on September 16,  2016.  The document will be submitted for deliberation to the City Council prior to the release of the  Development code.  After the Development Code is released for public review, the City will review  the Development Code and EIR and consider the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162  and 15177, as well as other applicable sections.  Response to Comment G.1‐42  This comment notes that the DEIR ignores feasible mitigation, such as changes to the land use  designations and densities and intensities proposed in the General Plan.  This comment is noted.   However, the EIR notes on page 5.10‐20, “the General Plan anticipates that the Downtown Planning  Area will be further refined through the implementation DNCP and the FCSP, and further  implemented through the adoption of the DDC for regulations specific to the Downtown Planning  Area.  The General Plan, as well as these proposed plans, envisions a new focus on land use and  design along major streets and in neighborhoods that support Downtown . . .”  In addition, Objective LU‐9 from the General Plan and on page 5.10‐28 aims to plan land uses, design  and development intensities to supplement and support, and not compete with, the Downtown.   The EIR is consistent with the General Plan as the purpose of the DNCP and FCSP is to guide  development in the Downtown Fresno and its surrounding neighborhoods.  The plans seek to capitalize  on the positive momentum for Downtown revitalization and put specific policies and actions into place  to guide the rejuvenation of the Downtown neighborhoods that brings about lasting prosperity and  improvements.  Response to Comment G.1‐43  This comment refers to the assessment of the environmental, social and economic impacts of  inadequate affordable housing and displacement, and the lack of consideration of impact of the  City’s failure to adopt and implement a legally adequate 5th Cycle Housing Element.  The City is  currently working with the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to  make revisions to its adopted Housing Element, which addresses the provision of residential capacity  throughout the City for all income levels.  Please also refer to the discussion in response G.1‐9.  Response to Comment G.1‐44, G.1‐45, and G.1‐47  This comment notes that the DMEIR fails to adequately analyze the project’s potential to displace  existing housing.  However, on page 5.12‐14, it is noted that “prior to displacement of any dwelling  unit, a relocation analysis must be prepared in accordance with federal and/or state law.” Please also  refer to the discussion in response G.1‐3, G.1‐9, and G.1‐43.  Response to Comment G.1‐46  This comment suggests that an inadequate reference was used for existing vacancy rates in the EIR,  and that Table  5 does not support the DEIR’s conclusion that the Project will not have a significant  impact resulting from the displacement of existing housing, and Tables  3 and 4 population and  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐57  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  housing data from an outdated source.  This comment is noted.  However, the Table  5 itself notes  that an estimated 99,393 persons could be living in within the DNCP/FCSP boundaries by the year  2035, with 169,080 persons allowed by the 2025.  In addition, because the DNCP and FCSP  population increase is within the population growth analyzed within the Fresno General Plan, the  project impacts are not deemed cumulatively considerable.  Therefore, less than significant  cumulative impacts are anticipated related to population growth.    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐73  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter G.2: Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, Ashley Werner, October 9, 2014 Response to Comment G.2‐1 though G.2‐11  The MEIR for the Fresno General Plan was certified in December 2014 and was not challenged within  the applicable statute of limitations.  This EIR does not propose any changes to the MEIR and as  such, challenges to the MEIR are untimely and outside the scope of this document.    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G.3-1 Letter G.3 Page 1 of 4 G.3-1 CONT G.3-2 G.3-3 Letter G.3 Page 2 of 4 G.3-3 CONT G.3-4 Letter G.3 Page 3 of 4 G.3-5 Letter G.3 Page 4 of 4 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐79  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter G.3: Development and Resource Management Department, Glen A. Campora, August 11, 2016 Response to Comment G.3‐1 through G.3‐5  The City adopted a 5th Cycle Housing Element within the deadline established by the Government  Code.  The City is working with the Department of Housing and Community Development to process  revisions in accordance with the Government Code.  With regard to meeting Housing Element  requirements, a by right procedure proposed in the DDC incentivizes and streamlines residential  development at minimum densities of 20 du/acre and above.  In addition, the dwelling unit capacity  proposed in the DNCP and FCSP meets or exceeds the dwelling unit capacity required by the Housing  Element.    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ) -FUUFS) 1BHFPG ) -FUUFS) 1BHFPG -FUUFS) 1BHFPG -FUUFS) 1BHFPG -FUUFS) 1BHFPG THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐87  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter H: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Wendell Lum September 13, 2016 Response to Comment H‐1 and H‐2  The commenter suggested the replacement of fourth and fifth paragraphs under Stormwater and  Drainage on page 5.9‐6 and 5.9‐7 with the following:   This Project Area has adopted drainage plans and most of this area has permanent  drainage service.  Within this area there are approximately 336,200 linear feet of  existing pipeline used to convey stormwater drainage, and there are approximately  16,150 linear feet of pipeline to be constructed.  These drainage facilities were  planned and constructed over time based on the existing and planned uses that  were then current.  If this Project generates more stormwater runoff than what was  originally planned, then measures will need to be under taken to mitigate the  additional runoff to the planned rate.  The developer may either make  improvements to the existing public drainage system to provide additional capacity  or construct a permanent peak reducing facility.    In addition, this Project Area was largely developed before the District’s  implementation of the major storm breakover guideline.  If the proposed  development is located in an area that has historically provided passage for a major  storm water flows then the grading of the proposed site shall need to be designed in  such a manner that there are no adverse impacts for the passage of such flows.    Many areas throughout the City currently lack complete or adequate storm drain  systems.  This makes them prone to frequent localized flooding that damages  properties and inconveniences residents, resulting in lower property values and  higher insurance costs for both homeowners and businesses.  Many of these areas  have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to fund the construction of  modern drainage facilities, so a number of storm drain improvements are now being  constructed with funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act  (ARRA).  One of these projects is located on Divisadero Street, adjacent to an  approximately twelve block area with no storm drain facilities that extends south  from Divisadero into the Specific Plan area.  These improvements will provide little  direct relief for this neighborhood, but they will make it feasible to relieve existing  flooding conditions by extending this system in the future.    Approximately 50 acres in the southern corner of the FCSP area also lack an existing  storm drain network.  No facilities are currently planned for this portion of the FCSP,  but it is assumed that storm drains will eventually be needed to accommodate  redevelopment, and these new facilities would be connected to the major storm  drain lines that now serve the central portion of the Specific Plan area or to the lines  that serve the neighborhood located immediately north of Divisadero Street.   Although there are no indications of significant drainage problems within the areas  now served by these facilities, shallow, nuisance flooding has been reported after  heavy rains.  It is expected the addition of runoff from any newly served areas would  exacerbate these problems, potentially limiting the Specific Plan area’s development  potential.  As a result, any increase in runoff resulting from storm drain extensions  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐88 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  may also trigger the need for capacity upgrades on the FMFCD’s collection facilities  (FCSP 2016).    The commenter suggested removal of the first and addition to the second paragraph under Flood  Control on page 5.9‐8 with the following:   Portions of the Plan areas have experienced localized flooding.  To  mitigate these  flood hazards, storm drain improvements (such as replacing or supplementing  existing pipes, adding inlets, or updating pump stations) are needed.   Neighborhoods with deficient storm drain systems are subject to increased local  flooding, lower property values, and higher insurance costs for homeowners and  businesses.  These areas have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to  fund the construction of modern drainage facilities (DNCP 2016).    As stated previously, the developed portions within this Project Area has permanent  drainage facilities and service.    City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx ERRATA SECTION 4: The following provides corrections and additions to the sections of the Final EIR. The corrections and additions are organized by page number. Additional text is shown in underline, and deleted text is shown in strikethrough format. Page 5.3-45: Air Quality The City has identified recommended revisions on this page, with the following deletion as follows. Under the CBIA v. BAAQMD Supreme Court opinion described above, projects containing sensitive receptors would not be required to reduce the impact from these existing sources. However, the City may request developers to implement voluntary control measures to reduce health impacts on future residents. Voluntary Measure AIR-1 is provided, which recommends For instance, the City might request developers of any new residential development that is located within 0.1 μg/m3 DPM concentration contours to install a positive static pressure forced air heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system into each residential unit. Page 5.3-52: Air Quality The City has identified recommended revisions on this page, with the following deletion and movement of text to Table 5.3-7: CAPCOA Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Receptors Near TAC sources: Voluntary Measure AIR-4b is provided, which recommends that any new residential development that is located within the recommended setback distances detailed in Table 5.3-7 from a stationary source of TAC emissions should prepare a screening level analysis or a project-specific HRA. If the screening criteria or HRA exceed cancer risk criteria, the projects should install a positive static pressure forced air heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system into each residential unit. Each HVAC system should install a high efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filter of MERV 13 or better in the air intake for the HVAC system, and the air intake will be installed with a fan designed to force air through the MERV 13 filter in order to create positive static pressure. Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The City has identified recommended revisions to mitigations on this page, with the following addition: Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL-3. The following addition has been made to MM CUL-3. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-2 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx MM CUL-3 Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City- approved archaeologist. The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archaeological measures prior to the initiation of any ground-disturbing activities at these locations. The archaeologist will discuss the project-specific sensitivity potential to encounter both prehistoric and historic materials; present (verbally or graphically) examples of potential types of prehistoric and historic materials that may be encountered; discuss the responsibilities and empowerments of the cultural resources monitor(s); and briefly address the procedures to address inadvertent finds. Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL-1. The following edit is located at second bullet point under MM CUL-1 on page 5.5-40. • Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources, the CRHR, and the or NRHP, as necessary. Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be summarized in the Phase I report. Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL-1. The following edits are located under MM CUL-1 on page 5.5-40. MM CUL-1 In accordance with Objective HCR-2 (specifically HCR-2-a through HCR-2-c) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all specific discretionary development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should shall undergo a standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review. • This CEQA-level evaluation should shall include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic-age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object evaluations. The report should shall also address any project-specific archaeological sensitivity determinations and additional project-specific proposed mitigation measures, as necessary. • Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should shall be evaluated for significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local register of Historic Resources, the CRHR or NRHP, as necessary. Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should shall be summarized in the Phase I report. • To ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings, the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-3 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx required to be completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information Center with the completed Phase I report. • Completed Phase I reports should shall be submitted to the City for incorporation into their local databases. Page 5.5-43: Cultural Resources The commenter correctly noted an error regarding locations used. The first sentence right after MM CUL-5 on page 5.5-43 has been revised as follows: MM CUL-5 Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 51 50 Site, Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the current investigations. (“Vicinity” is defined here as lying within 300 feet of the identified site boundaries.) These are presently the only archaeological sites recorded within the FCSP/DNCP areas. Page 5.5-46: Cultural Resources The City has identified recommended revisions to mitigations on this page, with the following: Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Page 5.5-33: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the second sentence under Project-Specific Impact Analysis on page 5.5-33, which has been revised as follows: The most recent review of cultural resources (both historic and prehistoric) within the DNCP and FCSP areas is contained in the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepared by Greenwood and Associates in February of 2012. Page 5.5-33: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the first sentence under Records Search Results on page 5.5-33, which has been revised as follows: As part of the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepared by Greenwood and Associates, a records search was conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield. Page 5.5-34: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the third sentence under Literature and Archival Review on page 5.5-34, which has been revised as follows: City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-4 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx The purpose of these maps was to aid insurance agents in assessing the degree of fire risk associated with a particular property. Page 5.5-36: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the second bullet point on page 5.5-36, which has been revised as follows: • Proposed: “L” Street Historic District. Boundaries: Van Ness, Amador, Divisadero, N Street, Stanislaus, M Street to Calaveras (FCSP/DNCP). Pages 5.9-6 and 5.9-7: Hydrology and Water Quality The commenter suggested the replacement of fourth and fifth paragraphs under Stormwater and Drainage on page 5.9-6 and 5.9-7 with the following: This Project Area has adopted drainage plans and most of this area has permanent drainage service. Within this area there are approximately 336,200 linear feet of existing pipeline used to convey storm water drainage and there are approximately 16,150 linear feet of pipeline to be constructed. These drainage facilities were planned and constructed over time, based on the existing and planned uses that were then current. If this Project generates more stormwater runoff than what was originally planned, then measures will need to be undertaken to mitigate the additional runoff to the planned rate. The developer may either make improvements to the existing public drainage system to provide additional capacity or construct a permanent peak reducing facility. In addition, this Project Area was largely developed before the District’s implementation of the major storm breakover guideline. If the proposed development is located in an area that has historically provided passage for a major stormwater flow, then the grading of the proposed site shall be designed in such a manner that there are no adverse impacts for the passage of such flows. Many areas throughout the City currently lack complete or adequate storm drain systems. This makes them prone to frequent localized flooding that damages properties and inconveniences residents, resulting in lower property values and higher insurance costs for both homeowners and businesses. Many of these areas have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to fund the construction of modern drainage facilities, so a number of storm drain improvements are now being constructed with funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). One of these projects is located on Divisadero Street, adjacent to an approximately twelve block area with no storm drain facilities that extends south from Divisadero into the Specific Plan area. These improvements will provide little direct relief for this neighborhood, but they will make it feasible to relieve existing flooding conditions by extending this system in the future. Approximately 50 acres in the southern corner of the FCSP area also lack an existing storm drain network. No facilities are currently planned for this portion of the FCSP, but it is assumed that storm drains will eventually be needed to accommodate redevelopment, and these new facilities would be connected to the major storm drain lines that now serve the central portion of the Specific Plan area or to the lines that serve the neighborhood located immediately north of Divisadero Street. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-5 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Although there are no indications of significant drainage problems within the areas now served by these facilities, shallow, nuisance flooding has been reported after heavy rains. It is expected the addition of runoff from any newly served areas would exacerbate these problems, potentially limiting the Specific Plan area’s development potential. As a result, any increase in runoff resulting from storm drain extensions may also trigger the need for capacity upgrades on the FMFCD’s collection facilities (FCSP 2016). Page 5.9-8: Hydrology and Water Quality The commenter suggested removal of the first paragraph and an addition to the second paragraph under Flood Control on page 5.9-8 with the following: Portions of the Plan areas have experienced localized flooding. To mitigate these flood hazards, storm drain improvements (such as replacing or supplementing existing pipes, adding inlets, or updating pump stations) are needed. Neighborhoods with deficient storm drain systems are subject to increased local flooding, lower property values, and higher insurance costs for homeowners and businesses. These areas have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to fund the construction of modern drainage facilities (DNCP 2016). As stated previously, the developed portions within this Project Area has permanent drainage facilities and service. Page 5.9-27: Hydrology and Water Quality The Cumulative mitigation measure was corrected as follows: Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1, HYD-2a and HYD-2b is required. Page 5.10-21: Land Use and Planning Exhibit 5.10-3a: Proposed DNCP Land Use and Zoning Designations has been revised as follows, mostly within the Jane Addams Neighborhood: • Light Industrial (IL) changed to Business Park (BP) 7217686.921638/43560 = 165.7 Acres • Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density (RS-3) Changed to Mobile Home Park (RM-MH) 2300703.429209/43560 = 52.82 Acres • Light Industrial (IL) changed to Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX) 357072.465763/43560 = 8.20 Acres • Heavy Industrial (IL) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 238959.073407/43560 = 5.49 Acres • Downtown Neighborhood (DTN) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 385955.389722/43560 = 8.86 Acres City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-6 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Section 5.13: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to Section 5.13 to make it clear and concise. Throughout the section, the header has been edited as follows: Public Services and Recreation Page 5.13-1: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located at the beginning of the page, and under study area for project impacts. 5.13—Public Services and Recreation This section addresses potential impacts to public services and recreation such as police protection, fire protection, schools, parks/recreation, and libraries resulting from implementation of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DNCP), the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP), and the Downtown Development Code (DDC). Study Area for Project Impacts The study area for project impacts on public services and recreation includes the DNCP and FCSP areas. Page 5.13-7: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located under 5.13.3 – Regulatory Setting. State and local regulations related to public services and recreation are described below. Page 5.13-10: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located under Fresno General Plan. Below are summaries of the City’s General Plan objectives and policies regarding public services and recreation (i.e., police, fire, parks/recreation, and schools). Page 5.13-15: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located under the first paragraph. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services and/or recreation: R A IL ROADA V E TURNER AVE FRE S N O S T KI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTA T E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCH A N NIN G WAYE L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO ST MCKENZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE CALIFORNIA AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCH S T DIVISADERO ST HUNTINGTON AVE NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULA RE ST VENTURA ST C S T PO T T L E AV E C A LA V E R A S S TMAPLE AVEMA RT I N A V EPARKWAYDR SANPABLOAVEFU L TON S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE CALIFORNIAAVE P L A Z A D RWTENTHSTBE LGRAVIAAVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP L A ZA D R EFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORENCE AVE MC KENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER A VE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITEAVEEL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVE MER C E D ST PLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L EL A V EH A Z E LWOO D B L VDDONAHOO ST C OL L I NSA V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVAT E FIFTHSTA M A D O R S T H ST STEPHENSAVEF RANKLIN AVE GILBERT ST I RWI NA V E MAUD AVEINYO ST J ONE SA V EM A R IP O S A S TUS T M E R C E D S T S A N JO A Q U IN S T TUOLUMN E ST S A N T A C L A R A S T WOODWAR DAVE KER N S T BRALY AVE LOS A N G E LE S S T THOR N EAVEM O N T E R E Y S T M O N O S T CAL A V E R A S S T SECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO S T F S TN S T CHA N DLE R A V E FAIRVIEWAVECLARKSTWAT ERM A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OL EANDER AVE AMA DOR ST FULTON/VANNESSA L Y HAMILTON AVE LORENA AVEBENGSTONAVEFRONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSONAVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LAN EAVE CHERRYAVE B ROA DWA YLIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSAR AVE PACIFIC AVEK LE T T E A V E S A N BE N ITO S T B A L L AVE O S T N S T CAPI T OL ST KER N M ALL T S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL A VE VA N NE S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYHAWES AVE WHITES BRIDGE AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STWHITE AVE THOMAS AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLV D BALCH AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE KERCKHOFF AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY OS T B S TMA YOR A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B /C A LY MONO ST L S T C S T BRO ADW A YS S T R S T F U L TON S T A / B A LYAS T B S T F AG A N A L Y NEVADA AVE E ST L S T CHI N A AL Y HOME RUN A L Y F S T S A N T A F E A V EQ S T B E N D AVE INYO ST GRACE STMADD Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANTAVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORA AV E HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEIOWA AVE T H OMAS AVE DEARINGAVEHAYSTON AVEWOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRA NT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATE E LD O R A D O S T FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVEWO O DSONAVEGLENNAVEG S T GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE GOL D E N S T A T E B L VD TO P EK A A V E ¬«2 ¬«2 ¬«2 ¬«2 ¬«3 ¬«4 ¬«5 ¬«5 ¬«1 ¬«1 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles Land Use Changes 1 - Light Industrial (IL) changed to Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX) 8.20 Acres 2 - Light Industrial (IL) changed to Business Park (BP) 165.7 Acres 3 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density (RS-3) Changed to Mobile Home Park (RM-MH) 52.82 Acres 4 - Heavy Industrial (IL) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 5.49 Acres 5 - Downtown Neighborhood (DTN) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 8.86 Acres Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation ·|}þ99 ·|}þ41 ·|}þ180 I 31680017 • 10/2016 | 5.10-3a_proposedLU.cdr Exhibit 5.10-3a Proposed DNCP Land Use and Zoning Designations CITY OF FRESNO DNCP, FCSP, AND DDC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Source: Moule & Polyzoides, 2016 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-9 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Page 5.13-27: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located at the beginning of the page 5.13—Public Services and Recreation ............................................................................................ 5.13-1 Page 5.14-3, 5.14-6, and 5.14-8: Transportation and Traffic Text was added to pages 5.14.3 and 5.14-6 as follows: “the proposed bicycle network identified in the 2010 City of Fresno Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trails Master Plan” Page 5.14-3: Transportation and Traffic A comment recommended that the bullet be modified under the Road Diets & Bike Lanes on page 5.14-3, as follows: • Tulare Street: Union Pacific Railroad to R Street (4 lane dievided to 3 lanes) Page 5.14-5: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested removal and addition of text within the second paragraph as follows: The FCSP accommodates the construction of a high speed rail station within the plan area. However, the full construction of an operational California High Speed Rail system is not currently fully-funded and too speculative to include in this analysis. However, roadway changes associated with the HSR are included in the Cumulative analysis The California High Speed Rail system is discussed further under the Cumulative Conditions (see Section 5.14.6). Page 5.14-9: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested defining the BMP in Policy 9-14-2 language as follows: • Policy 9-14-2: Provide safe and well-designed bicycle crossings of the railroad right-of-way at all places identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan (BMP)/ATP. Page 5.14-52: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested deleting the duplicate sentences within the second paragraph of City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines as follows: The guidelines include the preferred traffic analysis methodologies, significance criteria, and documentation requirements This analysis is conducted using the preferred analysis methodologies and significance criteria as outlined in the City’s guidelines. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-10 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Pages 5.14-106 through 5.14-130: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested deleting reference to AM and PM peak-hour traffic operation every 3 years and replacing it with 5 years, as follows: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak-hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 53 years. Surface water obtained under this agreement is treated at the City’s SWTF along with its other surface supplies, and pumped into the potable distribution system. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-11 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Page 5.15-4: Utilities and Service Systems The commenter recommended additional notes to Table 5.15-1 for consistency with previous references in the footnotes of other tables to as follows: Table 5.15-1: Current and Planned Potable Water Supplies Water Supply Additional Detail on Water Supply Projected Water Supply (af) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 (opt) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Groundwater1 Kings Subbasin 130,400 — 135,100 — 139,700 — 144,300 — 148,900 — Surface Water2 FID—Agmt. 106,200 — 111,200 — 116,200 — 121,200 — 126,200 — Surface Water3 USBR—CVP 52,600 — 52,600 — 52,600 — 52,600 — 52,600 — Recycled4 Tertiary, disinfected 7,000 — 16,000 — 16,000 — 16,000 — 16,000 — Recycled5 Secondary, disinfected 10,000 — 10,000 — 10,000 — 10,000 — 10,000 — Recycled6 Tertiary, disinfected 2,500 — 5,000 — 7,500 — 10,000 — 12,500 — Total 308,700 0 329,900 0 342,000 0 354,100 0 366,200 0 Notes: 1 The value for “Reasonably Available Volume” includes the Safe Yield which increases as the City’s SOI expands as discussed in Sections 6.1.5.1 & 6.1.5.2 and in Table 6-3 of the 2015 UWMP. Additionally, this value includes water from prior year(s) operation of intentional recharge as shown in Table 6-3 (of the 2015 UWMP) for the same year. 2 The City’s surface water supply from FID grows as the City’s annexed city limits expand as discussed in Section 6.2.1 of the 2015 UWMP. 3 The City’s USBR CVP Friant Division contract is for 60,000 af of Class 1 water. The 52,600 af/yr value is the historic average allocated value for the City per Figure 7-2 of the 2015 UWMP (rounded to nearest 100). 4 The 2020 value of 7,000 af/yr is based on the RWRF’s 5 mgd facility; the subsequent increase to 16,000 af/yr reflects the satellite WRF (8 mgd) being constructed and operational shortly after 2025. 5 The annual 10,000 af is the current amount presently directed to farm irrigation of non-food crops adjacent to the RWRF. 6 The City recently had extraction wells at the RWRF reclassified as providing “soil aquifer treated” recycled water. The projected values reflect the incorporation of this water into the flows returned to the metropolitan area and used for purposes as shown in Table 6-9 of the 2015 UWMP. Source: City of Fresno 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, 2016. Prepared by Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-12 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Page 5.15-2: Utilities and Service Systems The following edits were made to the third paragraph under Water Supply. The Surface Water Treatment Facility (SWTF) located in northeast Fresno receives supplies from the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Fresno Irrigation District (FID) contract for Kings River Water, and a wastewater recycle exchange agreement with the Fresno Irrigation District. The USBR would supply 60,000 acre-feet per year (afy) in year 2010 through year 2025, and the FID would supply an estimated 108,200 afy in year 2010 (125,543 afy actual) (increasing to 132,400 afy by 2035) for the Kings River contracted water., and the FID wastewater exchange agreement would supply 13,800 afy in year 2010 through year 2025 (City of Fresno 2016) Page 5.15-6: Utilities and Service Systems This comment recommended that the sentence be modified to reflect the most recent decreased water usage (in the last couple of years due to drought/conservation), or provide a range of years for which the average water use is shown. Under the Existing Water Demand—Citywide the first sentence of the first paragraph on page 5.15-6 has been revised as follows: According to The the Fresno 2015 UWMP, the existing average water use for the City of Fresno is 300309 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), with a baseline period between 1999 through 2008. However, the actual per capital water use for the City in 2015 was 190 gpcd. The overall water usage patterns for the City have been reduced due to ongoing drought year-practices, and conservation measures the City has enacted. Total water demand for all sectors (industrial, public landscape irrigation, commercial/institutional, multi-family residential, single-family residential) in 2015 was 132,843 afy, and is projected by the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to reach 262,500 afy by the year 2040. This projection includes conservation savings that will be achieved by the year 2040. Beginning late 2008 through January 2013, the City had initiated and completed the implementation of a residential water meter program through the installation of 113,000 water meters for single-family homes. From the period of 2008 through 2015, there has been a dramatic decline of water usage for all water use sectors, as such.; the City has met and exceeded the 2015 Interim target of 278 gpcd, as noted in the 2015 UWMP. NORTH WWW. Ci   H AMERICA | E FIRSTCARBON ty of Fres Co EUROPE | AFR SOLUTIONS.CO sno Down orridor Sp ICA | AUSTRA OM  Mitigati ntown Ne pecific Pla Ci LIA | ASIA on Monit eighborh an, and D ity of Fre Developm Co   toring an hoods Com Downtow sno, Fres ent and Reso ontact: Sophia Contact: Jas nd Report mmunity wn Develo sno Count ource Manage 2 a Pagoulatos,  FirstC 7265 N. Firs son Brandma Kim Burnel Report Dat ting Prog for y Plan, Fu opment C ty, Califo Prepare City of Fr ement Depart 2600 Fresno S Fresno, CA 9 559.621 Planning Ma Prepare Carbon Solu st Street, Suit Fresno, CA 9 an, Project Dir ll, Project Ma e: October 7, ram the lton Code rnia   ed for:  resno tment  Street  93721  1.8003  nager  ed by:  utions te 101  93720  rector  nager  , 2016  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1: DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.1—Aesthetics The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM AES‐4a: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas.  Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4b: Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low‐intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4c: Lighting systems for non‐residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties.  Low‐intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4d: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot‐Lamberts (FT‐L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT‐L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4e: Materials used on building facades shall be non‐reflective. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoCumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES‐4a through AES‐4e is required. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of Fresno  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 2 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.3—Air Quality The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific The implementation of the proposed plans and relevant policies for this area are expected to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions to the extent feasible.  This is well stated in the FCSP: “By improving Downtown, this Plan helps to expand access and make Downtown more inviting and attractive to everyone.  Over time, Downtown’s wide streets are put to better use, creating space for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, and connecting and creating synergy with adjacent neighborhoods and institutions that are within walking and biking distance of Downtown.”  The FCSP follows principles including infill development, mix of land uses, an interconnected street system, and a high level of walkability and bikability that have been documented to reduce vehicle miles traveled (see CAPCOA’s 2010 report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures).  No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. Implement proposed plans and relevant policies to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions.   Prior to construction of the project  City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Mitigation Measure AIR‐1 Projects that include five or more heavy‐duty truck deliveries per day with sensitive receptors located within 300 feet of the truck loading area shall provide a screening analysis to determine if the project has the potential to exceed criteria pollutant concentration based standards and thresholds for NO2 and PM2.5.  If projects exceed screening criteria, refined dispersion modeling and health risk assessment shall be Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a screening analysis as specified.   Prior to construction of the project  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 3 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial accomplished and if needed, mitigation measures to reduce impacts shall be included in the project to reduce the impacts to the extent feasible.  Mitigation measures include but are not limited to: • Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. • Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less. Mitigation Measure AIR‐2 Projects that result in an increased cancer risk of 10 in a million [20 in a million under revised SJVAPCD thresholds] or exceed criteria pollutant ambient air quality standards shall implement site‐specific measures that reduce TAC exposure to reduce excess cancer risk to less than 10 in a million [20 in a million under revised SJVAPCD thresholds].  Possible control measures include but are not limited to: • Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. • Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less • Construct block walls to reduce the flow of emissions toward sensitive receptors • Install a vegetative barrier downwind from the TAC source that can absorb a portion of the diesel PM emissions • For projects proposing to locate a new building containing sensitive receptors near existing sources of TAC emissions, install HEPA filters in HVAC systems to reduce TAC emission levels exceeding risk thresholds. • Install heating and cooling services at truck stops to eliminate the need for idling during overnight stops to run onboard systems. Implement the air pollution control measures, as necessary.   During project construction  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 4 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial • For large distribution centers where the owner controls the vehicle fleet, provide facilities to support alternative fueled trucks powered by fuels such as natural gas or bio‐diesel. • Utilize electric powered material handling equipment where feasible for the weight and volume of material to be moved. Mitigation Measure AIR‐3 Require developers proposing projects on ARB’s list of projects in its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (Handbook) warranting special consideration to prepare a cumulative health risk assessment when sensitive receptors are located within the distance screening criteria of the facility as listed in the ARB Handbook. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a cumulative health risk assessment as specified.   Prior to project construction City of FresnoMitigation Measure AIR‐4 Require developers of projects containing sensitive receptors to provide a cumulative health risk assessment at project locations exceeding ARB Land Use Handbook distance screening criteria or newer criteria that may be developed by the SJVAPCD (no longer required by CEQA). Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a cumulative health risk assessment as specified.   Prior to project construction City of FresnoThe following policy serves as mitigation measures, andwere not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific The implementation of the proposed plans and relevant policies for this area are expected to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions to the extent feasible.  This is well stated in the FCSP: “By improving Downtown, this Plan helps to expand access and make Downtown more inviting and attractive to everyone.  Over time, Downtown’s wide streets are put to better use, creating space for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, and connecting and creating synergy with adjacent neighborhoods and institutions that are within walking and biking distance of Downtown.” Implement proposed plans and relevant policies to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions. Prior to construction of the project City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 5 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial The DNCP and FCSP follow principles including infill development, mix of land uses, an interconnected street system, and a high level of walkability and bikability that have been documented to reduce vehicle miles traveled (see CAPCOA’s 2010 report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures).  No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific Odor source types listed in Table 5.3 8 may result in a potentially significant impact that would require mitigation to ensure that the impact is reduced to less than significant. Monitor odor source types and mitigate to less than significant. During construction activities City of FresnoMM AIR‐5: Require developers of projects with the potential to generate significant odor impacts as determined through review of SJVAPCD odor complaint history for similar facilities and consultation with the SJVAPCD to prepare an odor impact assessment and to implement odor control measures recommended by the SJVAPCD or the City to the extent needed to reduce the impact to less than significant. Review and confirm that the developer has prepared an odor impact assessment, as necessary.  Prior to construction of the project City of FresnoCumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR‐3 is required. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a cumulative health risk assessment as specified.   Prior to project construction City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 6 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.4—Biological Resources The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM BIO‐1a: Construction of a proposed project would avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special‐status species known to occur within the Plan areas.  If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special‐status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special‐status species.  If a special‐status species is determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a special‐status species to the greatest extent feasible.  Avoidance and minimization measures include and are not limited to removing vegetation communities to be replanted off‐site. On‐site inspection of any special‐status species.  Implement avoidance and minimization measures, as necessary. Before ground‐disturbing (preparation and construction activities) City of FresnoMM BIO‐1b: Direct or incidental take of any state or federally listed species would be avoided to the greatest extent feasible.  If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resource agencies and/or additional permitting may be required.  Agency consultation through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 2081 and United States Fish and Wildlife Service Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species.  Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis through agency consultation. Coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and United States Fish and Wildlife Service for permitting.  On‐site inspection to confirm implementation mitigation measures. Prior to construction of the project  California Department of Fish and Wildlife and United States Fish and Wildlife Service   City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 7 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM BIO‐1c: Development within the Plan areas would avoid, where possible, special‐status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special‐status species.  If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special‐status natural community or suitable habitat for special‐status species, compensatory habitat‐based mitigation may be required under the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Endangered Species Act.  Mitigation will consist of preserving on‐site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off‐site credits from an approved mitigation bank.  Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies.  An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be produced by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special‐status natural communities to a less than significant level.  Agreed‐upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special‐status species.  The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis. Coordinate with resource agencies.  On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures.   Prior to construction of the project City of FresnoMM BIO‐1d: Proposed projects within the Plan areas would avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code Section 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site.  If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre‐construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site.  If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be present on‐site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest.  A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have Monitor the timing of construction.  Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a pre‐construction clearance survey, as necessary.  Confirm presence of biological monitor, as necessary. Prior to and during construction activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 8 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial fledged and the nest is no longer active.  Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO‐1a through BIO‐1d is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to and during construction activities City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM BIO‐3a: If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site.  The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts.  Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of a wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the planning area.  Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a formal wetland delineation, as necessary.  Confirm implementation of wetland mitigation. Prior to construction of the project United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) MM BIO‐3b: In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the proposed project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland.  Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage, and incorporating detention basins shall help to ensure that project‐related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible. Confirm BMPs are incorporated into design and construction phases. Before ground‐disturbing (preparation and construction activities) City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 9 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO‐3a and BIO‐3b is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to construction of the project and before ground‐disturbing City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM CUL‐1: In accordance with Objective HCR‐2 (specifically HCR‐2‐a through HCR‐2‐c) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all discretionary development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should undergo a standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review. • This CEQA‐level evaluation should include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic‐age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object evaluations.  The report should also address any project‐specific archaeological sensitivity determinations and additional project‐specific proposed mitigation measures, as necessary.  • Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources, the CRHR, and the NRHP, as necessary.  Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be summarized in the Phase I report. • To ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings, the appropriate Department Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or Phase I review. Prior to construction of the project  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 10 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are required to be completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information Center with the completed Phase I report. • Completed Phase I reports should be submitted to the City for incorporation into their local databases. MM CUL‐2: In accordance with Objective HCR‐3 (specifically HCR‐3‐a) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1 (specifically Policy 6.2.1 through 6.2.7), all efforts should be made (within appropriate safest standards) to preserve, rehabilitate, and re‐use historic‐age structures (whether determined eligible or not). Confirm compliance with applicable objectives and goals. Prior to construction of the project  City of FresnoMM CUL‐3: Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City‐approved archaeologist.  The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archeological measures prior to the initiation of any ground‐disturbing activities at these locations.  The archaeologist will discuss the project‐specific sensitivity potential to encounter both prehistoric and historic materials; present (verbally or graphically) examples of potential types of prehistoric and historic materials that may be encountered; discuss the responsibilities and empowerments of the cultural resources monitor(s); and briefly address the procedures to address inadvertent finds.Confirm presence of City‐approved archaeologist.   During subsurface earthwork activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 11 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM CUL‐4: If previously unknown cultural resources are encountered during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and an archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study.  The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. • Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.  Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project area should be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria. • If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the archaeologist and recommended to the Lead Agency.  Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. • No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources.  Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. Cease construction when there is a potentially significant archaeological resource and perform technical analyses. During subsurface earthwork activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 12 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL‐1 through CUL‐4 is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures Prior to construction of the project and during subsurface earthwork activities City of FresnoMitigation Measure CUL‐1 is required in order to assess the prehistoric archaeological sensitivity of specific project developments.  If no previously recorded prehistoric resources are identified and no additional mitigation measures re proposed in the Phase I investigation, Mitigation Measure CUL‐4 is required to address potential inadvertent finds. Cease construction when there is a potentially significant archaeological resource and perform technical analyses. During subsurface earthwork activities City of FresnoIn addition to Mitigation Measure CUL‐1 and CUL‐4, the following mitigation measures, which were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project, are also required: MM CUL‐5: Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any ground‐disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 50 Site, Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the current investigations.  (“Vicinity” is defined here as lying within 300 feet of the identified site boundaries.)  These are presently the only archaeological sites recorded within the FCSP/DNCP areas. Confirm presence of a qualified archaeological monitor. During ground‐disturbing activities City of FresnoMM CUL‐6: Ground‐disturbing activities shall also be monitored in the vicinity of any archaeological sites identified in the future, as follows:  A qualified professional archaeologist and a Native American representative shall monitor any ground‐disturbing activities in the vicinity of known archaeological sites.  An archaeological monitoring plan shall be developed in accordance with professional standards by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology.  The monitors will ensure that any portions of Confirm presence of a qualified archaeological monitor. During ground‐disturbing activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 13 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial previously identified significant resources are avoided and protected.  In addition, they will identify any new cultural resources encountered during ground‐disturbing activities.  If potentially important cultural resources are discovered, the archaeologist will immediately divert such activity within 100 feet of the find, or a distance determined to be appropriate.  The potential significance of the find will be assessed and mitigation measures formulated, if warranted.  Appropriate mitigation may include avoidance of the resource, testing, and/or data recovery.  Ground disturbance in the area of suspended activity shall not recommence until authorized by the archaeologist. Upon completion of the monitoring, an archaeological report will be prepared for the City in accordance with professional standards.  A copy of the report will be submitted to the SSJV Information Center.  Provisions will be made for curation of any significant cultural materials recovered. Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL‐1, as well as Mitigation Measures CUL‐4, CUL‐5, and CUL‐6 are required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Prior to and during construction activities  City of FresnoThe following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM CUL‐7: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted.  The following procedures shall be followed: • If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence.  In the event Review and confirm that the applicant has conducted a field survey and literature search. Prior to construction of the project City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 14 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study.  The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds.  If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency.  Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.  No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources.  Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. • If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance.  If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist.  Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.  In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 15 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial literature review shall include a paleontological monitor.  The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist.  If additional paleontological/geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed. The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM CUL‐8: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately.  Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a).  If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).  The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains.  Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains.  The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants’ preferences for treatment. Cease construction when there are human remains unearthed and contact appropriate agency. During construction activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 16 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL‐4 is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measure. During subsurface earthwork activities City of FresnoSection 5.8—Hazards and Hazardous Materials The following mitigation measure were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project Project‐specific The following recommendations from the Phase I ESAs for the DNCP and the FCSP have been incorporated as mitigation measures and are anticipated to reduce potential impacts regarding hazardous materials to a less than significant level.  The following mitigation measures shall be implemented on a property‐by‐property basis as development and/or redevelopment progresses throughout the DNCP and FCSP areas: MM HAZ‐1a: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase I ESA shall be conducted for each individual property prior to development or redevelopment to ascertain the presence or absence of Recognized Environmental Conditions, Historical Recognized Environmental Condition, and Potential Environmental Concerns as defined in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Specific Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan relevant to the property under consideration. The findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow‐up investigation, if found to be warranted. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a Phase I ESA. Prior to issuance of a grading permit City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 17 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM HAZ‐1b: In the event that the findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA for a property result in evidence of RECs, HRECs and/or PECs warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase II ESA shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of a significant impact to the subject site from hazardous materials.  The Phase II ESA may include but may not be limited to the following: (1) Collection and laboratory analysis of soils and/or groundwater samples to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of constituents of concern; (2) Collection and laboratory analysis of soil vapors and/or indoor air to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of volatile constituents of concern; and/or (3) Geophysical surveys to ascertain the presence or absence of subsurface features of concern such as USTs, drywells, drains, plumbing, and septic systems. The findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow‐up investigation, site characterization, and/or remedial activities, if found to be warranted. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a Phase II ESA, as necessary. Prior to issuance of a grading permit City of FresnoMM HAZ‐1c: In the event the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA reveal the presence of significant concentrations of hazardous materials warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of additional Phase II ESAs in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern.  The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared additional Phase II ESA, as necessary. Prior to issuance of a grading permit City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 18 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM HAZ‐1d: If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESAs, site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency including, but not limited to, the Cal‐EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services (FCEHS). Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil.  If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility. Review and confirm that the property owners and/or developers have completed site remediation and potential risk assessment. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Cal‐EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services (FCEHS) MM HAZ‐1e: In the event of planned renovation or demolition of residential and/or commercial structures on the subject site, prior to the issuance of demolition permits, asbestos and LBP surveys shall be conducted in order to determine the presence or absence of asbestos‐containing construction materials and/or LBP.  Removal of friable and non‐friable ACCMs that have the potential to become friable during demolition and/or renovation shall conform to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.  The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District is the responsible agency on the local level to enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and shall be notified by the property owners and/or developers of properties (or their designee(s)) prior to any demolition and/or renovation activities.  If asbestos‐containing materials are left in place, an Operations and Maintenance Program (O&M Program) shall be developed for the management of asbestos‐containing materials. Confirm asbestos and LBP surveys were conducted.  Confirm conformity to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Prior to issuance of demolition permits San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 19 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Project‐specific The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR and are new for this project: MM HAZ‐3a: A Business Plan must be submitted by businesses that handle a hazardous material, or a mixture containing a hazardous material, in quantities equal to or greater than 500 pounds of a solid, 55 gallons of a liquid, 200 cubic feet of a compressed has at standard room temperature and pressure, the Federal Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) for Extremely Hazardous Substances, radioactive materials in quantities for which an Emergency Plan is required in accordance with Parts 30, 40, or 70, Chapter 1 of Title 10 of Code of Federal Regulations. A Risk Management Plan shall be completed for any business that has more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance in a process included any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or on‐site movement or any combination of these activities.  Regulated substances are those chemicals on either the Federal list or the State list.Confirm a business plan was submitted and a Risk Management Plan was completed. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM HAZ‐3b: In the event that unknown soil contamination is discovered during grading activities, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of a Phase II ESA in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern.  The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment.Confirm property owners and/or developers ensure site characterization. During grading activities City of FresnoMM HAZ‐3c: If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA, site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable Review and confirm preparation of a site remediation and risk assessment. Prior to construction of project Cal‐EPA DTSC or RWQCB, and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 20 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial regulatory agency, including but not limited to the Cal‐EPA DTSC or RWQCB, and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services.  Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil.  If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility.Section 5.9—Hydrology and Water Quality The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM HYD‐2a: The City shall develop and implement water conservation measures to continue to reduce the per capita water use to 247 gallons per capita per day by General Plan Buildout. Confirm development and implementation of water conservation measures. Ongoing City of FresnoMM HYD‐2b: The City shall continue to be an active participant in the Kings Water Authority and the implementation of the Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. Confirm active participation in the Kings Water Authority and implementation of Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.Ongoing City of FresnoSection 5.11—Noise The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM NOI‐2: Any noise‐sensitive land use development that would construct structures within 80 feet of the edge of existing or future rail lines within the Plan Areas shall be required to prepare a vibration impact analysis to determine potential vibration impacts from railroad operations and to mitigate any impacts to below the FTA’s significance criteria shown in Table 5.11 8. Confirm preparation of a vibration impact analysis. Prior to construction of project City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 21 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.14—Transportation and Traffic The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Cumulative MM TRANS‐2a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted intersections reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies that reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  When needed, confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 22 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐2b: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  The monitoring program will identify improvements that are needed, if any, to mitigate the project’s impacts to traffic operations at these impacted locations.  If the monitoring program determines that the proposed project causes an intersection to operate at unacceptable levels (LOS E or F), or adds more than five seconds of delay to an intersection already operating at an unacceptable LOS, the City of Fresno shall implement mitigation measures that improve operations to mitigate the project’s impact, if feasible.  These measures may include, but are not limited to, feasible TDM strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips or physical improvements, such as adding traffic signals, turn lanes, travel lanes, roundabouts, or the specific improvements listed for each impacted study intersection below. • Belmont Avenue/Golden State Boulevard‐Wesley Avenue ‐ Signalize the intersection. ‐ Widen the westbound approach to two through lanes and one protected left‐turn lane. • Belmont Avenue/Palm Avenue ‐ Convert the northbound shared through/left‐turn lane to separate through and left‐turn lanes. ‐ Convert the eastbound and westbound shared through/left‐turn lane to a single left‐turn lane. ‐ Convert the left‐turn movements to protected phasing. ‐ Add a second eastbound left‐turn lane. ‐ Convert the eastbound shared through/right‐turn lane to separate through and right‐turn lanes. ‐ Add a second northbound left‐turn lane. ‐ Optimize the signal timings. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  When needed, confirm implementation of mitigation measures such as, feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 23 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM TRANS‐3a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted intersections reach LOS D operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area. ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 24 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MMTRANS‐3b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoCumulative MM TRANS‐3a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted intersections reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 25 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐3b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoProject‐specific MM TRANS‐4a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted locations at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted locations reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area. ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted locations are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 26 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐4b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoCumulative MM TRANS‐4a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted locations at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted locations reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: • Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area. ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted locations are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 27 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐4b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoProject‐specific MM TRANS‐5a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic queuing at the impacted ramps at least every 5 years.  Once the queues at the impacted ramps extend into the deceleration zone as defined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic queuing at impacted ramps are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 28 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐5b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoCumulative MM TRANS‐5a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic queuing at the impacted ramps at least every 5 years.  Once the queues at the impacted ramps extend into the deceleration zone as defined in Caltrans HDM during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic queuing at impacted ramps are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 29 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐5b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approval City of FresnoProject‐specific MM TRANS‐7: The City shall update the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan to reflect the proposed changes in the DNCP and FCSP.  The implementation of this mitigation measure would maintain consistency among the City’s plans for bicycle facilities and lessen proposed project’s impact to less than significant. Review and confirm updated Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master plan. Prior to final project approval  City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM TRANS‐8: Implementation of the DNCP and FCSP would include improvements to the existing at‐grade railroad crossings to ensure that they have adequate vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and that the crossing gates meet PUC standards.  The implementation of these improvements would improve conditions at at‐grade railroad crossings and lessen potential project impacts to less than significant. Inspect at‐grade railroad crossings. Prior to final project approvals  City of Fresno  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Exhibit G Resolution Certifying final Program EIR 1. Final EIR a. Response to Comment and Errata b. Draft EIR (available at http://www.fresno.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C67797A8- 18B8-4FD2-859F- 1EC72BA629EF/0/31680017FresnoDowntownDra ftEIR.pdf) c. Appendences A-K (available at http://www.fresno.gov/Government/DepartmentDir ectory/DARM/AdvancedPlanning/EIR.htm) 2. CEQA findings of Fact a. Significant Unavoidable Impacts b. Impacts Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance c. Feasibility of Project Alternatives 3. Statement of Overriding Considerations 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program H AMERICA | E FIRSTCARBON ty of Fres Co EUROPE | AFR SOLUTIONS.CO sno Down orridor Sp ICA | AUSTRA OM  ntown Ne pecific Pla Ci LIA | ASIA R Final  eighborh an, and D ity of Fre Developm Co   Response Environm hoods Com Downtow sno, Fres ent and Reso ontact: Sophia Contact: Jas e to Comm mental Im mmunity wn Develo sno Count ource Manage 2 a Pagoulatos,  FirstC 7265 N. Firs son Brandma Kim Burnel Dat ments on  mpact Rep y Plan, Fu opment C ty, Califo Prepare City of Fr ement Depart 2600 Fresno S Fresno, CA 9 559.621 Planning Ma Prepare Carbon Solu st Street, Suit Fresno, CA 9 an, Project Dir ll, Project Ma te: October 7,  the   port  lton  Code   rnia  ed for:        resno  tment  Street  93721  1.8003  nager  ed by:  utions  te 101  93720  rector  nager  , 2016  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents FirstCarbon Solutions iii Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 00-01 TOC.docx Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1-1 Section 1: List of Commenters ..................................................................................................... 2-1 Section 2: Responses to Comments ............................................................................................. 3-1 Section 3: Errata.......................................................................................................................... 4-1 Section 4: List of Exhibits Exhibit 5.10-3a: Proposed DNCP Land Use and Zoning Designations ................................................. 4-7 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Introduction FirstCarbon Solutions 1-1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 01-00 Introduction.docx INTRODUCTION SECTION 1: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088, the City of Fresno has evaluated the comments received on the City of Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and Downtown Development Code Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Draft EIR was released for public review and comment from August 5, 2016 through September 12, 2016. This Response to Comments (including the Errata) comprise the Final EIR for use by the City of Fresno and responsible agencies in their review of the proposed project. This Response to Comments document is organized as follows: • Section 1: Introduction. • Section 2: List of Commenters. Provides a list of agencies, organizations, and individuals that commented on the Draft EIR. • Section 3: Responses to Comments. Includes a copy of all of the letters received and provides responses to comments on environmental issues describing the disposition of the issues, explaining the Draft EIR analysis, supporting the Draft EIR conclusions, and/or providing clarifying information or corrections, as appropriate. This section is organized with a copy of the comment letter followed by the corresponding responses. • Section 4: Errata. Includes the errata, clarifications, and additions to the Draft EIR. Additionally, these Responses to Comments and Errata clarify, amplify, and expand on the fully adequate analysis and significance conclusions that were already set forth in the Draft EIR for public review. CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 makes clear that such clarifications and amplifications are appropriate under CEQA and do not require recirculation of the EIR. Specifically, Section 15088.5 states: a) A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term “information” can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not “significant” unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project’s proponents have declined to implement. “Significant new information” requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that: 1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Introduction Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 1-2 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 01-00 Introduction.docx 2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. 3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project’s proponents decline to adopt it. 4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. b) Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. As set forth in more detail in these Responses to Comments and Errata, none of the clarifications or amplifications set forth herein change the significance conclusions presented in the Draft EIR or substantially alter the analysis presented for public review. Furthermore, the Draft EIR circulated for public review was fully adequate under CEQA such that meaningful public review was not precluded. Thus, the clarifications provided in these Responses to Comments and Errata do not constitute significant new information that might trigger recirculation. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report List of Commenters FirstCarbon Solutions 2-1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 02-00 Commenters.docx LIST OF COMMENTERS SECTION 2: A list of public agencies, organizations, and individuals who provided comments on the Draft EIR through the close of the public review period ending September 12, 2016 is presented below. Each comment has been assigned a code. Individual comments within each correspondence have been numbered so comments can be crossed-referenced with responses. The text of the correspondence is reprinted in Section 3, Responses to Comments, immediately followed by the corresponding response. Table 2-1: List of Commenters Code Commenter Comment Date A Caltrans, District 6, Michael Navarro September 12, 2016 B California Public Utilities Commission, Ken Chiang August 2, 2016 C California Public Utilities Commission, Marvin Kennix August 2, 2016 D Department of Public Works and Planning, Jeremy Shaw September 9, 2016 E Fresno Irrigation District, Laurence Kimura September 8, 2016 F Fresno’s Historic Preservation Program, Karana Hattersley-Drayton August 23, 2016 G.1 Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, Ashley Werner September 12, 2016 G.2 Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, Ashley Werner October 9, 2014 G.3 Department of Housing and Community Development, Glen A. Campora August 11, 2016 H Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Wendell Lum September 13, 2016 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of F Respons     FirstCar Y:\Publicatio SECT In acc City o Neigh Code, the D the EI   Fresno – DNCP, FC se to Comments o rbon Solutions ons\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\316 RTION 3:  cordance with of Fresno (City hborhoods Co , and the Draf raft EIR.  Mor IR are addres CSP, and DDC on the Final Enviro 680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\3168001 ESPONSES h Section 150 y), as the lead ommunity Pla ft EIR (State C re detailed re sed under se onmental Impact R 17 Sec 03‐00 Response to Com S TO  COM 88 of the Cali d agency, eval n, the Fulton Clearinghouse sponses to co parate cover  Report mments.docx  MMENTS  ifornia  Enviro luated the co  Corridor Spe e No. 201204 omments on t with the staff onmental Qua mments rece ecific Plan, the 1009).  The re the Plans and f report.  ality Act (CEQ eived on the D e Downtown  esponses pro d Code that a Responses to Com QA) Guidelines Downtown  Developmen ovided focus o re not directe mments 3‐1  s, the  nt  on  ed at  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK A-1 A-2 Letter A Page 1 of 3 A-3 A-4 A-5 A-6 A-2 Letter A Page 2 of 3 A-7 A-8 A-9 Letter A Page 3 of 3 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐7  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter A: Department of Transportation, Michael Navarro, September 12, 2016 Response to Comment A‐1  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the specific plan includes  creating a quality walking experience by improving transit, parking, regions air quality, and  prioritizing economic development over traffic congestion concerns.  Response to Comment A‐2  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the proposed transportation  improvements mitigate impacts to the environment and to the state highway system.   Response to Comment A‐3  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the proposed plan provides real  mitigation measures that encourages mode shift and encourage and considers as mitigation  reduction of headways, addition of transit routes, ride share incentives, and other trip reduction  strategies that would result in improving air quality and real reduction in trips to the state highway  system.  Response to Comment A‐4  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the City will monitor AM and PM  peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at regular intervals as determined by the  City Traffic  Engineer.  In addition, DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g will implement  feasible Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips  to/from the project area.  Response to Comment A‐5  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that the City will implement feasible  Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to/from the  project area.  Comment acknowledged.  The City of Fresno will consider including the nine (9)  additional downtown locations identified in Comment A‐6 in the next (2018) update to the TSMI fee  program.  Response to Comment A‐6  Comment acknowledged.  The City of Fresno should also consider including the nine (9) additional  downtown locations identified in Comment A‐6 in a future update to the TSMI fee program.  Response to Comment A‐7  Comment acknowledged.  The City of Fresno wholly supports the Smart Growth Principles of the  “California Interregional Blueprint” and the “San Joaquin Valley Regional Blueprint; Vision for the  Valley.”  Response to Comment A‐8  Comment acknowledged.  The commenter is correct in stating that on pages 6 and 8 of the DEIR  Section in 5.14, it is indicated that FCSP Policy 9‐1‐13 recommends that the loop entrance from  Broadway Street to southbound SR‐41 should be removed and replaced with a direct entrance ramp   City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐8 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment A‐9  The commenter’s proposed modifications to provide a full interchange at Van Ness Avenue will be  considered as a project alternative when the City of Fresno and Caltrans undertake a Project Study  Report/Project Development Support (PSR/PDS) for the SR‐41/Van Ness Avenue interchange.    STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 320 WEST 4TH STREET, SUITE 500 LOS ANGELES, CA 90013 (213) 576-7083 August 2, 2016 Sophia Pagoulatos City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 93721 Dear Sophia: Re: SCH 2012041009 Fresno (FRESNO) Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan - DEIR The California Public Utilities Commission (Commission) has jurisdiction over the safety of highway- rail crossings (crossings) in California. The California Public Utilities Code requires Commission approval for the construction or alteration of crossings and grants the Commission exclusive power on the design, alteration, and closure of crossings in California. The Commission Rail Crossings Engineering Branch (RCEB) has received the Draft Environment Import Report (DEIR) from the State Clearinghouse for the proposed City of Fresno (City) Downtown Neighborhoods Community, Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Development Code project. According to the DEIR, the project area includes active railroad tracks. RCEB recommends that the City add language to the project plan so that any future development adjacent to or near the rail right- of-way (ROW) is planned with the safety of the rail corridor in mind. New developments may increase traffic volumes not only on streets and at intersections, but also at at-grade crossings. This includes considering pedestrian circulation patterns or destinations with respect to railroad ROW and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Mitigation measures to consider include the planning for grade separations for major thoroughfares, improvements to existing at-grade crossings due to increase in traffic volumes, and continuous vandal resistant fencing or other appropriate barriers to prevent trespassers onto the railroad ROW. If you have any questions in this matter, please contact me at (213) 576-7076, ykc@cpuc.ca.gov. Sincerely, Ken Chiang, P.E. Utilities Engineer Rail Crossings and Engineering Branch Safety and Enforcement Division C: State Clearinghouse B-1 Letter B Page 1 of 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐11  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter B: California Public Utilities Commission, Ken Chiang, August 2, 2016 Response to Comment B‐1  Impact TRANS‐8 and Mitigation TRANS‐8 identify that implementation of the DNCP and FCSP would  include improvements to the existing at‐grade railroad crossings to ensure that they have adequate  vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and that the crossing gates meet PUC standards.  The  implementation of these improvements would improve conditions at at‐grade railroad crossings and  lessen potential project impact to less than significant.  The FCSP includes the following policies related to transportation and circulation near railroad  crossings:   Policy 9‐14‐1: Add sidewalks and enhance existing pedestrian facilities and safety at all  railroad crossings.   Policy 9‐14‐2: Provide safe and well‐designed bicycle crossings of the railroad right‐of‐way at  all places identified in the Fresno Bicycle Master Plan.    The DNCP includes the following policies related to transportation and circulation near railroad  crossing:   Policy 3.3.4: Utilize to the extent feasible, a tiered system of flexible, multi‐modal Level of  Service (LOS) criteria to evaluate the transportation performance of streets while generally  striving to provide for an automobile level of service (LOS) of “D” or better for street segments  and intersections located outside of the Core Area (bound by State Routes 99, 41, and 180).   Policy 3.9.5: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission, ensure that  equipment and design strategies used in railroad crossing improvements integrate  appropriately with their surrounding location.  (FSCP 7‐13‐3).   Policy 3.9.6: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission and as situations  allow and funding becomes available, support an increase in the number of pedestrian,  bicycle, and vehicle crossings of railroads and enhance existing crossings in order to improve  safety for all modes and access for pedestrians and cyclists.  (FSCP 7‐13‐4) (FCSP 7‐13‐1).      THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 1 From:Kennix, Marvin L. <marvin.kennix@cpuc.ca.gov> Sent:Tuesday, August 02, 2016 3:04 PM To:Sophia Pagoulatos Subject:Downtown Plans and Code Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2012041009) Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged HelloSophia: IamtheUtilitiesEngineer(CPUC)whoisresponsibleforrailcrossingsafetyintheFresnoarea.I’djustliketo “piggyͲback”onmycoͲworker’scommentsandspecificallyemphasizetheinstallationofsidewalksacrossthe trackswhendevelopmentcausesrailcrossingsorsurroundingareastobemodified.Inthepast,wehaveseen thattheCityhasendedsidewalksjustbeforethetracksratherthanhavethemcrossthetracks.Wewouldlike theCitytorefrainfromthepracticeofendingsidewalksjustbeforethetracks. Thanks, Marvin L. Kennix MarvinKennix UtilitiesEngineer RailCrossingsandEngineeringBranch SafetyandEnforcementDivision CPUC (916)928Ͳ3809 C-1 Letter C Page 1 of 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐15  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter C: California Public Utilities Commission, Marvin Kennix, August 2, 2016 Response to Comment C‐1  Comment acknowledged.  The FCSP includes the following policies related to transportation and  circulation near railroad crossings:   Policy 9‐14‐1: Add sidewalks and enhance existing pedestrian facilities and safety at all  railroad crossings.   Policy 9‐14‐2: Provide safe and well‐designed bicycle crossings of the railroad right‐of‐way at  all places identified in the Fresno Bicycle Master Plan.    Impact TRANS‐8 and Mitigation TRANS‐8 identify that implementation of the DNCP and FCSP would  include improvements to the existing at‐grade railroad crossings to ensure that they have adequate  vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and that the crossing gates meet PUC standards.  The  implementation of these improvements would improve conditions at at‐grade railroad crossings and  lessen potential project impact to less than significant.  The DNCP includes the following policies related to transportation and circulation near railroad  crossing:   Policy 3.3.4: Utilize to the extent feasible, a tiered system of flexible, multi‐modal Level of  Service (LOS) criteria to evaluate the transportation performance of streets while generally  striving to provide for an automobile level of service (LOS) of “D” or better for street segments  and intersections located outside of the Core Area (bound by State Routes 99, 41, and 180).   Policy 3.9.5: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission, ensure that  equipment and design strategies used in railroad crossing improvements integrate  appropriately with their surrounding location.  (FSCP 7‐13‐3).   Policy 3.9.6: In consultation with the California Public Utilities Commission and as situations  allow and funding becomes available, support an increase in the number of pedestrian,  bicycle, and vehicle crossings of railroads and enhance existing crossings in order to improve  safety for all modes and access for pedestrians and cyclists.  (FSCP 7‐13‐4) (FCSP 7‐13‐1).      THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK D-1 D-2 D-3 Letter D Page 1 of 2 D-3 CONT D-4 D-5 Letter D Page 2 of 2 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐19  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter D: Count of Fresno Department of Public Works and Planning, Jeremy Shaw, September 9, 2016 Response to Comment D‐1  This comment notes that the City has classified Belmont, Hughes, and Olive as collector streets, and  Marks as arterial, and suggests that the classification of Belmont as a collector road is in conflict with  the County General Plan, which classifies Belmont as an arterial.  The roadway classifications  proposed in the plan would only apply to the roadways within the City of Fresno.    Response to Comment D‐2  The roadway design and cross sections proposed in the plan for collector and arterial roadways  would only apply to the roadway segments located within the City of Fresno.  Response to Comment D‐3  The City of Fresno High Speed Rail (HSR) Station Area Master Plan includes provisions for ridesharing  drop‐off and pick‐up.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment D‐4  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment D‐5  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Letter E Page 1 of  E-1 E-2 Letter E Page 2 of  E-3 E-4 E-5 E-6 E-7 E-8 E-9 Letter E Page 3 of  E-9 CONT E-10 E-11 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐25  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter E: Fresno Irrigation District, Laurence Kimura, September 8, 2016 Response to Comment E‐1  The City understands and acknowledges that Fresno Irrigation District (FID) would be a “Responsible  Agency” for projects that encompass FID facilities or when project infrastructure requirements  require modification of off‐site FID facilities.  The City considers FID to be a “partnering” agency and  has established a practice of routing all development project applications to FID so that there is  adequate opportunity for the irrigation district to review and comment on specific projects that  potentially impact FID canals and easements.  Response to Comment E‐2  The City understands and acknowledges that Fresno Irrigation District (FID) would be a “Responsible  Agency” for projects that encompass FID facilities or when project infrastructure requirements  require modification of off‐site FID facilities.  The City considers FID to be a “partnering” agency and  has established a practice of routing all development project applications to FID so that there is  adequate opportunity for the irrigation district to review and comment on specific projects that  potentially impact FID canals and easements.  Response to Comment E‐3  The Fresno General Plan MEIR includes policies and mitigation measures to reduce impacts to water  supply to less than significant through implementation of water conservation measures (required  through implementation of MM HYD‐2a and MM HYD‐2b) to decrease future demand.  Response to Comment E‐4  The commenter accurately states that Fresno Irrigation District (FID) shall supply the City an  estimated 108,200 acre‐feet per year (afy) from 2010 increasing to 132,400 afy by 2035.  The  estimates are consistent with the City’s Urban Water Management Plan.  In 2014, FID supplied the  City with approximately 62,000 acre‐feet and in 2015 the supply decreased to approximately 43,000  acre‐feet.  The commenter identifies a potentially significant impact to water supplies as the yearly  water supply depends heavily on the amount of precipitation produced for each year particularly in  wet years, FID can supply more water, and in dry years, the number can be significantly less.  FID  would like to see the City keep progressing towards the goal of a balanced water supply, as there are  concerns about the rate of development relative to the progress in balancing the water usage if the  necessary offsets for the increased water demands are not accomplished consistent with water  conservation goals.  At  the point where water supply needs would exceed the supply capacity of  Fresno’s portfolio, additional supplies would need to be developed and/or additional conservation  measures would need to be implemented.  As a further protection in the currently adopted General  Plan, the City would be required to implement Mitigation Measure HYD‐2a part of Impact USS‐4,  which would alleviate future water supply demand through conservation, and ensure that adequate  water supply capacity is provided in order to accommodate future demand prior to approval of new  projects.  The commenter also suggested recommended changes in the document.  The second to last  paragraph on page 5.15‐2 has been revised as follows:  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐26 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  The Surface Water Treatment Facility (SWTF) located in northeast Fresno receives supplies from the  United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), FID contract for Kings River Water, and a wastewater  recycle exchange agreement with the Fresno Irrigation District.  The USBR would supply 60,000 acre‐ feet per year (afy) in year 2010 through year 2025, and the FID would supply an estimated 108,200  afy in year 2010 (125,543 afy actual) (increasing to 132,400 afy by 2035) for the Kings River  contracted water., and the FID wastewater exchange agreement would supply 13,800 afy in year  2010 through year 2025 (City of Fresno 2016).  Response to Comment E‐5  This comment noted a factual error in this EIR.  The third sentence of the last paragraph on page  5.15‐3 has been revised as follows:  Surface water obtained under this agreement is treated at the City’s SWTF along with its other  surface supplies, and pumped into the potable distribution system.  Response to Comment E‐6  This comment describes the history and prior rights of the Fresno Irrigation District.  Comment  acknowledged.  Response to Comment E‐7  The commenter states that many FID canals will be impacted by future road improvements.  The City  acknowledges that future development in accordance with the Plans and Code could impact FID  canals.  The City intends to work with FID to address these potential impacts as development is  proposed.  Comment acknowledged.  Response to Comment E‐8  The City acknowledges that FID would have a right to review projects involving a crossing of an FID  facility, and would apply FID requirements within its jurisdiction.  Response to Comment E‐9  The City acknowledges that FID would have a right to review projects involving a crossing of an FID  facility, and would apply FID requirements within its jurisdiction.  Response to Comment E‐10  The City acknowledges FIDs water routings and construction window.  Response to Comment E‐11  The City acknowledges that FID’s prohibition of discharged into its canals.    DEVELOPMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT August 23, 2016 To: Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager From: Karana Hattersley-Drayton, Historic Preservation Project Manager Re: Comments for EIR, Downtown, Fulton Corridor Plans and Downtown Code The Historic Preservation Commission at its public hearing August 22nd, 2016 reviewed the EIR. Assistant Director Dan Zack gave a Power Point Presentation that was focused on the plans and Code. One of the Commission architects raised a concern about the Neoclassical form of base/shaft/cornice for commercial buildings from the form based code and wondered whether this rule will stifle modernism and creativity in general. The archaeologist on the Commission wanted to ensure that contractors properly trained their construction crews on archaeological protocols (as Will and I did for the zoo team). I think it would be prudent to add a sentence about this to MM CUL-3, perhaps, “The archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archaeological resources.” She was also concerned that if encapsulation of a site is approved as a mitigation measure, that there should be some monitoring plan adopted as well. Another Commissioner appreciated the two mitigation measures MM-CUL-1 and 2 for historic resources (which we lobbied for following the Administrative Draft). The following staff recommendations were supported by the Commission: 1) Correction: Block 50 not Block 51 is the area of Chinatown that was called out in the Greenwood Archaeological report as particularly sensitive (5.5-43). 2) Pursuant to MM CUL-1, resources evaluated during development projects should also be evaluated for their potential for listing on Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources and not just for the California and National Registers (5.5-40). 3) The verb for MM CUL-1 needs to be revised from “should” to “shall,” which has greater potency in an environmental document. Additionally, there are a few minor typos in the EIR, page 5.5-33 Archaeological Assessment prepared (“d” missing off of two paragraphs. P. 5.5-34 Third sentence purpose of these maps was to “aid”… p. 5.5=36 Proposed “L” Street Historic District (“L” is missing). Also, in reviewing the two plans I found that several corrections from my memo of July 11 th 2016 (for the Downtown Neighborhoods Plan) were not incorporated: p. 6.2 Downtown Neighborhoods--- Chandler Field is one of four officially designated historic districts…. p. 6:4 Huntington Boulevard… change out the “potential…” Historic map on 6:5… what is the large light purple area? F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 F-6 F-7 F-8 F-9 F-10 Letter F Page 1 of 2 p. 6.4 The City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance has also been amended in 2009, 2012 and 2015. p. 6.4 City of Fresno Historic Preservation Database. Sentence makes no sense: “Many potential historic resources that have not been formally designated by the City are absent from the database.” Database includes all properties that have been designated but additionally, any property which has been included in any historic survey or entitlement, whether the property is designated, eligible or not. 6.6 The Historic Preservation Database is already on line. 6.5.1 As is the New Deal Walking Tour (on the City’s Historic Preservation page). I just wonder about continuing to repeat recommendations from four years ago that have already been addressed. 2|Page F-12 F-13 F-11 F-14 F-15 Letter F Page 2 of 2 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐29  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter F: Historic Preservation Project Manager, Karana Hattersley‐Drayton, August 23, 2016 Response to Comment F‐1  This comment questions whether or not modernism and creativity in general will be stifled, based on  the form‐based code.  This concern does not alter the environmental evaluations and findings  identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐2  The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL‐3.  The following addition has been  made to MM CUL‐3:  Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas  determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this  Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City‐ approved archaeologist.  The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction  crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archeological  measures.  The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a  “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archeological measures  prior to the initiation of any ground‐disturbing activities at these locations.  The  archaeologist will discuss the project‐specific sensitivity potential to encounter both  prehistoric and historic materials; present (verbally or graphically) examples of  potential types of prehistoric and historic materials that may be encountered;  discuss the responsibilities and empowerments of the cultural resources monitor(s);  and briefly address the procedures to address inadvertent finds.    Response to Comment F‐3  This comment states that the commenter appreciates considerations for cultural resources  mitigation measures.  This comment is noted.  Since there is no specific comment on the  environmental conclusions of the Draft Master EIR, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐4  The commenter noted an error regarding locations used.  The first sentence following MM CUL‐5 on  page 5.5‐43 has been revised as follows:  Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any  ground‐disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 5150 Site,  Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the  current investigations.    Response to Comment F‐5  The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL‐1.  The following edit is located at  second bullet point under MM CUL‐1 on page 5.5‐40.   City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐30 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx   Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and  potential standing with Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources, the CRHR or NRHP, as  necessary.  Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be  summarized in the Phase I report.    Response to Comment F‐6  The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL‐1.  The following edits are located  under MM CUL‐1 on page 5.5‐40.   In accordance with Objective HCR‐2 (specifically HCR‐2‐a through HCR‐2‐c) of the  Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all specific  development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should shall undergo a  standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment,  Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review.     This CEQA‐level evaluation should shall include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for  the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography  and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic‐ age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object  evaluations.  The report should shall also address any project‐specific archaeological  sensitivity determinations and additional project‐specific proposed mitigation measures,  as necessary.    Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should shall be evaluated for  significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local register of Historic Resources, the  CRHR or NRHP, as necessary.  Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures  should shall be summarized in the Phase I report.   To  ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings,  the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are required to be  completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information  Center with the completed Phase I report.    Completed Phase I reports should shall be submitted to the City for incorporation into  their local databases.    Response to Comment F‐7  The commenter noted typographical errors.  The second sentence under Project‐specific Impact  Analysis on page 5.5‐33 has been revised as follows:   The most recent review of cultural resources (both historic and prehistoric) within  the DNCP and FCSP areas is contained in the Archaeological Resources Assessment  Report prepared by Greenwood and Associates in February of 2012.    The first sentence under Records Search Results on page 5.5‐33 has been revised as follows:  As part of the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepared by Greenwood  and Associates, a records search was conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley  Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐31  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  The second sentence on page 5.5‐34 was been revised as follows:   The purpose of these maps was to aid insurance agents in assessing the degree of  fire risk associated with a particular property.    The second sentence on page 5.5‐34 and the second bullet point on page 5.5‐36 have been revised  as follows:   Proposed: “L” Street Historic District.  Boundaries: Van  Ness, Amador, Divisadero, N Street,  Stanislaus, M Street to Calaveras (FCSP/DNCP)    Response to Comment F‐8  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐9  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐10  This comment questioned an issue that is not applicable to this document.  This comment has been  noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental evaluations and findings  identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐11  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐12  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐13  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐32 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment F‐14  The commenter identified recommended revisions that are not applicable to this document.  This  comment has been noted.  These recommended revisions do not alter the environmental  evaluations and findings identified in the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions  of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment F‐15  The commenter identified concerns that not applicable to this document.  This comment has been  noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).    September 12, 2016 Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department 2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065 Fresno, CA 83721 Attn: Long Range Planning Sent via Email Re: Comments on the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan & Associated Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Dear Ms. Pagoulatos: We are writing to provide comments on the City of Fresno’s Draft Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan (“DNCP”, “Draft Plan” or “Plan”), Draft Downtown Development Code (“Draft DDC” or “Draft Code”), Fulton Specific Corridor Plan (“FSCP”) and associated Draft Environmental Impact Report (“DEIR”). Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments. Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability works alongside residents of disadvantaged communities throughout the San Joaquin Valley and Coachella Valley to eliminate injustice and secure equal access to opportunity regardless of wealth, race, income or place. Our comments on the Draft DNCP, Code, and EIR are based upon our extensive work alongside residents in the Plan Area in Southeast, Southwest, Downtown, and Jane Addams neighborhoods and those neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the the Plan Area. These comments build upon comments we submitted to the City on Draft 2035 General Plan and Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (“DMEIR”) respectively dated August 8 and October 9, 2014. While the Draft DNCP, FCSP and DEIR contain many strengths, they also, as drafted, replicate and build upon flawed policies, analysis, and mitigation measures contained in the General Plan and MEIR that would further entrench disparities in access to opportunity and a healthy environment in the City. We therefore incorporate our comments on the 2035 General Plan DMEIR herein by reference and are providing you with a copy of those comments along with this letter as Exhibit A. The Draft Plan contains many policies reflective of the desires of existing residents for a healthy neighborhoods with basic amenities and services needed for residents to thrive. Through these comments we emphasize our support for investment in the Downtown area but urge the City to ensure that all downtown related planning documents target policies, programs 1 LETTER G.1 Page 1 of 16 G.1-1 G.1-2 and investment across all neighborhoods within and adjacent to the Planning Area. While the Draft DNCP so eloquently identifies key deficits related to the health and wellbeing of the downtown neighborhoods - including but not limited to high levels of poverty, disparities in health outcomes, lack of quality and affordable housing, high asthma and other respiratory diseases, lack of access to healthy foods, etc. - it completely fails to identify strong goals, policies and implementation measures focused on ameliorating such deficits. Further as we will note throughout our comments there is strong preference, through policies, statements regarding resource allocation and implementation measures, for sub areas located within the FCSP that serve to the detriment of adjacent neighborhoods. Prioritization of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan at the Expense of Downtown Neighborhoods The lack of detail in the DNCP as compared to the FCSP demonstrates that the City’s prioritization of the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Area may come at the expense of improvements and improved connectivity in the surrounding Downtown Neighborhoods. The FCSP contains language that effectively prioritizes projects in the planning area to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods. The draft states that in the case of near, mid and long term identified priority projects for both public infrastructure and public-private partnerships, the City will direct all relevant resources and departmental actions (in transportation, public utilities, transit and other fiscal incentives, public realm design etc) to support their implementation.” The draft FCSP further identifies goals with supporting policy and implementation programs that focus on transforming downtown into a vibrant set of neighborhoods yet fails to incorporate policies and implementation measures focused on addressing inherent poverty, health, housing, transportation and economic challenges of families living below the poverty line identified in the draft DNCP. While the draft FCSP contains policies, programs and implementation measures focused on creating resilient, healthy neighborhoods, the draft fails to incorporate similar policies, programs and implementation measures for low income communities and communities of color currently residing in the FCSP area. Instead of protecting and building upon the culture and resiliency found in such neighborhoods, the City is accelerating displacement and gentrification risk and further perpetuating a cycle of poverty that has long plagued neighborhoods in the southern part of the City. In comparison to the DNCP, the FCSP contains specific implementation measures that target limited City resources to planning area that many adjacent and surrounding neighborhoods should be able to drawn upon to effectively spur revitalization. Additionally, the draft FCSP includes strategies that call for the formation of an interdisciplinary working group focused on the FCSD; tying of FCSD implementation framework to annual individual workplans of all departments and to Capital Improvement Plans; and focus of financial resources and physical improvements in concentrated areas of the Fulton Corridor. While these strategies 2 LETTER G.1 Page 2 of 16 G.1-2 CONT G.1-3 G.1-4 may be well intended, they provide for explicit prioritization of city resources and personnel solely to the FCSP area without directing such attention to surrounding neighborhoods. Public Participation Prior to Downtown Neighborhoods Plan Adoption The Draft Plan describes community engagement activities performed by the City during the initial development of the Plan in 2010 but does not identify any activities following that period or between release of the DEIR and adoption that the City will do to engage the public and ensure public input informs the final plan. Especially given that 6 years have passed since the City conducted public engagement in developing the draft plan, it is critical that the City ensure that residents can provide input at the final stages of the process. Accordingly, the City should develop an outreach plan in coordination with community leaders and CBOs and work collaboratively to implement it. The City must demonstrate how feedback on the draft plan provided in 2011 and during the above suggested outreach efforts is incorporated into the final plan and informs development of an implementation section of the plan. Integrating Neighborhoods and Conformance with other Plans While the DNCP notes that neighborhood integration is important, the Plan fails to include policies and implementation measures that will ensure integration among Downtown Neighborhoods and integration with neighborhoods beyond the area covered in the DNCP. Additionally, the Plan should include goals and policies designed to ensure that the Plan is harmonized with other plans and planning efforts, including the FCSP, City’s Active Transportation Plan, Fresno Council of Government Active Transportation Plan, Parks Master Plan, Southwest Specific Community Plan, Southeast Specific Community Plan and additional plans noted in the introductory section of the DNCP. Lack of information related to the Available of Public and Private Grants and Loans while the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out with specificity funding opportunities. The DNCP does not identify opportunities to pursue many available public and private grants and loans to implement the Plan’s goals and policies, including but not limited to state Cap and Trade funds, including the CalFire Urban Forestry Grants, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, weatherization programs, EOC support for solar and community-solar projects. In contrast, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan lays out in detail public and private funding sources available for each priority project and even includes cost projections for some components. The lack of detail in the DNCP undermines our confidence that some of the stronger goals and policies will be implemented. Revitalization Focus Should Ensure that All Downtown Neighborhoods Benefit The DNCP, and the City’s actions to implement it, must ensure that all downtown neighborhoods benefit from the City’s renewed focus on investing in existing central core 3 LETTER G.1 Page 3 of 16 G.1-4 CONT G.1-5 G.1-6 G.1-7 G.1-8 communities. For example, Goals and Policies: 2.2: Ensure that City-wide policies encourage development in the Downtown and discourage subsidized development in outlying areas of Fresno - must be clarified to ensure that such attention extend to all downtown neighborhoods, not just the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area. While we understand and applaud the City’s interest in attracting private investment, the DNCP must facilitate investment and revitalization in areas and neighborhoods surrounding the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area in addition to to the subset of downtown neighborhoods in the FCSP area. An exclusive, or almost exclusive focus, on the FCSP area will undermine the goals and policies included in the broader DNCP area and adjacent neighborhoods. Given that projected household size in the FCSP area is fewer than 2 individuals, and projected average household size in the broader downtown area is more than 4 individuals a preference for investment in the FCSP as compared to the broader Downtown Neighborhoods have a disproportionate and negative impact on families, in particular lower income families and non-white families. The Plan Must Provide Adequate Housing Opportunities to Meet the Needs of Existing and Future Low-Income Households As we have explained to the City in detail in previous written and oral comments, the City and the Downtown Neighborhoods has a severe shortage of affordable housing to meet the housing needs of lower-income residents. According to the City’s Adopted 2015-2023 Housing Element, over 50% of residents in Fresno are “housing-cost burdened”, paying over ⅓ of their income on housing costs. Lower-income residents, and lower-income renters in particular, are hit the hardest by the City’s lack of affordable housing, with 88% of Extremely-Low Income (“ELI”) and 76% of Very-Low Income (“VLI”) households overpaying on rent and 93% of ELI and 83% of VLI renter households overpaying on rent. Due to the shortage of affordable housing options for lower-income residents in Fresno, many lower-income residents are forced to live in substandard housing, live over-crowded housing, and are vulnerable to displacement due to small increases in housing costs and costs of living. Given this context, it is critical that the DNCP, FCSP, and Downtown Code contain protections to ensure that lower-income residents have access to adequate safe and affordable housing options in the Draft Plan Area. As currently drafted, the Drafts fail to identify to do so and in fact, threaten to result in significant displacement of the existing lower-income resident population. A. The Plan Fails to Include Strong and Clear Policies to Prevent Displacement of Lower-Income Residents i. The Plan Must Include Strong and Clear Policies to Preserve and Create Affordable Housing Opportunities for Lower-Income Residents 4 LETTER G.1 Page 4 of 16 G.1-8 CONT G.1-9 G.1-10 G.1-11 The policies in the DNCP include broad support for affordable housing but lack strong and clear policies to facilitate its preservation and development. At the same time, the Plan contains various policy and vision statements supporting the creation of market-rate housing. The Plan’s emphasis on the development of market rate housing, focusing public investment to attract private investment, and support for high speed rail are all likely to drive up housing costs in the plan area, along with other factor such such as population growth and movement inland from the coast. The Final plan and the Final DEIR must include clear and specific protections for lower income residents from dislocation due to rising rent prices. ii. The Draft Plan Does Not Discuss or Plan to Address the Housing Needs of Extremely-Low and Very-Low Income Residents The Draft Plan is devoid of any mention of the housing needs of extremely-low (“ELI”) and very-low income (“VLI”) residents. ELI and VLI residents experience the highest rates of housing-cost burden in the City, are at high risk of homelessness, and are most vulnerable to the impact of increased housing costs and costs of living. ELI and VLI residents in the Plan Area are at risk of displacement due to focused and prolonged investment in the Downtown Neighborhoods, the introduction of High Speed Rail, and the introduction of market-rate housing to the Plan Area as projected by the Plan iii. Preservation of Affordable, High Quality Mobile Home Units As the Draft Plan notes, the Jane Addams neighborhood has several mobile home parks. The City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element states that mobile homes are an important source of affordable housing for lower-income residents, but that they are at risk of conversion as land values increase. Land values are likely to increase significantly over the life of the Plan, as the City directs resources towards Plan implementation, High-Speed Rail becomes a reality, and population growth reduces available land for housing. The Draft Plan includes no discussion of the risk of conversion of mobile home parks and no policies to promote and facilitate the preservation of affordable and high quality mobile home units. The Final Plan must do so in order to ensure that existing residents are not displaced and the City’s scarce sources of affordable housing are maintained. iii. The Plan Must Include Additional Multi-Family Zoning in the Neighborhoods Outside of Downtown Outside of the Downtown Neighborhood and especially in the Jane Addams neighborhood, the Plan lacks significant opportunities for the development of higher-density multi-family housing. 5 LETTER G.1 Page 5 of 16 G.1-11 CONT G.1-12 G.1-13 G.1-14 The Plans must identify additional higher density housing opportunities outside of the Downtown in order to meet the need for housing affordable to lower-income households and in order to qualify for state grants for affordable housing development which have minimum density requirements. In particular, we recommend that the Draft DNCP be revised to replace industrial land use designations along McKinley Avenue with multi-family and mixed-use housing designations and replace single-family housing designations on Olive Avenue with multi-family and mixed-use housing. B. The Draft Plans Fail to Facilitate the Maintenance and Development of Affordable Housing for Large Households Thousands of lower-income households in Fresno face over-crowding, due to the lack of affordable units large enough for large families. According to the Draft Plan, households in the Community Plan Area are larger than households in the City on average and are predominantly comprised of children. Households in the Plan Area, due to their size and the prevalence of poverty, can be expected to face even greater over-crowding than households in other areas of the City. The Draft Plan does not identify the prevelance of over-crowding in the Plan Area or include policies to facilitate the maintenance and development of housing appropriately sized for large households. The Final Plan must do so. D. The Plan Must Ensure that City Code Enforcement Activities Do Not Displace and/or Disproportionately Impact Low-Income Residents and Residents of Color We support policies in the DNCP for proactive code-enforcement and to prioritize code enforcement resources to address health and safety issues in rental housing (Policy 2.13.4). These policies however do not but must include explicit protections against displacement of renters and support to low-income homeowners in maintaining their properties, including resources for rehabilitation for lower-income property owners. Policy 2:17, requiring owners to maintain property, risks triggering displacement of lower-income property owners through the imposition of fines. The City should instead create and expand programs to assist low-income homeowners with home maintenance and code compliance. Policy 2.13.6 states that, “As resources become available, require owners to maintain all portions of their properties, including buildings, yards, and service areas, as well as adjacent sidewalks and alleys.” p. 2:17. This Policy should be pursued through education but must not be exercised in a manner that targets low-income residents and/or residents of color, which would result in violations of federal and state fair housing and civil rights laws. Policy 2.9.9 calls on the City to create “a coordinated program to acquire, demolish, and rebuild blighted, non-traditional multi-family residential buildings.” p. 2:15. This policy must be revised 6 LETTER G.1 Page 6 of 16 G.1-14 CONT G.1-15 G.1-16 to include protections for any tenants of such buildings, including protections to prevent displacement and to support relocation of residents in the same neighborhood. Parks, Recreational, and Community Facilities While the DCSP identifies the need for parks, recreational and community facilities throughout the planning area, there are insufficient programs and policies designed to address those needs, especially in the most park deficient neighborhoods. In general, the DNCP should include policies and implementation measures aimed at converting vacant parcels and abandoned property into parks and community facilities as well as policies and implementation measures to pursue grants such as CalFire Urban Forestry grants for park space acquisition and development and HCD Housing-Related Parks Grants. The DNCP should contain language focused on seamless integration to policies, programs and implementation measures identified through the City’s efforts to update the Parks Master Plan. Specifically for the Jane Addams and Southeast neighborhoods the draft DNCP notes that these neighborhoods are especially park space deficient. Figure 4-6 of the DNCP identifies potential areas for park space and recreational facilities in the Jane Addams area. We recommend that the City acquire the vacant plot at the southwest corner of Olive Avenue and Marks Avenue for a park and small library. Unfortunately the Land Use Map does not include any new parks in the Southeast neighborhood area. We recommend the City identify new park opportunities and include them in the map, for example the vacant lot in front of Roosevelt High School. Additionally, Southeast neighborhood residents suggest the following locations immediately adjacent to the Plan area for acquisition for the development of new parks and recreational facilities including: 1. The Hanoian building, which is for sale, and the adjacent vacant lot at the corner of Cedar and Butler. The City could also consider relocating the police department located on the lot to increase the space available for a recreational center. 2. The lot in front of the Mosqueda Center is ideal for a new park. It is a large lot; FAX routes 33 and 26 pass by the site; it is near a grocery store. The historic WW-II building should be made into a museum, not left in disrepair. Create a Multi-Modal Transportation Network that Meet Needs of All Downtown Neighborhoods The Draft Plan identifies creating a “multi-modal transportation network” as a strategy (p. 1:4). Public investment and infrastructure improvements must support active transportation in order to create such a multi-modal network. The vision statement for the Jane Addams neighborhood, which increases access to pedestrian facilities, is an example of supporting active transportation. The Draft Plan anticipates that it will remain consistent with the ATP Plan (p. 7). If inconsistencies arise, the Plan should be amended to reflect the ATP Plan. 7 LETTER G.1 Page 7 of 16 G.1-16 CONT G.1-17 G.1-18 G.1-19 G.1-20 Public Investments and Infrastructure Improvements to Support Active Transportation Investment priorities should emphasize public health and safety of children and access to key amenities and services. Policy 1:6 requires the City to target public investment to locations that have the greatest potential to attract private investment. This policy would continue to leave behind many low-income neighborhoods that lack basic infrastructure, such as sidewalks, street lights, and stormwater drainage. The City should prioritize investments to maximize health outcomes and ensure the safety of children walking to and from school, community centers and parks. Such prioritization policies include Policy 2.1.2 (installation of new sidewalks near schools), Policy 3.9.3 (identify priority corridors between residential areas and schools and pursue grants to facilitate this through traffic calming), Policy 5.7.2 (maintenance of public facilities), and Policy 5.7.3 (funding and timely construction of needed public facilities). For example, Hamilton Avenue & South Maple Avenue, just South of Mosqueda Center, needs street lights, flashing stop lights for pedestrians, and sidewalks. Infrastructure to prevent flooding and pooled water would also facilitate public health. “The Downtown Area is characterized by large impervious areas, is susceptible to localized flooding, and could benefit from additional local stormwater retention facilities to mitigate flood hazards.” p. 15. The Plan must ensure adequate infrastructure to support connectivity with other neighborhoods, including active transit across railway and freeway segments that cut off neighborhoods from key amenities. The Draft Plan recognizes that the high rates of concentrated poverty in the Downtown neighborhoods is likely due in part to the geographic isolation of neighborhoods by freeways and railroad tracks. (p. 1.) “The introduction of the freeway system after World War II, created impenetrable barriers that isolated neighborhoods from one another and the Downtown area, and diminished the livability of the entire center of the city.” (p. 16.) Policy 2.18 places importance on interconnecting the Downtown Neighborhoods with great streets and beautiful public spaces. There should also be a policy about promoting interconnectedness among neighborhoods through multimodal transportation options and infrastructure and reversing isolating impacts of highway constructions. The Plan identifies the need to plan for safe, aesthetically pleasing, and green routes between neighborhoods and across freeway and railway track barriers to connect neighborhoods to rest of City, allow them to access key resources lacking in those neighborhoods, and mitigate air quality, sound, and visual impacts of those barriers. For example, the Jane Addams neighborhood is isolated from the rest of the city by SR 99 and 180, Union Pacific railroad right of way. “ Crossings of these transportation corridors and few and far 8 LETTER G.1 Page 8 of 16 G.1-21 G.1-22 G.1-23 G.1-24 between, hampering vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian connections to other parts of town.” Draft Plan, p. 20. The Vision for Jane Addams includes building a pedestrian bridge across State Route 99 to provide easier access to Roeding Park (p. 1:8) and building a pedestrian bridge across Highway 99 at Harvey Ave. to improve pedestrian access within the neighborhood (p. 3.9.9). Policy 3.4.6 also identifies the need to install curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements on Mickely between SR 99 and Marks (though this should go to Golden State) and along Golden State to the mobile home park. Routes throughout the Jane Addams neighborhood, and those that connect the neighborhood to other parts of the city, must be improved with sidewalks, lighting, trees, and the like, as they are incomplete and unsafe for both children and adults. Residents want to see more investment to support safe bicycling prioritizing routes to schools and major community centers like shopping centers, parks, and medical centers, including segregated bike lanes. Figure 3-1, “Proposed Bicycle Facilities,” identifies few Class 1 bike facilities in DNCP; only includes a Class 1 on Belmont in the Jane Addams neighborhood, but should also consider on McKinley, both directions from the school; and Southeast has no Class 1 facilities. Figure 3-5 does not propose road diets and bike lanes for Jane Addams. Access to Efficient and Affordable Public Transit Options For neighborhoods that lack access to essential amenities and services, like grocery stores and medical facilities, affordable and efficient public transit options are essential. Existing transit in the Downtown neighborhoods is often unreliable and has service gaps that mean residents have to walk significant distances and take several buses to get to their destination. Comparatively low rates of car ownership by residents in many of the Downtown Plan neighborhoods due to high poverty levels (34% in Jane Addams, 67% in Lowell, Draft Plan) are also reason for improved public transit options. Additionally, the summary of existing conditions does not discuss transit needs. Policy 3.1.3 advises to focus transit service and investments on the Transit Corridors identified in Figure 3-2. Policy 3.1.10 advises to prioritize reducing transit delay along these corridors. Policy 3.1.11 states to focus initial improvements on areas with the greatest ridership, including the Downtown Neighborhoods, as well as to increase rider safety and comfort. However, areas should be prioritized according to the greatest need, like Jane Addams. This focus on high ridership excludes neighborhoods that have historically struggled with deficient infrastructure, and continues inequitable investment. Generally, the needs of existing disadvantaged neighborhoods are ignored. Additionally, the focus on high priority corridors is that these corridors are generally not in residential areas which is problematic when seeking funding, including grants. Such a focus makes it difficult to connect with ATP plan efforts. Figure 3-2, High Priority Transit Corridors, does not propose primary or secondary routes in the Jane Addams neighborhood. The vision page for Jane Addams includes upgrading transit stops, and should also include expanded 9 LETTER G.1 Page 9 of 16 G.1-24 CONT G.1-25 G.1-26 G.1-27 transit service. P. 1:10. The City must also secure and allocate funding for extension of the BRT to Edison Neighborhoods. Policy 3.3.6 requires new developments in the Downtown Neighborhood do not result in the worsening of transportation related facilities, but for other neighborhoods it only requires mitigation. All new developments, regardless of neighborhood, should not result in the worsening of transportation related facilities. In the alternative, the City should, at a minimum, set mitigation thresholds. Policy 3.1.5 supports incentives for potential Downtown transit riders. Incentives must also be available to low-income residents to allow for affordable transit. It bears restating that It is absolutely critical that the DNCP, and implementation thereof, increases transit access to and connectivity between and among neighborhoods in Plan area. Mitigate Impacts and Enhance the Benefits of High-Speed Rail for All Downtown Neighborhoods The Draft Plan includes a general statement to introduce HSR in a manner that has least possible impact on surrounding existing land uses, while preserving Downtown’s interconnected street network to the greatest extent possible. 2:8. The Draft Plan, and related plans must ensure that all negative impacts of the High Speed rail are mitigated. The Draft Plan identifies potential impacts yet does not include physical and economic displacement, or relocation of industrial uses to areas already overly burdened by such uses. The investment in High Speed Rail must also directly benefit communities adjacent to the downtown core through increased transit access and connectivity between and among neighborhoods. Infrastructure for Safe Drinking Water and Wastewater There are places in and adjacent to the planning area, for example parts of the Jane Addams neighborhood that do not have City drinking water or wastewater services. The DNCP must include policies and implementation measures to address these critical deficiencies. The Plan identifies the need to improve conservation measures and diversify water resources to address the increasing scarcity of water in the region. The Plan must also include policies and implementation measures to protect dwindling water resources from suburban sprawl development and industrial development. We recommend the City update the draft DNCP to include policies and implementation measures similar to those found in the draft FCSP to ensure adequate infrastructure necessary to support infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. Road Quality 10 LETTER G.1 Page 10 of 16 G.1-27 CONT G.1-28 G.1-29 Many roads in the Downtown Neighborhoods have deteriorating, pot-holed roads and roads that serve as truck routes for industrial facilities are especially impacted. The Plan must include policies and implementation measures to restore and protect these resources. Neighborhood Greening We are supportive of policies to increase tree coverage in the Plan area recommend prioritizing investment in communities that are particularly park poor such as the Jane Addams Neighborhood (“In the Jane Addams Neighborhoods, however, street trees are noticeably absent.” p. 13). We also recommend implementation measures, such as proactively seeking funds and work with HSR and CalTrans. Safe and Clean Alleys Many alleys throughout the planning area are filled with trash and abandoned furniture. Sometimes residents find old medical products or decaying animals in alleys. While the Draft Plan includes broad policies to address alleys, we recommend aggressive actions and implementation measures including, transformation of alleys into a network of paths and green infrastructure, transferring ownership of alleys to adjacent homeowners, and extending regular alley cleaning services to problem areas throughout the downtown neighborhoods. Healthy Environment: Industrial Land and Other Polluting Land Uses The Draft Draft Plan Land Use Map notes that residents identified industrial land uses located next to residences, parks, and other sensitive land uses as a conflict. (“Numerous incompatibilities with the types and location of industrial uses were identified through the planning process. The issues include the proximity of industrial uses to residential areas, schools and parks, areas where industrial uses are located on parcels intended for residential uses and truck traffic from industrial areas impacting local streets.” p. 26) However, the DNCP maintains existing industrial zoning in several neighborhoods immediately adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses. The Plan recognizes that industrial buildings and complexes are located in many instances adjacent to homes (p. 20) yet the Plan maintains industrial zoning and does not include any policies to address incompatible land uses in that neighborhood. For South Van Ness the draft plan recommends continuation of industrial uses near residential areas. Policy 2.1.3 for the Edison Neighborhood: “Plan for the relocation of industrial uses that negatively impact nearby residential, public, and other similar uses.” must apply to all Downtown Neighborhoods. Additionally, the Land Use Map must be changed to eliminate industrial and business park land use designations within or next to neighborhoods and replace them with parks, neighborhood commercial, houses, and mixed use zoning as appropriate. 11 LETTER G.1 Page 11 of 16 G.1-30 G.1-31 G.1-32 G.1-33 While the importance of segregating industrial uses from sensitive receptors forms the foundation of land use planning and is supported by common sense it has also been identified as a principal priority of residents living among industrial uses. Furthermore, communities most impacted by concentrated industrial uses are also those neighborhoods ranked as the most vulnerable by CalEnviroScreen due to high asthma rates, poor air quality and proximity to polluting land uses. The DNCP acknowledges this, and includes Policy 7.7.3. That call for the City to locate sensitive uses - such as housing, schools, health facilities, and parks - away from building uses that generate toxic pollutants.” As noted above, the City must also apply the converse: locate building that generate toxic pollutants away from homes and other sensitive uses. We are very supportive of Policy 7.6.4 which calls for the City to “complete the Industrial Compatibility Study and work towards implementation” and wish to confirm that it applies to all neighborhoods in the Plan area and suggest an implementation timeline that includes identification of funding resources available to facilitate implementation. Policy 2.17 calls for a regulatory environment and development process that makes development decisions predictable, fair, and transparent and limits the use of CUPs and other discretionary approvals. To the extent that industrial zoning continues to be located in and adjacent to residential and other sensitive uses, these policies threaten to deny residents the opportunity know about and provide feedback on new industrial proposals that could impact their neighborhoods, lower their property values, and create toxic air emissions. Accordingly, until the ICA is conducted and implemented and industrial zoning is located away from sensitive land uses, Policies 2.17.7 and 2.17.8 should not apply to industrial and business park land uses. Additionally, there must be safeguards in place to protect existing residents from displacement and other undesirable impacts from land use decisions. We support policies designed to divert truck traffic from sensitive sites including residential neighborhoods, including: 1. 3.8.1 Designate streets that are suitable for truck delivery routes in order to divert truck traffic away from sensitive sites, particularly the residential neighborhoods. Truck routes should be limited to arterials and expressways specifically designated for the purpose or to collector and local industrial streets which directly service planned industrial areas.” 2. 3.8.2 Locate industrial uses such that industrial truck and vehicular traffic will not route through local residential streets. 3. 7.7.1 Do not locate truck routes on primarily residential streets or near parks, playgrounds, schools or other sensitive uses and create a map that highlights how existing truck routes impact existing and future development patterns. Finally, the DNCP must assess the potential air impacts of drive-thru establishments, especially to the extent that there is an increase in such establishments in communities impacted by poor air quality and traffic. 12 LETTER G.1 Page 12 of 16 G.1-33 CONT G.1-34 G.1-35 Increase Access to Retail, Grocery Stores, Banks, and Other Necessary Day-to-Day Services We support goals and policies designed to increase access to goods, services and groceries at a neighborhood scale and suggest targeted investment to realize that goal. Additionally, community based organizations should work with food vendors and the City to ensure quality and affordable healthy foods and locally sourced produce. We are concerned that Policy 2.12.5 could have a negative impact on small, lower income and minority owned mobile food vendors. Jobs and Employment The Draft Plan must include more aggressive policies to protect existing and promote quality jobs and employment opportunities. For example the Draft Plan should incentivize local hire policies and workforce development investments that will allow for upward financial mobility. Additionally, given that rents are expected to increase downtown, the City should support existing small and minority owned businesses against displacement. Public Participation in Local Government and Plan Implementation We are supportive of the proposed public participation policies included in the draft DNCP to engage the public as key partners in the City’s decision making processes (7.2.1). We recommend the City add policies to work directly with residents and stakeholders to identify and address barriers to civic engagement. We also recommend the City include implementation measures in the DNCP focused on ensuring resident and community stakeholder participation in implementation of the plan, including for allocation of resources. The City can draw upon implementation strategies found in the FCSP, such as convening interdisciplinary working groups, to ensure ongoing community engagement. We suggested similar recommendations in our 2014 General Plan comment letter. The Draft Environmental Impact Report Fails to Analyze and Mitigate Potentially Significant Impacts of the DNCP, FCSP, and Downtown Development Code The DEIR fails to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) to disclose, analyze, and propose all feasible mitigation measures for potentially significant environmental impacts related to the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Downtown Development Code (collectively, “Project”). The DEIR relies heavily on the Master Environmental Impact Report (“MEIR”) for City of Fresno 2035 General Plan for its analysis and to reach conclusions that various impacts are significant and unavoidable or less than significant and then cursorily dismisses without evidentiary basis the feasibility of additional mitigation measures beyond implementation of General Plan policies. As we explained in detail in our October 9, 2014 comments, the Draft MEIR was a fundamentally flawed document which did not satisfy the requirements of CEQA and its 13 LETTER G.1 Page 13 of 16 G.1-36 G.1-37 G.1-38 G.1-39 implementing guidelines. The Final MEIR fails to correct many of the DMEIR’s inadequacies, including the DMEIR’s reliance on vague, voluntary and otherwise unenforceable policies contained in the 2035 General Plan as mitigation measures and its failure to consider and propose all feasible mitigation measures for potentially significant impacts as required by CEQA. Pub. Res. Code §§ 21002; 21081.6(b); Cal. Code of Reg. (C.C.R.) §§ 15091(a)(1)(15126.4(a)(2); see id. § 15126.2(b); See Napa Citizens for Honest Gov’t v. Napa County Bd. of Sup. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 358. The DEIR too is fundamentally flawed for relying upon inadequate analysis, conclusions and mitigation measures of the MEIR and for failing to identify and identify feasible mitigation options for the MEIR’s project-specific and cumulative impacts. The DEIR’s failings will most directly impact low-income disadvantaged residents and communities in the Downtown Plan Area. These communities and residents are the most vulnerable to the impacts the DEIR fails to adequately analyze or effectively mitigate. Thus, the DEIR not only violates CEQA but results in violations of state and federal fair housing and civil rights laws, including but not limited to 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d, 3601 et seq., 5304(b)(2), 5306(s)(7B), 1205; Cal. Gov. Code §§ 11135, 12955, et seq. The City must revise and recirculate the DEIR to provide the public an accurate assessment of the environmental issues at stake and a mitigation strategy that fully addresses the Project’s significant impacts prior to adoption of the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC. The revised DEIR should include the changes to the Downtown Neighborhoods Communities Plan proposed in these comments above. The proposed revisions to the DNCP are feasible mitigation measures that can effectively reduce the Project’s impacts. 1. The DEIR Ignores Feasible Mitigation, Such as Changes to the Land Use Designations and Densities and Intensities Proposed in the General Plan P. 5. 2. The DEIR Fails to Assess the Environmental, Social and Economic Impacts of Inadequate Affordable Housing and Displacement A. Lack of Consideration of Impact of City’s Failure to Adopt and Implement a Legally Adequate 5th Cycle Housing Element The DEIR states that the City’s Housing Element has been adopted by City Council and is “currently awaiting certification by the state”. 5.12-8. In fact, the State Department of Housing and Community Development issued a letter on August 11, 2016 finding that the Housing Element does not substantially comply with state law. See Exhibit C. Among other things, HCD found that the City’s Adopted Housing Element: 14 LETTER G.1 Page 14 of 16 G.1-39 CONT G.1-40 G.1-41 G.1-42 G.1-43 ●Fails to account for the unmet need for housing affordable to lower-income households in Fresno as a result of the City’s failure to rezone adequate sites for multi-family housing to address the City’s shortfall of 6,228 units under its previous housing element. ●Fails to include adequate programs that will result in a beneficial impact on the City’s housing goals during the planning period, including with respect to maintaining and preserving affordable mobile home units in Fresno and with respect to creating affordable housing opportunity in higher income and higher opportunity neighborhoods. ●Identify sites and include programs as appropriate to make sites available to meet the current City’s 2013-2023 Regional Housing Need Allocation based on an accurate calculation of the City’s unmet need under its previous housing element. The City must revise the DEIR to disclose the State’s finding that the Housing Element does not comply with state law and assess how its failure to comply with state law impacts the DEIR’s related analyses, including but not limited to impacts on population and housing, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions. B. The DMEIR Fails to Adequately Analyze the Project’s Potential to Displace Existing Housing The DEIR’s analysis of the Project’s potential to displace significant numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, consists of a brief paragraph that concludes that the Project will have less than a significant impact because it is projected to result in a net increase in housing units. Missing from this assessment is a discussion of the affordability of units that will be constructed in the Downtown Plan Areas to residents that will need replacement housing as a result of displacement due to the loss of existing housing. According to the DNCP, neighborhoods in the Downtown Plan Area have high rates of concentrated poverty and are comprised of a relatively high proportion of renters compared to home-owners. The City’s 2015 Consolidated Plan indicates that high percentages of lower-income residents and renters in Fresno exceeding 70% are housing cost burdened, paying over a third of their income on rent. Therefore, the loss of existing housing currently used by lower-income residents in the Downtown Neighborhoods, as projected by the DEIR, will necessitate the construction of alternative housing affordable to those residents. Construction of new market-rate housing is unlikely to be affordable to lower-income residents. While the Draft DNCP includes broad vision statements and policy aims in support of a “diverse” housing stock and maintaining existing affordable housing, neither it nor the DEIR identify any specific actions the City will take or resources that will be dedicated to facilitate the creation and maintenance of affordable housing in the Downtown Neighborhoods. As noted in section A above, the City does not even have a legally-compliant housing element in place with a strategy to provide for the housing needs of lower-income residents and residents with special housing needs and has failed to accurately calculate and identify adequate sites to 15 LETTER G.1 Page 15 of 16 G.1-43 CONT G.1-44 G.1-45 accommodate the City’s shortfall of 6,228 units from the previous housing element planning period and the City’s lower-income RHNA of 11,923 for the 2013-2023 planning period. Thus, “build out” of the DNCP and General Plan without mitigation measures to ensure the creation and preservation of affordable housing has the potential to displacement significant numbers of lower-income residents without providing alternative financially-accessible housing options. The DEIR states that according to data contained in the DNCP, the vacancy rates in the Downtown Neighborhoods is high. According to Draft DNCP Table 5, the vacancy rates in the Downtown neighborhoods range from 8% in Southeast Fresno to 15% in the Downtown. Table 5 does not support the DEIR’s conclusion that the Project will not have a significant impact resulting from the displacement of existing housing. First, the Southeast Fresno vacancy rate identified of 8% is not a “high” vacancy rate. Second, the DNCP does not identify the source or timeframe of collection of the vacancy rates included in Table 5. Tables 3 and 4, immediately above Table 5 in the Draft DNCP, indicate that the housing and population that they contain were generated between 2008 and 2010 -- the time period when vacancy rates reached their peaks at the height of the recession. If the data from Table 5 was drawn from a similar time period, it is an inadequate reference for existing vacancy rates in the Downtown Neighborhoods, given the ongoing recovery of the housing market and decline in vacancy rates over the past six years. The DEIR must be revised to accurately reflect the potential for the displacement of housing to result in significant environmental impacts, including due to the loss of housing affordable to lower-income residents, and identify and include all feasible mitigation measures. ****** Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Sincerely, Ashley Werner 16 LETTER G.1 Page 16 of 16 G.1-45 CONT G.1-46 G.1-47 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐49  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter G.1: Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, Ashley Werner, September 12, 2016 Response to Comment G.1‐1  This comment notes that the letter builds upon comments that were submitted to the City regarding  the Draft 2035 General Plan and Drafter Master Environmental Impact Report (DMEIR).  This  comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐2  This comment suggests that the lack of detail in the DNCP as compared to the FCSP demonstrates  that the City has a prioritization for the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area at the expense of  improvements and improved connectivity in the surrounding downtown Neighborhoods.  This  suggestion is inaccurate, as a community plan provides less detail than a specific plan.  According to  the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, a community plan is a part of the General Plan.   Specific plans differ from area and community plans in the following ways:   A specific plan is not a component of a general plan.  It is a separately adopted general plan  implementation document.     Specific plans are described by statute (§65450 et seq.).  There are no statutes that specify the  contents of area and community plans.    The purpose of a specific plan is the “systematic implementation” (Section 65450) of the general  plan.  Neither community plans nor area plans have an emphasis on implementation.  They are used  to refine the policies of the general plan relating to a defined geographic area.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐3  This comment suggests that the FCSP contains language that effectively prioritizes projects in the  planning area to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods, and that the City is accelerating  displacement and gentrification risks.  This suggestion is inaccurate as the purpose of a specific plan  is the “systematic implementation” (Section 65450) of the general plan.  Neither community plans  nor area plans have an emphasis on implementation.  Specific plans are used to refine and  implement the policies of the general plan relating to a defined geographic area.  Regarding displacement due to gentrification, preemptive displacement measures are not necessary  at this time.  Cities that have experienced significant displacement tend to have extremely high  demand, low vacancy rates, low amounts of vacant of underdeveloped land, restrictive zoning, and  difficult entitlement processes, all of which contribute to a high degree of competition for an  artificially restricted amount of space.  This combination of factors does not currently exist in the  plan area.  Regarding displacement due to demolition of existing housing, although unlikely,  protections already exist in the Management of Real Property Ordinance (FMC section 10‐702, et  seq.) and the California Health and Safety Code section 17975, et seq.  No further response required.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐50 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐4  This comment suggests that strategies of the planning areas may be well intended, but they will  provide for explicit prioritization of city resources and personnel solely to the FCSP area without  directing such attention to surrounding neighborhoods.  Please refer to response to comment G.1‐2  and G.1‐3.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐5  The comment recommends that community engagement activities be identified following the period  of initial engagement or between the release of the DEIR and its adoption.  Comment noted.  Since  no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is  required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐6  This comment notes that the plan fails to include policies and implementation measures that will  ensure integration among Downtown Neighborhoods and integration with neighborhoods beyond  the area covered in the DNCP.  Please refer to the discussion in response G.1.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐7  This comment suggests that the DNCP does not identify opportunities to pursue many available  public and private grants and loans to implement the Plan’s goals and policies, and that the lack of  detail in the DNCP undermines the commenter’s confidence that some of the stronger goals and  policies will be implemented.  Please refer to the discussion in response G.1‐2.  Since no comment  on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐8  This comment requests that Goal and Policies: 2.2 must be clarified to ensure that such attention  extends to all downtown neighborhoods, not just the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan area.  Please refer  to the discussion in response G.1‐2.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on the  environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐9  This comment notes that the plan must provide adequate housing opportunities to meet the needs  to existing and future low‐income households.  This comment is noted.  The City adopted a 5th Cycle  Housing Element within the deadline established by the Government Code.  The City is working with  the Department of Housing and Community Development to process revisions in accordance with  the Government Code.  With regard to meeting Housing Element requirements, a by right procedure  proposed in the DDC incentivizes and streamlines residential development at minimum densities of  20 dwelling units per/acre and above.  In addition, the dwelling unit capacity proposed in the DNCP  and FCSP meets or exceeds the dwelling unit capacity required by the Housing Element.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐51  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  The City will determine whether further policies are required to ensure adequate access to  affordable housing.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐10 through G.1‐13.  These comments suggests that the Draft plan does not discuss or plan to address the housing needs  of extremely‐low and very‐low income residents, the preservation of affordable, high‐quality mobile  home units, the displacement of existing lower‐income resident population, and the plan failing to  include strong and clear policies to prevent displacement of lower‐income residents.  Please refer to  the discussion in responses G.1‐3 and G.1‐9 above.  Response to Comment G.1‐14  This comment suggests that the plan must include additional multi‐family  zoning in the neighborhoods  outside of downtown.  This comment is noted.  Within the residential neighborhoods, zones capable of  accommodating higher densities were located along the DNCP’s corridors.  Most of the parcels along  the major corridors are zoned Neighborhood Mixed‐Use (NMX), which requires a minimum of 50%  residential, a minimum density of 12 du/acre, and a maximum density of 16 du/acre.  In addition, parcels along Kings Canyon, Blackstone, and Abbey are zoned  Center/Corridor Mixed‐ Use which requires a minimum of 40% residential, a minimum density of 16 du/acre, and a  maximum density of 30 du/acre, a density above the Department of Housing’s qualifying minimum  density of 20 du/acre.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Please also refer to the discussion  in response G.1‐9 above.  Response to Comment G.1‐15 and comment G 1‐16   This comment suggests that the draft plan fails to facilitate the maintenance and development of  affordable housing for large households, and that the plan must ensure that City Code enforcement  activities do not displace and/or disproportionality impact low‐income residents and residents of  color.  Noted on page 5.12‐6, the EIR is subject to federal and state relocation regulations related to  relocation.  Please refer to the discussion in responses G.1‐3 and G.1‐9 above.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐17  This comment suggests that there are insufficient programs and policies designed to address park,  recreational, and community facilities in the most park deficient neighborhoods.  This comment is  noted.  An important strategy of the DNCP is to form joint‐use agreements with schools to open up  during after‐school hours and on weekends.  This strategy is already being implemented in the DNCP  area.  Further policies related to parks and recreation will be developed as part of the Parks Master  Plan process, currently underway.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR  was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  That said, at the City’s discretion, policies/strategies such as identifying funding sources such as  CalFire Urban Forestry grants for park acquisition can be added to the DNCP as well as references to  Parks Master Plan update.   City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐52 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐18  This comment recommends that the City acquire the vacant plot at the southwest corner of Olive  Avenue and Marks Avenue for a park and small library, and recommends the City to identify new  park opportunities and include them Figure 4‐6 of the DNCP.  This comment is noted.  Please refer to  discussion in response G.1‐17, above.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the  EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐19  This comment notes various buildings, including the Hanoian building and the adjacent vacant lot at  the corner of Cedar and Butler as well as the lot in front of the Mosqueda Center, that could be  acquired for the development of new parks and recreational facilities.  Please refer to the discussion  in response G.1‐17 above.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was  provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐20  The comment notes that the Draft plan anticipates that it will remain consistent with the ATP  Plan,  and that if inconsistencies arise, the plan should be amended to reflect the ATP  Plan.  This comment  is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐21  This comment suggests that investment priorities should emphasize public health and safety of  children and access to key  amenities and services through various policies.  This comment is noted.   The City will have discretion in determining whether any of the policies and implementation  strategies will be added to the plan.  Figure 2‐1‐8 on page 2‐11 of the DNCP Downtown  Neighborhoods Community Plan shows where sidewalk installation should be prioritized in the Jane  Addams neighborhood.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was  provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐22  The comment recommends infrastructure that would help prevent flooding and pooled water, and  would also facilitate public health.  This comment is noted.  The City is in considering introducing  storm water detention basins between H Street, the railroad tracks, Divisadero, and just north of the  HSR station.  The DEIR, on pages 5.9‐25–32, calls out existing regulations and plan policies that  minimize localized flooding, such as conformance with FMFCD’s Storm Drainage Master Plan and the  use of LID (Low Impact Development) Design in the public realm and at building sites.  Since no  comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required  (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐23  This comment notes that the Plan must ensure adequate infrastructure to support connectivity with  other neighborhoods, and does so with proposing policy and implementation measures.  This  comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐53  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐24  This comment identifies the need to plan for safe, aesthetically pleasing and green routes between  neighborhoods, and notes various locations and policies that would do so.  This comment is noted.   Figure 2‐1‐8 on page 2‐11 of the DNCP Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan shows where  sidewalk installation should be prioritized in the Jane Addams neighborhood.  Street Sections on  DNCP pages 3‐13 through 3‐18 show street/sidewalk/street tree designs for streets throughout the  DNCP as well.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐25  This comment notes that there are deficiencies relative to bicycling in the DNCP.  This comment has  been noted.  This comment does not alter the environmental evaluations and findings identified in  the EIR.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required.  Response to Comment G.1‐26  This comment notes that existing transit in the Downtown neighborhoods is often unreliable and has  service gaps, and that areas should be prioritized according to the greatest need.  This comment is  noted.  Response to Comment G.1‐27  This comment notes that the focus on high priority corridors is generally not in residential areas,  which is problematic when seeking funding.  It also recommends policies and implementation  strategies.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR  was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐28  This comment recommends that plans must ensure that all negative impacts of the High Speed Rail  are mitigated, and that investment must also directly benefit communities adjacent to the  downtown core through increased transit access and connectivity between and among  neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  The High Speed Rail project is under the purview of the  State of California, and more specifically the High Speed Rail Authority.  Potential impacts as a result  of either rail construction or operation of the system are subject to conditions and/or mitigation  measures outlined in the EIR prepared for that project (more information can be obtained at  www.hsr.ca.gov).  The City of Fresno is a Responsible Agency and implements mitigation measures  from the HSR EIR as appropriate.  The City will determine whether the policies and implementation  strategies suggested should be included in the plan.  Response to Comment G.1‐29  This comment recommends the City update the draft DNCP to include policies and implementation  measures similar to those found in the FCSP to ensure adequate infrastructure necessary to support  infill development for all Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  Both  the DNCP and the FCSP are consistent with the Urban Water Management Plan and include the  same conservation measures as the General Plan.  This EIR tiers off the General Plan MEIR with  regard to ensuring adequate infrastructure and requiring water conservation.  In addition, the plans  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐54 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  protect against suburban sprawl by promoting infill development that is higher density and more  water efficient.  Response to Comment G.1‐30  This comment recommends the City include policies and implementation measures to restore and  protect the roads in the Downtown Neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on  the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐31  This comment recommends the City include implementation measures such as proactively seeking  funds and work with HSR and Caltrans to increase tree coverage in the Plan area.  This comment is  noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐32  This comment recommends the City take aggressive actions and implementation measures such as  transformation of alleys into a network of paths and green infrastructure, transferring ownership of  alleys to adjacent homeowners, and extending regular alley cleaning services to problem areas  throughout the downtown neighborhoods.  This comment is noted.  Since no comment on the  environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐33  This comment raises issues including the proximity of industrial uses to residential areas, schools and  parks, areas where industrial uses are located on parcels intended for residential uses and truck  traffic from industrial areas affecting local streets.  The comment also recommends changes to  various policies and implementation strategies in the plans.  The City is proposing land use changes  to address this comment.  See Section 4—Errata.  Since no comment on the environmental  conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section  15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐34  This comment recommends that Policies 2.17.7 and 2.17.8 should not apply to industrial and  business parkland uses, and that there must be safeguards in place to protect existing residents from  displacement and other undesirable impacts from land use decisions.  Since no comment on the  environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further response is required (CEQA  Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐35.   This comment recommends that the DNCP must assess the potential air impacts of drive‐thru  establishments, especially to the extent that there is an increase in such establishments in  communities impacted by poor air quality and traffic.  This comment is noted.  Drive‐throughs would  be allowed as a conditional use in the plan area, and would only be allowed on “B” and “C” classified  streets in the DTN, DTG, and DTC zone districts.  They are also allowed conditionally in mixed use  zone districts.  All drive‐through facilities are subject to Section 15‐2728 of the Development Code,  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐55  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Drive‐In and Drive‐Through Facilities, which requires that aisles be designed to reduce idling.  Finally,  drive aisles are not allowed between the building and the sidewalk, further protecting pedestrians  from any potential air quality impacts.  Policy HC‐3‐f: New Drive‐Through Facilities on page 5.3‐28 of  the EIR aims to incorporated design review measures in the Citywide Development Code to reduce  vehicle emissions resulting from queued idling vehicles at drive‐through facilities in proximity to  residential neighborhoods.  The City will determine whether the comment’s suggestion should be  included in the plan.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided,  no further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐36  This comment notes community based organizations should work with food vendors and the City to  ensure quality and affordable health foods and locally sourced produce, and that Policy 2.12.5 could  have a negative impact on small, lower income and minority owned mobile food vendors.  This  comment is noted.  The City will determine whether the comment’s suggestion should be included in  the plan.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088). Response to Comment G.1‐37  This comment recommends the Draft plan must include more aggressive policies to protect existing  and promote quality jobs and employment opportunities, and includes strategies in doing so.  This  comment is noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no  further response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐38  This comment recommends policies and implementation measures for the City to work directly with  residents and stakeholders to identify and address barriers to civic engagement.  This comment is  noted.  Since no comment on the environmental conclusions of the EIR was provided, no further  response is required (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15088).  Response to Comment G.1‐39  This comment states that the Draft Environmental Impact report fails to meet the requirements of  the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) to disclose, analyze, and propose all feasible  mitigation measures for potentially significant environmental impacts related to the Downtown  Neighborhoods Communities Plan, the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan, and the Downtown  Development Code (collectively, “Project”) because it relies on the MEIR certified for the Fresno  General Plan.  The MEIR was certified in December 2014 and was not challenged within the  applicable statute of limitations.  This EIR does not propose any changes to the MEIR and as such, a  challenge to the MEIR is now untimely.    Response to Comment G.1‐40  This comment refers to the impacts to low‐income disadvantaged residents and communities in the  Downtown Plan area.  The City is currently working with the California Department of Housing and  Community Development (HCD) to make revisions to its adopted Housing Element, which addresses  the provision of residential capacity throughout the City for all income levels.  Please also refer to  the discussion in response G.1‐9 and G.1‐39.  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐56 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Response to Comment G.1‐41  This comment suggests that the DEIR should be recirculated to provide the public an accurate  assessment of the environmental issues at stake and a mitigation strategy that fully assesses the  impacts.  Refer to discussion in response G.1‐39, above.  This comment raised a concern that the  Document should be re‐circulated public review.  This comment period reflects the designated time  period for public comment and review.  Since the comment period was closed on September 16,  2016.  The document will be submitted for deliberation to the City Council prior to the release of the  Development code.  After the Development Code is released for public review, the City will review  the Development Code and EIR and consider the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162  and 15177, as well as other applicable sections.  Response to Comment G.1‐42  This comment notes that the DEIR ignores feasible mitigation, such as changes to the land use  designations and densities and intensities proposed in the General Plan.  This comment is noted.   However, the EIR notes on page 5.10‐20, “the General Plan anticipates that the Downtown Planning  Area will be further refined through the implementation DNCP and the FCSP, and further  implemented through the adoption of the DDC for regulations specific to the Downtown Planning  Area.  The General Plan, as well as these proposed plans, envisions a new focus on land use and  design along major streets and in neighborhoods that support Downtown . . .”  In addition, Objective LU‐9 from the General Plan and on page 5.10‐28 aims to plan land uses, design  and development intensities to supplement and support, and not compete with, the Downtown.   The EIR is consistent with the General Plan as the purpose of the DNCP and FCSP is to guide  development in the Downtown Fresno and its surrounding neighborhoods.  The plans seek to capitalize  on the positive momentum for Downtown revitalization and put specific policies and actions into place  to guide the rejuvenation of the Downtown neighborhoods that brings about lasting prosperity and  improvements.  Response to Comment G.1‐43  This comment refers to the assessment of the environmental, social and economic impacts of  inadequate affordable housing and displacement, and the lack of consideration of impact of the  City’s failure to adopt and implement a legally adequate 5th Cycle Housing Element.  The City is  currently working with the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to  make revisions to its adopted Housing Element, which addresses the provision of residential capacity  throughout the City for all income levels.  Please also refer to the discussion in response G.1‐9.  Response to Comment G.1‐44, G.1‐45, and G.1‐47  This comment notes that the DMEIR fails to adequately analyze the project’s potential to displace  existing housing.  However, on page 5.12‐14, it is noted that “prior to displacement of any dwelling  unit, a relocation analysis must be prepared in accordance with federal and/or state law.” Please also  refer to the discussion in response G.1‐3, G.1‐9, and G.1‐43.  Response to Comment G.1‐46  This comment suggests that an inadequate reference was used for existing vacancy rates in the EIR,  and that Table  5 does not support the DEIR’s conclusion that the Project will not have a significant  impact resulting from the displacement of existing housing, and Tables  3 and 4 population and  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐57  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  housing data from an outdated source.  This comment is noted.  However, the Table  5 itself notes  that an estimated 99,393 persons could be living in within the DNCP/FCSP boundaries by the year  2035, with 169,080 persons allowed by the 2025.  In addition, because the DNCP and FCSP  population increase is within the population growth analyzed within the Fresno General Plan, the  project impacts are not deemed cumulatively considerable.  Therefore, less than significant  cumulative impacts are anticipated related to population growth.    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐73  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter G.2: Leadership Counsel for Justice & Accountability, Ashley Werner, October 9, 2014 Response to Comment G.2‐1 though G.2‐11  The MEIR for the Fresno General Plan was certified in December 2014 and was not challenged within  the applicable statute of limitations.  This EIR does not propose any changes to the MEIR and as  such, challenges to the MEIR are untimely and outside the scope of this document.    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G.3-1 Letter G.3 Page 1 of 4 G.3-1 CONT G.3-2 G.3-3 Letter G.3 Page 2 of 4 G.3-3 CONT G.3-4 Letter G.3 Page 3 of 4 G.3-5 Letter G.3 Page 4 of 4 City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐79  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter G.3: Development and Resource Management Department, Glen A. Campora, August 11, 2016 Response to Comment G.3‐1 through G.3‐5  The City adopted a 5th Cycle Housing Element within the deadline established by the Government  Code.  The City is working with the Department of Housing and Community Development to process  revisions in accordance with the Government Code.  With regard to meeting Housing Element  requirements, a by right procedure proposed in the DDC incentivizes and streamlines residential  development at minimum densities of 20 du/acre and above.  In addition, the dwelling unit capacity  proposed in the DNCP and FCSP meets or exceeds the dwelling unit capacity required by the Housing  Element.    THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ) -FUUFS) 1BHFPG ) -FUUFS) 1BHFPG -FUUFS) 1BHFPG -FUUFS) 1BHFPG -FUUFS) 1BHFPG THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments     FirstCarbon Solutions 3‐87  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  Letter H: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District, Wendell Lum September 13, 2016 Response to Comment H‐1 and H‐2  The commenter suggested the replacement of fourth and fifth paragraphs under Stormwater and  Drainage on page 5.9‐6 and 5.9‐7 with the following:   This Project Area has adopted drainage plans and most of this area has permanent  drainage service.  Within this area there are approximately 336,200 linear feet of  existing pipeline used to convey stormwater drainage, and there are approximately  16,150 linear feet of pipeline to be constructed.  These drainage facilities were  planned and constructed over time based on the existing and planned uses that  were then current.  If this Project generates more stormwater runoff than what was  originally planned, then measures will need to be under taken to mitigate the  additional runoff to the planned rate.  The developer may either make  improvements to the existing public drainage system to provide additional capacity  or construct a permanent peak reducing facility.    In addition, this Project Area was largely developed before the District’s  implementation of the major storm breakover guideline.  If the proposed  development is located in an area that has historically provided passage for a major  storm water flows then the grading of the proposed site shall need to be designed in  such a manner that there are no adverse impacts for the passage of such flows.    Many areas throughout the City currently lack complete or adequate storm drain  systems.  This makes them prone to frequent localized flooding that damages  properties and inconveniences residents, resulting in lower property values and  higher insurance costs for both homeowners and businesses.  Many of these areas  have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to fund the construction of  modern drainage facilities, so a number of storm drain improvements are now being  constructed with funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act  (ARRA).  One of these projects is located on Divisadero Street, adjacent to an  approximately twelve block area with no storm drain facilities that extends south  from Divisadero into the Specific Plan area.  These improvements will provide little  direct relief for this neighborhood, but they will make it feasible to relieve existing  flooding conditions by extending this system in the future.    Approximately 50 acres in the southern corner of the FCSP area also lack an existing  storm drain network.  No facilities are currently planned for this portion of the FCSP,  but it is assumed that storm drains will eventually be needed to accommodate  redevelopment, and these new facilities would be connected to the major storm  drain lines that now serve the central portion of the Specific Plan area or to the lines  that serve the neighborhood located immediately north of Divisadero Street.   Although there are no indications of significant drainage problems within the areas  now served by these facilities, shallow, nuisance flooding has been reported after  heavy rains.  It is expected the addition of runoff from any newly served areas would  exacerbate these problems, potentially limiting the Specific Plan area’s development  potential.  As a result, any increase in runoff resulting from storm drain extensions  City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Responses to Comments Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report     3‐88 FirstCarbon Solutions  Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\31680017 Sec 03‐00 Response to Comments.docx  may also trigger the need for capacity upgrades on the FMFCD’s collection facilities  (FCSP 2016).    The commenter suggested removal of the first and addition to the second paragraph under Flood  Control on page 5.9‐8 with the following:   Portions of the Plan areas have experienced localized flooding.  To  mitigate these  flood hazards, storm drain improvements (such as replacing or supplementing  existing pipes, adding inlets, or updating pump stations) are needed.   Neighborhoods with deficient storm drain systems are subject to increased local  flooding, lower property values, and higher insurance costs for homeowners and  businesses.  These areas have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to  fund the construction of modern drainage facilities (DNCP 2016).    As stated previously, the developed portions within this Project Area has permanent  drainage facilities and service.    City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx ERRATA SECTION 4: The following provides corrections and additions to the sections of the Final EIR. The corrections and additions are organized by page number. Additional text is shown in underline, and deleted text is shown in strikethrough format. Page 5.3-45: Air Quality The City has identified recommended revisions on this page, with the following deletion as follows. Under the CBIA v. BAAQMD Supreme Court opinion described above, projects containing sensitive receptors would not be required to reduce the impact from these existing sources. However, the City may request developers to implement voluntary control measures to reduce health impacts on future residents. Voluntary Measure AIR-1 is provided, which recommends For instance, the City might request developers of any new residential development that is located within 0.1 μg/m3 DPM concentration contours to install a positive static pressure forced air heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system into each residential unit. Page 5.3-52: Air Quality The City has identified recommended revisions on this page, with the following deletion and movement of text to Table 5.3-7: CAPCOA Recommendations on Siting New Sensitive Receptors Near TAC sources: Voluntary Measure AIR-4b is provided, which recommends that any new residential development that is located within the recommended setback distances detailed in Table 5.3-7 from a stationary source of TAC emissions should prepare a screening level analysis or a project-specific HRA. If the screening criteria or HRA exceed cancer risk criteria, the projects should install a positive static pressure forced air heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system into each residential unit. Each HVAC system should install a high efficiency Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filter of MERV 13 or better in the air intake for the HVAC system, and the air intake will be installed with a fan designed to force air through the MERV 13 filter in order to create positive static pressure. Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The City has identified recommended revisions to mitigations on this page, with the following addition: Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL-3. The following addition has been made to MM CUL-3. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-2 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx MM CUL-3 Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City- approved archaeologist. The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archaeological measures prior to the initiation of any ground-disturbing activities at these locations. The archaeologist will discuss the project-specific sensitivity potential to encounter both prehistoric and historic materials; present (verbally or graphically) examples of potential types of prehistoric and historic materials that may be encountered; discuss the responsibilities and empowerments of the cultural resources monitor(s); and briefly address the procedures to address inadvertent finds. Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL-1. The following edit is located at second bullet point under MM CUL-1 on page 5.5-40. • Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources, the CRHR, and the or NRHP, as necessary. Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be summarized in the Phase I report. Page 5.5-40: Cultural Resources The commenter identified recommended revisions to MM CUL-1. The following edits are located under MM CUL-1 on page 5.5-40. MM CUL-1 In accordance with Objective HCR-2 (specifically HCR-2-a through HCR-2-c) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all specific discretionary development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should shall undergo a standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review. • This CEQA-level evaluation should shall include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic-age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object evaluations. The report should shall also address any project-specific archaeological sensitivity determinations and additional project-specific proposed mitigation measures, as necessary. • Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should shall be evaluated for significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local register of Historic Resources, the CRHR or NRHP, as necessary. Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should shall be summarized in the Phase I report. • To ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings, the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-3 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx required to be completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information Center with the completed Phase I report. • Completed Phase I reports should shall be submitted to the City for incorporation into their local databases. Page 5.5-43: Cultural Resources The commenter correctly noted an error regarding locations used. The first sentence right after MM CUL-5 on page 5.5-43 has been revised as follows: MM CUL-5 Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 51 50 Site, Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the current investigations. (“Vicinity” is defined here as lying within 300 feet of the identified site boundaries.) These are presently the only archaeological sites recorded within the FCSP/DNCP areas. Page 5.5-46: Cultural Resources The City has identified recommended revisions to mitigations on this page, with the following: Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Page 5.5-33: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the second sentence under Project-Specific Impact Analysis on page 5.5-33, which has been revised as follows: The most recent review of cultural resources (both historic and prehistoric) within the DNCP and FCSP areas is contained in the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepared by Greenwood and Associates in February of 2012. Page 5.5-33: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the first sentence under Records Search Results on page 5.5-33, which has been revised as follows: As part of the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepared by Greenwood and Associates, a records search was conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield. Page 5.5-34: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the third sentence under Literature and Archival Review on page 5.5-34, which has been revised as follows: City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-4 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx The purpose of these maps was to aid insurance agents in assessing the degree of fire risk associated with a particular property. Page 5.5-36: Cultural Resources The commenter noted a typographical error in the second bullet point on page 5.5-36, which has been revised as follows: • Proposed: “L” Street Historic District. Boundaries: Van Ness, Amador, Divisadero, N Street, Stanislaus, M Street to Calaveras (FCSP/DNCP). Pages 5.9-6 and 5.9-7: Hydrology and Water Quality The commenter suggested the replacement of fourth and fifth paragraphs under Stormwater and Drainage on page 5.9-6 and 5.9-7 with the following: This Project Area has adopted drainage plans and most of this area has permanent drainage service. Within this area there are approximately 336,200 linear feet of existing pipeline used to convey storm water drainage and there are approximately 16,150 linear feet of pipeline to be constructed. These drainage facilities were planned and constructed over time, based on the existing and planned uses that were then current. If this Project generates more stormwater runoff than what was originally planned, then measures will need to be undertaken to mitigate the additional runoff to the planned rate. The developer may either make improvements to the existing public drainage system to provide additional capacity or construct a permanent peak reducing facility. In addition, this Project Area was largely developed before the District’s implementation of the major storm breakover guideline. If the proposed development is located in an area that has historically provided passage for a major stormwater flow, then the grading of the proposed site shall be designed in such a manner that there are no adverse impacts for the passage of such flows. Many areas throughout the City currently lack complete or adequate storm drain systems. This makes them prone to frequent localized flooding that damages properties and inconveniences residents, resulting in lower property values and higher insurance costs for both homeowners and businesses. Many of these areas have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to fund the construction of modern drainage facilities, so a number of storm drain improvements are now being constructed with funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). One of these projects is located on Divisadero Street, adjacent to an approximately twelve block area with no storm drain facilities that extends south from Divisadero into the Specific Plan area. These improvements will provide little direct relief for this neighborhood, but they will make it feasible to relieve existing flooding conditions by extending this system in the future. Approximately 50 acres in the southern corner of the FCSP area also lack an existing storm drain network. No facilities are currently planned for this portion of the FCSP, but it is assumed that storm drains will eventually be needed to accommodate redevelopment, and these new facilities would be connected to the major storm drain lines that now serve the central portion of the Specific Plan area or to the lines that serve the neighborhood located immediately north of Divisadero Street. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-5 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Although there are no indications of significant drainage problems within the areas now served by these facilities, shallow, nuisance flooding has been reported after heavy rains. It is expected the addition of runoff from any newly served areas would exacerbate these problems, potentially limiting the Specific Plan area’s development potential. As a result, any increase in runoff resulting from storm drain extensions may also trigger the need for capacity upgrades on the FMFCD’s collection facilities (FCSP 2016). Page 5.9-8: Hydrology and Water Quality The commenter suggested removal of the first paragraph and an addition to the second paragraph under Flood Control on page 5.9-8 with the following: Portions of the Plan areas have experienced localized flooding. To mitigate these flood hazards, storm drain improvements (such as replacing or supplementing existing pipes, adding inlets, or updating pump stations) are needed. Neighborhoods with deficient storm drain systems are subject to increased local flooding, lower property values, and higher insurance costs for homeowners and businesses. These areas have not historically generated sufficient tax revenue to fund the construction of modern drainage facilities (DNCP 2016). As stated previously, the developed portions within this Project Area has permanent drainage facilities and service. Page 5.9-27: Hydrology and Water Quality The Cumulative mitigation measure was corrected as follows: Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1, HYD-2a and HYD-2b is required. Page 5.10-21: Land Use and Planning Exhibit 5.10-3a: Proposed DNCP Land Use and Zoning Designations has been revised as follows, mostly within the Jane Addams Neighborhood: • Light Industrial (IL) changed to Business Park (BP) 7217686.921638/43560 = 165.7 Acres • Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density (RS-3) Changed to Mobile Home Park (RM-MH) 2300703.429209/43560 = 52.82 Acres • Light Industrial (IL) changed to Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX) 357072.465763/43560 = 8.20 Acres • Heavy Industrial (IL) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 238959.073407/43560 = 5.49 Acres • Downtown Neighborhood (DTN) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 385955.389722/43560 = 8.86 Acres City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-6 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Section 5.13: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to Section 5.13 to make it clear and concise. Throughout the section, the header has been edited as follows: Public Services and Recreation Page 5.13-1: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located at the beginning of the page, and under study area for project impacts. 5.13—Public Services and Recreation This section addresses potential impacts to public services and recreation such as police protection, fire protection, schools, parks/recreation, and libraries resulting from implementation of the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DNCP), the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP), and the Downtown Development Code (DDC). Study Area for Project Impacts The study area for project impacts on public services and recreation includes the DNCP and FCSP areas. Page 5.13-7: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located under 5.13.3 – Regulatory Setting. State and local regulations related to public services and recreation are described below. Page 5.13-10: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located under Fresno General Plan. Below are summaries of the City’s General Plan objectives and policies regarding public services and recreation (i.e., police, fire, parks/recreation, and schools). Page 5.13-15: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located under the first paragraph. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services and/or recreation: R A IL ROADA V E TURNER AVE FRE S N O S T KI RKSTWHITE AVE GOLDENSTA T E B L V DTRINITYSTMODOCSTCH A N NIN G WAYE L MAVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO ST MCKENZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE CALIFORNIA AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCH S T DIVISADERO ST HUNTINGTON AVE NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULA RE ST VENTURA ST C S T PO T T L E AV E C A LA V E R A S S TMAPLE AVEMA RT I N A V EPARKWAYDR SANPABLOAVEFU L TON S T ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVEPARKWAY DR VOORMAN AVE CALIFORNIAAVE P L A Z A D RWTENTHSTBE LGRAVIAAVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP L A ZA D R EFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLORENCE AVE MC KENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER A VE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITEAVEEL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVE MER C E D ST PLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE P A R A L L EL A V EH A Z E LWOO D B L VDDONAHOO ST C OL L I NSA V E NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIVAT E FIFTHSTA M A D O R S T H ST STEPHENSAVEF RANKLIN AVE GILBERT ST I RWI NA V E MAUD AVEINYO ST J ONE SA V EM A R IP O S A S TUS T M E R C E D S T S A N JO A Q U IN S T TUOLUMN E ST S A N T A C L A R A S T WOODWAR DAVE KER N S T BRALY AVE LOS A N G E LE S S T THOR N EAVEM O N T E R E Y S T M O N O S T CAL A V E R A S S T SECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO S T F S TN S T CHA N DLE R A V E FAIRVIEWAVECLARKSTWAT ERM A N A V E BELGRAVIA AVE OL EANDER AVE AMA DOR ST FULTON/VANNESSA L Y HAMILTON AVE LORENA AVEBENGSTONAVEFRONTAGE RD P S T MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSONAVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LAN EAVE CHERRYAVE B ROA DWA YLIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSAR AVE PACIFIC AVEK LE T T E A V E S A N BE N ITO S T B A L L AVE O S T N S T CAPI T OL ST KER N M ALL T S T WHITE AVE M S T LEMON AVE ONEIL A VE VA N NE S S A V E THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYHAWES AVE WHITES BRIDGE AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROSEAVE SARAH STMARY STWHITE AVE THOMAS AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLV D BALCH AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE KERCKHOFF AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY OS T B S TMA YOR A V E LIBERTY/LYELL ALY LYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B /C A LY MONO ST L S T C S T BRO ADW A YS S T R S T F U L TON S T A / B A LYAS T B S T F AG A N A L Y NEVADA AVE E ST L S T CHI N A AL Y HOME RUN A L Y F S T S A N T A F E A V EQ S T B E N D AVE INYO ST GRACE STMADD Y DR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANTAVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORA AV E HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEIOWA AVE T H OMAS AVE DEARINGAVEHAYSTON AVEWOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRA NT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATE E LD O R A D O S T FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVEWO O DSONAVEGLENNAVEG S T GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE GOL D E N S T A T E B L VD TO P EK A A V E ¬«2 ¬«2 ¬«2 ¬«2 ¬«3 ¬«4 ¬«5 ¬«5 ¬«1 ¬«1 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles Land Use Changes 1 - Light Industrial (IL) changed to Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX) 8.20 Acres 2 - Light Industrial (IL) changed to Business Park (BP) 165.7 Acres 3 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density (RS-3) Changed to Mobile Home Park (RM-MH) 52.82 Acres 4 - Heavy Industrial (IL) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 5.49 Acres 5 - Downtown Neighborhood (DTN) changed to Public and Institutional (PI) 8.86 Acres Overlay Districts UC - Urban Campus AH - Apartment House NR - Neighborhood Revitalization Base Districts DTC - Downtown Core DTG - Downtown General DTN - Downtown Neighborhood RS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low Density RS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RM-MH - Mobile Home Park NMX - Neighborhood Mixed Use CMX - Corridor/Center Mixed Use BP - Business Park IL - Light Industrial IH - Heavy Industrial PI - Public and Institutional PR - Park and Recreation ·|}þ99 ·|}þ41 ·|}þ180 I 31680017 • 10/2016 | 5.10-3a_proposedLU.cdr Exhibit 5.10-3a Proposed DNCP Land Use and Zoning Designations CITY OF FRESNO DNCP, FCSP, AND DDC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Source: Moule & Polyzoides, 2016 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-9 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Page 5.13-27: Public Services and Recreation The City of Fresno identified recommended revisions to this page to make it clear and concise. The following changes are located at the beginning of the page 5.13—Public Services and Recreation ............................................................................................ 5.13-1 Page 5.14-3, 5.14-6, and 5.14-8: Transportation and Traffic Text was added to pages 5.14.3 and 5.14-6 as follows: “the proposed bicycle network identified in the 2010 City of Fresno Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trails Master Plan” Page 5.14-3: Transportation and Traffic A comment recommended that the bullet be modified under the Road Diets & Bike Lanes on page 5.14-3, as follows: • Tulare Street: Union Pacific Railroad to R Street (4 lane dievided to 3 lanes) Page 5.14-5: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested removal and addition of text within the second paragraph as follows: The FCSP accommodates the construction of a high speed rail station within the plan area. However, the full construction of an operational California High Speed Rail system is not currently fully-funded and too speculative to include in this analysis. However, roadway changes associated with the HSR are included in the Cumulative analysis The California High Speed Rail system is discussed further under the Cumulative Conditions (see Section 5.14.6). Page 5.14-9: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested defining the BMP in Policy 9-14-2 language as follows: • Policy 9-14-2: Provide safe and well-designed bicycle crossings of the railroad right-of-way at all places identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian and Trails Master Plan (BMP)/ATP. Page 5.14-52: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested deleting the duplicate sentences within the second paragraph of City of Fresno Traffic Impact Study Report Guidelines as follows: The guidelines include the preferred traffic analysis methodologies, significance criteria, and documentation requirements This analysis is conducted using the preferred analysis methodologies and significance criteria as outlined in the City’s guidelines. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-10 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Pages 5.14-106 through 5.14-130: Transportation and Traffic The commenter suggested deleting reference to AM and PM peak-hour traffic operation every 3 years and replacing it with 5 years, as follows: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak-hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 53 years. Surface water obtained under this agreement is treated at the City’s SWTF along with its other surface supplies, and pumped into the potable distribution system. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Response to Comments on Final Environmental Impact Report Errata FirstCarbon Solutions 4-11 Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Page 5.15-4: Utilities and Service Systems The commenter recommended additional notes to Table 5.15-1 for consistency with previous references in the footnotes of other tables to as follows: Table 5.15-1: Current and Planned Potable Water Supplies Water Supply Additional Detail on Water Supply Projected Water Supply (af) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 (opt) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Reasonably Available Volume Total Right or Safe Yield (optional) Groundwater1 Kings Subbasin 130,400 — 135,100 — 139,700 — 144,300 — 148,900 — Surface Water2 FID—Agmt. 106,200 — 111,200 — 116,200 — 121,200 — 126,200 — Surface Water3 USBR—CVP 52,600 — 52,600 — 52,600 — 52,600 — 52,600 — Recycled4 Tertiary, disinfected 7,000 — 16,000 — 16,000 — 16,000 — 16,000 — Recycled5 Secondary, disinfected 10,000 — 10,000 — 10,000 — 10,000 — 10,000 — Recycled6 Tertiary, disinfected 2,500 — 5,000 — 7,500 — 10,000 — 12,500 — Total 308,700 0 329,900 0 342,000 0 354,100 0 366,200 0 Notes: 1 The value for “Reasonably Available Volume” includes the Safe Yield which increases as the City’s SOI expands as discussed in Sections 6.1.5.1 & 6.1.5.2 and in Table 6-3 of the 2015 UWMP. Additionally, this value includes water from prior year(s) operation of intentional recharge as shown in Table 6-3 (of the 2015 UWMP) for the same year. 2 The City’s surface water supply from FID grows as the City’s annexed city limits expand as discussed in Section 6.2.1 of the 2015 UWMP. 3 The City’s USBR CVP Friant Division contract is for 60,000 af of Class 1 water. The 52,600 af/yr value is the historic average allocated value for the City per Figure 7-2 of the 2015 UWMP (rounded to nearest 100). 4 The 2020 value of 7,000 af/yr is based on the RWRF’s 5 mgd facility; the subsequent increase to 16,000 af/yr reflects the satellite WRF (8 mgd) being constructed and operational shortly after 2025. 5 The annual 10,000 af is the current amount presently directed to farm irrigation of non-food crops adjacent to the RWRF. 6 The City recently had extraction wells at the RWRF reclassified as providing “soil aquifer treated” recycled water. The projected values reflect the incorporation of this water into the flows returned to the metropolitan area and used for purposes as shown in Table 6-9 of the 2015 UWMP. Source: City of Fresno 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, 2016. Prepared by Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group. City of Fresno – DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Errata Response to Comments on the Final Environmental Impact Report 4-12 FirstCarbon Solutions Y:\Publications\Client (PN-JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 - FEIR\31680017 Sec 04-00 Errata.docx Page 5.15-2: Utilities and Service Systems The following edits were made to the third paragraph under Water Supply. The Surface Water Treatment Facility (SWTF) located in northeast Fresno receives supplies from the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Fresno Irrigation District (FID) contract for Kings River Water, and a wastewater recycle exchange agreement with the Fresno Irrigation District. The USBR would supply 60,000 acre-feet per year (afy) in year 2010 through year 2025, and the FID would supply an estimated 108,200 afy in year 2010 (125,543 afy actual) (increasing to 132,400 afy by 2035) for the Kings River contracted water., and the FID wastewater exchange agreement would supply 13,800 afy in year 2010 through year 2025 (City of Fresno 2016) Page 5.15-6: Utilities and Service Systems This comment recommended that the sentence be modified to reflect the most recent decreased water usage (in the last couple of years due to drought/conservation), or provide a range of years for which the average water use is shown. Under the Existing Water Demand—Citywide the first sentence of the first paragraph on page 5.15-6 has been revised as follows: According to The the Fresno 2015 UWMP, the existing average water use for the City of Fresno is 300309 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), with a baseline period between 1999 through 2008. However, the actual per capital water use for the City in 2015 was 190 gpcd. The overall water usage patterns for the City have been reduced due to ongoing drought year-practices, and conservation measures the City has enacted. Total water demand for all sectors (industrial, public landscape irrigation, commercial/institutional, multi-family residential, single-family residential) in 2015 was 132,843 afy, and is projected by the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) to reach 262,500 afy by the year 2040. This projection includes conservation savings that will be achieved by the year 2040. Beginning late 2008 through January 2013, the City had initiated and completed the implementation of a residential water meter program through the installation of 113,000 water meters for single-family homes. From the period of 2008 through 2015, there has been a dramatic decline of water usage for all water use sectors, as such.; the City has met and exceeded the 2015 Interim target of 278 gpcd, as noted in the 2015 UWMP. NORTH AMERICA | EUROPE | AFRICA | AUSTRALIA | ASIA WWW.FIRSTCARBONSOLUTIONS.COM Findings of Fact Environmental Impact Report City of Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan, Ful ton Corridor Specific Plan, and Downtown Development Code City of Fresno, Fresno County, California Prepared for: City of Fresno 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721 Contact: Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager Prepared by: FirstCarbon Solutions 250 Commerce, Suite 250 Irvine, CA 92602 714.508.4100 Contact: Jason Brandman, Project Director Kim Burnell, Project Manager September 2, 2016 City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Table of Contents First Carbon Solutions iii K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Table of Contents Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 - Background ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 - Project Location ................................................................................................................. 2 1.3 - Project Objectives ............................................................................................................. 3 1.4 - Record of Proceedings ....................................................................................................... 5 1.5 - Custodian and Location of Records ................................................................................... 5 Section 2: Significant and Unavoidable effects .............................................................................. 7 2.1 - Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 - Greenhouse Gases ........................................................................................................... 24 2.3 - Noise ................................................................................................................................ 26 2.4 - Transportation and Traffic ............................................................................................... 34 2.5 - Section 3: Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance ................................................................................................................. 40 3.1 - Aesthetics ........................................................................................................................ 40 3.2 - Air Quality ........................................................................................................................ 44 3.3 - Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 47 3.4 - Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 55 3.5 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................... 71 3.6 - Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................................................... 80 Section 4: Feasibility of Project Alternatives ................................................................................ 87 4.1 - Alternatives Considered and Evaluated ........................................................................... 89 4.2 - Environmentally Superior Alternative ............................................................................. 92 List of Tables Table 1: DNCP and FCSP Construction Emissions ................................................................................. 10 Table 2: DNCP and FCSP Annual Air Pollutant Emissions...................................................................... 12 Table 3: Traffic Noise Contours ............................................................................................................. 28 Table 4: Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources .......................................................................... 44 City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Introduction First Carbon Solutions 1 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx INTRODUCTION SECTION 1: Background 1.1 - In compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Fresno (City) has conducted an environmental review of the proposed City of Fresno Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan (DNCP), Fulton Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP), and Downtown Development Code (DDC). A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was released for public review in April 2012, along with a revision of the NOP in September 2015. In July 2016, the Draft Environmental Report (Draft EIR) was released. After receiving public comment on the Draft EIR, the City prepared a document entitled Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (RTC). The RTC document includes the verbatim comments received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, entities, and agencies providing comments, the City’s responses to the significant environmental points raised in the comment, review and consultation process, and the various written responses to the comments prepared by the City’s technical consultants and City staff. These Findings are based upon the information contained in the record of proceedings, including the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), which includes the Draft EIR and technical appendices, the RTC, the staff report, and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). CEQA provides that “public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects*.+” (Public Resources Code Section 21002 *emphasis added+.) The procedures required by CEQA “are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects.” (Public Resources Code Section 21002.) CEQA’s mandates and principles are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three conclusions: (1) “*c+hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR,” (2) “*s+uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding *and+ *s+uch changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency,” or (3) “*s+pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR.” City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Introduction Findings of Fact 2 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx (Public Resources Code Section 21081; CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15091.) CEQA defines “feasible” to mean “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, legal, environmental, social and technological factors.” (Public Resources Code Section 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15364.) Because the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP and DDC Draft EIR identified significant effects that may occur as a result of the project, and in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Fresno hereby adopts these Findings of Fact. For each of the significant effects identified in Section 2, as set forth in greater detail in these Findings below, the City of Fresno makes the finding under Public Resources Code Section Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(2) and/or 21081(a)(3). For each of the significant effects identified in Section 3, as set forth in greater detail in these Findings below, the City of Fresno makes the finding under Public Resources Code Section Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1). Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines does not require specific findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as having “no impact” or a “less than significant” impact. Therefore, these effects are not addressed in these Findings. In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council of the City of Fresno has independently reviewed the Record of Proceedings and based on the evidence in the Record of Proceedings adopts these Findings of Fact. Project Location 1.2 - The City of Fresno is located within Fresno County, which is in central San Joaquin Valley. The City is located approximately 220 miles north of the Los Angeles and 170 miles south of Sacramento. The City is located on the State Route (SR) 99 corridor that links it to other Central Valley cities. To the north of Fresno is Madera County. The City of Clovis adjoins the City to the northeast. Smaller cities including the City of Fowler, City of Kingsburg, City of Parlier, City of Reedley, City of Sanger and City of Selma are located east-southeast. The City of Kerman is located to the west. The remaining area surrounding the City to the east, south, and west are unincorporated lands. The DNCP boundaries are located within the southern portion of the City of Fresno. The DNCP boundaries encompass 7,290 acres. The DNCP area is generally bounded to the east by Chestnut Avenue, to the south by Church Avenue, to the west by Thorne, West, and Marks Avenues, and to the north by SR 180 (Exhibit 3‐2). Along the western side of the DNCP, the boundaries extend as far north as Clinton Avenue. The DNCP area is divided by State Routes 99, 41, and 180, as well as the Union Pacific and BNSF railroad right‐of‐ways. The FCSP area is located within the boundaries of the DNCP (Exhibit 3‐2). The FCSP boundaries encompass 655 acres. The FCSP area is generally bounded to the north by Divisadero Street, to the west by SR 99, to the south by SR 41, and to the east by N Street, O Street, and the alley between M City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Introduction First Carbon Solutions 3 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx and N Streets (Exhibit 3‐3). The FCSP is divided by the Union Pacific railroad right‐of‐way. The Fulton District is also within the boundaries of the FCSP. The DDC is a form‐based zoning code that contains the standards and requirements for development and land use activity within the boundaries of the DNCP and FCSP. It implements the DNCP and the FCSP and would apply to all 7,290 acres of property within the plan boundaries. While this code will be referenced as the “Downtown Development Code” throughout the DEIR, upon adoption it would be incorporated into the Citywide Development Code. Project Objectives 1.3 - Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Objectives 1.3.1 - The primary objectives of the DNCP are as follows:  To make the Downtown Neighborhoods attractive, healthy, mixed-income places to live, thanks to their historic character and their proximity to a revitalized Downtown.  To revive the underlying structure of the Downtown Neighborhoods to create identifiable neighborhoods, districts, and corridors.  To integrate the public realm of streets with a multi-modal transportation network that renders them walkable and livable.  To regenerate parks and public spaces and make them safe and accessible to residents.  To reinforce the identity of each of the Plan’s planning areas by including all of the remaining ingredients for quality of life from childhood to old age within a walkable range.  To reintroduce missing street trees, irrigation, and sidewalks, and slow down traffic on primary thoroughfares through various traffic-calming measures.  To introduce a range of well-designed buildings that provide a variety of housing choices within easy access of parks, services, and jobs.  To design residential buildings to promote safety and community on the sidewalk and street.  To design commercial buildings with facades that are adjacent to sidewalks, are constructed of quality and durable materials, can accommodate a mix of uses at any one time, and can be reused over time under different programs.  To introduce the High Speed Rail in a manner that has the most beneficial impact possible on the surrounding homes, businesses, and open spaces, while preserving Downtown’s interconnected street network to the maximum extent possible. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Objectives 1.3.2 - The primary objectives of the FCSP are to define: City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Introduction Findings of Fact 4 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  A vision for the future of Downtown that recognizes the importance of history and tradition while embracing opportunities for continued reinvestment, growth, and beneficial change.  Goals and policies that work in tandem with and refine those of the General Plan and the DNCP to achieve the revitalization of the Plan area.  New land use policies for the Plan area will guide upcoming zoning regulations. These new policies are calibrated to deliver new development that is consistent with Fresno’s physical character, history, and culture, as well as the community’s vision for its future growth.  The implementation strategy for transforming the Plan area’s streets, infrastructure, parks, and other public spaces.  Revitalization of the Fulton District and promote it as a key asset and urban place. Strike a balance between the original character and value of the pedestrian-only Mall and its importance as the economic engine of the Downtown. The above objectives provide private property owners with a clear understanding of the future context within which they are investing and reinvesting in their properties. Downtown Development Code Objectives 1.3.3 - The objectives of the DDC are summarized as follows:  Property shall be occupied with land use activity to improve health; stabilize and improve property values; provide continuity of Fresno’s heritage; maximize compatibility; offer a range of housing choices; increase reinvestment in the Downtown Neighborhoods; provide a wide range of services and shopping; revitalize mixed-use corridors; and support convenient transit.  Buildings and their additions shall be designed and maintained to support reinvestment; front the adjacent street(s); enhance the building’s relationship to the public realm; use appropriate landscape materials; generate long-term value.  Frontages shall be designed and maintained to support the intended physical environment; support active and continuous pedestrian-oriented environments; provide appropriate physical transitions between the public right-of-way and the property; and express creativity.  Signage shall be designed and maintained to promote the aesthetic and environmental values of the community; provide an effective channel of communication; avoid traffic safety hazards; and safeguard and protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.  Open spaces, landscaping and streetscapes shall be designed and maintained to preserve and promote the aesthetic character and environmental quality of Fresno as a place to live, work, and shop; correspond to the adjacent streetscapes; incorporate urban agriculture at all scales, as practical; and contribute to mitigating environmental degradation.  Each new or modified block and street shall be designed and maintained to interconnect and form/maintain a network; support the intended physical context; generate pedestrian- City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Introduction First Carbon Solutions 5 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx oriented block lengths; transform large sites into pedestrian-oriented blocks; increase the number of blocks; and support a multi-modal transportation system. Record of Proceedings 1.4 - For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:  The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and all other public notices issued by the City of Fresno in conjunction with the proposed project.  The Draft EIR and the technical appendices for the proposed project.  All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft EIR.  All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review comment period on the Draft EIR.  The Final Environmental Impact Report (City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR) for the proposed project, which consists of the Draft EIR, the technical appendices, and the Response to Comments.  All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the proposed project at which such testimony was taken.  The MMRP.  The documents, reports, and data included or referenced in the technical appendices of the EIR.  All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and Response to Comments.  The City of Fresno Staff Report  The Resolution adopted by the City of Fresno in connection with the proposed project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein.  Any documents expressly cited in these Findings or in the resolution adopting these Findings.  Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e) (excluding privileged materials). Custodian and Location of Records 1.5 - The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City of Fresno’s actions related to the project are located at the City of Fresno City Clerk Office at 2600 Fresno Street, City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Introduction Findings of Fact 6 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Fresno, CA 93721. Copies of these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings, are, and at all relevant times, have been and will be available upon request at the City of Fresno City Clerk Office. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guideline Section 15091(e). City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 7 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE EFFECTS SECTION 2: The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR identified project-specific and/or cumulative impacts to aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gases, noise, transportation and traffic that cannot be mitigated to less than significant. Each of the significant and unavoidable impacts are discussed further below. The City of Fresno finds, based on the facts set forth in the record, which include but are not limited to the facts as set forth below, those facts contained in the Fresno General Plan (and the MEIR) and the Response to Comments, and any other facts set forth in materials prepared by the City of Fresno and/or City consultants, that there are no feasible mitigation measures, changes, or alterations available to reduce the impacts to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gases, noise, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. Air Quality 2.1 - Air Quality Standards/Violations – Program-Level Impacts 2.1.1 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified program-level significant impacts that would violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality. Violations of air quality standards occur when official air monitoring stations within the Air Basin exceed air quality standards as defined by EPA criteria and statistical sampling methods. Monitoring stations are located in areas that are representative of air quality in the Air Basin and are not necessarily located in all areas impacted by local sources. The DNCP and FCSP do not identify specific projects that would allow quantification of localized impacts from project-level emissions. Additional discussion regarding localized impacts on sensitive receptors is provided under Impact AIR-4. Although monitoring stations in Fresno currently experience violations of ozone and PM2.5 air quality standards, the impacts of the project for these pollutants are better assessed on a cumulative basis, because a single project alone would not result in a violation of the ozone standard (see Impact AIR-3). Ozone is generated by photochemical reactions of the cumulative emissions of ROG and NOx in the Air Basin. PM10 and PM2.5 are generated by direct emissions and by secondary reactions in the atmosphere, and have localized and cumulative regional impacts. The SJVAPCD has adopted project-level quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors, ROG and NOx of 10 tons per year, and 15 tons per year for PM10 and PM2.5. The threshold for CO is 100 tons per year. The threshold for SOx is 27 tons per year. These thresholds are based on the SJVAPCD’s New Source Review (NSR) offset thresholds contained in Rule 2201—New and Modified Stationary Source Review. Application of the District’s NSR offset thresholds to development projects provides a measure of the project’s impact in comparison to an important regulatory threshold. Projects that City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 8 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx exceed these thresholds may be considered to contribute substantially to an existing or projected violation. The results of the quantitative analysis for comparison with SJVAPCD thresholds is provided under this impact. Although these thresholds are intended for use on individual development projects, no other quantitative plan level threshold has been adopted by the SJVAPCD. The DNCP and FCSP provide for the development of numerous individual development projects that will be subject to the project- level thresholds at the time they are proposed. Large individual projects are likely to exceed the thresholds during project construction and operation. The DNCP and FCSP include estimates of increases in population, housing, and jobs anticipated from implementation of the plans. One of the primary goals of the plans is to increase development densities through infill and redevelopment of underutilized locations within the plan areas. The DNCP and FCSP reflect the cumulative projects anticipated for the City from the present until buildout of the plan areas, which is predicted for 2039. A more appropriate metric for cumulative contribution at the plan level is whether the cumulative impact of development predicted by the DNCP and FCSP would conflict with plans adopted to achieve the applicable standards (see discussion under Impact AIR-1). A conflict would result when growth in emissions exceed the amounts required for attainment by the years mandated by state and federal regulations. After the attainment year, the emissions inventory must stay below the attainment inventory even with continued growth in order to maintain the standard. Once standards are achieved, no significant impact to health would occur as long as standards are maintained. The project area is designated nonattainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Ozone is not directly emitted but is formed in the atmosphere by ozone precursors (ROG and NO2). In addition, PM10 and PM2.5 are emitted directly and also form in the atmosphere as a secondary pollutant from emissions of NO2 and ammonia. Ammonia is not a criteria pollutant and the SJVAPCD PM control strategy is based primarily on NO2 controls and reductions of directly emitted PM10 and PM2.5. Therefore, this section addresses the cumulative emissions of the pollutants ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. The ambient concentrations of other criteria pollutants, CO and SO2 are well below state and federal standards. CO is addressed under Impact AIR-4 for its potential to create a localized CO hotspot. There are no substantial sources of SO2 emissions proposed in the plan area, so no additional analysis is warranted for this pollutant. Analysis Approach The quantitative analysis of project criteria pollutant emissions was accomplished using CalEEMod version 2013.2.2. The analysis uses growth assumptions contained in the DNCP and FCSP to estimate the amounts of each land use type anticipated for development within the plan areas through buildout. The Traffic Study prepared by Fehr & Peers for the plans identified the land use categories, square feet and units of each development type, and trip generation rates for each land use that are used in CalEEMod to estimate project emissions. Construction emissions are based on the amount of land expected to be disturbed during construction projects and the square feet of buildings that would be constructed. Model default assumptions were used for the vehicle fleet mix, trip length, construction equipment fleet, energy consumption, and area source emissions. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 9 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx The land use and trip generation assumptions used in the analysis are provided in Appendix E.3. Development of the planning areas would result in air pollutant emissions from short-term construction activities and long-term project operation described below. Construction Construction activity from implementing the planning areas would cause temporary, short-term emissions of various air pollutants at each project site developed through project buildout. Due to the size of the project, the activity would generate construction emissions at locations within the planning area throughout the 23-year buildout period. ROG and NOx (ozone precursors), PM10, and PM2.5 would be emitted by construction equipment during various activities, which may include but are not limited to grading, excavation, building construction, or demolition. Soil disturbance during construction activities emits fugitive dust, a fraction of which consists of PM10 and PM2.5. CalEEMod assumes emissions from each construction phase would occur sequentially, no matter what the size of the project, unless each project is assessed separately. For example, all grading for all projects is assumed to occur in the first years of the buildout period and architectural coatings are assumed to be applied in the last years of buildout. The actual order and timing of individual construction projects is unknown. To more accurately assess annual construction emissions, the total emissions for each year were added and then divided by the number of years anticipated to reach buildout, in order to arrive at an annual average emission rate. SJVAPCD and state regulations reduce potential construction emissions. The ARB has adopted regulations for New Off-Road Diesel Engines and Equipment that result in cleaner equipment being placed in service as older, higher emitting equipment is retired. The ARB also adopted the In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation requiring NOx and PM10 emission reductions from equipment and vehicles currently in operation. SJVAPCD Regulation VIII includes requirements to control fugitive dust emissions during construction activities and requires commercial projects over 5 acres and residential projects over 10 acres to file a Dust Control Plan. The SJVAPCD 2015 GAMAQI states that compliance with Regulation VIII does not constitute mitigation because it is required by law. The SJVAPCD also provides Enhanced and Additional Control Measures that will provide a greater degree of PM10 reduction than required by Regulation VIII. Rule 9510—Indirect Source Review requires projects to reduce exhaust-related construction emissions by 20 percent for NOx and 50 percent for PM10; however, significance for these emissions is based on whether projects exceed the SJVAPCD annual quantitative thresholds. The District indicates that the control measures in Regulation VIII are required by regulation for all construction sites to reduce fugitive dust emissions. The District’s 2002 GAMAQI lists additional measures that may be required because of sheer project size or proximity of the project to sensitive receptors. The additional measures are referred to as “enhanced control measures” in the GAMAQI. These enhanced control measures have been added as amendments to Regulation VIII, so they are no longer considered mitigation measures that could be imposed on very large or sensitive projects, but standard control measures required for rule compliance. Each commercial project over 5 acres in size and residential project over 10 acres in size is required to submit a Dust Control Plan to the City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 10 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx SJVAPCD for approval, and requires control measures adequate to prevent significant fugitive dust impacts. If measures included in the Dust Control Plan prove inadequate to control fugitive dust, construction contractors must implement additional controls or cease dust generating construction activities. In addition, projects smaller than the Dust Control Plan size thresholds must still comply with most other Regulation VIII requirements. Therefore, fugitive dust impacts from construction activities are considered less than significant. The buildout of the planning areas will result in hundreds of individual development projects spread out over many years. Information regarding specific development projects, soil conditions, and the location of sensitive receptors in relation to the various projects would be needed in order to determine localized impacts associated with construction activity. The average annual emissions from construction of the planning areas is provided in Table 1. The annual emissions would substantially exceed the SJVAPCD project-level thresholds for the pollutants of ROG and NOx. The inventory represents a worst-case emission estimate for construction activity. Emissions from construction activities are expected to decline over time as new, cleaner equipment replaces older, higher-emitting equipment. However, on a cumulative basis, construction emissions would continue to exceed SJVAPCD annual thresholds, even with the regulatory reductions. Table 1: DNCP and FCSP Construction Emissions Source Emissions (tons/year) ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5 Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan 111.21 182.11 117.83 36.37 Fresno Corridor Specific Plan 149.33 219.52 155.81 47.07 Total 260.60 401.63 273.64 83.44 Annual Average 10.86 16.73 11.40 3.48 SJVAPCD Annual Thresholds 10 10 15 15 Exceeds District Significance Thresholds (yes or no) Yes Yes No No Note: Annual average emissions are calculated by adding the modeling results for each year of construction and dividing by the 24-year buildout period. The modeling results can be viewed in the Air Quality Analysis Report Appendix 4. Source: FirstCarbon Solutions and CalEEMod. Emissions related to projected construction activities are included in emission forecasts used to demonstrate attainment of the applicable air quality standards, and would therefore not interfere with or obstruct SJVAPCD attainment plans. However, the combined impact of all construction projects to reach buildout is a cumulative impact that makes it more difficult to attain the air quality standards, compared with a scenario where no growth takes place. Although individual projects may exceed SJVAPCD project-level thresholds, using a project threshold to address the impact of hundreds of projects that would be constructed to reach buildout of the planning areas is a highly conservative measure of project-level significance for an impact that is cumulative in nature. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 11 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Rule 9510—Indirect Source Review requires reductions of construction emissions in order to mitigate the impacts of growth. The rule requires NOx reductions of 20 percent and PM10 reductions of 45 percent compared with the statewide average by using clean construction equipment at the project site or paying mitigation fees to the SJVAPCD to obtain off-site reductions. Rule 9510 serves to mitigate both project-level and cumulative effects of construction on ozone and particulate matter emissions. Individual projects that exceed project-level significance thresholds after accounting for Rule 9510 reductions would be required to implement additional mitigation measures to reduce significant emissions, or the City would be required to prepare an EIR and adopt a statement of overriding considerations if emissions remain significant after applying all feasible mitigation measures. ARB off-road equipment regulations would result in reductions in NOx and PM emissions as new equipment meeting current and future standards replaces older higher emitting equipment. The regulations provide substantial reductions near-term and mid-term. ARB also requires retrofits of existing equipment to reduce particulate emissions that will help reduce emissions from older equipment. Regulations are normally implemented over a 5- to 10-year period at which time a new round of regulations are proposed if still needed to attain the air quality standards. The ARB has a long history of tightening regulations as technology advances increase the feasibility of additional controls. Large individual projects that exceed the SJVAPCD project thresholds will be required to include feasible mitigation measures that reduce the significant impact. The measures could include additional on-site controls or off-site mitigation fees that reduce emissions to less than significant levels. Based on the continued emission reductions anticipated from adopted ARB and SJVAPCD regulations, the attainment of ozone and particulate standards, accounting for projected growth, are on track. In the event that the SJVAB fails to reach Rate of Progress requirements, fails to reach attainment of the air quality standards on schedule, or falls out of attainment in the future, the SJVAPCD will be required to implement contingency measures to address the shortfall or be subject to Clean Air Act sanctions. The SJVAPCD could obtain additional reductions from any source within its regulatory authority, which includes the construction emissions regulated under Rule 9510. No action by the SJVAPCD or the City of Fresno is required until such time the planned reductions prove insufficient. When project construction emissions are viewed in relation to the applicable air quality plans adopted by the SJVAPCD, the emissions would not result in a significant cumulative contribution since the emissions would not interfere with attainment of air quality standards. However, estimated annual project construction emissions exceed project-level thresholds by a substantial margin for all pollutants. Therefore, construction emissions are considered potentially significant. Operation Operational emissions would increase each year as projects within the plan area are completed and occupied. In order to illustrate the cumulative growth over time, emissions were estimated based on the cumulative amount of development estimated for the years 2020, 2030, and the buildout year 2039. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 12 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx The main sources of operational criteria air pollutants in the City of Fresno are on-road motor vehicles, off-road motor vehicles, natural gas combustion, and stationary/area sources. Operational emissions were modeled using CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2. City of Fresno air pollutant emissions for the planning areas at 2020 and 2039 (buildout) are shown in Table 2. As shown in Table 2, the greatest sources of emissions are from on-road and off-road vehicles. Off-road vehicle emissions are generated by sources such as recreational equipment, lawn and garden equipment, and construction/mining equipment. Analysis of emission projections accounting for the effects of adopted regulations shows that there would be a net decrease in emissions with buildout of the planning areas. This is because the emission rates for the most important sources of these pollutants substantially decrease due to SJVAPCD and state regulations. As shown in Table 2, total emissions of ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 exceed the District’s project-level significance thresholds; however, as discussed earlier, the project thresholds are a highly conservative measure of significance for a long-range plan. Table 2: DNCP and FCSP Annual Air Pollutant Emissions Year Source Emissions (tons/year) ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5 Downtown Neighborhood Community Plan 2020 Area 7.17 0.05 0.04 0.04 Energy 0.03 0.83 0.06 0.06 Mobile 6.66 17.68 8.76 2.53 Total 13.86 18.56 8.86 2.63 2030 Area 29.67 0.18 0.15 0.15 Energy 0.38 3.38 0.26 0.26 Mobile 20.14 46.00 36.29 10.38 Total 50.19 49.56 36.70 10.79 2039 Area 43.05 0.32 0.26 0.26 Energy 0.56 4.97 0.39 0.39 Mobile 27.14 63.81 52.47 15.03 Total 70.75 69.10 53.12 15.68 Fresno Corridor Specific Plan 2020 Area 9.68 0.09 0.07 0.07 Energy 0.10 0.88 0.07 0.07 Mobile 12.88 32.12 15.37 4.43 Total 22.66 33.09 15.51 4.57 City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 13 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Table 2 (cont.): DNCP and FCSP Annual Air Pollutant Emissions Year Source Emissions (tons/year) ROG NOx PM10 PM2.5 2030 Area 33.84 0.31 0.26 0.26 Energy 0.35 3.06 0.24 0.24 Mobile 32.41 70.63 53.58 15.35 Total 66.60 74.00 54.08 15.85 2039 Area 44.89 0.32 0.26 0.26 Energy 0.47 4.18 0.33 0.33 Mobile 45.73 100.03 77.45 22.21 Total 91.09 104.53 78.04 22.80 2020 Total 36.52 51.65 24.37 7.20 2030 Total 116.79 123.56 90.78 26.64 2039 Total 161.84 173.63 131.16 38.48 SJVAPCD project significance thresholds 10 10 15 15 Significant Impact? (yes or no) Yes Yes Yes Yes Source: FirstCarbon Solutions and CalEEMod. The emissions shown in Table 2 reflect the benefits of adopted regulations incorporated in the air quality models used to estimate emissions in each analysis year. The rate of decline is rapid through 2020 and goes beyond reflecting the benefits of currently adopted regulations. Mobile source regulations are dependent on technological advancements in pollution controls and fuels. The state cannot require manufacturers to produce new equipment and vehicles that are not technologically or economically feasible. ARB updates regulations as technologies come to fruition, or provides adequate lead times for compliance with technology forcing regulations. The latest on-road standards adopted by the ARB in 2013 are not yet reflected in the emission model (EMFAC 2011) used in CalEEMod to estimate emissions. Those standards would provide reductions well beyond 2020 that are not reflected in Table 2. The State of California and the SJVAPCD are very likely to adopt additional regulations on most sources of emissions to be implemented during the plan buildout period and result in much greater reductions than is predicted with the adopted regulations included in the current version of CalEEMod or with off-model quantification methods available pending the next model update. Expanded use of renewable fuels, zero emission vehicles, and replacing combustion sources with electrically powered alternatives for greenhouse gas reductions will also result in reductions in criteria pollutant emissions. In addition, the General Plan includes policies and development patterns that will result in lower vehicle miles traveled and energy use compared with development projects constructed in the recent past that provide the basis for future emission projections. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 14 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Development within the planning area will result in increases in annual emissions that exceed SJVAPCD significance thresholds for all nonattainment pollutants. Although the growth in emissions is accounted for in SJVAPCD attainment plans and total emissions within the Air Basin will decline even when accounting for growth, this analysis identifies the impact as significant under the ton per year quantitative threshold criterion as listed in Table 2. Stationary Sources A variety of industrial and commercial processes (food processing plants, glass manufacturers, gas stations, dry cleaning, etc.) allowed under the project would also be expected to emit criteria pollutant emissions. These are referred to as stationary and stationary/area sources in this assessment. Emissions from stationary sources are regulated at the local and regional level through SJVAPCD permitting and prohibitory rules. Under Rule 2201—New and Modified Stationary Source Review, sources emitting more than two pounds per day of any regulated pollutant are required to obtain an Authority to Construct (ATC) and Permit to Operate (PTO) from the SJVAPCD, and to implement best available control technology (BACT). Emission offsets are required for stationary sources that exceed offset thresholds contained in Rule 2201. The SJVAPCD has also adopted prohibitory rules that set emission limits and/or identify control technologies that apply to new and existing sources and further reduce emissions. The net effect of this regulatory system is continued reductions in stationary source emissions including proposed buildout of planning areas. Therefore, stationary source emissions from the project are considered less than significant. Policies, Ordinances, and Regulations that Mitigate Project Impacts It is important to note that the DNCP and the FCSP are a primary General Plan implementation strategy to reduce mobile source emissions in the City of Fresno, which as shown in Table 2 are responsible for over 90 percent of air quality impacts with the plan area. The increases in development densities, mixed-use development, and transportation infrastructure supportive of walking, bicycling, transit, are expected to provide substantial reductions in emissions compared with more traditional suburban automobile oriented development. The City of Fresno has previously adopted comprehensive policies and strategies aimed at improving the environment for the people of Fresno. Initiatives include the following: Fresno Green: The City of Fresno’s Strategy for Achieving Sustainability. The City adopted the Handbook for Fresno Green Residential and Non-Residential Checklist in October 2009. The program provides incentives for projects that achieve a minimum of 20 points spread over five major sustainability categories, including those with air quality benefits. The incentives include:  25 percent reduction on Planning entitlement fees  20 percent minor deviation from development standards (parking, setbacks, etc.)  Expedited processing  Recognition City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 15 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Fresno Bus Rapid Transit Master Plan. The City of Fresno prepared the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Master Plan in 2008. The overall vision of the BRT Master Plan is to demonstrate how improved efficiency, speed, and service can attract new transit ridership, improve customer satisfaction, and benefit the broader community by providing a quality of service similar to light rail systems through the use of bus technology. The City has received a grant from the federal government to implement BRT in Fresno. Construction has begun on the first BRT segment along Blackstone Avenue, with an expected completion date of 2017. General Plan Policies. The General Plan includes policies designed specifically to address a variety of air quality impacts through measures that reduce vehicle and other operational-related air quality emissions. A list of policies that would reduce air pollutant emissions is provided below.  Policies to reduce motor vehicle emissions by encouraging compact communities, smart growth, mixed use, infill development, pedestrian and bicycle accessibility, transit use, alternative fuel, and jobs/housing balance: - UF-1-c, UF-12-a, UF-12-b, UF-12-d, UF-12-e, UF-12-f, UF-14-a, UF-14-b, UF-14-c, LU-2-a, LU- 2-b, LU-3-b, LU-3-c, LU-5-f, LU-5-e, LU-6-b, LU-6-f, LU-6-g, LU-8-b, RC-4-d, RC-4-e, RC-4-f, RC- 4-g, RC-8-b, HC-3-b, and policies under the objectives MT-1, MT-4, MT-5, MT-6, MT-8, and MT-9.  Policies to reduce the City government operational emissions: - RC-4-j, RC-8-f, RC-8-g.  Policies encouraging the environmental review of projects to reduce air pollutant emissions: - RC-4c, RC-4d, RC-8c. SJVAPCD Land Use Related Regulations. Individual projects to be developed under the proposed project would be subject to District Rules and Regulations, including Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review) and Regulation VIII (Fugitive Dust Prohibitions). Existing businesses and new projects that are large employers (over 100 employees) will be subject to Rule 9410 (Employer Based Trip Reduction). Rule 9510 was adopted with the purpose of mitigating the impacts of growth on air quality throughout the San Joaquin Valley. Rule 9510 is by far the most stringent development related to air regulation in California and the nation. Reductions from Rule 9510 are surplus, meaning they are not required to demonstrate attainment of air quality standards. Rule 9410’s purpose is to reduce emissions related to employee commute trips. These two rules provide substantial emission reductions from the General Plan buildout and provide assurance that the project would not result in significant air quality impacts. SJVAPCD Voluntary Emission Reduction Agreements (VERA). The SJVAPCD offers VERAs as a method for development projects that exceed SJVAPCD thresholds after accounting for Rule 9510 reductions to mitigate significant criteria pollutant impacts. VERAs require emission reductions in addition to those required by Rule 9510. The developers of individual projects enter into contracts with the SJVAPCD to purchase emission reductions obtained through projects funded under SJVAPCD grant and incentive programs. The SJVAPCD will also verify emission reductions from projects identified by the developer and manage the implementation and long-term monitoring of the City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 16 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx projects. The use of a VERA may not be feasible for all projects, but should be considered for large projects with significant impacts. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding Although the existing policies, ordinances, regulations and objectives will reduce criteria pollutant emissions, the planning areas would exceed the SJVAPCD project-level thresholds of significance for ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. Therefore, there are no feasible mitigation measures that could reduce this impact to less than significant. As a result, the project’s criteria pollutant impact is significant and unavoidable. Project-specific The implementation of the proposed plans and relevant policies for this area are expected to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions to the extent feasible. This is well stated in the FCSP: “By improving Downtown, this Plan helps to expand access and make Downtown more inviting and attractive to everyone. Over time, Downtown’s wide streets are put to better use, creating space for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, and connecting and creating synergy with adjacent neighborhoods and institutions that are within walking and biking distance of Downtown.” The FCSP follows principles including infill development, mix of land uses, an interconnected street system, and a high level of walkability and bikability that have been documented to reduce vehicle miles traveled (see CAPCOA’s 2010 report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures). No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. Air Quality Standards/Violations – Cumulative Impacts 2.1.2 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified significant cumulative impacts that would violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The study area for the analysis of cumulative regional air quality impacts such as ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 is the SJVAB, which includes the counties of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and a portion of Kern. This analysis will be based on a summary of projections approach as provided in Section 15130(b)(1)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states: City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 17 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx The following elements are necessary to an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts: 1) Either: (A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. The District’s 2015 GAMAQI states the following regarding cumulative criteria air pollutants: As discussed in section 8.4 (Thresholds of Significance—Criteria Pollutant Emissions) the District’s thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are based on District Rule 2201 (New Source Review) offset requirements. Furthermore, New Source Review (NSR) is a major component of the District’s attainment strategy. The District’s attainment plans demonstrate that project specific emissions below New Source Review (NSR) offset requirements will not prevent the District from achieving attainment. Consequently, if project specific criteria pollutant emissions are below their respective thresholds of significance, the project would be consistent with the overall District attainment plan and would be determined to have a less than cumulatively significant impact on air quality. Under the amended CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impacts may be analyzed using other plans that evaluate relevant cumulative effects. The air quality attainment plans describe and evaluate the future projected emissions sources in the Basin and set forth a strategy to meet both state and federal Clean Air Act planning requirements and federal ambient air quality standards. Therefore, the attainment plans are relevant plans for a CEQA cumulative impacts analysis. As discussed in Impact AIR-1, the project is consistent with the air quality attainment plans. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact under this criterion. However, since the project exceeds the SJVAPCD quantitative thresholds for ROG and NOx, cumulative air emissions impacts are considered potentially significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding There are no feasible mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations that could reduce this cumulative impact to less than significant. As a result, the project’s contribution to cumulative the criteria pollutant impact is significant and unavoidable. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 18 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Criteria Pollutant – Program-Level Impacts 2.1.3 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified project-specific significant impacts that could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Program-Level Impact Analysis of the DNCP and FCSP To result in a less than significant impact, the following criteria must be true: 1. Regional analysis: emissions of nonattainment pollutants must be below the District’s regional significance thresholds. This is an approach recommended by the District in its GAMAQI. 2. Summary of projections: the project must be consistent with current air quality attainment plans including control measures and regulations. This is an approach consistent with Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. 3. Cumulative health impacts: the project must result in less than significant cumulative health effects from the nonattainment pollutants. This approach correlates the significance of the regional analysis with health effects, consistent with the court decision, Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1219-20. Step 1: Regional Analysis If an area is in nonattainment for a criteria pollutant, then the background concentration of that pollutant has historically exceeded the ambient air quality standard. It follows that if a project exceeds the regional threshold for that nonattainment pollutant, it would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of that pollutant and result in a significant cumulative impact. The Air Basin is in nonattainment for PM10, PM2.5, and ozone. Therefore, if the project exceeds the regional thresholds for PM10, or PM2.5, then it contributes to a cumulatively considerable impact for those pollutants. If the project exceeds the regional threshold for NOx or ROG (ozone precursors), then it follows that the project would contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact for ozone. Regional emissions include those generated from all on-site and off-site activities. Regional significance thresholds have been established by the District because emissions from projects in the Air Basin can potentially contribute to the existing emission burden and possibly affect the attainment and maintenance of ambient air quality standards. Projects within the Air Basin region with regional emissions in excess of any of the thresholds presented previously are considered to have a significant regional air quality impact. The criteria pollutant emissions analysis assessed whether the project would exceed the District’s thresholds of significance. As shown in Table 2, criteria pollutant emissions would exceed the threshold of significance during project construction for ROG and NOx; however, buildout of the DNCP and FCSP is the cumulative result of hundreds of separate projects requiring separate approvals. Therefore, the combination of project emissions with the criteria pollutants from other City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 19 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx sources within the Air Basin would not cumulatively contribute to a significant impact according to this criterion. Step 2: Plan Approach Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states the following: The following elements are necessary to an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts: 1) Either: (A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15130(b), this analysis of cumulative impacts is based on a summary of projections analysis. The Fresno MEIR includes development projections through the year 2056. The growth anticipated by the DNCP and the FCSP are included in the growth projections used for the MEIR. The Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) prepared for the Fresno General Plan found the regional criteria pollutant impacts to be significant and unavoidable. The MEIR included the following mitigation measures to reduce the impacts from the General Plan: Mitigation Measure AIR-1 Projects that include five or more heavy-duty truck deliveries per day with sensitive receptors located within 300 feet of the truck loading area shall provide a screening analysis to determine if the project has the potential to exceed criteria pollutant concentration based standards and thresholds for NO2 and PM2.5. If projects exceed screening criteria, refined dispersion modeling and health risk assessment shall be accomplished and if needed, mitigation measures to reduce impacts shall be included in the project to reduce the impacts to the extent feasible. Mitigation measures include but are not limited to:  Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards.  Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less. Mitigation Measure AIR-2 Projects that result in an increased cancer risk of 10 in a million *20 in a million under revised SJVAPCD thresholds+ or exceed criteria pollutant ambient air quality standards shall implement site-specific measures that reduce TAC exposure to reduce excess cancer risk to less than 10 in a million *20 in a million under revised SJVAPCD thresholds+. Possible control measures include but are not limited to:  Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 20 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less  Construct block walls to reduce the flow of emissions toward sensitive receptors  Install a vegetative barrier downwind from the TAC source that can absorb a portion of the diesel PM emissions  For projects proposing to locate a new building containing sensitive receptors near existing sources of TAC emissions, install HEPA filters in HVAC systems to reduce TAC emission levels exceeding risk thresholds.  Install heating and cooling services at truck stops to eliminate the need for idling during overnight stops to run onboard systems.  For large distribution centers where the owner controls the vehicle fleet, provide facilities to support alternative fueled trucks powered by fuels such as natural gas or bio-diesel.  Utilize electric powered material handling equipment where feasible for the weight and volume of material to be moved. Mitigation Measure AIR-3 Require developers proposing projects on ARB’s list of projects in its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (Handbook) warranting special consideration to prepare a cumulative health risk assessment when sensitive receptors are located within the distance screening criteria of the facility as listed in the ARB Handbook. Mitigation Measure AIR-4 Require developers of projects containing sensitive receptors to provide a cumulative health risk assessment at project locations exceeding ARB Land Use Handbook distance screening criteria or newer criteria that may be developed by the SJVAPCD (no longer required by CEQA). The projects within the planning areas will be required to follow these mitigation measures in order to reduce impacts from TAC emissions. Additionally, no other mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations were available to further reduce this impact. The impacts of the Fulton Mall Reconstruction Project on cumulative criteria pollutant emissions were assessed in a DEIR prepared specifically for the project. The analysis in the DEIR found that project construction emissions would not exceed SJVAPCD regional criteria pollutant threshold and therefore would not produce a significant cumulative contribution to this impact. The operational emissions assessed in the current analysis assume the completion of the reconstruction project. The District attainment plans are based on a summary of projections that accounts for projected growth throughout the Air Basin and the controls needed to achieve ambient air quality standards. This analysis considers the current CEQA Guidelines, which includes the amendments approved by the Natural Resources Agency and effective on March 18, 2010. The Air Basin is in nonattainment or maintenance status for ozone and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), which means that concentrations of those pollutants currently exceed the ambient air quality standards for those pollutants or that the standards have recently been attained. When concentrations of ozone, PM10, or PM2.5 exceed the ambient air quality standard, then those sensitive to air pollution (such as City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 21 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx children, the elderly, and the infirm) could experience health effects such as decrease of pulmonary function and localized lung edema in humans and animals, increased mortality risk, and risk to public health implied by altered connective tissue metabolism and altered pulmonary morphology in animals after long-term exposures and pulmonary function decrements in chronically exposed humans. See Section 2.3: Existing Air Quality Conditions for additional correlation of the health impacts with the existing pollutant concentrations experienced in the Fresno area. Under the amended CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impacts may be analyzed using other plans that evaluate relevant cumulative effects. The geographic scope for cumulative criteria pollution from air quality impacts is the Air Basin, because that is the area in which the air pollutants generated by the sources within the Air Basin circulate and are often trapped. The SJVAPCD is required to prepare and maintain air quality attainment plans and a State Implementation Plan to document the strategies and measures to be undertaken to reach attainment of ambient air quality standards. While the SJVAPCD does not have authority over land use decisions, it is recognized that changes in land use and circulation planning would help the Air Basin achieve clean air mandates. The District evaluated emissions from land uses and transportation in the entire Air Basin when it developed its attainment plans. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, subdivision (h)(3), a lead agency may determine that a project’s incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with the requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program. The history and development of the SJVAPCD’s current Ozone Attainment Plan is described in Section 2.4, Air Quality Plans. The 2007 8-Hour Ozone Plan contains measures to achieve reductions in emissions of ozone precursors and sets plans towards attainment of ambient ozone standards by 2023. The 2012 PM2.5 Plan and the 2015 PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard require fewer NOx reductions to attain the PM2.5 standard than the Ozone Plan, so the Ozone Plan is considered the applicable plan for reductions of the ozone precursors NOx and ROG. The 2012 PM2.5 Plan requires reductions in directly emitted PM2.5 from combustion sources such as diesel engines and fireplaces and from fugitive dust to attain the ambient standard and is the applicable plan for PM2.5 emissions. PM2.5 is also formed in secondary reactions in the atmosphere involving NOx and ammonia to form nitrate particles. Reductions in NOx required for ozone attainment are also sufficient for PM2.5 attainment. As discussed in Impact AIR-1, the project is consistent with all applicable control measures in the air quality attainment plans. The planning areas would comply with any District rules and regulations that may pertain to implementation of the AQPs. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with regard to compliance with applicable rules and regulations. Step 3: Cumulative Health Impacts The study area for the analysis of cumulative regional air quality impacts such as ROG, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 is the SJVAB, which includes the counties of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and a portion of Kern. This analysis will be based on a summary of projections approach as provided in Section 15130(b)(1)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states: City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 22 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx The following elements are necessary to an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts: 1) Either: (A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. The District’s 2015 GAMAQI states the following regarding cumulative criteria air pollutants: As discussed in section 8.4 (Thresholds of Significance—Criteria Pollutant Emissions) the District’s thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are based on District Rule 2201 (New Source Review) offset requirements. Furthermore, New Source Review (NSR) is a major component of the District’s attainment strategy. The District’s attainment plans demonstrate that project specific emissions below New Source Review (NSR) offset requirements will not prevent the District from achieving attainment. Consequently, if project specific criteria pollutant emissions are below their respective thresholds of significance, the project would be consistent with the overall District attainment plan and would be determined to have a less than cumulatively significant impact on air quality. Under the amended CEQA Guidelines, cumulative impacts may be analyzed using other plans that evaluate relevant cumulative effects. The air quality attainment plans describe and evaluate the future projected emissions sources in the Basin and set forth a strategy to meet both state and federal Clean Air Act planning requirements and federal ambient air quality standards. Therefore, the attainment plans are relevant plans for a CEQA cumulative impacts analysis. As discussed in Impact AIR-1, the project is consistent with the air quality attainment plans. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact under this criterion. However, since the project exceeds the SJVAPCD quantitative thresholds for ROG, NOx, PM10, PM2.5, cumulative air emissions impacts are considered potentially significant. The Air Basin is in nonattainment for ozone, PM10, (State only) and PM2.5, which means that the background levels of those pollutants are at times higher than the ambient air quality standards. The air quality standards were set to protect public health, including the health of sensitive individuals (such as children, the elderly, and the infirm). Therefore, when the concentration of those pollutants exceeds the standard, it is likely that some sensitive individuals in the population would experience health effects that were described. However, the health effects are a factor of the dose-response curve. Concentration of the pollutant in the air (dose), the length of time exposed, and the response of the individual are factors involved in the severity and nature of health impacts. If a significant health impact results from project emissions, it does not mean that 100 percent of the population would experience health effects. Since the Basin is nonattainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, it is considered to have an existing significant cumulative health impact without the project. When this occurs, the analysis considers City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 23 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx whether the project’s contribution to the existing violation of air quality standards is cumulatively considerable. The SJVAPCD regional thresholds for NOx, VOC, PM10, or PM2.5 are applied as cumulative contribution thresholds. Projects that exceed the regional thresholds would have a cumulatively considerable health impact. As shown in Table 1, the regional analysis of construction emissions indicates that the project would exceed the District’s significance thresholds for ROG and NOx; however, buildout of the DNCP and FCSP is the cumulative result of hundreds of separate projects requiring separate approvals. Therefore, the project would not result in significant cumulative health impacts. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding There are no feasible mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations that could reduce this cumulative impact to less than significant. As a result, the project’s contribution to cumulative the criteria pollutant impact is significant and unavoidable. Project-specific The implementation of the proposed plans and relevant policies for this area are expected to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions to the extent feasible. This is well stated in the FCSP: “By improving Downtown, this Plan helps to expand access and make Downtown more inviting and attractive to everyone. Over time, Downtown’s wide streets are put to better use, creating space for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, and connecting and creating synergy with adjacent neighborhoods and institutions that are within walking and biking distance of Downtown.” The DNCP and FCSP follow principles including infill development, mix of land uses, an interconnected street system, and a high level of walkability and bikability that have been documented to reduce vehicle miles traveled (see CAPCOA’s 2010 report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures). No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. Cumulative As stated above, the plans provide an effective framework for reducing per capita emissions that would reduce the projects cumulative impacts. No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 24 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Greenhouse Gases 2.2 - Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Project Impact 2.2.1 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report Draft EIR identified project-specific significant impacts that would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Greenhouse gas impacts are by their nature cumulative impacts. Localized impacts of climate change are the result of the cumulative impact of global emissions. The combined benefits of reductions achieved by all levels of government help to slow or reverse the growth in greenhouse gas emissions. In the absence of comprehensive international agreements on appropriate levels of reductions achieved by each country, another measure of cumulative contribution is required. California has defined reductions required by the State in AB 32 (1990 emission levels by 2020). This serves to define California’s share of the reductions regardless of the activities or lack of activities of other areas of the U.S. or the world. Therefore, a cumulative threshold based on consistency with state targets and actions to reduce greenhouse gases is an appropriate standard of comparison for significance determinations at the program level of analysis, as supported by data contained within the City’s GHG Plan. Greenhouse gas impacts are by their nature cumulative impacts. Localized impacts of climate change are the result of the cumulative impact of global emissions. The combined benefits of reductions achieved by all levels of government help to slow or reverse the growth in greenhouse gas emissions. In the absence of comprehensive international agreements on appropriate levels of reductions achieved by each country, another measure of cumulative contribution is required. California has defined reductions required by the State in AB 32 (1990 emission levels by 2020). This serves to define California’s share of the reductions regardless of the activities or lack of activities of other areas of the U.S. or the world. Therefore, a cumulative threshold based on consistency with state targets and actions to reduce greenhouse gases is an appropriate standard of comparison for significance determinations at the program level of analysis, as supported by data contained within the City’s GHG Plan. The cumulative impacts of DNCP and FCSP implementation after 2020 has no comprehensive state target that provides a similar basis of comparison. The regional targets adopted to comply with SB 375 only apply to a fraction of the mobile source inventory in 2020 and 2035. The GHG Plan includes an interim target of a 40 percent reduction from BAU for 2035. Continued implementation and reductions from the City’s strategy are predicted to achieve the interim target. As described earlier, the State is in the process of identifying a reduction target for 2030, but the actual strategy required to reach a target has not been determined. Finally, in preliminary assessments of options to achieve the 2050 goal, the State concluded that reliance on technical advancements and accelerated market penetration of new technologies would be required. Developing a community 2050 target without an adopted state strategy would be highly speculative. The General Plan and GHG Plan will likely be updated several times before 2050. Each update will provide an opportunity to identify community targets to coincide with state targets and to adjust the strategy to ensure that the City of Fresno does its part in achieving greenhouse gas reductions. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 25 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding The General Plan policies and GHG Plan strategies will continue to provide greenhouse gas reductions beyond 2020 since they apply to all development that will occur between adoption and buildout unless superseded by new policies. Although the interim targets contained in the GHG Plan are expected to be achieved, the actual amount of local reductions needed beyond 2020 is uncertain pending adoption of state targets for later years. In addition, the long-term effectiveness of the General Plan policies and programs that avoid, reduce, or minimize greenhouse gas emissions is not known. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to the growth under the DNCP and FCSP are significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Cumulative Impact 2.2.2 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified significant cumulative impacts that would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Greenhouse gas impacts are by their nature cumulative impacts. Localized impacts of climate change are the result of the cumulative impact of global emissions. The combined benefits of reductions achieved by all levels of government help to slow or reverse the growth in greenhouse gas emissions. In the absence of comprehensive international agreements on appropriate levels of reductions achieved by each country, another measure of cumulative contribution is required. California has defined reductions required by the State in AB 32 (1990 emission levels by 2020). This serves to define California’s share of the reductions regardless of the activities or lack of activities of other areas of the U.S. or the world. Therefore, a cumulative threshold based on consistency with state targets and actions to reduce greenhouse gases is an appropriate standard of comparison for significance determinations at the program level of analysis, as supported by data contained within the City’s GHG Plan. The cumulative impacts of DNCP and FCSP implementation after 2020 has no comprehensive state target that provides a similar basis of comparison. The regional targets adopted to comply with SB 375 only apply to a fraction of the mobile source inventory in 2020 and 2035. The GHG Plan includes an interim target of a 40 percent reduction from BAU for 2035. Continued implementation and reductions from the City’s strategy are predicted to achieve the interim target. As described earlier, the State is in the process of identifying a reduction target for 2030, but the actual strategy required to reach a target has not been determined. Finally, in preliminary assessments of options to achieve the 2050 goal, the State concluded that reliance on technical advancements and accelerated market City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 26 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx penetration of new technologies would be required. Developing a community 2050 target without an adopted state strategy would be highly speculative. The General Plan and GHG Plan will likely be updated several times before 2050. Each update will provide an opportunity to identify community targets to coincide with state targets and to adjust the strategy to ensure that the City of Fresno does its part in achieving greenhouse gas reductions. The General Plan policies and GHG Plan strategies will continue to provide greenhouse gas reductions beyond 2020 since they apply to all development that will occur between adoption and buildout unless superseded by new policies. Although the interim targets contained in the GHG Plan are expected to be achieved, the actual amount of local reductions needed beyond 2020 is uncertain pending adoption of state targets for later years. In addition, the long-term effectiveness of the General Plan policies and programs that avoid, reduce, or minimize greenhouse gas emissions is not known. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to the growth under the DNCP and FCSP are significant and unavoidable. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The General Plan policies and GHG Plan strategies will continue to provide greenhouse gas reductions beyond 2020 since they apply to all development that will occur between adoption and buildout unless superseded by new policies. Although the interim targets contained in the GHG Plan are expected to be achieved, the actual amount of local reductions needed beyond 2020 is uncertain pending adoption of state targets for later years. In addition, the long-term effectiveness of the General Plan policies and programs that avoid, reduce, or minimize greenhouse gas emissions is not known. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to the growth under the DNCP and FCSP are significant and unavoidable. Noise 2.3 - Noise Levels in Excess of Standards – Project Impact 2.3.1 - Significant Impact Long-Term Project Impacts The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified project-specific significant impacts that would result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Based on existing noise measurements taken in the City (Table 1 and Table 2), as well as on existing and future noise modeling (Figures NS-2 and NS-3 of the General Plan), noise levels in excess of City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 27 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx existing standards set forth by the City of Fresno currently occur and would continue to occur throughout the City, potentially affecting residential and other noise-sensitive uses. Based on the traffic noise levels shown in Figure NS-3 of the General Plan, future noise levels along many major roadway segments in the Plan Areas currently exceed, or would exceed with implementation of the project, the City’s desirable and generally acceptable exterior noise standard of 65 dBA Ldn for transportation noise sources. Future development activities within the Plan Areas would result in higher land use densities, which would result in increased traffic volumes and increases in commercial and industrial uses that would incrementally increase noise levels in some areas. Substantial noise level exposures can also be expected for project-related, noise-sensitive development that could occur near existing railroad lines. Roadway Noise Sources The FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate traffic noise impacts related to implementation of the project. Traffic data used in the model were obtained from the traffic impact analysis prepared by Fehr & Peers for the proposed project. The existing, existing with project, and cumulative with project traffic volumes are based on the maximum traffic volumes anticipated to be experienced for each roadway classification. In order to determine the proposed project’s contribution to roadway noise contours, each of the City of Fresno’s roadway classifications were modeled by applying the FHWA’s noise modeling procedure, using roadway, speed, and traffic mix data, and the greatest project increase anticipated for each roadway type, which have been based on traffic volume levels provided by the engineering firm of Fehr & Peers. Noise contours represent the distance to noise levels of a constant value and are measured from the center of the roadway. For analysis comparison purposes, the noise levels are calculated at the right-of-way of each roadway type, which is the nearest location where development may occur to each roadway. In establishing noise contours for land use planning, it is customary to ignore noise attenuation afforded by buildings, roadway elevations, and depressions, and to minimize the barrier effect of natural terrain features. The result is a worst-case estimate of the existing and future noise environment. The developed noise contours are conservative, meaning that the contours are modeled with minimal noise attenuation by natural barriers and buildings. Table 3 shows the anticipated noise levels for each roadway type for existing, existing with project, cumulative with project, and other representative traffic volume levels at the right-of-way. The distance from the centerline to the 55-, 60-, 65-, and 70-dBA noise levels have been calculated and are also shown in Table 3 with the noise calculation spreadsheets provided in Appendix I. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 28 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Table 3: Traffic Noise Contours Roadway Scenario dBA CNEL at Right-of- Way Increase over Existing (dBA) Distance to Contour (feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL 2-Lane Collector Existing 66 NA 36 79 169 365 2-Lane Collector Existing Plus Project 66 0 39 84 182 391 2-Lane Collector Cumulative Plus Project 66 0 41 89 191 412 4-Lane Collector Existing 61 NA RW 51 109 235 4-Lane Collector Existing Plus Project 62 1 RW 55 119 257 4-Lane Collector Cumulative Plus Project 62 1 RW 56 120 258 4-Lane Arterial Existing 67 NA 62 133 287 619 4-Lane Arterial Existing Plus Project 68 1 78 169 363 782 4-Lane Arterial Cumulative Plus Project 69 2 81 175 376 811 4-Lane Super Arterial Existing 66 NA 64 137 295 636 4-Lane Super Arterial Existing Plus Project 68 2 96 208 448 965 4-Lane Super Arterial Cumulative Plus Project 68 2 97 209 450 970 6-Lane Arterial Existing 68 NA 89 192 414 893 6-Lane Arterial Existing Plus Project 69 1 101 217 468 1,009 6-Lane Arterial Cumulative Plus Project 69 1 106 229 494 1,063 Scenic Arterial Existing 61 NA RW 70 151 326 Scenic Arterial Existing Plus Project 63 2 RW 95 204 439 Scenic Arterial Cumulative Plus Project 63 2 RW 96 207 446 6-Lane Expressway Existing 70 NA 119 256 551 1,188 6-Lane Expressway Existing Plus Project 71 1 138 296 639 1,376 6-Lane Expressway Cumulative Plus Project 72 2 141 304 655 1,410 Scenic Expressway Existing 68 NA 97 208 448 966 Scenic Expressway Existing Plus Project 69 1 122 262 565 1,218 Scenic Expressway Cumulative Plus Project 70 2 132 284 613 1,320 SR 41 Freeway Existing 73 NA 251 540 1,164 2,508 SR 41 Freeway Existing Plus Project 75 2 308 663 1,427 3,075 SR 41 Freeway Cumulative Plus Project 75 2 316 680 1,465 3,155 SR 180 Freeway Existing 72 NA 263 566 1,220 2,628 SR 180 Freeway Existing Plus Project 74 2 332 716 1,542 3,322 SR 180 Freeway Cumulative Plus Project 74 2 337 725 1,563 3,367 City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 29 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Table 3 (cont.): Traffic Noise Contours Roadway Scenario dBA CNEL at Right-of- Way Increase over Existing (dBA) Distance to Contour (feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL SR 99 Freeway Existing 73 NA 202 435 937 2,019 SR 99 Freeway Existing Plus Project 76 3 287 619 1,334 2,875 SR 99 Freeway Cumulative Plus Project 76 3 298 642 1,383 2,979 SR 168 Freeway Existing 71 NA 194 418 901 1,941 SR 168 Freeway Existing Plus Project 72 1 235 505 1,089 2,345 SR 168 Freeway Cumulative Plus Project 73 2 257 554 1,195 2,574 Notes: RW = Noise contour is located within right-of-way of roadway. Source: FirstCarbon Solutions, 2014. Table 3 shows that the majority of roadway classification scenarios currently exceed or would exceed (under plus project conditions) the City’s 65 dBA CNEL standard for sensitive land uses as measured at the right-of-way of the modeled roadways. This would be considered a significant impact. Project-related traffic noise impacts to existing land uses are discussed under Impact NOI-3: Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels, below. Railroad Noise Sources As shown in the existing conditions discussion above, existing railroad operations in the Plan Areas could expose proposed development that could occur with implementation of the project to noise levels in excess of the City’s transportation noise standard. Implementation of the project is not expected to directly result in expanded railroad operations and therefore would not result in increased railroad noise impacts. General Plan Policies NS-1-a through NS-1-o establish exterior and interior noise level standards, require the incorporation of noise reduction design features, use of best available technology, and require site-specific acoustical studies, among other measures, as requirements that would assist in reducing railroad noise impacts for new noise-sensitive land use development. However, development may occur in areas exposed to excessive railroad noise levels that, even with implementation of the best technology measures and compliance with the policies of the General Plan it may not be feasible to reduce railroad noise impacts to below the City’s exterior transportation noise level standard for the receiving land use. Therefore, similar to the findings of the General Plan MEIR, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 30 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Stationary Noise Sources Stationary noise sources can also have an effect on existing or future development. Stationary noise sources can involve a wide spectrum of uses and activities, including various industrial uses, commercial operations, agricultural production, school playgrounds, high school football games and marching bands, HVAC units, generators, lawn maintenance equipment, and swimming pool pumps. Even with incorporation of the best available noise control technology, noise emanating from industrial uses can be substantial and exceed the daytime or nighttime noise standards. These noise sources can be continuous and may contain tonal components that may be annoying to nearby receptors. Although new industrial uses in the Plan Area would typically be located in industrial districts near freeways and commercial uses and away from residences and other sensitive noise receptors, noise sources associated with new commercial uses such as automotive repair facilities, recycling centers, and loading docks may occur in the vicinity of residential uses. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding General Plan Policies NS-1-a through NS-1-I, and NS-1-n and NS-1-o establish exterior and interior noise level standards, require the incorporation of noise reduction design features, use of best available technology, and require site-specific acoustical studies, among other measures, as requirements that would assist in reducing stationary source noise impacts for new land use development. In addition, the proposed DDC includes setback requirements for new mechanical equipment that would assist in reducing noise impacts to off-site sensitive uses. However, even with implementation of the best technology measures and compliance with all of the policies of the General Plan it may not be feasible to reduce stationary source noise impacts to below the City’s exterior noise level standards for receiving land uses. Therefore, similar to the findings of the General Plan MEIR, stationary source noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Noise Levels in Excess of Standards – Cumulative Impact 2.3.2 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified significant cumulative impacts that would result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Long-Term Project Impacts Significant and unavoidable impact. Similar to the Project-specific Impact Analysis above, development that could occur with implementation of the DNCP, the FCSP and the DDC, could result in exposure of new receptors to traffic and railroad noise levels in excess of the City’s transportation City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 31 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx noise standard. In addition, such development could also result in new stationary noise sources or introduction of new noise-sensitive land uses to existing stationary noise sources that could result in exposure of persons to noise levels in excess of the City’s stationary noise source standards. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding In most instances, compliance with the General Plan Policies NS-1-a through Policy NS-1-o, as provided above, would reduce long-term project noise impacts to less than significant levels. However, these policies and measures that individual projects would implement are ultimately limited, as even advanced policies and measures are limited in what they can do to remediate or reduce the magnitude of noise effects on many existing noise-sensitive land uses in areas with current high noise exposures or where substantial noise increases are expected. Thus, the continuing exposure of existing noise-sensitive land uses to noise levels in excess of standards established by the City, or to substantial noise increases as a result of future growth that could occur with implementation of the project, would be deemed a cumulatively considerable impact that could not in all cases be reduced to less than significant. Therefore, similar to the findings of the General Plan MEIR, traffic, railroad, and stationary source noise impacts would remain a significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impact. Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels – Project Impact 2.3.3 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified project-specific significant impacts that would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. According to General Plan Policy NS-1-j, a significant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity of a project by 3 dBA Ldn or CNEL or more above the ambient noise levels existing without the project. Permanent increases in ambient noise levels could result from new traffic and stationary noise sources resulting from buildout associated with implementation of the project. Implementation of the project is not expected to directly result in expanded railroad operations and therefore would not result in project-related permanent increases in railroad noise impacts. Future development activities within the Plan Areas would result in increased traffic volumes, thus incrementally increasing noise levels in some areas. As is shown in Table 3, all but one modeled roadway segment would result in a less than 3 dBA increase compared to ambient noise conditions existing without the project. The greatest noise increase for the modeled roadway segments would occur along portions of the SR 99 Freeway. For this segment, existing plus project traffic noise levels City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 32 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx would result in a maximum increase of 3 dBA over existing traffic noise level conditions. This would be considered a significant impact. Implementation of the project could also result in the introduction of new stationary noise sources that could result in substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels at existing noise- sensitive land uses. Even with incorporation of the best available noise control technology, noise emanating from industrial uses can be substantial and exceed the daytime or nighttime noise standards. Stationary noise sources can be continuous and may contain tonal components that may be annoying to nearby receptors. Although new industrial uses in the Plan Area would typically be located in industrial districts near freeways and commercial uses and away from residences and other sensitive noise receptors, noise sources associated with new commercial uses such as automotive repair facilities, recycling centers, and loading docks may occur in the vicinity of residential uses. Thus, new stationary noise sources that could be developed with implementation of the project could result in increases in ambient noise levels by 3 dBA CNEL or greater as measured at adjacent land uses which would be considered a significant impact. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding General Plan Policies NS-1-a through NS-1-o establish exterior and interior noise level standards, require the incorporation of noise reduction design features, use of best available technology, and require site-specific acoustical studies, among other measures, as requirements that would assist in reducing stationary source noise impacts for new land use development. In addition, the proposed DDC includes setback requirements for new mechanical equipment that would assist in reducing noise impacts to off-site sensitive uses. However, even with implementation of the best technology measures and compliance with all of the policies of the General Plan it may not be feasible to reduce new traffic and stationary source noise impacts to not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels at existing land uses. Therefore, similar to the findings of the General Plan MEIR, new traffic and stationary noise source impacts that could occur with implementation of the proposed project would remain significant and unavoidable. Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels – Cumulative Impact 2.3.4 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified significant cumulative impacts that would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Cumulative conditions in the Plan Areas are expected to result in increased traffic volumes, thus incrementally increasing noise levels in some areas. Substantial noise level exposures can also be City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 33 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx expected from railroad operations, as well as new stationary noise sources under cumulative conditions. Table 3 shows that under cumulative plus project conditions, some roadway segments would experience increases in traffic noise by as much as 3 dBA CNEL over existing conditions. This would be considered a significant impact. While implementation of the project is not expected to directly result in expanded railroad operations, under cumulative conditions, expanded railroad operations are expected to occur within the Plan Areas. While these future cumulative projects would be required to complete their own environmental review in compliance with CEQA requirements, they may still result in substantial permanent increases in ambient noise levels along the existing or future railroad alignments. Therefore, new development that could occur with implementation of the project could result in the exposure of new noise-sensitive land uses to substantial increases in railroad noise operations. Substantial cumulative noise level exposures could also be expected from stationary noise sources. Even with incorporation of the best available noise control technology, noise emanating from new stationary noise sources, such as industrial uses, can be substantial and could result in increases in ambient noise levels by 3 dBA CNEL or greater as measured at adjacent land uses. This would be considered a significant impact. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding In most instances, compliance with the General Plan Policies NS-1-a through Policy NS-1-o, as provided above, would reduce long-term cumulative noise impacts to less than significant levels. However, these policies and measures that individual projects would implement are ultimately limited, as even advanced policies and measures are limited in what they can do to remediate or reduce the magnitude of noise effects on many existing noise-sensitive land uses in areas with current high noise exposures or where substantial noise increases are expected. Thus, the continuing exposure of existing noise-sensitive land uses to substantial noise increases as a result of future growth that could occur with implementation of the project, would be deemed a cumulatively considerable impact that could not in all cases be reduced to less than significant. Therefore, similar to the findings of the General Plan MEIR, traffic, railroad, and stationary source noise impacts would remain a significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impact. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 34 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Transportation and Traffic 2.4 - Traffic Increase – Project Impact 2.4.1 - Significant Impact Traffic Increase – Cumulative Impact 2.4.2 - Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified significant cumulative impacts that would conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit. Significant and unavoidable impact. The proposed project will contribute to increasing traffic volumes at City of Fresno study intersections outside the Core Area. Based on these results and the significance criteria presented in Section 5.14.3, the proposed project’s incremental effects on intersection operations would be cumulatively considerable at the following two City of Fresno study intersections during the AM, PM, or both peak hours:  Belmont Circle/Golden State Boulevard–Wesley Avenue  Belmont Avenue/Palm Avenue The specific improvements listed below for the impacted City of Fresno study intersections would address the proposed project’s cumulatively considerable incremental effects on intersection traffic operations. Belmont Avenue/Golden State Boulevard-Wesley Avenue The proposed project would contribute to increased traffic delay at the Belmont Avenue/Golden State Boulevard-Wesley Avenue intersection during the AM and PM peak hours contributing to LOS F conditions. This contribution to traffic delay is defined as cumulatively considerable, and therefore a significant impact. The following improvements would improve operations to LOS C during the AM and PM peak hour under Cumulative conditions:  Signalize the intersection.  Widen the westbound approach to two through lanes and one protected left-turn lane. These improvements or improvements providing similar operational benefits as approved by the City Traffic Engineer will be needed when the intersection degrades to LOS F operations. These improvements are not included in the Fresno COG 2014 RTP/SCS, Fresno Major Streets Impact (FMSI) fee program, Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) fee program, or Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (RTMF). City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 35 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Although these improvements would mitigate the proposed project’s cumulatively considerable incremental effect, full funding for these improvements is uncertain and this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Belmont Avenue/Palm Avenue The proposed project would contribute to increased traffic delay at the Belmont Avenue/Palm Avenue intersection during the PM peak hour contributing to LOS F conditions. This contribution to traffic delay is defined as cumulatively considerable, and therefore a significant impact. The following improvements would improve operations by reducing delay:  Convert the northbound shared through/left-turn lane to separate through and left-turn lanes.  Convert the eastbound and westbound shared through/left-turn lane to a single left-turn lane.  Convert the left-turn movements to protected phasing.  Add a second eastbound left-turn lane.  Convert the eastbound shared through/right-turn lane to separate through and right-turn lanes.  Add a second northbound left-turn lane.  Optimize the signal timings. These improvements or improvements providing similar operational benefits as approved by the City Traffic Engineer will be needed upon project build out. While the LOS remains unacceptable during the AM and PM peak hours, these improvements reduce delay, mitigating the proposed project’s cumulative contribution. The roadway is constrained by existing development on all four corners at this intersection, making the addition of dual left-turn lanes on the northbound and eastbound approaches potentially infeasible. A portion of these improvements are included in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) fee program, but not all are identified and funded. Although these improvements would mitigate the proposed project’s cumulatively considerable incremental effect, due to right of-way and funding constraints, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. The specific improvements listed below for the impacted City of Fresno study intersections would address the proposed project’s cumulatively considerable incremental effects on intersection traffic operations. Belmont Avenue/Golden State Boulevard-Wesley Avenue The proposed project would contribute to increased traffic delay at the Belmont Avenue/Golden State Boulevard-Wesley Avenue intersection during the AM and PM peak hours contributing to LOS F conditions. This contribution to traffic delay is defined as cumulatively considerable, and therefore a significant impact. The following improvements would improve operations to LOS C during the AM and PM peak hour under Cumulative conditions:  Signalize the intersection.  Widen the westbound approach to two through lanes and one protected left-turn lane. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 36 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx These improvements or improvements providing similar operational benefits as approved by the City Traffic Engineer will be needed when the intersection degrades to LOS F operations. These improvements are not included in the Fresno COG 2014 RTP/SCS, Fresno Major Streets Impact (FMSI) fee program, Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) fee program, or Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (RTMF). These improvements or improvements providing similar operational benefits as approved by the City Traffic Engineer will be needed upon project build out. While the LOS remains unacceptable during the AM and PM peak hours, these improvements reduce delay, mitigating the proposed project’s cumulative contribution. The roadway is constrained by existing development on all four corners at this intersection, making the addition of dual left-turn lanes on the northbound and eastbound approaches potentially infeasible. A portion of these improvements are included in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) fee program, but not all are identified and funded. Although these improvements would mitigate the proposed project’s cumulatively considerable incremental effect, due to right of-way and funding constraints, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. The results of the AM and PM peak-hour queueing analysis at each off-ramp study intersection are referred to in Appendix J). Based on these results, the proposed project would cause the 95th percentile queues to extend into the deceleration zone, or increase baseline 95th percentile queues to extend further into the deceleration zone, at the following locations:  SR 99 SB Off-Ramp/Belmont Avenue  SR 99 NB Off-Ramp/Belmont Avenue  SR 180 EB Off-Ramp/Fulton Street  SR 99 SB Off-Ramp/Stanislaus Street  SR 99 SB Off-Ramp/Fresno Street  SR 99 NB Off-Ramp/Fresno Street  SR 41 SB Off-Ramp/Divisadero Street  SR 99 NB Off-Ramp/Ventura Avenue  SR 41 SB Off-Ramp/Van Ness Avenue The resulting queues are due to a combination of traffic generated by development associated with the proposed project in combination with existing traffic and future traffic growth from reasonably foreseeable projects. The City of Fresno General Plan includes the following policy related to transportation funding and regional-level coordination:  Policy MT-2-j: Funding for Multi-Modal Transportation Systems. Continue to seek and secure adequate financing to construct and maintain a complete multi-modal system through such measures as development of impact fees, local sales tax measures, special tax measures, assessment/improvement districts, and regional state, and federal transportation funds and grants. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 37 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  Policy MT-2-l: Region-wide Transportation Impact Fees. Continue to support the implementation of a metropolitan-wide and region-wide transportation impact fees to cover the proportional share of a development’s impacts to and need for a comprehensive multi- modal transportation system that is not funded by other sources. Work with the Council of Fresno County Governments, transportation agencies (e.g., Caltrans, Federal Transportation Agency) and other jurisdictions in the region to develop a method for determining: - Regional transportation impacts of new development; - Regional highways, streets, trails, public transportation, goods movement system components consistent with the General Plan necessary to mitigate those impacts and serve projected demand; - Projected full lifetime costs of the regional transportation system components, including construction, operations, and maintenance; - Cost covered by establishing funding sources. Significant Impact. Appendix J summarizes the AM and PM peak-hour level of service (LOS) at the freeway mainline segments and ramp junctions, respectively (refer to Appendix J for calculations). In general, the LOS results for ramp junctions are worse than the freeway mainline, and are controlling the freeway operations. Based on the significance criteria, the project causes a significant impact at the following freeway locations during the AM and/or PM peak hour: SR 99 Northbound  Jensen Avenue to SR 41  Stanislaus Street to SR 180  SR 180 to Belmont Avenue  Belmont Avenue to Olive Avenue  Ventura Avenue On-Ramp  Fresno Street Off-Ramp  Stanislaus Street On-Ramp  SR 180 Off-Ramp  SR 180 WB On-Ramp  Belmont Avenue Off-Ramp  Belmont Avenue On-Ramp  Olive Avenue Off-Ramp SR 99 Southbound  Olive Avenue to Belmont Avenue  SR 180 to Stanislaus Street  Olive Avenue On-Ramp  Belmont Avenue Off-Ramp  Belmont Avenue to SR 180  SR 180 EB On-Ramp  Stanislaus St Off-Ramp  Fresno Street Off-Ramp  Fresno Street to Ventura Avenue  SR 41 to Jensen Avenue SR 41 Northbound  SR 99 to Van Ness Avenue  M Street to Tulare Street SR 99 On-Ramp  Van Ness Avenue Off-Ramp  M Street On-Ramp  Tulare Street Off-Ramp  Divisadero Street to SR 180  SR 180 to McKinley Avenue SR 41 Southbound  McKinley Avenue to SR 180  SR 180 to Divisadero Street  O Street Off-Ramp  Van Ness Avenue Off-Ramp SR 180 Eastbound  SR 99 Off-Ramp  SR 99 to Fulton Street  Van Ness Avenue to Abby Street  Abby Street to SR 41 SR 180 Westbound  SR 41 NB On-Ramp  SR 41 to Blackstone Avenue  Blackstone Avenue to Fulton Street  Fulton Street to SR 99  SR 99 On-Ramp City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 38 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx The resulting LOS E or F operations are due to a combination of traffic generated by development associated with the proposed project in combination with existing traffic and future traffic growth from reasonably foreseeable projects. The City of Fresno General Plan includes the following policy Policy MT-2-l: Region-wide Transportation Impact Fees. Continue to support the implementation of a metropolitan-wide and region-wide transportation impact fees to cover the proportional share of a development’s impacts to and need for a comprehensive multi-modal transportation system that is not funded by other sources. Work with the Council of Fresno County Governments, transportation agencies (e.g., Caltrans, Federal Transportation Agency) and other jurisdictions in the region to develop a method for determining:  Regional transportation impacts of new development;  Regional highways, streets, trails, public transportation, goods movement system components consistent with the General Plan necessary to mitigate those impacts and serve projected demand;  Projected full lifetime costs of the regional transportation system components, including construction, operations, and maintenance;  Cost covered by establishing funding sources.  There are no currently identified funding sources for improvements at the impacted locations.  Ultimately, improvements to the freeway system would affect roadways under Caltrans’s jurisdiction. Since full funding for improvements at these impacted locations has not been identified and the City of Fresno does not have control over its timing or implementation, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding These improvements or improvements providing similar operational benefits as approved by the City Traffic Engineer will be needed upon project build out. While the LOS remains unacceptable during the AM and PM peak hours, these improvements reduce delay, mitigating the proposed project’s cumulative contribution. The roadway is constrained by existing development on all four corners at this intersection, making the addition of dual left-turn lanes on the northbound and eastbound approaches potentially infeasible. A portion of these improvements are included in the Traffic Signal Mitigation Impact (TSMI) fee program, but not all are identified and funded. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 39 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Although these improvements would mitigate the proposed project’s cumulatively considerable incremental effect, due to right of-way and funding constraints, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. As noted in the Traffic Impact Fee Programs section of this report, the current RTMF administered by Fresno COG will provide 57 percent of the funding for improvements at the following interchanges in the study area:  SR 99/Belmont Avenue  SR 41/Tulare Street–Divisadero Street  SR 180/Fulton Street–Van Ness Avenue While the RTMF provides 57 percent of the funding for improvements at a few of the impacted locations, there is no identified funding source for the remaining cost at these locations. Furthermore, a funding source has not been identified for the improvements outside of these three interchanges receiving RTMF funding. Ultimately, improvements to the freeway system would affect roadways under Caltrans’s jurisdiction. Since full funding for improvements at these impacted locations has not been identified and the City of Fresno does not have control over its timing or implementation, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 40 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx ADVERSE PROJECT-SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS SECTION 3: WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified significant project-specific and cumulative adverse impacts of the proposed project and proposed mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen those impacts. Those impacts and mitigation measures are identified in the following section. The City of Fresno finds, based on the facts set forth in the record, which include but are not limited to the facts as set forth below, that the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures will mitigate the following identified significant project-specific and cumulative adverse impacts to a level that is considered less than significant. Aesthetics 3.1 - Glare or Glare – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact. The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR identified that the project would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect views in the area. Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Potentially significant impact. Development in accordance with the DNCP will result in land use changes by increasing densities and intensities of land uses within the Plan area. These land use changes include the development of new residential and non-residential land uses. Development under the DNCP, including the reconstruction of Fulton Mall, would include introducing contextual infill development, as part of revitalizing the Downtown neighborhoods. The addition of infill development would increase the amount of light from street lights, exterior lighting systems on private and public property, exterior lighting from buildings, and vehicular headlights. New development could also increase light with new illuminated signs and lighting systems to illuminate active play areas and to enhance nighttime safety throughout the Plan area. The increase in lighting within the city limits could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties and an increase in urban light illuminating the sky at night. This increase in light is considered a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-5 is required. New development in the Plan area will increase the number and/or the size of structures that could create new sources of glare. These new sources of glare could be from materials used on building facades, parking lots, signs, roadway surfaces, and motor vehicles. Within the city limits, there are currently many sources of glare, and future development will add to these existing sources. Within the rural and agricultural areas outside of but adjacent to the Plan area, there are limited sources of glare. The primary sources of glare that will be added within the Community Plan area will occur from vertical structures such as building facades and signs. Parking lots, roadway surfaces and motor vehicles do not create substantial amount of glare. Because of the anticipated amount of new building square footage planned for the DNCP area, DNCP implementation will result in a substantial City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 41 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx increase in glare. This increase could result in significant glare impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e is required. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Potentially significant impact. The intent of the FCSP is to concentrate development within the heart of Downtown Fresno. FCSP Section 2.3, Design Principles—one of the design principles that forms the basis for the DDC as well as the goals, policies, and actions set forth in the FCSP—relates to infill development. The FCSP calls for effective use of existing private and public land and infrastructure investments to fill in available urban sites to create a more vibrant public realm. As described above for the DNCP, this addition of infill development would result in additional sources of light and glare in the Plan area. The FCSP also includes the following goals and policies for enhanced lighting throughout the Plan area:  Goal 6-1: Allocate the necessary resources to stabilize and then revitalize Downtown Fresno as the economic and cultural heart of the City and the Region.  Policy 6-1-1: Introduce new buildings in conformance with the Downtown Development Code that generate a safe, positive, and attractive mixed-use environment that encourages neighborhood pride and identity.  Goal 6-3: Build new buildings in order to make Downtown a safe and inviting place to live, work, and visit.  Policy 6-3-1: Promote passive security on streets (“eyes on the street ”) by: b. Introducing pedestrian-scaled street lighting on all streets within the Plan Area.  Policy 6-3-2: Promote perceived and actual security on and around building sites by requiring new development to provide sufficient lighting along street- and alley-facing frontages and in shared open spaces.  Policy 6-3-3: Promote passive security in parks (“eyes on the park”) by: e. Providing sufficient lighting.  Goal 8-9: Enhance the streetscape through appropriate street lighting.  Policy 8-9-1: Install pedestrian-scaled street light poles and fixtures that emit warm light.  Policy 8-9-2: Ensure safe lighting levels of at least 1 foot-candle at the sidewalk level, while meeting the needs of the intended physical character of the particular area. Policy 8-9-3: Encourage business and property owners to keep storefronts and offices window display lighting illuminated throughout the night. Infill development of vacant sites and enhanced safety lighting throughout the Specific Plan area has the potential to add sources of light and glare to the FCSP area and result in a potentially significant impact with regard to light and glare. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES- 4e is required. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 42 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR and incorporated into the project. MM AES-4a Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. MM AES-4b Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low-intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. MM AES-4c Lighting systems for non-residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low-intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. MM AES-4d Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot-Lamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT-L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. MM AES-4e Materials used on building facades shall be non-reflective. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e will reduce impacts on the illumination of the sky at night. Lighting on properties adjacent to lighting systems will be less than significant. Glare impacts will be less than significant with implementation of the mitigation measures identified above. Light or Glare – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact Potentially significant impact. Growth within the DNCP and FCSP areas, combined with growth in the nearby areas within the City of Fresno, would result in a cumulatively significant impact on light and glare. Future development in the City, including the DNCP and FCSP areas, will increase population and development, which will in turn increase the amount of lighting and glare. Overall, cumulative development is anticipated to result in a significant increase in lighting. Since the proposed project is expected to result in potentially significant lighting impacts, the project’s contribution to cumulative lighting impacts is potentially cumulatively considerable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e is required. With future development outside of the Plan areas, there will be increases in the amount of structures that could create new sources of glare. These new sources of glare could be from City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 43 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx materials used on building facades, parking lots, signs, roadway surfaces, and motor vehicles. Therefore, cumulative development could create significant glare impacts. Since the proposed project is expected to result in potentially significant glare impacts, the project’s contribution to cumulative glare impacts is potentially cumulatively considerable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e is required. City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC DEIR and incorporated into the project. MM AES-4a Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. MM AES-4b Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. MM AES-4c Lighting systems for non-residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. MM AES-4d Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot Lamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT-L when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. MM AES-4e Materials used on building facades shall be non-reflective. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e will reduce impacts to the project’s contribution of the illumination of the sky at night. Lighting impact on properties adjacent to lighting systems will be less than cumulatively significant. Glare impacts will also be less than cumulatively significant. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 44 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Air Quality 3.2 - Odors – Program-Level Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project would create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Thresholds of Significance Odor impacts on residential areas and other sensitive receptors, such as hospitals, day-care centers, schools, etc. warrant the closest scrutiny, but consideration should also be given to other land uses where people may congregate, such as recreational facilities, worksites, and commercial areas. The project-level odor impacts of the Fulton Mall Reconstruction Project were assessed in an Environmental Impact Report prepared by the City (State Clearinghouse Number 2013101046). The DEIR found the Fulton Mall project would result in less than significant impacts related to odors. Two situations create a potential for odor impact. The first occurs when a new odor source is located near an existing sensitive receptor. The second occurs when a new sensitive receptor locates near an existing source of odor. The CBIA v. BAAQMD court opinion described earlier also applies to the impacts of existing odor sources on new sensitive receptors. The second impact in this situation is not subject to CEQA analysis or an obligation to mitigate potential impacts. The following analysis discloses the potential impacts from existing odor sources on future sensitive receptors, but does not make a conclusion regarding its significance in a CEQA context. The District has determined the common land use types that are known to produce odors in the Air Basin. These types are shown in Table 4. Table 4: Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources Odor Generator Screening Distance Wastewater Treatment Facilities 2 miles Sanitary Landfill 1 mile Transfer Station 1 mile Composting Facility 1 mile Petroleum Refinery 2 miles Asphalt Batch Plant 1 mile Chemical Manufacturing 1 mile Fiberglass Manufacturing 1 mile Painting/Coating Operations (e.g., auto body shop) 1 mile Food Processing Facility 1 mile Feed Lot/Dairy 1 mile City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 45 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Table 4 (cont.): Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources Odor Generator Screening Distance Rendering Plant 1 mile Source: SJVAPCD, 2015. According to the SJVAPCD GAMAQI, analysis of potential odor impacts should be conducted for the following two situations:  Generators: projects that would potentially generate odorous emissions proposed to locate near existing sensitive receptors or other land uses where people may congregate, and  Receivers: residential or other sensitive receptor projects, or other projects built for the intent of attracting people locating near existing odor sources (not subject to CEQA). Formerly, if the project were to result in sensitive receptors being located closer than the recommended distances to an odor generator included within Table 4, a more detailed analysis including a review of SJVAPCD odor complaint records is recommended. The detailed analysis would involve contacting the SJVAPCD’s Compliance Division for information regarding odor complaints. For a project locating near an existing source of odors, the potential for exposure of future residents to odors should be disclosed to the public. The criteria for requiring disclosure of potential exposure to odors are if a project is proposed for a site that is closer to an existing odor source than any location where there have been:  More than one confirmed complaint per year averaged over a three-year period, or  Three unconfirmed complaints per year averaged over a three-year period. Potential Odor Sources in the DNCP and FCSP The City of Fresno has many sources with the potential to generate odors including wastewater treatment facilities, landfills, transfer stations, recycling centers, manufacturing plants, food processors, painting operations, and rendering plants. The implementation of the DNCP and FCSP could result in the odor sources identified in Table 4 being located within the screening threshold distances, and could result in significant impacts on sensitive receptors. The DNCP and FCSP could also result in sensitive receptors being constructed within the screening level distances from existing odor sources. Under this situation, these potential odor impacts on new sensitive receptors are not subject to CEQA review. However, when potential odor impacts on these new sensitive receptors occur, the SJVAPD has authority under Rule 4102 to require the owner of the odor-generating source to take actions that would reduce impacts to less than significant. Odor Complaints in DNCP and FCSP Odor impacts from waste and recycling facilities is one of the primary factors considered in the location decision and are regulated by the State of California through CalRecycle and the Local City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 46 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Enforcement Agency delegated by the State. The SJVAPCD addresses odor issues through Rule 4102—Nuisance. Facilities creating nuisance odors generating public complaints can result in SJVAPCD enforcement action. Individual development projects are required to determine if odors would be a potentially significant impact as part of CEQA review. The DNCP and FCSP does not identify specific projects that are likely to result in an increase in odors. However, projects meeting the screening criteria are likely to be proposed in the planning areas. In addition, projects containing sensitive receptors are likely to be proposed near existing odor sources. Projects proposing new receptors within screening level distances will reduce the impact to less than significant through procedures provided by Rule 4102. Proposal of a new source within the screening distance would require the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed facility includes odor controls within its design and through implementation of odor management practices to reduce odors to less than significant. Therefore, impacts from the project are potentially significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Project-specific Odor source types listed in Table 4 may result in a potentially significant impact that would require mitigation to ensure that the impact is reduced to less than significant. The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project: MM AIR-5 Require developers of projects with the potential to generate significant odor impacts as determined through review of SJVAPCD odor complaint history for similar facilities and consultation with the SJVAPCD to prepare an odor impact assessment and to implement odor control measures recommended by the SJVAPCD or the City to the extent needed to reduce the impact to less than significant. The implementation of the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with odors to less than significant. Odors – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project would create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 47 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx The geographic scope of the cumulative odor analysis is the local area. Impacts relative to objectionable odors are generally limited to the area in close vicinity to the source and are not cumulative in nature. As the emissions that cause odors disperse, the odor becomes less and less detectable. Odor impacts can occur when a project is an odor generator with the potential to impact sensitive receptors. There are no specific land uses or policies proposed in the DNCP and FCSP that would result in a concentration of odor sources at any particular location. With the buildout of the planning areas, impact from projects could result in a cumulative impact. Therefore, cumulative odor impacts are potentially significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-5 as previously discussed above is required. The implementation of the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with glare to less than significant. Biological Resources 3.3 - Effect on Species – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified that the project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Development within the Plan areas could result in the loss of natural vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for nine special-status species (two plants and seven wildlife species) that have the potential to occur within or adjacent to the Plan areas. As described above, under “Environmental Setting,” the bulk of the Plan areas are categorized as urban/developed land. However, there are small dispersed patches of land categorized by the CDFW as irrigated row and field crops (agricultural) and lacustrine habitats within the DNCP plan area that, depending on the condition of the land, could provide suitable habitat for these special-status species, as described in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 48 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Implementation of the DNCP and FCSP could result in the loss or degradation of these habitat types, which could result in a substantial adverse effect to a special-status plant or animal species, if it is determined that a special-status species exists on-site and will be impacted, either directly or through habitat modifications. Direct project impacts to species listed as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species by local, state, and federal agencies should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible; however, it is acknowledged that future projects may not be able to fully avoid these species. Project-related impacts that result in the direct take of a special-status species would be considered a significant impact. The presence/absence of a special-status species on a project site and the potential to impact a special-status species must be determined prior to project construction. Development within the Plan areas that results in the direct take or loss of suitable habitat for any special-status species would require project-level mitigation to avoid such loss. Project impacts to special-status species listed as threatened or endangered by CDFW and/or USFWS would also require agency consultation and/or take permits. To reduce potential impacts on biological resources within the Community Plan area, the DNCP includes the following provisions for the protection of biological resources (figures and tables referenced are located in the DNCP):  Goal 4.2: Regenerate the urban forest to promote ecological sustainability, increase human comfort, and reduce energy costs. Intent: To introduce new and replace missing street trees in order to provide shade; reduce solar heat gain and local ambient air temperature; reduce stormwater runoff; extend the life of the streets they cover; improve local air, soil, and water quality; reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide; provide wildlife habitats; increase property values; and enhance the attractiveness and walkability of the community.  Policy 4.2.1: Introduce new and reintroduce missing street trees in the Community Plan Area’s neighborhoods, districts, and corridors with the goal of providing a minimum of 50 percent landscape canopy cover (the layer of leaves, branches, and stems that cover the ground when viewed from above) for each street in the Community Plan Area within 15 years. Trees should provide shade, visual identity for residents, and reflect the individual character of each community. Trees planted within the Chandler Airport Overlay area shall be planted in conformance with Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, particularly in terms of height and potential to attract wildlife. The recommended street trees for the Plan Area’s neighborhood streets are shown in Figure 4-3 (Neighborhood Street Landscape Character) and described in Table 4.1 (Neighborhood Street Tree Planting List) of the DNCP (see Appendix A). The recommended street trees for each of the prominent corridors in the Plan Area are shown in Figure 4-4 (Corridor Landscape Character) and described in Table 4.2 (Corridor Street Tree Planting List) of the DNCP (see Appendix A).  Policy 4.2.2: Partner with as many private, public, or non-profit groups as possible to support tree planting and maintenance. Consider using portions of community gardens to grow street tree seedlings and saplings until they are large enough to be planted along City streets. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 49 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  Policy 4.2.3: Require the retention and protection of existing, mature, non-agricultural trees within the Downtown Neighborhoods.  Policy 4.2.4: Encourage the use of large shade street trees by implementing broad parkways, structural soils, or other systems to accommodate their root systems.  Policy 4.2.5: Encourage the proper tree selection for the site in response to above ground or underground infrastructure and parkway constraints (such as telephone wires).  Policy 4.2.6: Use a well-balanced variety and uniform spacing of deciduous or evergreen trees to establish visual continuity for streetscapes, to help reduce energy costs of adjacent buildings, and to define unique public or private open spaces.  Policy 4.2.7: Spread the cost of tree planting and maintenance among a variety of entities and funding sources, including special improvement districts, permit fees and surcharges, an optional customer-directed one-year or multi-year maintenance cycle paid by adjacent property owners, Adopt-a-Tree or Adopt-a-Street programs, a community tree and street tree endowment, and/or donations from businesses, utility companies, service clubs, and individuals.  Policy 4.2.8: Continue to apply the City’s 50 percent shade tree ordinance on all mixed-use and non-residential surface parking lots.  Policy 4.2.9: Ensure a long life for the urban forest through proper soil drainage and by limiting the installation of lights, hardscape, and amenities in and around trees.  Goal 4.3: Promote sustainable landscapes, native habitats, and natural hydrological function. Intent: Use landscape and hardscape to enhance the character of both the public and private realms, respond to Fresno’s climate, improve human comfort, reduce energy costs, facilitate sustainable water use and drainage strategies, and reduce energy costs.  Policy 4.3.1: Introduce pervious surfaces within parks and open spaces to reduce storm water runoff.  Policy 4.3.2: Incentivize property owners to use drought tolerant adaptive and native landscapes to reduce water usage and decrease reliance on fertilizers and pesticides. Possible strategies include: - Working with the City of Fresno’s Water Division to educate property owners about the cost savings that drought tolerant plants produce; - Creating incentives for property owners to replace turf and/or water-hungry landscape with drought-tolerant landscape.  Policy 4.3.3: Provide access to sun and shade in public parks and open spaces by introducing climate attenuation elements such as deciduous canopy trees and trellises.  Policy 4.3.4: Encourage green walls and rooftop landscapes to reduce heat sink islands in the Community Plan Area’s office and commercial districts.  Policy 4.4.8: Use parks to protect resources and wildlife, enhance water and air quality, and improve sustainability for new and existing parks. Develop smart irrigation systems using the latest Certus Management Information System (CMIS) data, plan to use reclaimed water systems for parks where and when available, limit turf grass to recreational areas, and offset water needs by using low water plant material in non-recreational areas.  Policy 5.3.4: In order to minimize conflicts between aircraft and wildlife, limit the construction of new retention/recharge basins within 10,000 feet of the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 50 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx runways and/or introduce mitigation measures that discourage wildlife from congregating around or inhabiting retention/recharge basins within 10,000 feet of the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport runways. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding The following measures are required to be implemented to reduce the project’s impact on special- status species to less than significant. In addition, the implementation of the measures below would reduce the project’s contribution to a potential significant cumulative loss of a population(s) of a special-status species to less than significant. Cumulative MM BIO-1a Construction of a proposed project would avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special-status species known to occur within the Plan areas. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special-status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special- status species. If a special-status species is determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a special-status species to the greatest extent feasible. Avoidance and minimization measures include and are not limited to removing vegetation communities to be replanted off-site. MM BIO-1b Direct or incidental take of any state or federally listed species would be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resource agencies and/or additional permitting may be required. Agency consultation through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 2081 and United States Fish and Wildlife Service Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation. MM BIO-1c Development within the Plan areas would avoid, where possible, special-status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special-status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special-status natural community or suitable habitat for special-status species, compensatory habitat-based mitigation may be required under the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Endangered Species Act. Mitigation will consist of City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 51 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx preserving on-site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off-site credits from an approved mitigation bank. Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be produced by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special-status natural communities to a less than significant level. Agreed-upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special-status species. The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case-by-case basis. MM BIO-1d Proposed projects within the Plan areas would avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code Section 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be present on-site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. The implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce impacts associated with effects on species to less than significant. Effect on Species – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified that the project could have a substantial adverse cumulative effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The continued urbanization of the Plan areas and vicinity could result in a cumulatively considerable effect on suitable habitat for sensitive species, if development encroaches into undisturbed natural communities. Development within the City of Fresno over a 20-year period primarily focuses on the conversion of agricultural land to development, which will reduce the availability of suitable habitat for sensitive species, including suitable foraging habitat for raptor species. Additionally, agricultural land and open space conversion will also reduce the potential for wildlife movement corridors, due to habitat fragmentation of undeveloped open space areas within the San Joaquin Valley. The loss of potentially suitable habitat for sensitive species, primarily resulting from the total conversion of agricultural and undeveloped land to development in the region, is considered a City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 52 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx cumulatively considerable effect. However, the direct impact to special-status species from development within the Plan areas is not deemed cumulatively considerable, because the majority of the Plan areas are already urbanized and provide very little marginal habitat for special-status species. Continued development of the Plan areas would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species with the implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1a through BIO-1d. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding The following measures are required to be implemented to reduce the project’s impact on special- status species to less than significant. In addition, the implementation of the measures below would reduce the project’s contribution to a potential significant cumulative loss of a population(s) of a special-status species to less than significant. MM BIO-1a Construction of a proposed project would avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special-status species known to occur within the Plan areas. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special-status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special- status species. If a special-status species is determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a special-status species to the greatest extent feasible. Avoidance and minimization measures include and are not limited to removing vegetation communities to be replanted off-site. MM BIO-1b Direct or incidental take of any state or federally listed species would be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resource agencies and/or additional permitting may be required. Agency consultation through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 2081 and United States Fish and Wildlife Service Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation. MM BIO-1c Development within the Plan areas would avoid, where possible, special-status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special-status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special-status natural community or suitable habitat for special-status species, compensatory City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 53 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx habitat-based mitigation may be required under the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Endangered Species Act. Mitigation will consist of preserving on-site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off-site credits from an approved mitigation bank. Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be produced by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special-status natural communities to a less than significant level. Agreed-upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special-status species. The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case-by-case basis. MM BIO-1d Proposed projects within the Plan areas would avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code Section 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre-construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be present on-site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. The implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce impacts associated with riparian habitat to less than significant. Federally Protected Wetlands – Project Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified that the project could have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Development within the Plan areas, particularly in previously undeveloped areas containing freshwater ponds or lacustrine habitats, could have a substantial adverse effect on federally or state protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Any project-related impacts that result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland is considered a significant impact. Additionally, special-status species associated with wetlands and vernal pool habitats may be impacted as a result of project impacts to protected wetlands. Project- specific agency (such as CDFW, RWQCB, USACE) coordination and/or regulatory permitting would be required to first identify and then avoid, reduce, or minimize project impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. Compliance with General Plan Policies POSS-6-a through POSS-7-d, as listed above in the City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 54 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx “Regulatory Setting ” section, would reduce potential project impacts to wetland features, but implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3a and BIO-3b is also required. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding MM BIO-3a If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts. Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of a wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the planning area. Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland. MM BIO-3b In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the proposed project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland. Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage, and incorporating detention basins shall help to ensure that project-related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible. The implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce impacts associated with federally protected wetlands to less than significant. Federally Protected Wetlands – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report identified that the project could have a substantial adverse cumulative effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. The development of agricultural, lacustrine, and/or undeveloped/undisturbed areas within the City of Fresno may result in adverse effects on federally or state protected wetland habitats. For example, cumulative development that encroaches into wetland habitat areas or indirectly impacts wetland habitats through the increase of upstream urban runoff could result in significant impacts to protected wetland habitats. While implementation of the DNCP and FCSP could increase impacts on City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 55 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx wetland habitats, continued development of the Plan areas would not result in a substantial adverse effect on federally or state protected wetlands with the implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO- 3a and BIO-3b. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report. Facts in Support of Finding MM BIO-3a If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts. Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of a wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the planning area. Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland. MM BIO-3b In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the proposed project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland. Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage, and incorporating detention basins shall help to ensure that project-related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible. The implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce impacts associated with federally protected wetlands to less than significant. Cultural Resources 3.4 - Historic Resource – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.55 of the CEQA Guidelines. Project-specific Impact Analysis As discussed above, an abundance of both potential and listed historical resources and historic properties are located in the Downtown Fresno area. The most recent review of cultural resources (both historic and prehistoric) within the DNCP and FCSP areas is contained in the Archaeological City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 56 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Resources Assessment Report prepare by Greenwood and Associates in February of 2012. This report was also the basis for determinations made within the Fulton Mall Reconstruction Project EIR prepared by FCS in November of 2013. General summaries and descriptions of specific plan districts within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC have been provided above. The findings and determinations as to the historic archaeological sensitivity of both existing and proposed historic districts, as well as proposed changes to specific plan districts within the Project Area, as detailed in the Greenwood and Associates report, will be summarized below. Records Search Results As part of the Archaeological Resources Assessment Report prepare by Greenwood and Associates, a records search was conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) located at California State University, Bakersfield. The records search included the project area and a 0.25-mile search radius beyond the proposed project boundaries. The results indicated that although 48 previously conducted surveys or studies are on file, no archaeological resources, either prehistoric or historic, have been identified within the search radius. This may be due to the fact that previous investigations were largely limited to transportation corridors and cell sites, with very few large-scale pedestrian surveys. That no significant sites or features have been recorded for the entirety of the project area is surprising and in no way a true indication of the prehistoric or historic archaeological sensitivity of the area. Literature and Archival Review Greenwood and Associates reviewed various archival materials including historical documents and manuscripts, historical aerial photographs, local and regional histories, and historical maps. The Sanborn Map Company insurance maps for the City of Fresno were determined to be among the most useful resource for investigating historical development of the region and understanding current archaeological sensitivity. The purpose of these maps was to id insurance agents in assessing the degree of fire risk associated with a particular property. They often include such details as each building’s use, its size and shape, number of floors, types of construction materials, types of doors and windows present, widths of streets, property boundaries, house and block numbers, etc. Of particular interest for the current investigations, the maps also indicate subsurface features, including basements (labeled B, B’st, or Bst), wells (We), water closets or privies (WC), and hollow spaces understanding structures (OU for “open under ”). Additionally, elevators—which typically required pits—are indicated, as are tanks and other buried features. The presence of any of these subsurface features may indicate the potential for intact archaeological deposits. Sanborn Maps for the project area exist for 1885, 1888, 1898, 1906, 1918–1919, and 1948-1950. Field Investigations Greenwood and Associates employed a program of limited archaeological field investigations that would focus on assessing a cross-section of parcel types that had been identified in the course of archival, aerial photography, and historical map review as possessing moderate to high sensitivity for the presence of cultural deposits. A total of 18 representative parcels located within both the FCSP City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 57 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx and DNCP area were selected for pedestrian surface survey. Selection was based in part on accessibility. The parcels ranged in size from full city blocks to several lots. The parcels selected were predominantly located within the Downtown area, or within Downtown adjacent subareas of the DNCP. There are several reasons for this distribution pattern. First, because of past urban renewal activities and other forces, Downtown and adjacent areas contain the highest number of historically developed parcels that are now vacant and accessible. Further, the outlying portions of the DNCP tend to be predominantly residential in nature, more recently developed, more intact, more poorly documented by the historical maps, and generally less accessible for survey. Following a preliminary reconnaissance, the surface survey was performed by Greenwood and Associates archaeologists Dana Slawson, M. Arch., and Michael Kay, M.A., on June 27 and 28, 2011. The standard method of walking parallel transects spaced no more than 5 meters apart was employed. All exposed surface soils were thoroughly inspected for indications of cultural resources, including fortuitous exposures such as landscaped, graded, or cleared areas, and areas of rodent disturbance. While all of the parcels surveyed produced at least a limited amount of historical cultural material, in two locations (Block 50 and Block 534) the density of cultural material and/or features identified indicated the presence of historic-age archaeological site. The Block 50 site is located in the Chinatown neighborhood and comprises a dense concentration of historical artifacts, primarily Chinese and Japanese in origin. Constituents of the Block 534 site include several discrete structural features, all of which likely relate to an early 20th century building that once stood on the parcel. Also recorded was one feature isolate a concrete slab believed to correspond with the location of an early twentieth century summer kitchen associated with Volga German residents of Block 1052. Locations of Archaeological Field Investigations Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Area  Block 40E (Mariposa Street, Fagan Alley, Fresno Street, F Street)  Block 50E (Tulare Street, China Alley, Mariposa Street, G Street)  Block 50W (Tulare Street, F Street, Mariposa Street, China Alley)  Block 52E (Inyo Street, China Alley, Kern Street, G Street)  Blocks 501 and 502 (El Dorado Street, Railroad Tracks, Divisadero Street, H Street)  Block 504 (*Amador Street+, Railroad Tracks, *Sacramento Street+, H Street)  Block 516 (Ventura Street, Railroad Tracks, Mono Street, H Street)  Block 534 (Inyo Street, G Street, Kern Street, Railroad Tracks)  Block 535 (Mono Street, G Street, Inyo Street, Railroad Tracks)  Block 536 (Ventura Street, G Street, Mono Street, Railroad Tracks)  Block 537 (Santa Clara Street, G Street, Ventura Street, Railroad Tracks)  Block 538 (San Benito Street, G Street, Santa Clara Street, Railroad Tracks) City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 58 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Area  Block 16 (Kern Street, C Street, Tulare Street, 99 Freeway)  Block 295 (Fresno Street, A Street, Merced Street, B Street)  Block 583 (Illinois Avenue, Clark Street, McKenzie Avenue, Valeria Street)  Block 593 (Illinois Avenue, Effie Street, McKenzie Street, Diana Street)  Block 1024 (Braly Avenue, Van Ness Avenue, Hamilton Avenue, Sara Street)  Block 1052 (Belgravia Avenue, Cherry Avenue, Florence Avenue, Anna Street) Historic Districts and Sensitivity Determinations The review of historic maps, aerial photographs, and literature conducted for the FCSP/DNCP project encompassed more than 1,480 city blocks. Using Sanborn insurance maps and other sources, an assessment of the level of sensitivity for historic archaeological resources was calculated for every block within the project area. Results of the field investigations were also taken into account. Ratings of sensitivity were divided into five classes: Low, Low-Moderate, Moderate, Moderate-High, and High. Excluding information not derived from the insurance maps, these categories were defined as follows: Low: no map data available, or; maps indicate that any archaeological deposits have most likely been destroyed or substantially disturbed by existing development, or; historical development as indicted on the maps is substantially intact and no demolished structure locations are present. Low-Moderate: maps indicate that historic-era buildings/features have been removed and sites disturbed, but some potential survives for the presence of intact archaeological resources, e.g., sites of post-1900 wood frame residences or small commercial/industrial structures that have been paved over. Moderate: maps indicate that historic-era light framed buildings/features have been removed but no significant post-demolition development or disturbance is evident. There is a potential for presence of intact archaeological resources, e.g., sites of multiple post-1900 wood framed residences or small commercial/industrial structures that have not been paved over, or; sites of multiple pre-1900 residential properties that are paved over but display potential for buried deposits (privies, wells, cisterns, etc.). Moderate-High: maps indicate that historic buildings of heavy construction have been removed; site may or may not have surface disturbance, e.g., site of brick commercial/industrial/residential building with basement covered by pavement or, site of brick commercial/industrial building with no basement and no subsequent surface disturbance known. High: maps indicate that historic building(s) with basement or hollow space has been removed, or residential site with wells, privies, etc., with no subsequent surface disturbance, e.g., brick commercial building with basement, parcel open dirt or grass, or, pre-1891 residential properties with indicated privies or wells and dirt or grass surface cover. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 59 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Using the above criteria for assessment of historic archaeological sensitivity, a total of 290 city blocks, or portions thereof (136 in the FCSP area and 154 in the DNCP area) were assessed as possessing Moderate to High potential for the presence of subsurface historic archaeological deposits on the basis of documented historical development and current ground conditions (vacant). Although substantially larger in size, the DNCP area produced only slightly more positive results for archaeological sensitivity than the FCSP area. This outcome is largely due to later, post-1948–1950, development on many parcels within the DNCP, especially in the eastern reaches of the Plan Area. Further, Sanborn map coverage for those later developed areas is less complete. The following current City-designated historic districts and proposed historic districts were identified within the FCSP/DNCP project limits and are considered to have a moderate to high potential for historic archaeological resources:  Existing: Fresno Airport/Chandler Field (DNCP)  Proposed: Street Historic District. Boundaries: Van Ness, Amador, Divisadero, N Street, Stanislaus, M Street to Calaveras (FCSP/DNCP)  Proposed: St. John’s Cathedral Historic District. Boundaries: Tulare, Q Street, Fresno, Divisadero, U Street (DNCP)  Proposed: Santa Fe Warehouse Historic District. Boundaries: P Street, Tulare, R Street, Ventura (DNCP)  Proposed: Bellevue Bungalow Historic District. Boundaries: Howard/Thesta Streets south of Belmont (DNCP)  Proposed: East Madison Avenue Historic District. Boundaries: Madison Avenue South of Belmont, between Fresno and Mariposa (DNCP)  Proposed: North Park Historic District. Boundaries: Divisadero Street, Blackstone Avenue, SR 180, and Roosevelt Avenue (DNCP)  Proposed: Lower Fulton-Van Ness Historic District. Boundaries: Voorman Street, Belmont Avenue, Wishon Avenue, Yosemite Street, College Avenue Additional newly identified historic resources include:  The Fresno Chinatown Block 50 Site is a dense surface scattering of late 19th and early 20th century artifacts, including glass and ceramic fragments, leather and metal items, and building materials. The deposit appears to be principally associated with the historic occupation of the parcel by Chinese residents. Implementation of the proposed project has the potential to damage or destroy unrecorded subsurface components of this site.  Also located within the Chinatown subarea, the Fresno Block 534 Site consists of a number of structural features, all believed to relate to the development of a Penny-Newman Grain Company warehouse on the site during the early 20th century. There are also remnants of a City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 60 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx railroad siding dating to the late 1800s. Implementation of the proposed project could damage or destroy unrecorded components of this site.  Additionally, one isolated historic archaeological feature was identified within the Edison Neighborhoods planning subarea of the DNCP. The Fresno Block 1052 Concrete Pad is a structural feature thought to correspond with an early 20th century backyard “Kitchen” indicated on historic maps. Backyard kitchens in this section of Fresno are generally associated with occupation by members of the Volga German community. This feature and related subsurface deposits in the vicinity have not yet been recorded and could therefore be damaged or destroyed should the proposed project be implemented. Potential Project Impacts Implementation of the FCSP/DNCP has the potential to damage or destroy as-yet unrecorded subsurface deposits on these parcels identified as archaeologically sensitive. Potential impacts to historic archaeological resources are characterized below by DNCP Subarea or FCSP District. DNCP Planning Areas Jane Addams Neighborhoods The DNCP envisions infilling the Jane Addams Neighborhoods planning area over time, while retaining its informal agricultural character. Among other actions, it would also make Jane Addams Neighborhoods more self-sufficient through the introduction of neighborhood shopping centers. These actions could potentially impact as-yet unidentified archaeological resources. Edison Neighborhoods Under the DNCP, vacant neighborhood parcels within the Edison Neighborhoods, such as those west of SR 99, would be infilled with “house-scaled, pedestrian-oriented buildings such as houses, duplexes, triplexes, and ‘granny flats,’” with “‘more intense building types’ developed along Fresno Street.” Implementation of the DNCP has the potential to impact the Block 1052 Isolate site, identified by these investigations within the Edison Neighborhoods planning area, along with other, yet-to-be-discovered archaeological resources. Lowell Neighborhood The DNCP calls for older building stock within the Lowell Neighborhood to be restored. Vacant parcels would be infilled with “house-scaled, pedestrian-oriented buildings such as houses, duplexes, triplexes, and ‘granny flats,’” and “commercial and mixed-use buildings with parking behind or on the street.” These actions have the potential to impact as-yet unidentified archaeological resources within this planning area. Jefferson Neighborhood As within the Lowell Neighborhoods planning area, the DNCP envisions older building stock in the Jefferson Neighborhood being restored and vacant parcels infilled with house-scaled, pedestrian- oriented buildings. A new neighborhood shopping center with mixed-use, multi-story buildings would also be developed. Archaeological resources as yet unidentified could be impacted by these efforts. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 61 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Southeast Neighborhood. Under the DNCP, new neighborhood-serving commercial development may be built on principal intersections along the corridors within the Southeast Neighborhoods to create neighborhood centers. This development has the potential to impact yet to be discovered archaeological resources within the planning area. South Van Ness Construction activity associated with the adaptive reuse of pre-World War II brick warehouses as commercial, retail, residential, and mixed-use projects within the South Van Ness planning area, as proposed by the DNCP, has the potential to impact as-yet undiscovered archaeological resources within the subarea. Downtown Potential impacts to archaeological resources within the Downtown planning area are generally associated with the extensive landscaping activity proposed for the planning area under the DNCP. FCSP Subareas Fulton District Within this Subarea, the FCSP would “prioritize adaptive reuse of Fresno’s unique, older buildings, including those listed on the Local, State, and National historic registers” and “infill vacant land rather than tearing down distinctive, older buildings . . . .” These activities have a potential to impact as-yet unidentified archaeological resources within the Fulton District. Mural District Of specific concern for archaeological resources, within the Mural District the FCSP proposes to introduce mixed use development and “adaptively reuse buildings along Van Ness Avenue and Fulton Street.” These activities have a potential to impact as-yet unidentified archaeological resources. Civic Center Within the Civic Center, the FCSP proposes landscaping Mariposa, Merced, Fresno, Tulare, and Kern Streets to direct pedestrian activity toward Fulton Street. Landscaping activity has the potential to impact as-yet unidentified archaeological resources at the building edge areas within the Civic Center. South Stadium FCSP goals for the District include its transformation into “a mixed-use district that introduces a diversity of new uses” while also revitalizing and reusing the existing older buildings that currently line Fulton Street. These adaptive reuse and redevelopment activities carry the potential to impact archaeological resources yet to be recorded. Chinatown The FCSP proposes to “infill Chinatown’s many vacant lots with sensitively scaled, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly buildings . . . and establish F Street as the districts new main street.” The infilling City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 62 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx of vacant lots and associated reuse of existing buildings has the potential to impact known and yet to be discovered archaeological resources. Armenian Town/Convention Center Within the Armenian Town Subarea, the intention of the FCSP is to “transform this area into a walkable and bikeable mixed-use place by infilling vacant parcels with pedestrian-friendly, mixed use buildings and also introduce larger office buildings.” These actions may result in impact to as-yet unidentified archaeological resources. Divisadero Triangle As in the Armenian Town Subarea, the FCSP would transform the Divisadero Triangle into “a walkable mixed-use place by infilling vacant parcels with shopper-friendly buildings.” Another goal is to “consolidate and relocate isolated older buildings from throughout Downtown within the Divisadero Triangle.” These actions may result in impact to as-yet unidentified archaeological resources. The proposed Fulton Corridor Specific Plan and Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan will result in new development on vacant parcels and surface parking lots, as well as new development and redevelopment at underutilized sites. As described above, the Fresno Fulton Corridor Specific Plan/Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan encompasses a wide range of historic land uses and includes areas that are highly sensitive for historic archaeological resources. These resources are likely to be found in a buried context within areas that have been subject to considerable long- term historic development. Future demolition and construction activities that require excavations involving the removal of foundations, excavations into previously undisturbed soils, or other activities that involve excavation or grading in areas of undisturbed soils or early historical development could result in the potential for significant impacts on historic archaeological resources. As discussed above, the potential for impacts to historic archaeological resources exists within all subareas of both the FCSP and DNCP. With regard to potential impacts, the greater the number of intensity or development projects in the area, the greater the chance for impacts on subsurface resources. As such, those subareas with a greater density of vacant or underutilized parcels, typically also the subareas with earlier historical development, would possess a greater potential for impacts on archaeological resources. The loss of historic archaeological resources as a result of parcel clearance or development activity within any of the plan areas would result in a potentially significant impact. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 63 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Project-specific MM CUL-1 In accordance with Objective HCR-2 (specifically HCR-2-a through HCR-2-c) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all specific development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should undergo a standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review.  This CEQA-level evaluation should include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic-age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object evaluations. The report should also address any project-specific archaeological sensitivity determinations and additional project-specific proposed mitigation measures, as necessary.  Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and potential standing with the CRHR or NRHP, as necessary. Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be summarized in the Phase I report.  To ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings, the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are required to be completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information Center with the completed Phase I report.  Completed Phase I reports should be submitted to the City for incorporation into their local databases. MM CUL-2 In accordance with Objective HCR-3 (specifically HCR-3-a) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1 (specifically Policy 6.2.1 through 6.2.7), all efforts should be made (within appropriate safest standards)to preserve, rehabilitate, and re-use historic-age structures (whether determined eligible or not). MM CUL-3 Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City- approved archaeologist. MM CUL-4 If previously unknown cultural resources are encountered during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and an archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 64 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.  Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project area should be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria.  If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the archaeologist and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.  No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. The implementation of the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with historic resources to less than significant. Historic Resource – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.55 of the CEQA Guidelines. Future development in the vicinity of the FCSP and DNCP areas could result in impacts to historic archaeological resources. As described above, many potential cultural resources within the proposed FCSP/DNCP areas have likely been destroyed or have lost integrity in the past due to unmonitored excavation and grading activities. To the extent that other resources with similar cultural value are lost as a result of these activities, a cumulative impact on cultural resources would occur. Additional losses attributable to the proposed DNCP, FCSP, and DDC would contribute to this impact. In addition, construction activities could result in potential significant impacts to unknown buried historical resources. Development within the Planning Area as well as within the greater City of Fresno could result in significant impacts to historical resources. Such losses, which as described above are considered potentially significant project impacts, are also considered potentially significant in a cumulative context. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 65 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-4 listed above are required. Archaeological Resource – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could cause a substantial adverse cumulative change in the significance of a prehistoric archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Project-specific Impact Analysis Prehistoric archaeological resources are those cultural resources deposited before Europeans established a Franciscan Mission in California (1769) and include any deposits, features, or isolated artifacts. Under PRC 21083.2(h), prehistoric archaeological resources can be divided into two classes, unique and non-unique. Unique resources must be treated as if they are significant and avoidance of those resources is the first choice, while non-unique resources do not meet criteria in 21083.2(g) and therefore need not be avoided under CEQA Guidelines. The records search conducted by Greenwood and Associates did not identify any previously recorded prehistoric archaeological resources within the project area or a 0.25-mile search radius. However, as there have been few large-scale pedestrian surveys within the project area, and no recorded subsurface testing, this is not an accurate determination of archaeological sensitivity within the region. The region, and the project area itself, contains several geological features that would have been ideal for prehistoric temporary or seasonal encampments. The northern boundary of the DNCP is several miles from the banks of the San Joaquin River; therefore, no impacts would occur to resources in the vicinity of the river. However, additional sources of fresh water, such as creeks and tributaries, may have permeated the project area in prehistoric times. As such, it is possible that grading and construction activities may uncover previously unrecorded archaeological resources. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 66 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 is required in order to assess the prehistoric archaeological sensitivity of specific project developments. If no previously recorded prehistoric resources are identified and no additional mitigation measures re proposed in the Phase I investigation, Mitigation Measure CUL-4 is required to address potential inadvertent finds. In addition to Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and CUL-4, the following mitigation measures, which were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project, are also required: MM CUL-5 Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 51 Site, Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the current investigations. (“Vicinity” is defined here as lying within 300 feet of the identified site boundaries.) These are presently the only archaeological sites recorded within the FCSP/DNCP areas. MM CUL-6 Ground-disturbing activities shall also be monitored in the vicinity of any archaeological sites identified in the future, as follows:  A qualified professional archaeologist and a Native American representative shall monitor any ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of known archaeological sites. An archaeological monitoring plan shall be developed in accordance with professional standards by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology. The monitors will ensure that any portions of previously identified significant resources are avoided and protected. In addition, they will identify any new cultural resources encountered during ground-disturbing activities. If potentially important cultural resources are discovered, the archaeologist will immediately divert such activity within 100 feet of the find, or a distance determined to be appropriate. The potential significance of the find will be assessed and mitigation measures formulated, if warranted. Appropriate mitigation may include avoidance of the resource, testing, and/or data recovery. Ground disturbance in the area of suspended activity shall not recommence until authorized by the archaeologist. Upon completion of the monitoring, an archaeological report will be prepared for the City in accordance with professional standards. A copy of the report will be submitted to the SSJV Information Center. Provisions will be made for curation of any significant cultural materials recovered. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 67 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Archaeological Resource – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could cause a substantial adverse cumulative change in the significance of a prehistoric archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. As described above, future development in the vicinity of the FCSP and DNCP areas could result in impacts to previously undiscovered archaeological resources, resulting in a potential cumulatively significant impact when considered in conjunction with other cumulative development projects. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, as well as Mitigation Measures CUL-4, CUL-5, and CUL-6 are required would reduce impacts associated with archeological resources to less than significant. Unique Paleontological Resource/Site or Unique Geologic Feature – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Project-specific Impact Analysis Based on a review of geologic maps of the Planning Area, there are two primary surficial deposits: (1) Pleistocene non-marine and (2) Quaternary non-marine fan deposits. The Pleistoscene non- marine deposits are considered to have a high potential sensitivity. The Quaternary non-marine deposits consist of Pleistocene-Holocene alluvial sediments. Since these deposits include Pleistocene sediments, they are also considered to have a high potential for sensitivity. Therefore, excavation and/or construction activities within the Planning Area that are associated with the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC have the potential to impact paleontological/geological resources during excavation and construction activities within previously undisturbed soils. Although many areas have been previously disturbed by farming activities or previous structural development, the project could include future development that will require excavations or construction within previously City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 68 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx undisturbed soils. The impact to paleontological and geological resources is considered potentially significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. MM CUL-7 Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed:  If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds. If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study. If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 69 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include a paleontological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist. If additional paleontological/geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed. The implementation of the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features to less than significant. Unique Paleontological Resource/Site or Unique Geologic Feature – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Future development in areas outside the plan areas, as well as other cumulative development, could result in impacts to paleontological/geological resources during excavation and/or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils. These potential impacts from cumulative development could be significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft Environmental Impact Report and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-3 discussed above would reduce impacts associated with unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features to less than significant. Human Remains – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 70 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Project-specific Impact Analysis There is currently no evidence that the DNCP or FCSP plan areas contain prehistoric cemeteries or Native American cemeteries, however, various cemeteries are located throughout the City. The General Plan and Development Code Update identifies these cemeteries as Public Facilities on the Land Use Map. Future development within the plan areas would not impact existing cemeteries. Although there is no record of isolated human remains or unknown cemeteries, there is always a possibility that ground-disturbing activities associated with future development may uncover previously unknown buried human remains. In the event that human remains are encountered, this impact is considered potentially significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. MM CUL-8 In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. The implementation of the mitigation measure identified above would reduce impacts associated with human remains to less than significant. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 71 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Human Remains – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Although no known prehistoric or Native American human remains have been identified within or in the vicinity of the plan areas, there is a possibility that ground‐disturbing activities associated with cumulative development may uncover previously unknown buried human remains. The uncovering of human remains is considered a significant impact. Since there is a possibility for the project to uncover previously unknown buried human remains, the project ’s contribution to cumulative impacts on human remains would be potentially cumulatively considerable. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-4 as discussed above would reduce impacts associated with human remains to less than significant. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 3.5 - Routine Use – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified what could be a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Project-specific Impact Analysis It is anticipated that implementation of development under the proposed DNCP and FCSP could result in the exposure of persons to hazards and/or hazardous materials during construction as well as from buildout of the DNCP and FCSP. Thus, potential construction-related and long-term (i.e. operational) hazards impacts are discussed below. Potential Short-Term Construction Impacts Development of the proposed DNCP and FCSP plan areas includes infill development and intensification of land uses within the plan areas. Therefore, existing structures within the DNCP and FCSP plan areas may need to be demolished and new buildings will be constructed. Demolition of City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 72 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx existing buildings and construction of new buildings could expose persons working or living in the plan areas to potentially hazardous materials, including, but not limited to asbestos and lead from LBP s. However, there are regulatory requirements that pertain to both lead based paint and asbestos containing materials. Additionally, the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration has regulations that pertain to hazardous materials and the safety of workers who handle such materials. In addition, sites containing hazardous materials are located throughout the City which pose potential health hazards (City of Fresno Map Atlas Existing Conditions Report 2011). Additionally, within the FCSP and DNCP plan areas, there are sites which could pose potential hazardous materials threats due to previous land uses (Krazan and Associates 2011a). New development that would occur as a result of implementation of the DNCP and/or FCSP would be required to be remediated (cleaned up) prior to the commencement of construction activities. If existing or yet undiscovered soil or groundwater contamination were to be discovered during construction activities for development in the DNCP and FCSP plan areas, this contamination could pose a hazard to those persons who are exposed. The Phase I ESAs prepared for the FCSP and DNCP recommend specific measures to reduce potential impacts from the creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Grading and construction activities may involve limited transport, storage, usage, or disposal of hazardous materials, such as the use of petroleum products for fueling/servicing of construction equipment. This activity would occur for short-term periods during each project, and all such hazardous materials would be removed from the project site and disposed of pursuant to applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Because the construction activities are required to comply with the applicable regulations and laws pertaining to the transport, storage, use, and disposal of potentially hazardous materials associated with the project, health hazards from construction activities would be less than significant. Potential Long-Term Operational Impacts New development associated with the proposed DNCP and FCSP would result in the addition of new buildings and infrastructure as well as population to the plan areas. Development under the proposed DNCP and FCSP would result in the addition of land uses types that could generate hazardous materials, as well as added population that could be exposed to future hazardous materials releases. Furthermore, new development that would be constructed under the proposed DNCP and FCSP that involves routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials will be required to conform to City of Fresno laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. Unless determined to be exempt, new businesses under the proposed DNCP and FCSP that would handle a hazardous material, or a mixture containing a hazardous material, in quantities equal or greater than 500 pounds of a solid, 55 gallons of a liquid, 200 cubic feet of a compressed gas at a standard room temperature and pressure, the federal Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) for City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 73 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Extremely Hazardous Substances, and radioactive materials in quantities for which an Emergency Plan is required in accordance with Parts 30, 40, or 70, Chapter 1 of Title 10 of Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) will be required to conform to the City of Fresno approved Hazardous Materials Business Plan. The Hazardous Materials Business Plan includes a business owner/operator identification form, business activities form, hazardous materials inventory, site map and building diagram(s), written emergency response plans, and written employee training programs. Less than significant impacts are anticipated because all generation, transport, and treatment of hazardous materials are required to comply with applicable federal, state and local requirements. Mitigation is also required to reduce potential impacts; see MM HAZ-1a through MM HAZ-1e below. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Project-specific The following recommendations from the Phase I ESAs for the DNCP and the FCSP have been incorporated as mitigation measures and are anticipated to reduce potential impacts regarding hazardous materials to a less than significant level. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented on a property-by-property basis as development and/or redevelopment progresses throughout the DNCP and FCSP areas: MM HAZ-1a Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase I ESA shall be conducted for each individual property prior to development or redevelopment to ascertain the presence or absence of Recognized Environmental Conditions, Historical Recognized Environmental Condition, and Potential Environmental Concerns as defined in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Specific Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan relevant to the property under consideration. The findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow-up investigation, if found to be warranted. MM HAZ-1b In the event that the findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA for a property result in evidence of RECs, HRECs and/or PECs warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase II ESA City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 74 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of a significant impact to the subject site from hazardous materials. The Phase II ESA may include but may not be limited to the following: (1) Collection and laboratory analysis of soils and/or groundwater samples to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of constituents of concern; (2) Collection and laboratory analysis of soil vapors and/or indoor air to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of volatile constituents of concern; and/or (3) Geophysical surveys to ascertain the presence or absence of subsurface features of concern such as USTs, drywells, drains, plumbing, and septic systems. The findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow-up investigation, site characterization, and/or remedial activities, if found to be warranted. MM HAZ-1c In the event the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA reveal the presence of significant concentrations of hazardous materials warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of additional Phase II ESAs in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern. The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment. MM HAZ-1d If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESAs, site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency including, but not limited to, the Cal-EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services (FCEHS). Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil. If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility. MM HAZ-1e In the event of planned renovation or demolition of residential and/or commercial structures on the subject site, prior to the issuance of demolition permits, asbestos and LBP surveys shall be conducted in order to determine the presence or absence of asbestos-containing construction materials and/or LBP. Removal of friable and non- friable ACCMs that have the potential to become friable during demolition and/or renovation shall conform to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District is the responsible agency on the local level to enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 75 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Pollutants and shall be notified by the property owners and/or developers of properties (or their designee(s)) prior to any demolition and/or renovation activities. If asbestos-containing materials are left in place, an Operations and Maintenance Program (O&M Program) shall be developed for the management of asbestos- containing materials. Potential Short Term Construction Impacts During project construction/development, compliance with all applicable regulations combined with implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1a through HAZ-1e are anticipated to mitigate potential hazardous materials impacts to construction workers and the general public. Therefore, related impacts are anticipated to be reduced to a level of less than significant. Potential Long-Term Operational Impacts Impacts from the proposed DNCP and FCSP related to hazards and hazardous materials transport, use, and disposal are anticipated to be less than significant because all new development under the General Plan that handles, stores, generates or disposes of hazardous materials must be in compliance with City of Fresno regulations/laws regarding hazardous materials, as well as state and federal laws regarding hazardous materials. It is anticipated that implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1a through HAZ-1e will further reduce impacts to a less than significant level. As such, the proposed DNCP and FCSP are anticipated to have a less than significant impact. The implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce impacts associated with regarding hazardous materials to less than significant. Routine Use – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that there could be a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Cumulative Impact Analysis Potentially significant impact. Less than significant cumulative impacts are anticipated regarding the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials because both the City and County of Fresno have their own manpower/facilities to handle hazardous materials. The County of Fresno Environmental Health Department (the larger governing body) inspects businesses’ Business Plans, which must be submitted by businesses that handle a hazardous material, or a mixture containing a hazardous material, in certain quantities (County of Fresno Hazardous Materials Business Plans 2012). Additionally, the project would be required to implement the following mitigation measures, thereby reducing project-specific impacts to less than significant. Therefore, development in the City of Fresno as a whole would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local requirements. With implementation of mitigation, less than significant cumulative impacts are anticipated regarding the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 76 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1a through HAZ-1f listed above would reduce potential cumulative impacts to less than significant. Thus, no additional mitigation measures are required. The contribution of the proposed DNCP’s and FCSP’s impacts on the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials are anticipated to be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable because all generation, transport, and treatment of hazardous materials are required to comply with applicable federal, state and local requirements. Additionally, with implementation of mitigation measures listed above, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. Schools – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project has the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Project-specific Impact Analysis Less than significant impact. According to the Public Services section of this document, all of the schools within the DNCP plan area are within the Fresno Unified School District. There are 14 elementary schools, two middle schools, two high schools, an adult school, and the New Millennium Institute of Education within the boundaries of the DNCP area. This FCSP area does not have any existing schools except for Kepler Charter School; additionally, the plan area falls entirely within the Fresno Unified School District. Development under the proposed DNCP and FCSP could include land uses that have the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials and substances. It is anticipated that future development under the General Plan and Citywide Development Code could occur within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. However, all generation, transport, and treatment of hazardous materials would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local requirements. Additionally, any future projects would be reviewed by the City of Fresno in light of their potential impacts and location in relation to existing and/or proposed schools. Therefore, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 77 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Project-specific MM HAZ-3a A Business Plan must be submitted by businesses that handle a hazardous material, or a mixture containing a hazardous material, in quantities equal to or greater than 500 pounds of a solid, 55 gallons of a liquid, 200 cubic feet of a compressed has at standard room temperature and pressure, the Federal Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) for Extremely Hazardous Substances, radioactive materials in quantities for which an Emergency Plan is required in accordance with Parts 30, 40, or 70, Chapter 1 of Title 10 of Code of Federal Regulations. A Risk Management Plan shall be completed for any business that has more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance in a process included any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or on- site movement or any combination of these activities. Regulated substances are those chemicals on either the Federal list or the State list. MM HAZ-3b In the event that unknown soil contamination is discovered during grading activities, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of a Phase II ESA in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern. The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment. MM HAZ-3c If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA, site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency, including but not limited to the Cal- EPA DTSC or RWQCB, and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services. Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil. If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility. The DNCP and FCSP’s potential impacts on the emission of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school are anticipated to be less than significant and would not be cumulatively City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 78 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx considerable because all generation, transport, and treatment of hazardous materials are required to comply with applicable federal, state and local requirements. Implementation of mitigation for the project will further reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Schools – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project has the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Cumulative Impact Analysis Less than significant impact. Impacts from hazards are generally site-specific, and do not result in cumulative impacts. Less than significant cumulative impacts are anticipated regarding hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school, because project level mitigation would be required that would reduce impacts from each proposed project. Thus, the same mitigation would be required to reduce impacts on a cumulative level. Additionally, all generation, transport, and treatment of hazardous materials are required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local requirements, and the greater City of Fresno has its own manpower/facilities to handle hazardous materials. Therefore, less than significant impacts are anticipated. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Cumulative No additional mitigation measures are required for cumulative impacts regarding emission of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school. Impacts from hazards are generally site-specific, and do not result in cumulative impacts. The cumulative contribution of the DNCP’s and FCSP’s potential impacts on the emission of hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school are anticipated to be less than significant and would not be cumulatively considerable. All generation, transport, and treatment of hazardous materials are required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local requirements. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 79 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Hazardous Materials Site Listing – Project-Specific Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identified that the project could potentially be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Project-specific Impact Analysis Separate Phase I ESAs were conducted for the DNCP and FCSP plan areas. Because of the location of the FCSP boundaries within the DNCP boundaries, the information below is from the DNCP Phase I ESA because the geographical area for the DNCP covers both plan areas. A review was conducted of local, state, and federal governmental regulatory agency lists compiled by Environmental FirstSearch (EFS) of published documents that list businesses or properties which have handled hazardous materials or waste or may have experienced site contamination in the DNCP project area. However, no site-specific regulatory agency file review for individual properties was conducted as a matter of practicality, due to the size of the project area and the time/expense associated with this type of analysis (given the huge number of individual properties that are included in the DNCP area (approximately 23,000), it is unreasonable and impractical to conduct property-specific research tasks in light of the investigative goals of the Phase I ESA (Krazan & Associates 2011). Therefore, this analysis conservatively assumes that all of the listed properties discussed below could potentially represent hazardous materials sites. Because of the size of the DNCP project area, the DNCP was divided into three sections for the purpose of compiling the three EFS reports. Therefore, within the Phase I ESA, information regarding the northern/eastern area is provided in the first EFS report, followed by the southeastern area in the second report and the southwestern area in the third report. The northern/eastern EFS area includes roughly the region to the north of Divisadero/Neilson and to the east of SR 41 (Roeding, Lowell/Jefferson and Roosevelt plan areas); the southeastern EFS area includes roughly the region to the southeast of SR 41 (South Van Ness Industrial Area); and the southwestern EFS area includes roughly the region to the south of SR 180 west of SR 99 (Edison plan area) (Krazan & Associates 2011). A summary of the environmental conditions for each of the three sections described in the Phase I ESA is provided below (Phase I ESA DNCP 2011). Because of the large number of records found, please refer to the DNCP Phase I ESA contained in Appendix H.1 for details. Section 1—Northern/Eastern Area Environmental FirstSearch Listed Properties Summary: A total of 1,250 sites were listed in the northern/eastern DNCP area on the EFS database report, 909 within the DNCP area, 340 sites within one-eighth mile of the DNCP boundaries, and one formerly proposed NPL site greater than one-half mile from the DNCP boundaries. Section 2—Southeastern Area Environmental FirstSearch Listed Properties Summary: A total of 220 sites were listed in the southeastern DNCP area on the EFS database report, 56 within the DNCP City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 80 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx area, 72 sites within one-eighth mile of the DNCP boundaries, and one National Priorities List (NPL) site within one-eighth mile of the DNCP boundaries. Section 3—Southwestern Area Environmental FirstSearch Listed Properties Summary: A total of 215 sites were listed in the southwestern DNCP area on the EFS database report, 126 within the DNCP area, 87 sites within one-eighth mile of the DNCP boundaries, and two NPL sites greater than one-half mile from the DNCP boundaries. Based on the information provided in the Phase I ESA for the DNCP, development under the proposed DNCP and FCSP has the potential to be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. However, before development would occur on such a site, the project would be required to remediate and mitigate for on-site hazardous materials to a level that would permit development on-site. Additionally, recommendations from the Phase I ESA report have been incorporated as mitigation measures. Prior to mitigation, potentially significant impacts are anticipated. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. The following mitigation measures are anticipated to reduce potential impacts regarding hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5: Mitigation Measures HAZ- 1a, HAZ-1b, HAZ-1c, HAZ-1d, and HAZ-1e. Impacts from the proposed DNCP and FCSP related to hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 are anticipated to be less than significant with mitigation because pursuant to the mitigation measures, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency. As such, with implementation of the mitigation measures listed above, the proposed DNCP and FCSP are anticipated to have a less than significant impact. Hydrology and Water Quality 3.6 - Groundwater Supplies and Recharge – Project-Specific Impact Less than significant impact. The City of Fresno relied on groundwater for approximately 75 percent of its domestic water supply in 2015, which is approximately equal to 83,360 af. The groundwater was withdrawn from the Kings Groundwater Sub-basin of San Joaquin Basin Hydrologic Area. The City projects that groundwater withdrawal will be 135,100 afy by the year 2025 and to 148,900 afy City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 81 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx by the year 2040 according to the 2015 UWMP. In 2015, natural groundwater recharge (25,400), subsurface inflow (47,100 af), and intentional recharge (19,800 af) occurred for a total groundwater recharge of 92,300 afy. The City of Fresno is currently updating a key objective of balancing its groundwater operations by the Year 2025 (Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group 2016). According to the 2015 UWMP, achieving this objective includes implementing a host of strategies, which includes increasing the amount of intentional groundwater recharge from 19,800 af in 2015 to 58,500 afy by the Year 2025 and 66,500 afy by the Year 2040. In addition, expansion of tertiary recycled water treatment capacity is anticipated to be implemented from 2016 to 2021 and is expected to increase water supplies by 14,600 afy. The expansion of surface water treatment capacity is anticipated to be implemented from 2018 to 2035 and is expected to increase water supplies by 103,000 afy. Furthermore, the ongoing expansion of the groundwater recharge program allows the City to utilize the surface water supplies to make groundwater use sustainable. Based on the 2015 UWMP, projected water demand which includes development of the Fresno General Plan is based on a per capita target. For the years of 2020 and after, the per capita target is 247 gallons per day per capita (gpcd). The projected water demand for the City of Fresno in the year 2040, based on a population of 824,000 is 301,100 afy. To accommodate the 2040 water demand, 262,500 afy would need to be provided from potable and raw water, and 38,600 afy would be provided as recycled water. The projected water demand for the City at full buildout of the Fresno General Plan, based on a population of 824,000 and a per capita water demand of 247 gpcd from the 2015 UWMP, is 301,100 afy. Assuming treated water supplies, recycled water supplies, and pumped groundwater remain the same, the total supply of water would be 366,200 afy. This water supply would be more than the buildout demand by approximately 65,100 afy. As discussed in Section 5.15, Utilities and Service Systems, groundwater pumping would remain at approximately 148,900 afy in 2040 and beyond. To accommodate the buildout water demand, the treated surface water supply would need to be increased, the recycled water supply would need to be increased, or the amount of groundwater to be pumped would need to be increased. An increase in water conservation could also accommodate the buildout demand. On a community-level, the DNCP includes policies to alleviate groundwater burden, including:  Policy 5.1.3: Ensure the continued provision of an adequate supply of potable water to serve all urban development within the planned urban area.  Policy 5.1.4: Implement water conservation programs that will result in decreased per capita water consumption.  Policy 5.2.3: Where practical and cost-effective, require new residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional projects to connect to the City’s recycled water distribution system for non-potable uses. The DNCP also includes policies for water conservation, which, when implemented, would serve to alleviate groundwater burden: City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 82 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  Goal 5.1: Work within the existing water resources portfolio.  Policy 5.1.1: Work within the existing water resources portfolio and accommodate the water use demands for current and new development.  Policy 5.1.2: Consistent with new state law requirements described in the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), work with the community to reduce the use of potable water for outside irrigation through drought tolerant native planting and other landscape that requires less water, and convert as many non-potable water uses to recycled water.  Policy 5.1.3: Ensure the continued provision of an adequate supply of potable water to serve all urban development within the planned urban area. (RCP 4-3)  Policy 5.1.4: Implement water conservation programs that will result in decreased per capita water consumption. (RCP 4-3.6)  Goal 5.5: Minimize natural resource consumption.  Policy 5.5.1: Promote regionally appropriate green building within the Downtown Neighborhoods that implement the goals and strategies of Fresno Green.  Policy 5.5.2: Require solid waste separation at the source for all land uses (compost, recycle, landfill) in order to reduce the volume and toxicity of solid wastes that must be sent to landfill facilities.  Policy 5.5.3: Encourage high albedo materials for roofs and hardscape in order to reduce heat absorption and radiation.  Policy 5.5.4: Develop utility design guidelines that cluster and locate penetration and layout to minimize impacts to lot frontages for stormwater management or other sustainable features.  Policy 5.5.5: Provide green building design resources and material sourcing options to local builders.  Goal 5.6: Ensure collaboration between City of Fresno and outside utility agencies such as P.G.&E. and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD).  Policy 5.6.1: Coordinate with utility providers for new development projects and infrastructure projects during the schematic design phase of each Capital Improvement Project.  Policy 5.6.2: Organize regular meetings between capital improvement departments of FMFCD, the City of Fresno Public Works and Public Utilities Department.  Policy 5.6.3: Appoint a liaison within the City to coordinate meetings between various agencies and utility providers. In conjunction with the City’s Recycled Water Master Plan, establishing a recycled water system within Downtown will allow the new development in the Specific Plan area to be more likely to decrease dependence on groundwater pumping and external water sources. The following goals and policies of the FCSP bolster the City’s burgeoning recycled water program and supplement its alternative water resources (FCSP 2016):  Goal 10-3: Develop a downtown recycled water plant adjacent to the water tower at Eaton Plaza and distribution network to offset potable water being used for non-potable purposes, to be integrated into the City’s future Recycled Water Master Plan.  Policy 10-3-1: As economically feasible, supply recycled water to street improvements and planting areas within the Plan Area. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 83 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  Policy 10-3-2: As economically feasible, supply recycled water to both public and private large irrigation users.  Policy 10-3-3: To the greatest extent allowed by local, State and Federal Regulations, supply recycled water to commercial and industrial development projects for nonpotable uses such as boiler feed water, chiller makeup water, urinal and commode flushing (dual –plumbing), decorative fountains, and similar uses. The FCSP also includes the following policy regarding groundwater, which is included in the Plan’s approach to stormwater management:  Policy 10-6-4: Promote infiltration after treatment whenever possible, without compromising groundwater quality, to help recharge the groundwater basin. Additionally, the Implementation Framework for the FCSP includes projects and action programs to implement these policies, as follows:  FCSP Implementation Projects - Proposed Recycled Water Facility: Design and construct a recycled water facility adjacent to the water tower at Eaton Plaza - Potential Recycled Water Improvements: Install recycled water main in coordination with streetscape improvements.  FCSP Implementation Actions - Design a Downtown Recycled Water Distribution Network: Design a downtown recycled water distribution network to be aligned with and integrated into the City’s planned recycled water Transmission Grid Main system and instituted with the priority street improvements and planting plan. - Align Installation of Downtown Recycled Water Distribution Network with other Projects. - Align installation and construction of the downtown recycled water distribution network with priority street improvements, large irrigation users, and planning areas projected in this Specific Plan. The implementation of the proposed project could result in significant impacts to groundwater levels within the Kings Sub-basin if the increase in water demand is met through an increase of water supply from increased groundwater pumping. Although a reduction of impacts would occur through compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of DNCP and FCSP plans and programs designed to reduce groundwater impacts would serve to reduce impacts, this is considered a potentially significant impact. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Environmental Impact Report Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance Findings of Fact 84 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx Facts in Support of Finding The potentially significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Project-specific MM HYD-2a The City shall develop and implement water conservation measures to continue to reduce the per capita water use to 247 gallons per capita per day by General Plan Buildout. MM HYD-2b The City shall continue to be an active participant in the Kings Water Authority and the implementation of the Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. The implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce impacts associated with groundwater supplies and recharge to less than significant. Groundwater Supplies and Recharge – Cumulative Impact Potentially Significant Impact The City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR identifies that the proposed project and related cumulative projects could substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted. The Kings Sub-basin is a source of groundwater for the communities of Clovis, Fresno, Sanger, Del Rey, Orange Cove, East Orosi, Orosi, Cutler, Dinuba, Reedley, Parlier, London, Traver, Kingsburg, Selma, Fowler, Easton, Bowles, Laton, Caruthers, Raisin City, Biola, Kerman, Riverdale, Lanare, and San Joaquin. The aquifer also provides groundwater for agricultural irrigation water and numerous private domestic wells. The Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) was developed by the Kings Basin Water Authority to provide regional planning and management of water resources in the Kings Sub-basin to maintain a sustainable supply of the surface and groundwater resources for the water users within the basin (Kings Basin Water Authority 2012). The first regional goal (RG1) of the Kings Basin IRWMP is to reduce groundwater overdraft in the Kings Sub-basin (Kings Basin Water Authority 2012). To accomplish this goal, the Kings Basin Water Authority has developed Measurable Objective, Resource Strategies, and Project and Programs. The current planning horizon of the Kings Basin IRWMP is the year 2032. The Kings Basin IRWMP has developed strategies to achieve the regional goal to reduce groundwater overdraft. These include (Kings Basin Water Authority 2012): 1. Increase conjunctive use of water and groundwater storage 2. Precipitation enhancement City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Findings of Fact Which Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance First Carbon Solutions 85 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx 3. Increase surface storage 4. Regional conveyance enhancement 5. Increase recycled water use for recharge 6. Remediation of contaminated groundwater and reinjection of the treated water 7. Encourage the use of stormwater runoff for recharge by agencies that collect and discharge stormwater 8. Increasing number and storage capacities of basins to store flood flows 9. Protect recharge areas from urban development The Kings Basin Water Authority has developed a project review process to identify projects, rank their ability to achieve the goals of the Authority as articulated in the Kings Basin IRWMP. Participating agencies, including the City of Fresno, within the Kings Sub-basin vet projects with the Authority and funds are allocated to finance all or portions of projects that work to achieve the goals, including Goal RG1, reduce groundwater overdraft. While not an instant solution for the cumulative groundwater overdraft in the Kings Sub-basin, the City has begun to reach its stated goal of reducing groundwater overdraft by providing funding for projects and education as a member agency of the Kings Water Authority. Implementation of the aforementioned actions will result in a no cumulative overdraft impact on the aquifer, and cumulative impacts of the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC are considered to be less than significant. Finding Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Finding The potentially significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the City of Fresno DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Draft EIR and incorporated into the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-2a, and HYD-2b is would reduce impacts associated with groundwater supplies and recharge to less than significant. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Feasibility of Project Alternatives First Carbon Solutions 87 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES SECTION 4: CEQA requires that an EIR include an analysis of a reasonable range of feasible alternatives to a proposed project capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant adverse environmental impact associated with the project. The discussion of alternatives is required to include the “No Project ” alternative. CEQA requires further that the City of Fresno identify an environmentally superior alternative. If the “No Project” alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, an environmentally superior alternative must be identified from among the other alternatives. (CEQA Guidelines, section 15126.6.) As set forth in these Findings, the implementation of the proposed General Plan and Development Code Update will result in significant and unavoidable impacts. The City of Fresno reviewed a range of potential alternatives to the proposed project. The range of alternatives was determined based on, in part, the basic objectives of the proposed project. These objectives include: Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Objectives The primary objectives of the DNCP are as follows:  To make the Downtown Neighborhoods attractive, healthy, mixed-income places to live, thanks to their historic character and their proximity to a revitalized Downtown.  To revive the underlying structure of the Downtown Neighborhoods to create identifiable neighborhoods, districts, and corridors.  To integrate the public realm of streets with a multi-modal transportation network that renders them walkable and livable.  To regenerate parks and public spaces and make them safe and accessible to residents.  To reinforce the identity of each of the Community Plan’s planning areas by including all of the remaining ingredients for quality of life from childhood to old age within a walkable range.  To reintroduce missing street trees, irrigation, and sidewalks, and slow down traffic on primary thoroughfares through various traffic-calming measures.  To introduce a range of well-designed buildings that provide a variety of housing choices within easy access of parks, services, and jobs.  To design residential buildings to promote safety and community on the sidewalk and street.  To design commercial buildings with facades that are adjacent to sidewalks, are constructed of quality and durable materials, can accommodate a mix of uses at any one time, and can be reused over time under different programs. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Feasibility of Project Alternatives Findings of Fact 88 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  To introduce the High Speed Rail in a manner that has the most beneficial impact possible on the surrounding homes, businesses, and open spaces, while preserving Downtown’s interconnected street network to the maximum extent possible. Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Objectives The primary objectives of the FCSP are as follows:  A vision for the future of Downtown that recognizes the importance of history and tradition while embracing opportunities for continued reinvestment, growth, and beneficial change.  Goals and policies that work in tandem with and refine those of the General Plan and the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan to achieve the revitalization of the Plan area.  New land use policies for the Plan Area will guide upcoming zoning regulations. These new policies are calibrated to deliver new development that is consistent with Fresno’s physical character, history, and culture, as well as the community’s vision for its future growth.  The implementation strategy for transforming the Plan area’s streets, infrastructure, parks, and other public spaces.  Revitalize the Fulton District and promote it as a key asset and urban place. Strike a balance between the original character and value of the pedestrian-only Mall and its importance as the economic engine of the Downtown. The above purposes provide private property owners with a clear understanding of the future context within which they are investing and reinvesting in their properties. Downtown Development Code Objectives The objectives of the DDC are summarized as follows:  Property shall be occupied with land use activity to improve health; stabilize and improve property values; provide continuity of Fresno’s heritage; maximize compatibility; offer a range of housing choices; increase reinvestment in the Downtown Neighborhoods; provide a wide range of services and shopping; revitalize mixed-use corridors; and support convenient transit.  Buildings and their additions shall be designed and maintained to support reinvestment; front the adjacent street(s); enhance the building’s relationship to the public realm; use appropriate landscape materials; generate long-term value; and express creativity.  Frontages shall be designed and maintained to support the intended physical environment; support active and continuous pedestrian-oriented environments; provide appropriate physical transitions between the public right-of-way and the property. City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Feasibility of Project Alternatives First Carbon Solutions 89 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx  Signage shall be designed and maintained to promote the aesthetic and environmental values of the community; provide an effective channel of communication; avoid traffic safety hazards; and safeguard and protect the public health, safety, and general welfare.  Open spaces, landscaping and streetscapes shall be designed and maintained to preserve and promote the aesthetic character and environmental quality of Fresno as a place to live, work, and shop; correspond to the adjacent streetscapes; incorporate urban agriculture at all scales, as practical; and contribute to mitigating environmental degradation.  Each new or modified block and street shall be designed and maintained to interconnect and form/maintain a network; support the intended physical context; generate pedestrian- oriented block lengths; transform large sites into pedestrian-oriented blocks; increase the number of blocks; and support a multi-modal transportation system. The various alternatives that were reviewed were classified Alternatives Considered and Evaluated Following is a discussion of each alternative. Alternatives Considered and Evaluated 4.1 - An evaluation of four alternatives to the proposed project was provided in the EIR and is provided below. These alternatives represent a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project. This analysis includes alternatives that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the proposed project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. Alternative 1—No Project/Development in Accordance with Existing General 4.1.1 - Plan Land Use Designations Under the No Project Alternative, the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC would not be implemented. The existing community and specific plans in the Planning Area would continue building out in accordance with the General Plan, as this represents the most likely “circumstance under which the project does not proceed.” Approximately 30 to 50 percent of the planned development would occur. Substantially less development would occur under this alternative compared with the proposed plans, and therefore environmental effects associated with this alternative would be less when compared with the proposed plans. Under the proposed plans, the maximum development potential for the DNCP and FCSP plan areas would increase by 9,990 residential dwelling units, 5,900,000 additional square feet of office space, 1,950,000 square feet of retail space, and 3,050,00 square feet of industrial space through the year 2035. This alternative would introduce less population growth and fewer residential units compared with the proposed plans in the same timeline. This alternative would also include a lower gross residential density for new residences compared with the proposed plans. The significant and unavoidable effects associated with the proposed plans (air quality, greenhouse gas, noise and traffic) would be reduced with the implementation of this alternative. This alternative would represent planned growth in accordance with the current General Plan, and therefore any significant and unavoidable impacts that did occur under this alternative would have already been City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Feasibility of Project Alternatives Findings of Fact 90 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx accounted for in the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) prepared for the General Plan. In addition, the effects that were found to be less than significant or less than significant with mitigation under the proposed plans would also be reduced. This alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed plans; however, this alternative would not meet any of the objectives of the proposed plans. Alternative 2—High Density Residential Focus 4.1.2 - The High Density Residential Focus consists of implementing a version of the DNCP and FCSP that emphasizes residential use intensification. This alternative would increase residential land use density for the “high” capacity development potential by 60 percent (i.e., instead of 14 percent proposed for the DNCP), a 30 percent increase in residential land use density for the “medium” capacity development potential, and a 10 percent increase in the “low” capacity development potential for both Plan areas. This would equate to an increase in 5,994 dwelling units for high capacity, 2,997 for medium, and 990 for low in addition to the 9,990 dwelling units proposed for the project. The intent of this alternative is to allow more people to live in the downtown neighborhoods where job opportunities, commercial, and recreational activities exist. This alternative would provide more dense urban housing opportunities, and seeks to create a fully integrated horizontal and vertical mixed-use downtown area with a vibrant commercial core and lifestyle residential neighborhoods. Under this alternative, the commercial square footage would remain the same as proposed under the DNCP and FCSP. Because of increased residential development under this alternative compared with the proposed plans, environmental effects associated with this alternative would be greater than the proposed plans. Under this alternative, the maximum residential development potential for the DNCP and FCSP plan areas would increase by 990 to 5,994 residential dwelling units in addition to the 9,990 dwelling units proposed for the project, and commercial development would remain the same as the proposed plans through the year 2035. This alternative would enable more people to live in the downtown neighborhoods compared with the proposed plans in the same timeline. The significant and unavoidable effects associated with the proposed plans (air quality, greenhouse gas, noise and traffic) would be slightly greater with the implementation of this alternative. In addition, the effects that were found to be significant prior to mitigation under the proposed plans would also be increased, as would impacts that were found to be less than significant under the proposed plans. This alternative would meet all of the project’s objectives. Alternative 3—Retail-Oriented Development Potential Scenario 4.1.3 - The Retail Oriented Development Potential Scenario Alternative consists of implementing a version of the DNCP and FCSP that emphasizes retail use intensification. This alternative would increase the retail square footage under the plans by 10 percent for the “high” capacity development potential, and would decrease the office and industrial square footage proposed under the plans by 5 percent in the high capacity development potential category. This would equate to a 249,553-square-foot increase in retail space that would occur as new development, and an increase in 11,923 square feet of existing vacant space that would be used for retail over that of the proposed plan (a total increase City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact Feasibility of Project Alternatives First Carbon Solutions 91 K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx of 261,476 square feet). Additionally, this alternative would have 30,734 fewer office square feet than what is proposed under the DNCP and FSCP (for a proposed total of 583,996 square feet of office space in the plan areas), and 153,628 fewer industrial square feet (for a total of 2,918,948 square feet for industrial use in the plan areas). Under this alternative, residential and other land uses would remain the same as the proposed plans. The intent of this alternative is to allow more retail use in the downtown neighborhoods where job opportunities, commercial, and recreational activities exist. This alternative would increase the tax base for the city, and would serve to attract more shopping retailers to the downtown neighborhoods for more intensified retail shopping opportunities where public transit and pedestrian amenities are available in the City. Because of increased retail development under this alternative compared with the proposed plans, along with decreased office and industrial development, the environmental effects associated with this alternative would be roughly similar to the proposed plans. Under this alternative, the maximum retail development potential for the DNCP and FCSP plan areas would increase by 249,553 square feet, and there would be 30,734 fewer office square feet and 153,628 fewer industrial square feet relative to the proposed plans through the year 2035. The significant and unavoidable effects associated with the proposed plans (air quality, greenhouse gas, noise and traffic) would be essentially the same with the implementation of this alternative. In addition, the effects that were found to be significant prior to mitigation under the proposed plans would be the same, as would impacts that were found to be less than significant under the proposed plans. This alternative would meet all of the project’s objectives. Alternative 4—Office Oriented Development Potential Scenario 4.1.4 - The Office Oriented Development Potential Scenario Alternative consists of implementing a version of the DNCP and FCSP that emphasizes office use intensification. This alternative would increase the office square footage under the plans by 10 percent for the “high” capacity development potential, and would decrease the retail and industrial square footage proposed under the plans by 5 percent in the high capacity development potential category. This would equate to a 503,848-square-foot increase in office space that would occur as new development, and an increase in 39,098 square feet of existing vacant space that would be used for office over that of the proposed plan (a total increase of 542,946 square feet of office space development). Additionally, this alternative would have 130,738 fewer retail square feet than what is proposed under the DNCP and FSCP (for a proposed total of 2,484,028 square feet of retail space in the plan areas), and 153,628 fewer industrial square feet (for a total of 2,918,948 square feet for industrial use in the plan areas). Under this alternative, residential and other land uses would remain the same as the proposed plans. The intent of this alternative is to generate a better jobs-to-housing ratio in the Downtown neighborhoods and to allow for more local employment opportunities in the Downtown core where transit and other amenities are more readily available. This alternative would serve to increase the amount of jobs available in the downtown area that may also attract prospective homebuyers and City of Fresno—General Plan and Development Code Update Environmental Impact Report Feasibility of Project Alternatives Findings of Fact 92 FirstCarbon Solutions K:\Downtown EIR\2015 Completion\CC\Exhibits\Word Docs\31680017 DT Fresno - Findings of Fact_161013.docx consumers of commercial and recreational offerings to the downtown neighborhoods for more intensified use of the downtown area. Under this alternative, the maximum office development potential for the DNCP and FCSP plan areas would increase by 503,848 square feet, and there would be 130,738 fewer retail square feet and 153,628 fewer industrial square feet relative to the proposed plans through the year 2035. Because of increased office development under this alternative compared with the proposed plans, there would be a total increase of 258,580 square feet of development in the plan area relative to the proposed plans. Although there would be decreased retail and industrial development, the overall environmental effects associated with this alternative would be greater than the proposed plans. The significant and unavoidable effects associated with the proposed plans (air quality, greenhouse gas, noise and traffic) would be greater with the implementation of this alternative. In addition, the effects that were found to be significant prior to mitigation under the proposed plans would be greater, as would the impacts that were found to be less than significant under the proposed plans. This alternative would meet all of the project’s objectives. Environmentally Superior Alternative 4.2 - CEQA requires that the City identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative. If the No Project Alternative is the Environmentally Superior Alternative as it is in this case, the City must identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives considered in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6). It should be noted that the No Project Alternative would reduce, but not avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts that would occur under the proposed plans. This is because the MEIR prepared for the General Plan identified similar significant unavoidable impacts related to air quality, noise and traffic, and the No Project Alternative represents planned growth in accordance with the current General Plan. The Retail Oriented Development Potential Scenario Alternative would have impacts similar to the proposed plans in all impact categories with the exception of transportation, under which it would have greater environmental impacts related to peak hour trip generation. However, it would not exacerbate the significant and unavoidable air quality and noise impacts that would occur under the proposed plans. The High-Density Residential Focus and Office Oriented Development Potential Scenario Alternatives would exacerbate these significant and unavoidable impacts. Therefore, based on the evaluation of the remaining alternatives, the Retail Oriented Development Potential alternative would have environmental impacts similar to the proposed plans and would be considered the Environmentally Superior Alternative. NORTH WWW. Ci   H AMERICA | E FIRSTCARBON ty of Fres Co EUROPE | AFR SOLUTIONS.CO sno Down orridor Sp ICA | AUSTRA OM  Mitigati ntown Ne pecific Pla Ci LIA | ASIA on Monit eighborh an, and D ity of Fre Developm Co   toring an hoods Com Downtow sno, Fres ent and Reso ontact: Sophia Contact: Jas nd Report mmunity wn Develo sno Count ource Manage 2 a Pagoulatos,  FirstC 7265 N. Firs son Brandma Kim Burnel Report Dat ting Prog for y Plan, Fu opment C ty, Califo Prepare City of Fr ement Depart 2600 Fresno S Fresno, CA 9 559.621 Planning Ma Prepare Carbon Solu st Street, Suit Fresno, CA 9 an, Project Dir ll, Project Ma e: October 7, ram the lton Code rnia   ed for:  resno tment  Street  93721  1.8003  nager  ed by:  utions te 101  93720  rector  nager  , 2016  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 1 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1: DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.1—Aesthetics The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM AES‐4a: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas.  Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4b: Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low‐intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4c: Lighting systems for non‐residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties.  Low‐intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4d: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot‐Lamberts (FT‐L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT‐L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM AES‐4e: Materials used on building facades shall be non‐reflective. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoCumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures AES‐4a through AES‐4e is required. On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approvals City of Fresno  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 2 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.3—Air Quality The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific The implementation of the proposed plans and relevant policies for this area are expected to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions to the extent feasible.  This is well stated in the FCSP: “By improving Downtown, this Plan helps to expand access and make Downtown more inviting and attractive to everyone.  Over time, Downtown’s wide streets are put to better use, creating space for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, and connecting and creating synergy with adjacent neighborhoods and institutions that are within walking and biking distance of Downtown.”  The FCSP follows principles including infill development, mix of land uses, an interconnected street system, and a high level of walkability and bikability that have been documented to reduce vehicle miles traveled (see CAPCOA’s 2010 report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures).  No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. Implement proposed plans and relevant policies to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions.   Prior to construction of the project  City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Mitigation Measure AIR‐1 Projects that include five or more heavy‐duty truck deliveries per day with sensitive receptors located within 300 feet of the truck loading area shall provide a screening analysis to determine if the project has the potential to exceed criteria pollutant concentration based standards and thresholds for NO2 and PM2.5.  If projects exceed screening criteria, refined dispersion modeling and health risk assessment shall be Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a screening analysis as specified.   Prior to construction of the project  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 3 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial accomplished and if needed, mitigation measures to reduce impacts shall be included in the project to reduce the impacts to the extent feasible.  Mitigation measures include but are not limited to: • Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. • Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less. Mitigation Measure AIR‐2 Projects that result in an increased cancer risk of 10 in a million [20 in a million under revised SJVAPCD thresholds] or exceed criteria pollutant ambient air quality standards shall implement site‐specific measures that reduce TAC exposure to reduce excess cancer risk to less than 10 in a million [20 in a million under revised SJVAPCD thresholds].  Possible control measures include but are not limited to: • Locate loading docks and truck access routes as far from sensitive receptors as reasonably possible considering site design limitations to comply with other City design standards. • Post signs requiring drivers to limit idling to 5 minutes or less • Construct block walls to reduce the flow of emissions toward sensitive receptors • Install a vegetative barrier downwind from the TAC source that can absorb a portion of the diesel PM emissions • For projects proposing to locate a new building containing sensitive receptors near existing sources of TAC emissions, install HEPA filters in HVAC systems to reduce TAC emission levels exceeding risk thresholds. • Install heating and cooling services at truck stops to eliminate the need for idling during overnight stops to run onboard systems. Implement the air pollution control measures, as necessary.   During project construction  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 4 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial • For large distribution centers where the owner controls the vehicle fleet, provide facilities to support alternative fueled trucks powered by fuels such as natural gas or bio‐diesel. • Utilize electric powered material handling equipment where feasible for the weight and volume of material to be moved. Mitigation Measure AIR‐3 Require developers proposing projects on ARB’s list of projects in its Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (Handbook) warranting special consideration to prepare a cumulative health risk assessment when sensitive receptors are located within the distance screening criteria of the facility as listed in the ARB Handbook. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a cumulative health risk assessment as specified.   Prior to project construction City of FresnoMitigation Measure AIR‐4 Require developers of projects containing sensitive receptors to provide a cumulative health risk assessment at project locations exceeding ARB Land Use Handbook distance screening criteria or newer criteria that may be developed by the SJVAPCD (no longer required by CEQA). Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a cumulative health risk assessment as specified.   Prior to project construction City of FresnoThe following policy serves as mitigation measures, andwere not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific The implementation of the proposed plans and relevant policies for this area are expected to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions to the extent feasible.  This is well stated in the FCSP: “By improving Downtown, this Plan helps to expand access and make Downtown more inviting and attractive to everyone.  Over time, Downtown’s wide streets are put to better use, creating space for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, and connecting and creating synergy with adjacent neighborhoods and institutions that are within walking and biking distance of Downtown.” Implement proposed plans and relevant policies to reduce per capita motor vehicle emissions. Prior to construction of the project City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 5 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial The DNCP and FCSP follow principles including infill development, mix of land uses, an interconnected street system, and a high level of walkability and bikability that have been documented to reduce vehicle miles traveled (see CAPCOA’s 2010 report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures).  No mitigation measures beyond General Plan policies, ordinances, and regulations are available to further reduce this impact. The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific Odor source types listed in Table 5.3 8 may result in a potentially significant impact that would require mitigation to ensure that the impact is reduced to less than significant. Monitor odor source types and mitigate to less than significant. During construction activities City of FresnoMM AIR‐5: Require developers of projects with the potential to generate significant odor impacts as determined through review of SJVAPCD odor complaint history for similar facilities and consultation with the SJVAPCD to prepare an odor impact assessment and to implement odor control measures recommended by the SJVAPCD or the City to the extent needed to reduce the impact to less than significant. Review and confirm that the developer has prepared an odor impact assessment, as necessary.  Prior to construction of the project City of FresnoCumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR‐3 is required. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a cumulative health risk assessment as specified.   Prior to project construction City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 6 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.4—Biological Resources The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM BIO‐1a: Construction of a proposed project would avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special‐status species known to occur within the Plan areas.  If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special‐status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special‐status species.  If a special‐status species is determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a special‐status species to the greatest extent feasible.  Avoidance and minimization measures include and are not limited to removing vegetation communities to be replanted off‐site. On‐site inspection of any special‐status species.  Implement avoidance and minimization measures, as necessary. Before ground‐disturbing (preparation and construction activities) City of FresnoMM BIO‐1b: Direct or incidental take of any state or federally listed species would be avoided to the greatest extent feasible.  If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resource agencies and/or additional permitting may be required.  Agency consultation through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Section 2081 and United States Fish and Wildlife Service Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species.  Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis through agency consultation. Coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and United States Fish and Wildlife Service for permitting.  On‐site inspection to confirm implementation mitigation measures. Prior to construction of the project  California Department of Fish and Wildlife and United States Fish and Wildlife Service   City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 7 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM BIO‐1c: Development within the Plan areas would avoid, where possible, special‐status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special‐status species.  If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special‐status natural community or suitable habitat for special‐status species, compensatory habitat‐based mitigation may be required under the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Endangered Species Act.  Mitigation will consist of preserving on‐site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off‐site credits from an approved mitigation bank.  Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies.  An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be produced by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special‐status natural communities to a less than significant level.  Agreed‐upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special‐status species.  The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis. Coordinate with resource agencies.  On‐site inspection to confirm implementation of mitigation measures.   Prior to construction of the project City of FresnoMM BIO‐1d: Proposed projects within the Plan areas would avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code Section 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site.  If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre‐construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site.  If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be present on‐site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest.  A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have Monitor the timing of construction.  Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a pre‐construction clearance survey, as necessary.  Confirm presence of biological monitor, as necessary. Prior to and during construction activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 8 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial fledged and the nest is no longer active.  Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor. Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO‐1a through BIO‐1d is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to and during construction activities City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM BIO‐3a: If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site.  The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts.  Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of a wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the planning area.  Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a formal wetland delineation, as necessary.  Confirm implementation of wetland mitigation. Prior to construction of the project United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) MM BIO‐3b: In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the proposed project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland.  Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage, and incorporating detention basins shall help to ensure that project‐related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible. Confirm BMPs are incorporated into design and construction phases. Before ground‐disturbing (preparation and construction activities) City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 9 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO‐3a and BIO‐3b is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to construction of the project and before ground‐disturbing City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM CUL‐1: In accordance with Objective HCR‐2 (specifically HCR‐2‐a through HCR‐2‐c) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1, all discretionary development projects within the DNCP, FCSP, and DDC should undergo a standard Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or equivalent Phase I review. • This CEQA‐level evaluation should include, at minimum, a CHRIS records search for the project area and an appropriate search radius, a historical map/aerial photography and literature review for the project area, a pedestrian survey to identify specific historic‐age structures within the project area, and any subsequent building/structure/object evaluations.  The report should also address any project‐specific archaeological sensitivity determinations and additional project‐specific proposed mitigation measures, as necessary.  • Any newly recorded prehistoric or historic resources should be evaluated for significance and potential standing with Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources, the CRHR, and the NRHP, as necessary.  Eligibility determinations and proposed mitigation measures should be summarized in the Phase I report. • To ensure that state and local historic resources databases are updated with new findings, the appropriate Department Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a Cultural Resources Assessment, Archaeological Resource Assessment, Historic Property Evaluation, or Phase I review. Prior to construction of the project  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 10 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms are required to be completed for any newly recorded resources and submitted to the CHRIS Information Center with the completed Phase I report. • Completed Phase I reports should be submitted to the City for incorporation into their local databases. MM CUL‐2: In accordance with Objective HCR‐3 (specifically HCR‐3‐a) of the Fresno General Plan, and in accordance with DNCP Chapter 6 Goal 6.1 (specifically Policy 6.2.1 through 6.2.7), all efforts should be made (within appropriate safest standards) to preserve, rehabilitate, and re‐use historic‐age structures (whether determined eligible or not). Confirm compliance with applicable objectives and goals. Prior to construction of the project  City of FresnoMM CUL‐3: Subsurface excavations or mass grading for new developments within areas determined to have moderate to high archaeological sensitivity (whether in this Specific Plan or in subsequent Phase I reports) should be monitored by a City‐approved archaeologist.  The Archaeologist will provide training to the construction crew at a “tailgate” meeting regarding state laws and protocols for archeological measures prior to the initiation of any ground‐disturbing activities at these locations.  The archaeologist will discuss the project‐specific sensitivity potential to encounter both prehistoric and historic materials; present (verbally or graphically) examples of potential types of prehistoric and historic materials that may be encountered; discuss the responsibilities and empowerments of the cultural resources monitor(s); and briefly address the procedures to address inadvertent finds.Confirm presence of City‐approved archaeologist.   During subsurface earthwork activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 11 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM CUL‐4: If previously unknown cultural resources are encountered during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and an archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study.  The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. • Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.  Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project area should be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria. • If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the archaeologist and recommended to the Lead Agency.  Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. • No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources.  Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. Cease construction when there is a potentially significant archaeological resource and perform technical analyses. During subsurface earthwork activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 12 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL‐1 through CUL‐4 is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures Prior to construction of the project and during subsurface earthwork activities City of FresnoMitigation Measure CUL‐1 is required in order to assess the prehistoric archaeological sensitivity of specific project developments.  If no previously recorded prehistoric resources are identified and no additional mitigation measures re proposed in the Phase I investigation, Mitigation Measure CUL‐4 is required to address potential inadvertent finds. Cease construction when there is a potentially significant archaeological resource and perform technical analyses. During subsurface earthwork activities City of FresnoIn addition to Mitigation Measure CUL‐1 and CUL‐4, the following mitigation measures, which were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project, are also required: MM CUL‐5: Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist shall be conducted during any ground‐disturbing activities in the vicinity of the Fresno Chinatown Block 50 Site, Fresno Block 534 Site, and the Block 1052 Isolate, which were identified by the current investigations.  (“Vicinity” is defined here as lying within 300 feet of the identified site boundaries.)  These are presently the only archaeological sites recorded within the FCSP/DNCP areas. Confirm presence of a qualified archaeological monitor. During ground‐disturbing activities City of FresnoMM CUL‐6: Ground‐disturbing activities shall also be monitored in the vicinity of any archaeological sites identified in the future, as follows:  A qualified professional archaeologist and a Native American representative shall monitor any ground‐disturbing activities in the vicinity of known archaeological sites.  An archaeological monitoring plan shall be developed in accordance with professional standards by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology.  The monitors will ensure that any portions of Confirm presence of a qualified archaeological monitor. During ground‐disturbing activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 13 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial previously identified significant resources are avoided and protected.  In addition, they will identify any new cultural resources encountered during ground‐disturbing activities.  If potentially important cultural resources are discovered, the archaeologist will immediately divert such activity within 100 feet of the find, or a distance determined to be appropriate.  The potential significance of the find will be assessed and mitigation measures formulated, if warranted.  Appropriate mitigation may include avoidance of the resource, testing, and/or data recovery.  Ground disturbance in the area of suspended activity shall not recommence until authorized by the archaeologist. Upon completion of the monitoring, an archaeological report will be prepared for the City in accordance with professional standards.  A copy of the report will be submitted to the SSJV Information Center.  Provisions will be made for curation of any significant cultural materials recovered. Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL‐1, as well as Mitigation Measures CUL‐4, CUL‐5, and CUL‐6 are required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Prior to and during construction activities  City of FresnoThe following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM CUL‐7: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted.  The following procedures shall be followed: • If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence.  In the event Review and confirm that the applicant has conducted a field survey and literature search. Prior to construction of the project City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 14 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study.  The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds.  If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency.  Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.  No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources.  Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. • If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance.  If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist.  Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.  In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 15 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial literature review shall include a paleontological monitor.  The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist.  If additional paleontological/geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed. The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM CUL‐8: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately.  Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a).  If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC).  The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains.  Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains.  The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants’ preferences for treatment. Cease construction when there are human remains unearthed and contact appropriate agency. During construction activities City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 16 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Cumulative Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL‐4 is required. Confirm implementation of mitigation measure. During subsurface earthwork activities City of FresnoSection 5.8—Hazards and Hazardous Materials The following mitigation measure were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project Project‐specific The following recommendations from the Phase I ESAs for the DNCP and the FCSP have been incorporated as mitigation measures and are anticipated to reduce potential impacts regarding hazardous materials to a less than significant level.  The following mitigation measures shall be implemented on a property‐by‐property basis as development and/or redevelopment progresses throughout the DNCP and FCSP areas: MM HAZ‐1a: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase I ESA shall be conducted for each individual property prior to development or redevelopment to ascertain the presence or absence of Recognized Environmental Conditions, Historical Recognized Environmental Condition, and Potential Environmental Concerns as defined in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Specific Plan and the Fulton Corridor Specific Plan relevant to the property under consideration. The findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow‐up investigation, if found to be warranted. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a Phase I ESA. Prior to issuance of a grading permit City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 17 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM HAZ‐1b: In the event that the findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA for a property result in evidence of RECs, HRECs and/or PECs warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase II ESA shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of a significant impact to the subject site from hazardous materials.  The Phase II ESA may include but may not be limited to the following: (1) Collection and laboratory analysis of soils and/or groundwater samples to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of constituents of concern; (2) Collection and laboratory analysis of soil vapors and/or indoor air to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of volatile constituents of concern; and/or (3) Geophysical surveys to ascertain the presence or absence of subsurface features of concern such as USTs, drywells, drains, plumbing, and septic systems. The findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow‐up investigation, site characterization, and/or remedial activities, if found to be warranted. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared a Phase II ESA, as necessary. Prior to issuance of a grading permit City of FresnoMM HAZ‐1c: In the event the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA reveal the presence of significant concentrations of hazardous materials warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of additional Phase II ESAs in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern.  The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment. Review and confirm that the applicant has prepared additional Phase II ESA, as necessary. Prior to issuance of a grading permit City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 18 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM HAZ‐1d: If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESAs, site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency including, but not limited to, the Cal‐EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services (FCEHS). Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil.  If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility. Review and confirm that the property owners and/or developers have completed site remediation and potential risk assessment. Prior to issuance of a grading permit Cal‐EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services (FCEHS) MM HAZ‐1e: In the event of planned renovation or demolition of residential and/or commercial structures on the subject site, prior to the issuance of demolition permits, asbestos and LBP surveys shall be conducted in order to determine the presence or absence of asbestos‐containing construction materials and/or LBP.  Removal of friable and non‐friable ACCMs that have the potential to become friable during demolition and/or renovation shall conform to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.  The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District is the responsible agency on the local level to enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and shall be notified by the property owners and/or developers of properties (or their designee(s)) prior to any demolition and/or renovation activities.  If asbestos‐containing materials are left in place, an Operations and Maintenance Program (O&M Program) shall be developed for the management of asbestos‐containing materials. Confirm asbestos and LBP surveys were conducted.  Confirm conformity to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Prior to issuance of demolition permits San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 19 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Project‐specific The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR and are new for this project: MM HAZ‐3a: A Business Plan must be submitted by businesses that handle a hazardous material, or a mixture containing a hazardous material, in quantities equal to or greater than 500 pounds of a solid, 55 gallons of a liquid, 200 cubic feet of a compressed has at standard room temperature and pressure, the Federal Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) for Extremely Hazardous Substances, radioactive materials in quantities for which an Emergency Plan is required in accordance with Parts 30, 40, or 70, Chapter 1 of Title 10 of Code of Federal Regulations. A Risk Management Plan shall be completed for any business that has more than a threshold quantity of a regulated substance in a process included any use, storage, manufacturing, handling, or on‐site movement or any combination of these activities.  Regulated substances are those chemicals on either the Federal list or the State list.Confirm a business plan was submitted and a Risk Management Plan was completed. Prior to final project approvals City of FresnoMM HAZ‐3b: In the event that unknown soil contamination is discovered during grading activities, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of a Phase II ESA in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern.  The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment.Confirm property owners and/or developers ensure site characterization. During grading activities City of FresnoMM HAZ‐3c: If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA, site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable Review and confirm preparation of a site remediation and risk assessment. Prior to construction of project Cal‐EPA DTSC or RWQCB, and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services  City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 20 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial regulatory agency, including but not limited to the Cal‐EPA DTSC or RWQCB, and Fresno County Department of Environmental Health Services.  Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil.  If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility.Section 5.9—Hydrology and Water Quality The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM HYD‐2a: The City shall develop and implement water conservation measures to continue to reduce the per capita water use to 247 gallons per capita per day by General Plan Buildout. Confirm development and implementation of water conservation measures. Ongoing City of FresnoMM HYD‐2b: The City shall continue to be an active participant in the Kings Water Authority and the implementation of the Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan. Confirm active participation in the Kings Water Authority and implementation of Kings Basin Integrated Regional Water Management Plan.Ongoing City of FresnoSection 5.11—Noise The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM NOI‐2: Any noise‐sensitive land use development that would construct structures within 80 feet of the edge of existing or future rail lines within the Plan Areas shall be required to prepare a vibration impact analysis to determine potential vibration impacts from railroad operations and to mitigate any impacts to below the FTA’s significance criteria shown in Table 5.11 8. Confirm preparation of a vibration impact analysis. Prior to construction of project City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 21 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial Section 5.14—Transportation and Traffic The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Cumulative MM TRANS‐2a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted intersections reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies that reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  When needed, confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 22 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐2b: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  The monitoring program will identify improvements that are needed, if any, to mitigate the project’s impacts to traffic operations at these impacted locations.  If the monitoring program determines that the proposed project causes an intersection to operate at unacceptable levels (LOS E or F), or adds more than five seconds of delay to an intersection already operating at an unacceptable LOS, the City of Fresno shall implement mitigation measures that improve operations to mitigate the project’s impact, if feasible.  These measures may include, but are not limited to, feasible TDM strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips or physical improvements, such as adding traffic signals, turn lanes, travel lanes, roundabouts, or the specific improvements listed for each impacted study intersection below. • Belmont Avenue/Golden State Boulevard‐Wesley Avenue ‐ Signalize the intersection. ‐ Widen the westbound approach to two through lanes and one protected left‐turn lane. • Belmont Avenue/Palm Avenue ‐ Convert the northbound shared through/left‐turn lane to separate through and left‐turn lanes. ‐ Convert the eastbound and westbound shared through/left‐turn lane to a single left‐turn lane. ‐ Convert the left‐turn movements to protected phasing. ‐ Add a second eastbound left‐turn lane. ‐ Convert the eastbound shared through/right‐turn lane to separate through and right‐turn lanes. ‐ Add a second northbound left‐turn lane. ‐ Optimize the signal timings. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  When needed, confirm implementation of mitigation measures such as, feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 23 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial The following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM TRANS‐3a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted intersections reach LOS D operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area. ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 24 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MMTRANS‐3b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoCumulative MM TRANS‐3a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted intersections at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted intersections reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted intersections are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 25 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐3b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoProject‐specific MM TRANS‐4a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted locations at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted locations reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area. ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted locations are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 26 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐4b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoCumulative MM TRANS‐4a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic operations at the impacted locations at least every 5 years.  Once the impacted locations reach LOS D/E operations during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: • Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area. ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic operations at impacted locations are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 27 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐4b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoProject‐specific MM TRANS‐5a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic queuing at the impacted ramps at least every 5 years.  Once the queues at the impacted ramps extend into the deceleration zone as defined in Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic queuing at impacted ramps are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 28 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐5b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures  Ongoing City of FresnoCumulative MM TRANS‐5a: The City of Fresno shall monitor AM and PM peak‐hour traffic queuing at the impacted ramps at least every 5 years.  Once the queues at the impacted ramps extend into the deceleration zone as defined in Caltrans HDM during either the AM or PM peak hour, a Transportation Management Association (TMA) shall be formed and funded to actively implement feasible transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce peak‐hour vehicle trips to and from the project area, as supported by DNCP Policy 3.3.3 and General Plan Policy MT‐2‐g.  The TMA will implement TDM measures such as: • Provide discounted transit passes. • Coordinate with Fresno Area Express and TMA members to ensure transit schedules align with TMA member work schedules to the extent feasible. • Organize ridesharing, bike‐share, or car‐share programs. • Offer shuttle/vanpool services, in collaboration with employers, to serve major employment centers. • Operate a commute trip reduction program that includes measures such as: ‐ Preferential carpool parking. ‐ Encouraging flexible work schedules/telecommuting. ‐ Conducting marketing campaigns to encourage non‐auto modes for commuting and other travel purposes. ‐ Encouraging the use of a transportation coordinator for the project area ‐ Provide end‐of‐trip facilities for bicyclists. Confirm AM and PM peak hour traffic queuing at impacted ramps are monitored.  Confirm that a TMA is formed and funded.  Confirm implementation of feasible TDM strategy. Every 5 years  City of Fresno City of Fresno—DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program   FirstCarbon Solutions 29 Y:\Publications\Client (PN‐JN)\3168\31680017\EIR\4 ‐ FEIR\edit\31680017 DT Fresno MMRP.docx Table 1 (cont.): DNCP, FCSP, and DDC Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Method of Verification Timing of Verification Responsible for Verification Verification of Completion Date Initial MM TRANS‐5b: Implement General Plan Policy MT‐2‐j and MT‐2‐l pursuant to Fresno General Plan MEIR impact TRANS‐1 to seek funding for a multimodal transportation system and funding mechanism to address region‐wide traffic impacts. Confirm implementation of mitigation measures. Prior to final project approval City of FresnoProject‐specific MM TRANS‐7: The City shall update the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan to reflect the proposed changes in the DNCP and FCSP.  The implementation of this mitigation measure would maintain consistency among the City’s plans for bicycle facilities and lessen proposed project’s impact to less than significant. Review and confirm updated Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master plan. Prior to final project approval  City of FresnoThe following mitigation measures were not included in the MEIR but are applicable to this project: Project‐specific MM TRANS‐8: Implementation of the DNCP and FCSP would include improvements to the existing at‐grade railroad crossings to ensure that they have adequate vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and that the crossing gates meet PUC standards.  The implementation of these improvements would improve conditions at at‐grade railroad crossings and lessen potential project impacts to less than significant. Inspect at‐grade railroad crossings. Prior to final project approvals  City of Fresno  THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Exhibit H Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-009 ·|}þ ·|}þ ·|}þ NGST TULARE STSTRINITYSTSTHORNEAVENFIRSTSTSMODOCSTE D I V I S A D E R O ST SFRUITAVESARTHURAVENFULTONSTSFIRSTSTE B E L M O N T A V E SCALLISCHST W B E L M ONTA V E C S TNBROADWAYWNIELSENAVE P O T T L E A V E NCOLLEGEAVEG S T E T U L A R E S T F U LT O N STNABBYST E V E N T U R A S TNORCHARDSTNFRESNOSTNANGUSST E FLOR E N C E AVE NMARIPOSASTE D U D L E Y A V E N SECOND STE S TFRESNOSTETHOMASAVEMERCED STSPLUMASSTS P A R A L L E LAVENGLENNAVEMONOSTN H S T E FRAN K LIN AV E NUSTE C A L I F O R N I A A V E JO N ES AVE IR WIN A V E KERN STINYO STU ST MERCEDSTE H AW ES AV E TUOLUMNESTKERN STE BRALY AV E L O SANGELESST VENTURASTSSECONDSTSTANISLAUSSTSANBENITOSTSTHIRDSTN S T NCLARKSTE O L E A N D E R A V E H S T E H A M I L T O N A V E F R O N T A G E R D E C A L I F O R N I A A V E P S T B R O A D W A Y E T U O L U M N E S TNTHORNEAVEEDENNETT A V E SHOLLYAVESLILYAVEN S T T S T M S T N THIRD STE L E W I S A V E N W E B E R A V E S R AIL R O A D A V E E THOMAS AVE E W H I T E A V E S IVY AVEV A N N E S S A V E B S T E TYLER AVE L S T C S T B R O A D W A Y S S T R S T F U L T O N S T B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y F U L T O N M A L L E S T L S T C HIN A A L Y F S T Q S T S G S T E PLATT AVENPARKAVE S GOLD E N S T A T E B L V DNEFFIESTN DIANA STN FRUIT AVESPOPPYAVES EUNICE AVESELMAVENSANPABLOAVESDELNOAVEWAM A D O R S T O S T S EAST AVE180 99 41 Central Area Community Plan Location Map 0 2,000 4,0001,000 Feet/ EXHIBIT A Plan Proposed to be Repealed Central Area Community Plan City Limits Exhibit I Ordinance Bill Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-010 ·|}þ P S TNABBYSTNVANNESSAVEEDIVISADEROSTNFULTONST L S TNBLACKSTONEAVEA S TAMADOR STCALAVERASSTH S T NCOLLEGEAVENECHOAVEF S T E N E V A D A A V E E I L L I N O I S AV ENTHESTASTEMCKENZIEAVEN WILSON AVENBROADWAYFRESNOSTE T H O M A S A V E MERCED STNGLENNAVEAMADORSTN H S T SANJOAQUINSTE THOMAS AVE B S T KERN STV A N N E S S A V E TULARE STSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNE STSACRAMENTOSTE B E L M O N T A V E CALAVERAS STSTANISLAUS STNROOSEVELTAVEINYO STE V O O R M A N A V E N S T O S TNCLARKSTETH OMAS AV E E W H I T E A V E E BELMONT/WHITE ALY R S T C HIN A A L Y F U L T O N M A L L S STN FULTON/VAN NESS ALYO ST-ALYCAPITOL STKERN MALLNGST B R O A D W A Y L S T C S T E S T G S T Q S T M S T MA D D YDRNPOPLARAVEN FERGER AVEN PARK AVEABBY/EFFIEALYN DIANA/EFFIE ALYN ABBY/EFFIE ALYN EFFIE STN CLARK/DIANA ALYNCLARK/VALERIAALYNVALERIASTNTHESTA/VALERIAALYN DIANA STNSANPABLOAVEEL DORADO ST180 Fulton-Lowell Specific Plan Location Map 0 1,000 2,000500Feet/ EXHIBIT A Plan Proposed to be Repealed Fulton/Lowell Specific Plan Exhibit J Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No A-16-011 ·|}þ ·|}þ ·|}þ S R AIL R O A D A V ENCLARKSTTULARE STSHUGHESAVESTRINITYSTS MARKS AVEE H A M I L T O N A V ESTHORNEAVESMODOCSTNELEVENTHSTN NINTH STE D I V I S A D E RO S T SFRUITAVEW M C K I N L E Y A V E E L O WE AV ENMARKSAVEWBELMONTAVE E V E N T U R A S T E J E N S E N A V EN THORNE AVENWINERYAVEW N I E L S E N A V E N P ARKW A Y D R E F L O R A D O R A A V E G S T NBLACKSTONEAVEE P R I N C E T O N A V E EH U N T I N G T O N B L V DN MAROA AVENWESTAVEE C O R N E L L A V E NWISHONAVENVANNESSBLVDN PALM AVESORANGEAVEE HARVARD AVE S CEDAR AVESCLARAAVEE HAMMOND AVE W C L I N T O N A V E E M C K E N Z I E A V E E D E N N E T T A VEN HARRISON AVEN WILSON AVENWARRENAVEN FRUIT AVESWALNUTAVEE S TFRESNOSTMERCED STE S I M P SON AVE SPLUMASSTE C H U R C H A V E E ALTA AVE S PA R ALL E LAVENCHESTNUTAVEE GR OVE AVEMONOSTSFIFTHSTN H S T INYO STMARIPOSASTMERCEDSTTUOLUMNESTKERN STVENTURASTSTANISLAUSSTSTHIRDSTE S H I E L D S A V E NFIRSTSTN S T SLEEAVEW O L I V E A V E E M C K I N L E Y A V E E T Y L E R A V E E FOU N TAIN WAY NECHOAVEE D A K O T A A V E N FRESNO STP S T E O L I V E A V E S G O L D E N S T A T E BLVD E W H I T E A V EEBELMONTAVENTEILMANAVENCHANNINGWAYNVANNESSAVE SCHESTNUTAVESBARDELLSTE N E V A D A A V EE I L L I N O I S A V E W S H I E L D S A V E E H O M E A V EN ARTHUR AVEW C A L I F O R N I A A V E NSIERRAVISTAAVENBARTONAVENMAPLEAVEE T U L A R E S T P RIVATEEK E N M OR E DR B R O A D W A Y N W E B E R A V E E K I N G S C A N Y O N R D W D A K O T A A V E S HOLLY AVEE L A N E A V ENBROADWAYT ST FRON T A G E R D E KAVILAND AVE M S T E Y A L E A V E S IVY AVEE B A L C H A V E E P L A T T A V EE K E R C K H O F F A V E V A N N E S S A V E E M O N O S TC S T S ST R S T B S T A S T E S T H S T L S T F S T E ANDREWS AVE E CORTLAND AVE E H U N T I N G T O N A V EN DELNO AVESWESTAVEW D U D L E Y A V E E GARLAND AVE E C L I N T O N A V E N ADOLINE AVEW E D E N AV E NVAGEDESAVESMARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDN FRUIT AVEE VASSAR AVE NGLENNAVEW J E N S E N A V E SMAPLEAVEE M A D I S O N A V E S LILY AVEIOWA/TULARE ALY E T H O M A S A V E E W A S H I N G T O N A V E E HARVEY AVE E S A G I N A W W A Y SELMAVEE G R I F F I T H W A Y W K E A R N E Y B L V D W W H I T E S B R I D G E A V E E B U T L E R A V E O S T E W O O D W A R D A V E S G S T S WINERY AVEE W E L DO N AV EN G O L D E N S T A T E B L V D S EAST AVEE COMMERCE AVE W C H U R C H A V E E J E N S E N A V EN MARKS AVEE VINE AVE E DATE AVE 180 99 41 Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Location Map 0 4,600 9,2002,300 Feet/ EXHIBIT A Plan Proposed for Adoption Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan City Limits Exhibit K Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-012 ·|}þ ·|}þ MARIPOSA STNMARIPOSASTTULARE STS GOLDEN S TATEBL V D E D I V I S A D E R O S T S A N T A F E A V E P O T T L E A V E C S T F S TCALAVERASST E D I V I S A D E R O S T G S TNPARKAVENCOLLEGEAVENPOPLARAVE E S TNSANPABLOAVEN BLACKSTONE AVEN ABBY STF U L T O N S TN EFFIE STE HAM I LT O N A V EN DIANA STE N E V A D A A V E E B R A L Y A V E E W O O D W A R D A V E E I L L I N O I S A V E SCHERRYAVEE M C K E N Z I E A V E FRESNOSTMERCED STSPICKFORDAVEC O L LIN S A V E NGLENNAVEMONOSTAMADORSTN H S T SSTEPHENSAVEN U STKERN STINYOSTU S T INYO STTUOLUMNESTSANTACLARASTKERN STL OSANGELESSTVENTURASTMONTEREYSTMONOSTINYO STSTANISLAUSSTSANBENITOSTE V O O R M A N A V E N S T W A T E R M A N A V E H S T P S T PRIVAT EDRNCALAVERASSTB R O A D W A Y K L E T T E A V EMER CEDSTN S T T S T M S TV A N N E S S A V E B S T M A Y O R A V E B R O A D W A Y C S T L S T S S T R S T F U L T O N S T A/B A L Y B S T A S T F A G A N A L Y E S T F U L T O N M A L L L S T C HIN A A L Y F S T Q S T L S TMA D D YDRABBY/EFFIEALYO S TEL DORADO ST99 41 Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Location Map 0 1,250 2,500625Feet/ EXHIBIT A Plan Proposed for Adoption Fulton Corridor Specific Plan Exhibit L Resolution Approving Plan Amendment Application No. A-16-008 Table 3-1 will be amended as follows: TABLE 3-1: CITYWIDE STANDARDS FOR DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY Land Use Minimum to Maximum Residential Density (du/net acre)1,2,3 Maximum Floor Area Ratio Buffer Max = 0.05 (1 unit per 20 net acres) - Residential Low Density Min = 1 unit per 5 acres Max = 3.5 units per acre - Medium Low Density Min = 3.5 units per acre Max = 6 units per acre - Medium Density Min = 5 units per acre Max = 12 units per acre - Medium High Density Min = 12 units per acre Max = 16 units per acre - Urban Neighborhood Density Min = 16 units per acre Max = 30 units per acre - High Density Min = 30 units per acre Max = 45 units per acre - Commercial Main Street 1.0 Community 1.0 Recreation 0.5 General 2.0 Highway & Auto 0.75 Regional 1.0 Mixed-Use Neighborhood Mixed-Use Min = 12 units per acre Max = 16 units per acre 1.5 Corridor/Center Mixed- Use Min = 16 units per acre Max = 30 units per acre 1.5 Regional Mixed-Use Min = 30 units per acre Max = 45 units per acre 2.0 Downtown Downtown Neighborhood Min = No limit Max = No limit No limit Downtown General Min = No limit Max = No limit No limit Downtown Core Min = No limit Max = No limit No limit Employment Office - 2.0 Business Park - 1.0 Regional Business Park - 1.0 Light Industrial - 1.5 Heavy Industrial - 1.5 1. Based on Net Acreage. 2. Residential density refers to the ratio of residential dwelling units per acre (43,560 square feet) of land which is calculated by dividing the number of existing or proposed residential dwelling units by the land area of the property designated for, or proposed for development with, a residential use. The residential land area includes property upon which the residential and ancillary structures are located, together with yards and other private or common open spaces, and includes vehicle access drives and parking areas together with public and private roadways. The residential land area does not include major streets or State Routes designated by Figure MT-1: General Plan Circulation Diagram, and does not include schools or regional trails. 3. Additional density may be allowed for affordable housing or provision of community benefits (pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918, as may be amended). Table 3-2 and the immediately preceding text will be deleted as follows: Table 3-2 provides density and intensity standards specific to the Downtown Planning Area. TABLE 3-2: DOWNTOWN PLANNING AREA STANDARDS FOR DENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY Land Use Maximum Residential Density (du/net acre)1,2 Maximum Floor Area Ratio Central Business District (CBD) 60 units per acre3 7.5 Civic Center - 5.0 Town Center 45 units per acre 4.0 Neighborhood Center 30 units per acre 2.0 Chinatown District 45 units per acre 3.0 Cultural Arts District Corridor General 30 units per acre 2.5 Neighborhoods 16 units per acre - Special Districts4 - 2.5 Public Facility - - Open Conservation - - South Stadium District 60 units per acre 5.0 1. Based on Net Acreage. 2. Additional density may be allowed for affordable housing or provision of community benefits (pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65915 – 65918, as may be amended). 3. Maximum density in CBD provided for capacity analysis and is considered an average for the district. Industrial projects may be allowed to exceed this density. 4. Additional FAR may be granted for hospitals and related uses, up to 5.0. The Downtown Land Use Classifications section, which begins on Page 3-43, will be amended as follows: Downtown Land Use Classifications These land use classifications are specific only to the Downtown Planning Area portion of the Planning Area, as depicted in the inset to Figure LU-1: General Plan Land Use Diagram. It is anticipated the land use classifications may be further refined in community or Specific Plans, such as the proposed DNCP and FCSP. The following are general descriptions of the Land Use classifications within the Downtown Planning Area. Downtown designations allow a wide range of uses and the most intense development patterns in the region while creating pedestrian-oriented urban environments. DOWNTOWN CORE The Downtown Core (DTC) is the cultural, civic, shopping, and transit center of Fresno and the region. This designation is applied to the traditional central business district of the city near the proposed High Speed Rail station and oriented around the restored section of Fulton Street. New buildings will be rise up to 15 stories in height and will be located at or near the sidewalk. Ground floor spaces will have active frontages with commercial, retail, multi-family housing, and office activity to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind storefronts will accommodate a wide variety of office, civic, lodging, housing, or additional commercial uses. DOWNTOWN GENERAL The Downtown General (DTG) designation will support a high concentration of regional activity generators such as governmental buildings and convention centers within a pedestrian-oriented, mixed- use urban setting. New buildings will be rise up to 10 stories in height and will be located at or near the sidewalk. Ground floor spaces will have active frontages with commercial, retail, multi-family housing, and office activity to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind storefronts will accommodate a wide variety of office, civic, lodging, housing, or additional commercial uses. DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD The Downtown Neighborhood (DTN) designation will create lively, walkable, mixed-use urban neighborhoods surrounding the Downtown Core and Downtown General areas. New buildings will be rise up to 6 stories in height and will be located at or near the sidewalk. Ground floor spaces will have active frontages with commercial, retail, multi-family housing, and office activity to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind storefronts will accommodate a wide variety of office, civic, lodging, housing, or additional commercial uses. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT The Central Business District (CBD) is the cultural, civic, shopping, and transit center of Fresno and the region. This designation is applied to areas of the Downtown Planning Area bounded by Stanislaus Street, the Union Pacific tracks, Inyo Street, and the alley between Van Ness Avenue and L Street. New buildings will be at least 2 to 15 stories in height and located at or near the sidewalk. Buildings will be occupied with ground floor commercial, retail, multi-family housing, and office activity to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind storefronts will accommodate a wide variety of office, civic, lodging, housing, or additional commercial uses. CIVIC CENTER The Civic Center is intended for civic and office uses, including numerous public buildings containing City, County, State, and federal uses. This land use designation is applied to properties currently fronting Mariposa Street, the south side of Fresno Street, and the north side of Tulare Street between Van Ness Avenue and Q Street. New buildings will be block-scale, up to 10 stories in height, and set back from the sidewalk along a continuous build-to line to maintain a formal alignment and arrangement of building frontages. Upper stories will be expressed in volumes that enhance and support the civic presence of buildings along these streets. A full range of civic and office uses, including ground floor retail, are envisioned to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors will have office and civic uses. CHINATOWN DISTRICT The Chinatown District designation is applied to the areas bounded by the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, State Route 99, Stanislaus Street, and Inyo Street. Chinatown’s close proximity to State Route 99 and Downtown Core create the unique opportunity to introduce buildings and uses that serve both the region and the surrounding neighborhoods. F Street is preserved and developed as Chinatown’s “Main Street.” New buildings will be block-scale, up to three stories in height and located at the sidewalk to activate the street with pedestrian-oriented commercial activity. Most upper stories will be expressed in single volumes to enhance the small scale of this urban neighborhood and historic main street. Ground floor uses will include commercial, retail, civic, or office uses to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the space behind storefronts will have offices, housing, or additional commercial uses. CULTURAL ARTS DISTRICT This designation is applied to the area immediately north of the CBD bounded by Divisadero Street to the north, Van Ness Avenue to the east, Stanislaus Street to the south and Union Pacific railroad tracks to the west. This designation is intended to spur the area’s transformation by encouraging mixed-use buildings comprised primarily of small-scale retail, office, industrial, and multi-family residential uses. New buildings will be block scale, up to five stories tall, and located at or near the sidewalk to generate an active public realm and support walking. Buildings will have ground floor retail, live-work, and uses such as art galleries on key streets. South Stadium / South Van Ness This designation is applied to the areas immediately to south of the Central Business District, including the Monterey and Los Angeles Street areas. It is intended for small-scale retail, office, and industrial uses. New buildings will be block-scale, with non-industrial buildings up to five stories in height, and located at or near the sidewalk to generate an active public realm. Secondary streets and upper floors will have residential and office uses. Industrial buildings may have larger footprints and may be up to two stories tall. Town Center The Town Center designation is applied to nodes at major intersections along major roadway corridors. It is intended for medium-scale retail, housing, office, civic, and entertainment uses that serve several neighborhoods. New buildings will be block-scale, up to five stories in height and located at or near the sidewalk to generate focused and active, commercial activity along corridors. Most upper stories will be expressed in single volumes along the corridor and in multiple volumes with significant setbacks when adjacent to neighborhoods. Ground floor uses will include commercial, retail, and office uses to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind storefronts will have office, civic, residential, or additional commercial uses. Neighborhood Center The Neighborhood Center designation is applied to nodes at secondary intersections and along corridors and is comprised of primarily small-scale neighborhood uses such as retail, office, civic, entertainment, and housing. New buildings will be block and house-scale, up to three stories in height, completely compatible in scale with adjacent single-family houses, and located at or near the sidewalk to generate pedestrian activity. Upper stories will be expressed in volumes compatible with adjacent houses. Buildings will have ground floor commercial, retail, and office uses to support active streetscapes and walking. Upper floors and the floor area behind shop fronts will have office, civic, residential or additional commercial uses. Downtown Neighborhood areas Centers support surrounding neighborhoods with feature a mix of uses, including retail, office, civic, housing, and entertainment. Corridor General This designation is applied to areas fronting on corridors including Belmont Avenue, Kings Canyon Road, Blackstone Avenue, Abby Street, and North Fresno Street. It is intended for moderate intensity housing and neighborhood services, while also accommodating automobile-oriented commercial uses. New buildings will be block-scale and house-scale, up to three stories in height, and located at or near the sidewalk to generate more pedestrian activity. Buildings will vary in size and type, but be compatible in massing and scale with adjacent buildings. Most upper stories will be expressed in single volumes along the corridor and in multiple volumes with significant setbacks when adjacent to neighborhoods. Living rooms, dining rooms, and other formal rooms will face the street. Ground floor uses will include housing, as well as commercial, retail and office uses. Upper floors will be for housing, office, or additional commercial uses. Neighborhood (General, General Preservation, General Revitalization, Edge) The Neighborhood designations are applied to areas outside of the Downtown CBD. These areas include the Lowell neighborhood; much of the southwest and southeast neighborhoods; the L Street area and the Huntington Boulevard area east of Downtown Core; the Jefferson Neighborhood; areas south of Elm and B Streets in southwest; several southeast neighborhoods adjacent to State Route 180; and areas west of State Route 99, including the Jane Addams area. New buildings will be house-scale, up to two stories in height, and some buildings may be up to two and one-half stories. All buildings will set back from the sidewalk to provide a buffer between the sidewalk and the dwellings. Living rooms, dining rooms, and other formal rooms will face and activate the street. Other house-scale buildings are compatible in these neighborhoods when scaled and massed in relation to the predominant single-family houses. Buildings will be occupied with residential uses, limited live/work uses, and home occupation activity. Special Districts The Special Districts designation is applied to areas that are best suited for a variety of moderate to intense industrial and manufacturing activity. These areas are comprised primarily of large and varied building sizes with substantial activity from large cargo vehicles. New buildings will be block-scale, up to eighteen stories in height (hospitals), and located with a portion, or all, of their frontage at or near the sidewalk. Ground floor activity will range from industrial and manufacturing uses and outdoor assembly to offices. Included in the Special Districts designation are General Industrial (1 & 2); Fresno Chandler Executive Airport between Kearney Boulevard, and Thorne Avenue and Whitesbridge Road; and Downtown Hospital that includes the hospital campus and surrounding streets with Diana Street / railroad tracks on the west and south, McKenzie Avenue on the north and Fresno Street on the east and south. Open Conservation This designation is intended to provide for permanent open spaces, and does not include neighborhood and community parks and recreational center. This applies only to parcels zoned Open Conservation (FMC 12-204) prior to the adoption of the DNCP. Table 3-3 will be amended as follows: TABLE 3-3: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS CONSISTENCY General Plan Land Use Designation Development Code Zoning District Buffer B Buffer Residential Low Density RE Residential Estate RS-1 Residential Single-Family, Extremely Low Density RS-2 Residential Single-Family, Very Low Density RS-3 Residential Single-Family, Low Density Medium Low Density RS-4 Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density Medium Density RS-5 Residential Single-Family, Medium Density Medium High Density RM-1 Residential Multi-Family, Medium High Density RM-MH Mobile Home Park Urban Neighborhood Density RM-2 Residential Multi-Family, Urban Neighborhood High Density RM-3 Residential Multi-Family, High Density Commercial Main Street CMS Commercial – Main Street Community CC Commercial – Community Regional CR Commercial – Regional General CG Commercial – General Highway and Auto CH Commercial – Highway and Auto Recreation CRC Commercial – Recreation Mixed-Use Neighborhood Mixed-Use NMX Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor/Center Mixed-Use CMX Corridor/Center Mixed-Use Regional Mixed-Use RMX Regional Mixed-Use Downtown Downtown Neighborhood DTN Downtown Neighborhood Downtown General DTG Downtown General Downtown Core DTC Downtown Core Employment Office O Office Business Park BP Business Park Regional Business Park RBP Regional Business Park Light Industrial IL Light Industrial Heavy Industrial IH Heavy Industrial Other Open Space OS Open Space PR Parks and Recreation Public Facilities PI Public and Institutional Downtown Planning Area Anticipated Zoning Districts Central Business District DTC Downtown Core DTG Downtown General Civic Center DTG Downtown General Town Center DTN Downtown Neighborhood Chinatown Cultural Arts South Stadium TABLE 3-3: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS CONSISTENCY General Plan Land Use Designation Development Code Zoning District Neighborhood Center NMX Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor General Neighborhoods RS-5 Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RS-4 Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density Special Districts IL Light Industrial Public Facility PI Public and Institutional Open Conservation OS Open Space PR Parks and Recreation Table 12-1 will be amended as follows: TABLE 12-1: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS CONSISTENCY General Plan Land Use Designation Development Code Zoning District Buffer B Buffer Residential Low Density RE Residential Estate RS-1 Residential Single-Family, Extremely Low Density RS-2 Residential Single-Family, Very Low Density RS-3 Residential Single-Family, Low Density Medium Low Density RS-4 Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density Medium Density RS-5 Residential Single-Family, Medium Density Medium High Density RM-MH Mobile Home Park RM-1 Residential Multi-Family, Medium High Density Urban Neighborhood Density RM-2 Residential Multi-Family, Urban Neighborhood High Density RM-3 Residential Multi-Family, High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood Mixed-Use NMX Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor/Center Mixed-Use CMX Corridor/Center Mixed-Use Regional Mixed-Use RMX Regional Mixed-Use Downtown Downtown Neighborhood DTN Downtown Neighborhood Downtown General DTG Downtown General Downtown Core DTC Downtown Core Commercial Main Street CMS Commercial – Main Street Community CC Commercial – Community Regional CR Commercial – Regional General CG Commercial – General Highway and Auto CH Commercial – Highway and Auto Recreation CRC Commercial – Recreation Employment Office O Office Business Park BP Business Park Regional Business Park RBP Regional Business Park Light Industrial IL Light Industrial Heavy Industrial IH Heavy Industrial Other Open Space OS Open Space PR Parks and Recreation Public Facilities PI Public and Institutional Downtown Planning Area Anticipated Zoning Districts Central Business District DTC Downtown Core DTG Downtown General Civic Center DTG Downtown General Town Center DTN Downtown Neighborhood Chinatown Cultural Arts South Stadium TABLE 12-1: GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS CONSISTENCY General Plan Land Use Designation Development Code Zoning District Neighborhood Center NMX Neighborhood Mixed-Use Corridor General Neighborhoods RS-5 Residential Single-Family, Medium Density RS-4 Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density Special Districts IL Light Industrial Public Facility PI Public and Institutional Open Conservation OS Open Space PR Parks and Recreation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! R AIL R O A D A V E CEDARAVEFIRST STT U R N E R A V E FRESNOSTBELMONT AVE LILY AVEW H I T E A V E GOLDEN S TATE B LV D NINTH STG S T EIGHTH STPLUMAS STTENTH STELEVENTHSTPICKFORDAVEKERN STELMAVESTEPHENSAVEHOLLY AVESECOND STFIFTHSTD I V I S A D E R O S T FOURTH STRAISINA STTHIRD STH U N T I N G T O N A V E MERCED STM A D I S O N A V E H S T L O W E A V E GRANT AVE CALIFORNIA AVE W A S H I N G T O N A V E CALLISCHSTD I V I S A D E R O ST WALNUT AVEV O O R M A N A V E R S T NEVADA AVE I L L I N O I S A V E SIERRA VISTA AVEEFFIE STTULARES T LOSANGELESSTINYO STC S T H A M I L T O N A V ETUOLUMNE STA ST SAN BENITO STSTANISLAUS STM S T ILLINOIS AVE B R O A D W A Y P A R K WA Y D R ORCHARD STF U LT O N S T ROWELL AVEANNA STG O L D E N S T A T E B L V D R E V C H E STE R R IG G I NS AV E NEVADA AVE T H O M A S A V E BELGRAVIA AVE SECOND STM C K E N Z I E A V E FLORENCE AVE THIRDSTFIFTH STMARIPOSA STF R A N K L I N A V E HARVEY AVE THESTA STFISHER STLORENA AVE IOWA AVE E S TMERCED STALTA AVE A M A D O R S T POPLAR AVEC O LLIN S A V E GLENN AVEE S TAMADOR STCHERRYAV E M A Y O R A V E US T K L E T T E A V EMARIPOS A STIR W IN A V E KERN STINYO STMONO STSANTACLARASTW O O D W A R D A V E BRALY AVEMONTEREYST F S T IVY AVEM C K E N Z I E A V E H E D G E S A V E O S T H U N T I N G T O N B L V D FAIRVIEW AVEB S T M O N O S T PEARL STORLEANS AVE D U N N A V E T H O M AS AVELAFAYETTE AVEFRUIT AVEELDORADOSTLYELL AVE PLATT AVE BALLA VE B S T N S T T ST WHITE AVE L E M O N A V E HARVEY AVE ONEIL AVE W H I T E A V E B A L C H A V E K E R C K H O F F A V E V E R R U E A V EPLATT/V E R R U E A L Y F S T S A NTA F E A VEMONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY M O N O S T L ST C S T S S T F A G A N A LY Q S T WELLER STI N Y O S T NEVADA AVE POPPY AVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYDIANA STFLORADORA AVE GRANT AVE NAPA AVE B A L C H A V E MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY BACKER AVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY T H O M A S A V E HAYSTON AVEDEARING AVERACO AVE AIRPORT RDCRYSTAL AVEBOYD AVEP I N E A V E TO PEKA AVE TRINITY STJACKSON AVEMODOCSTPARK AVEH A Z EL W O O D B L V D BARTON AVERECREATIONAVEPRIV A T E P ST N S T LEE AVEL ST E CEM HOSPE E EEE E&M E E E E E E A HOSP E H EHOSP E CEM A H Planned Land Use Downtown CoreDowntwon GeneralDowntown NeighborhoodCorridor/Center Mixed useBusiness ParkNeighborhood Mixed UseResidential Medium DensityResidential Low DensityResidential Medium High DensityHeavy IndustrialLight IndustialPublic FacilitiesOpen Space/Park v. 9/30/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeGeneral Plan Land Use & Circulation Map Amendment Circulation Freeway Expressway Scenic Expressway Super Arterial Arterial Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Scenic Arterial !!!!!!!Scenic Drive Collector Scenic Collector Document Path: K:\ADVANCED PLANNING-GREEN CODE\2016 Mapping\Zoning (New)_MA\Downtown Planning Area\GPLU DTPA 09262016\General Plan Land Use and Circulation Amendment.mxd Exhibit M Ordinance Bill Approving Text Amendment Application No. TA-16-002 Exhibit N Ordinance Bill Approving Rezone Application No. R-16-011 RAILR O A D AVE TURNER AVE FRESNO STK I R K STWHITE AVE GOLDENSTATE BLVDTRINITYSTMODOCSTCHANNINGWAY EL M AVEBELMONT AVE DIVISADERO ST MCKEN ZIE AVEFIRST STLIBERTY AVE MADISON AVE LOWE AVE GRANT AVE WASHINGTON AVE CALLISCHS T DIVISADERO ST HUNTINGTON AVE NEVADA AVE ILLINOIS AVE CEDARAVEIOWA AVE TULARE ST VENTURA ST C ST CALIFORNIA AVE POTTLE AVE CALAVERASSTMAPLE AVEM ARTIN AVE P A R K W A Y D R S ANPABLOAVEFULTO N ST ROWELL AVEELEVENTHSTANNA STNEVADA AVE P A R K WA Y D R VOORMAN AVE PLAZA D R WTENTHSTBELGRAVIA AVE ILLINOIS AVE ORCHARDSTP LAZADREFOURTH STFIFTHSTSIXTHSTNINTH STBELGRAVIA AVETHESTAST ANGUSSTFLOREN C E AVE MCKENZIE AVE MARIPOSA STSECOND STTURNER AVE LORENA AVE FLORENCE AVE EIGHTHSTSEVENTHSTWALNUT AVERAISINASTYOSEMITEAVEEL MONTE WAY REV CHESTER RIGGINS AVEMERCED STPLUMASSTALTA AVE PICKFORDAVEMONTECITO AVE PARALLEL AV E HAZELW O O D BLVD DONAHOO ST C OLLIN S AVE NICHOLASAVEFOURTHSTPRIV A TE FIFTHSTAMADORSTHST STEPHENSAVEFRANKLIN AVE GILBERT ST IR WIN AVE MAUD AVEINYO STJO NES AVE MARIPOSASTU ST MERCEDSTSANJOAQUINSTTUOLUMNE ST SANTACLARASTWOODWARD AVEKERN STBRALY AVE LOS ANGELESSTTHORN E AVEMONTEREYSTMONOSTCALAVERAS STSECOND STSTANISLAUS ST FOURTHSTSTROTHER AVE THIRD STBARTON AVETHORNE AVEINYO STFST N ST CHANDLERAVE FAIRVIEWAVEBENGSTONAVECLARKSTW ATER M AN AVE BELGRAVIA AVE OLEANDER AVE AMADOR ST FULTON/VANNESSALYH A MILTON AVE LORENA AVE FRONTAGE RD P ST MONO ST FILLMORE AVE PEARL STBARDELL STBELMONT AVE HARVEY AVE JACKSON AVEBACKER AVESIERRAVISTAAVERECREATION AVELAFAYETTE AVECLARA AVETOWNSEND AVE LANE AVE CHERR Y AVE BR OAD W AY LIBERTY/LOWE ALY HOLLY AVETUPMAN STVASSAR AVE PACIFIC AVEKLETTE AVE SANBENITOSTBALLAVE O ST N STCAPITOL STKERN MALLT ST WHITE AVE M ST LEMON AVE ONEIL AVE VAN NESS AVE THIRDSTFISHER/THIRD ALYWHITES BRIDGE AVE HAWES AVE DUNN AVE SAN JOAQUIN ST ROS E A VE SARAH STMARY STTHOMAS AVE WHITE AVE IVY AVEHUNTINGTON BLVD BALCH AVE KERCKHOFF AVE VERRUE AVE PLATT AVE PLATT/VERRUE ALY O ST B ST M AY O R AVE LIBERTY/LYELL ALYLYELL AVE MONO/VENTURA ALY KERCKHOFF/PLATT ALY B/C ALY MONO ST L ST C ST BR O AD W AY S ST R ST FULTO N ST A/B ALY BST A ST FA GA N ALY NEVADA AVE L ST C HINA ALY H O M E R U N ALY F ST E ST SA NTA FE AVE Q ST BENDA V E INYO ST GRACE STMA D DYDR MARIPOSA/UALYPLEASANT AVEPOPLARAVEPOPLAR/SANPABLOALYCOLLEGE/VANNESSALYARTHURAVEHUMBOLDT AVEPARKAVEDIANA/EFFIE ALYEFFIESTCLARK/DIANA ALYCLARK/VALERIAALYGEARY ST FLORADORA AVE HEDGES AVE WAYTE LNWASHINGTON AVE GRANT AVE VALERIASTTHESTA/VALERIAALYDELNO AVELEE AVEGRANT/MADISON ALY MARTINLUTHERKINGJRBLVDDIANA STFRUITAVEBALCH AVE MCKENZIE/WASHINGTON ALY GRANT/MADISON ALY MERIDIAN AVEPOPPYAVEBACKER AVEMCKENZIE AVE MADISON AVE LILYAVEMCKENZIE/NEVADA ALY EUNICE AVEHAYSTON AVEDEARINGAVEIOWA AVE THOMAS AVE WOODROW AVELOTUS AVEGRANT/WASHINGTON ALY HARVEY AVE NEVADA AVE WELLER STGENEVAAVENAPA AVE PRIVATEELDORADOST FARRIS AVEPLATT AVE LAUREL AVE WOO D SONAVEGLENNAVEG ST GLENN/SAN PABLO ALYRACO AVE EAST AVEAIRPORT RDTEILMANAVE ARCHIE AVECRYSTAL AVEWHITNEY AVEBOYD AVEPLATT/TULARE ALY PINE AVE G OLDEN STATE BLVD TO PEKA AVE Overlay Districts UC - Urban CampusAH - Apartment HouseNR - Neighborhood Revitalization v. 9/30/201600.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles ® Base Districts DTC - Downtown CoreDTG - Downtown GeneralDTN - Downtown NeighborhoodRS-3 - Residential Single-Family, Low DensityRS-5 - Residential Single-Family, Medium DensityRM-MH - Mobile Home ParkNMX - Neighborhood Mixed UseCMX - Corridor/Center Mixed UseBP - Business ParkIL - Light IndustrialIH - Heavy IndustrialPI - Public and InstitutionalPR - Park and Recreation City of FresnoDowntown Development CodeZoning Map Exhibit O Resolution Repealing Resolution No. 2016 -28 Exhibit P Resolution Authorizing the Development and Resource Management Director or her designee to correct any typographical errors Exhibit Q City of Fresno Housing Projects Map !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ")") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") ") !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(TUOLUMNEDIVISADERO KEARNEY CHURCH OLIVE CHESTNUTBELMONT FIGWALNUTCEDARVENTURATRINITY KINGS CANYONELDORADO GOLDEN STATESTANISLAUSG B R O A D W AY H VA N N ESS ATULAREFRESNOBUTLERINYO LOS ANGELESNIEL SEN CALIFORNIA P VA N N ESS M R G G H B FIRSTMAPLEBELMONT ABBYH AZEL W O O D B DIVISADERO G OLD E N STATE B G O LD E N STATE CALIFORNIA M MCKENZIE SAN PABLOFULTONO EASTBELMONT TULARE THORNEG O LD E N STATE FRESNOHUNTINGTON TULARE BELMONT ELME L MMM P ANGUS FIGR AILR O A DVAN NESSG ´ 0 1 20.5 Miles Home Funded ")Multi-Family - $2,514,000 ")Senior Housing - $1,400,000 ")Mixed-Income - $180,000 ")Single Room Occupancy - $2,050,000 NSP Funded ")NSP 1 (Multi-Family) - $2,772,253 ")NSP 1 (Single Family) - $1,206,897 ")NSP 3 (Single Family) - $1,294,728 RDA Funded !(RDA Hous ing - $25,540,000 City of FresnoHousing Projects2009 - 2016 Exhibit R Planning Commission Resolutions Exhibit S PowerPoint Presentation THE DOWNTOWN PLANS AND CODEBuilding the Next Great American DowntownDan Zack, Assistant DirectorDevelopment and Resource Management Department GREAT CITIES HAVEGREAT DOWNTOWNS. THIS IS OUR MOMENT… ABOUT THE PLANS AND CODE Southwest Specific Plan Displacement Frontage Coverage Pedestrian Access Windows Massing OUTREACH www.fresno.gov/downtownplanPublic Comment ClosedSeptember 12Public Comment OpenedJuly 27 Downtown StakeholdersDowntown StakeholdersSteering CommitteesJune 30July 6July 13PBID BoardJune 15Art Hop Open HouseAugust 4Area Agency Executive LuncheonAugust 24City Council WorkshopAugust 25 Fulton Walking TourPlanning Commission WorkshopAugust 27September 21Downtown AcademySeptember 29PC Housing WorkshopOctober 5DNCP Steering CommitteeOctober 5CC Housing WorkshopOctober 13Planning Commission HearingOctober 12 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Environmental Impact Report•Tiers from the MEIR – allows use of relevant analysis in the MEIR; avoids repetitive analysis•“Program” EIR because it covers a series of plans or actions that are geographically related•Can be used for project‐specific environmental analysis as long as project is within plan policies and EIR scope Impact Areas Analyzed•Aesthetics•Agriculture Resources•Air Quality•Biological Resources•Cultural Resources•Geology and Soils•Greenhouse Gasses•Hazards/Hazardous Materials•Hydrology/Water Quality•Land Use and Planning•Noise•Population and Housing•Public Services/ Recreation•Transportation/Traffic•Utilities and Service Systems Impact Areas•Aesthetics•Air Quality•Biological Resources•Cultural Resources•Greenhouse Gasses•Hazards/Hazardous Materials•Hydrology/Water Quality•Noise•Transportation/Traffic Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant with Mitigation•Aesthetics•Biological Resources•Cultural Resources•Hazards/Hazardous Materials•Hydrology/Water Quality Significant and Unavoidable Impacts•Air Quality•Greenhouse Gasses•Noise•Transportation/Traffic Mitigation Measures•Most tier from the MEIR•New Mitigation Measures for this PEIR include:–Cultural Resources: Include additional protections for both above‐ground and subsurface resources–Hazards/Hazardous Materials:•Requires Phase I and II site assessments (if warranted) and remediation prior to development•Requires asbestos and lead‐based paint surveys–Noise: Requires a vibration impact analysis within 80 feet of rail lines–Transportation: Includes collaborative monitoring of key intersections and future creation of a Transportation Management Association to implement transportation demand management measures  IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS Thank You!Dan Zack, Assistant DirectorDevelopment and Resource Management Department daniel.zack@fresno.gov