HomeMy WebLinkAboutT-5232 - Conditions of Approval - 3/21/2006 y
city of
REPORT TO THE PLANNING-COMMISSIONvII-7:oo PM
r - AGENDA ITEM_NO.
-.COMMISSION MEETING 4-20-05
April 20, 2005
APPROVED BY
.. FROM: STAFF, Planning Division
Planning and Development Department DEPARrMENrDIREc o
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REZONE APPLICATION NO. R-04-14, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. C-04-79,VESTINGTENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO.T-5232 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 10133
(SCH NO. 2004021071) FOR THE "FANCHER CREEK" PROJECT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At the Council hearing of November 19, 2002, the Council approved the 2025 Fresno General Plan
which included the designation of regional commercial, medium density residential, and business park
land uses for properties controlled by Fancher Creek Properties. These land use designations will allow
for a development that implements the goals and policies of the approved 2025 Fresno General Plan
and provide an impetus for reinvigoration of.the southeastern portion of the Fresno Metropolitan Area.
Rezone Application No. R-04-14 relates to the development ofC4?4 acres�of property (the "Fancher
Creek",site) generally located on the northwest and northeast corners of East Kings Canyon Road and
South Fowler Avenue; the northwest and southwest corners of East Belmont and North Armstrong
Avenues; and an area northeast and southeast corners of Clovis Avenue and the Tulare Avenue
alignment. . The rezoning application proposes to rezone the property.from the AE-5/UGM (Five Acre
Agriculture Exclusive/Urban Growth Management) and the AE-20 (County) zone districts to the
R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Single Family Residential/Boulevard Area - 15-foot Landscape SetbacWUrban
Growth Management/conditions of zoning) zone district for 211 acres; to R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (Low,
Density Multiple Family Residential/Boulevard Area 15-foot Landscaped SetbacWUrban Growth
Management/conditions of zoning) zone district for 32 acres; to the C-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (Community
Shopping Center/Boulevard Area- 15-foot Landscape SetbacWUrban Growth Management/conditions
of zoning) zone district for 31 acres; to the C-3/UGM/cz (Regional Shopping Center/Urban Growth
Management(conditions of zoning) zone district for 43 acres; and to the M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Light
Manufacturing/Boulevard Area - 15-foot Landscape SetbacWUrban Growth Management/conditions of
zoning)zone district for 107 acres(Exhibit A).
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. T-5232 proposes the subdivision of the R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz zoned
portion to include 448 single family residential lots covering 140.8 acres. The R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz zoned
portion of the project- is proposing 239 single family residential lots on 32.2 acres of property.
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79 to reduce the minimum lot size;.the front, side, and rear
building setbacks for the R=2 portion of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 for 239 lots covering 32
acres. The special permit is also requesting a private road that will serve as an alley for a series of lots
within the R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz zoned portion of the development.
The proposed C-2/BA-5/UGM/cz and C-3/UGM/cz zone districts, although development entitlements
have been submitted, will allow retail and offices uses with a potential for residential uses within the
mixed use concept. The M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz zoning component of this project is proposed to be
developed as an industrial business park. Parcel Map 2004-36 has been submitted by the applicant that
will.create an industrial subdivision.
An evaluation of potential environmental effects was completed by Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
No. 10133 for the project, and the project is..now scheduled for consideration by the Planning
Commission. The Roosevelt Community Plan Committee reviewed the project on March 28, 2005, and
recommended approval of Rezoning Application No. R-04-14, Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79 and
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. T-5232.,
f
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
_ Conditional Use Permit Application No._C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 2
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT Rezone application to rezone 424 acres to allow for single family
residential development, commercial and office development 'and an
industrial business park a conditional use permit application to
reduce residential lot sizes and yard setbacks for a portion of Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232; and a Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No. 5232 to subdivide 234 acres into a 687-lot single family
subdivision with five remainder lots and 25 outlots
APPLICANT Fancher Creek Properties
LOCATION The northwest and northeast corners of East Kings Canyon Road
and South Fowler Avenue; the northwest and southwest corners of
East Belmont and North Armstrong Avenues; and the northeast and
southeast corners of South Clovis and East Tulare Street
(Council District 5, Councilmember Dages)
SITE SIZE 476 acres(EIR No. 10133)
424 acres(Rezone Application No. R-04-14)
LAND USE Existing - Agriculture and rural residential medium density
residential-(243 acres), community commercial (31
acres), regional commercial (95 acres), neighborhood
park (5:0 acres), public facility (16 acres), and business
park (107 acres)
Proposed - Single family residential, commercial and office uses,
and.business park
ZONING Existing AE-5/UGM (Five Acre Agriculture Exclusive/Urban
Growth Management)and AE-20 (County)
Proposed R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Single Family Residential)
Boulevard Area — 15-foot Landscape Setback/Urban
Growth Management/conditions of zoning)211 acres
R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (Low Density Multiple Family
Residential/Boulevard Area — 15-foot landscape
Setback/Urban Growth Management/conditions of
zoning)32.2 acres
C-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (Community Shopping Centerl
Boulevard Area— 15-foot landscape Setback/Urban
Growth Management/conditions of zoning)31 acres
C-3/UGM/cz (Regional Shopping Center/Urban Growth
Managementiconditions of zoning)43 acres
M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Light Manufacturing/Boulevard
Area — 15-foot Landscape Setback/Urban Growth
Management/conditions of zoning)
, i
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION I
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No.C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 3"
PLAN DESIGNATION The proposed R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz and R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz zone
AND CONSISTENCY districts are consistent with the-medium density residential planned
land use designation. The proposed I C-2/BA-15/UGM/cz and
C-3/UGM/cz zone districts are consistent with the community
commercial and regional commercial planned and use designations
of the 2025 General Plan. The M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz zone district is
consistent with the business park land use designation of the.2025
Fresno General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 10133, dated October 2004,
was prepared determining that the project would result in significant
adverse environmental impacts that may be entirely or partially
mitigated
PLAN COMMITTEE On March 28, 2005, the Roosevelt Community Plan
RECOMMENDATION Implementation Advisory Committee recommended that Rezone
Application No. R-04-14, Conditionals Use Permit Application
No. C-04-79, and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 be
continued to a subsequent meeting (see staff report)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend that the City Council certify Environmental Impact
Report No. 10133 (SCH No. 2004021071) and adopt appropriate
environmental impact mitigation measure's and approve the
proposed project subject to the conditions noted below
"
I
BORDERING PROPERTY INFORMATION
w Planned Land Use Existing Zoning I Existing Land Use
North Medium and Medium Low R-1NGM Single Family Residential,
Density Residential Single Family Residential/Urban �Rural'Residential, Agriculture
Light Industrial Growth Management
AE-20(County)
South Low.Density Residential R-1-13 (County) Single Family Residential,
Neighborhood Commercial C-1 '" !Convenience Store
Neighborhood Shopping Center
East Low and Medium-Low - R-1/UGM Single Family Residential,
Density Residential Single Family Residential/Urban Rural Residential, Agriculture
Growth Management 11
AE-20(County)
i.
West Medium Low and Medium R-1, R-2, R-3 (County) Single Family Residential,
High,Density Residential C-P Apartments, and Office Uses
Office Commercial
Administrative and Professional Office
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14 - -
conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
Apri120, 2005
Page 4
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDING
The planning firm of Land Use Associates.of Fresno, California was retained by the City of:Fresno and`.
the applicant (Fancher Creek'Properties) to prepare the revised Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for
the project. The EIR was assigned City of Fresno EIR No. 10133 and State Clearinghouse
No. 2004021071, respectively, for the project. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a Draft EIR was
circulated by the City of Fresno on February 11, 2004, and a public scoping meeting was held by the
City of Fresno on February 26, 2004.
Through the EIR process, areas of significant and unavoidable impacts resulting from the proposed
project were identified. These areas include cumulative air quality impacts and project related and
cumulative traffic impacts. The EIR includes traffic, hydrology, historical survey, and an air quality
analysis.
,Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 10133 (SCH No. 2004021071) was prepared to provide an
environmental impact evaluation of the project at a conceptual program level comparable to the analysis
provided for a community plan or specific plan. The project description established with the rezone
application and EIR No. 10133 provides a more complete set of guiding development parameters and
establishes a more precise definition of the maximum level of project development. Sufficient project
information was provided in terms of the locations, sizes, and intensities of planned uses to.provide a
more magnified evaluation of the potential environmental impacts and identification of appropriate
mitigation measures. However, formal site plan drawings were not available to examine the precise
details of building arrangements or points of direct vehicular and pedestrian access with respect to the
commercial components of the project. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.5232 with related Conditional
Use Permit No. Application C-04-79 has been filed to subdivide 234 acres into a 687-lot single family
residential subdivision with five remainder lots and 25 outlots.
EIR No. 10133 was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) as codified in the California Public Resources Code, Division 13, and the implementing
guidelines as codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3. This process included
the distribution of requests for comment to other responsible or affected agencies and interested
organizations and persons. A public review period of 45 days (October 11, 2004, through November 29,
2004) was provided to allow adequate opportunity for interested persons to review and comment and an
additional 5 days was added to the review period. Nineteen written comments were received regarding
the EIR and responses to these comments have been prepared by city staff and project consultants.
Preparation of the EIR necessitated a thorough review of the proposed project and relevant
environmental issues and considered previously prepared environmental and technical studies pertinent
to the metropolitan area and the Roosevelt Community Plan area including the Master Environmental
Impact Report (MSIR No. 10130) for the recently adopted 2025 Fresno General Plan. These previous.
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 proposed project, including a rezone, conditional use permit, vesting tentative tract map, and parcel
map applications, has been determined to not be fully within the scope of MEIR No. 10130, as provided
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79 i"
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 ..
April 20, 2005
Page 5 I
f
by CEQA, as codified in the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section. 21157.1(d) and the CEQA
Guidelines Section 15177(c). It has been further determined that all applicable mitigation measures of
MEIR No.. 10130 will be applied to the project, together with the project specific mitigation measures as _
identified by EIR No. 10133. . Therefore, the project will not cause significant adverse cumulative
impacts, growth inducing impacts and irreversible significant effects beyond those lidentified by MEIR-
No. 10130 as provided by CEQA Section 15178(a) especially since the proposed zone districts are
consistent with the respective land use designations as approved by the 2025 Fresno General Plan.
However, it has been determined that based upon the analysis and evidence in the record that the
project.will have significant impacts upon the environment that necessitate the application of mitigation
measures in addition to those identified by MEIR No. 10130.
j
EIR No. 1.0133 addresses adverse environmental impacts that may occur within twelve topical areas
including land use and planning; traffic and circulation; air quality; geology and soil's; biotic resources;
noise; drainage; public facilities and services hydrology; aesthetics; cultural resources; and energy
(PG&E substation). Within these categories, 29 potential environmental impacts were identified related
to the project of which 21 necessitated the application of. mitigation measures in addition to, or
supplemental to, those property development standards and requirements typically applicable to
development projects. . Based upon the analysis of the EIR, including the information contained within
the three referenced technical studies, it has been determined that 19 of the identified impacts can be
substantially mitigated. However, adverse impacts that would occur within three environmental review
categories (loss of prime agricultural land, traffic and air quality) will remain significant effects (although
identified mitigation measures will reduce these impacts to the extent feasible) thus necessitating City
Council review and adoption of overriding technical,social, economic, fiscal, environmental, land use,
and other considerations.
S
(JACKGROUND/ ANALYSIS j
The subject property (Fancher Creek site) is located in the southeast portion of the City of Fresno
generally located on the northwest and northeast corners of East Kings Canyon Road and South Fowler
Avenue; the northwest and southwest corners of East Belmont Avenue and North Armstrong Avenue;
and the northeast and southeast corners of South Clovis Avenue and the Tulare Street alignment. On
November 19, 2002, the City Council adopted the 2025 Fresno Generali Plan which approved the
corresponding land use designations. of medium density residential, community commercial, business
park, and regional commercial. In addition, the plan update also included the designations of a
neighborhood park, an elementary school site, and multi-purpose trail along Fancher Creek as well as
the designation of Tulare Street as a collector street and Fancher Creek Avenue as a scenic drive street
from Fowler Avenue west to Clovis Avenue. Furthermore, the plan update eliminated the Tulare Street
collector designation east of Fowler. Avenue to its previously anticipated connection with Armstrong
Avenue. The applicant, Fancher Creek Properties, previously submitted plan amendment and rezone
applications that were never formally considered and were withdrawn in April of 2002.
The Fancher Creek project site encompasses 476 acres, all of which is loc ated .within the current
Sphere of Influence of the City of Fresno. Approximately 139 acres (northwest and southwest corners
of Belmont and Armstrong Avenues) will be required to be annexed to the City of Fresno. Rezone
Application No. R-04-14 facilitates the development of the project site in accordance with the planned
land use designations (medium density residential, community commercial, regional commercial, light
industrial), the major street circulation components (arterial, collector, scenic boulevard), and the open
space multi-purpose trail features (Fancher Creek) which have been identified by the 2025 Fresno
General Plan.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14.
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20,2005
Page 6
The project includes 476 acres of:which 425 are proposed to be rezoned. Approximately 52 acres
within the area planned for regional commercial uses_(owned by MEGG properties), and not under the
project a lica
control of the applicant, will.not.be rezoned p pp ed at this time but are included as part of the future
development for appropriate ro environmental analysis.
P PP P � -
M-1/UGM (Light Manufacturing/Urban Growth Management) 107 acres
R-1/UGM (Single Family Residential/Urban Growth Management) 211 acres
R-2/UGM (Low Density Multiple Family Residential/Urban Growth Management) 32 acres
C-2/UGM (Community Shopping Center/Urban Growth Management) 31 acres
C-3/UGM (Regional-Shopping Center/Urban Growth Management) ; 43 acres
425 acres
The zone district change for 139 acres that are currently unincorporated would only become effective
upon annexation. Any annexation would occur subsequent to the rezoning and would be subject to,the
requirements of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) and standards of Fresno County.
The project consists of four major project areas:
Area 1: The rezoning involves approximately 30`acres at the northwest corner of North Armstrong and
East Belmont Avenues to be rezoned from the AE-20 (Exclusive Agricultural - 20 acres, County) to
M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Light Manufacturing/Boulevard Area 15-foot Landscape` Setback/Urban Growth
Managementiconditions of zoning)'zone district. The property is currently under row crop cultivation and
is projected to be developed with a mix of office, industrial, and commercial uses consistent with the M-1
zone district. Exhibit D shows preliminary circulation and lotting patterns for the business park area as
proposed by Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 2004-36.
Area 2: The rezoning involves approximately 109 acres generally bound by East Belmont Avenue on
the north, North Fowler Avenue on the west, Fancher Creek on the south, and North Armstrong.Avenue
on the east. Area 2 will be rezoned from the AE-20 (Exclusive Agricultural - 20 acres, County) to the
M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Light Manufacturing/ Boulevard-Area 15-foot LandscapeSetback/ Urban Growth .
Management/conditions of zoning) and R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Single Family ResidentiaUBou/evard Area
15-foot Landscape Setback/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning) zone districts. The
proposed M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz portion (approximately 77 acres) will be developed with a mix of office,
industrial, and commercial uses consistent with the M-1 zone district.
The R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz portion of this area will consist of approximately 32 acres and is located
adjacent on the north and east sides of an existing R-1 (Single Family Residential) zoned subdivision.
The northwesterly portion of the proposed R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz zoning will have direct access to North
Fowler Avenue while the property located on the southeast portion of the subject request will have
access to the extension of North Armstrong Avenue and the new Fancher Creek Avenue. The property
is currently used for row crops and has two single family houses and accessory buildings that are either
unused or supporting farming operations. Exhibit D shows preliminary circulation and lotting patterns for
the business park and residential areas.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION j
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 {
April 20, 2005
Page 7 i
Area 3: These parcels are. located north of East Kings Canyon Road, south of Fancher Creek,
approximately 200 feet east of South Argyle Avenue and west of the South Bu{rgan Avenue alignment.
Approximately 31 acres at the northeast and northwest corners of East Kings Canyon.Road and South
Fowler Avenue are requested to be zoned C-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (Community.Shopping Center/Boulevard
Area 15-foot Landscape Setback/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning). Retail, commercial,
community services,. and multiple family ,.residentialuses are anticipated) within a town center
environment consistent with a mixed use Zoning Ordinance amendment being considered by the City of
Fresno for office, commercial, and industrial zonedistricts. These amendments would allow residential
mixed development in commercial zone districts, including C-2 and C-3, by a conditioinal use permit.
The remaining 211-acre area is requested 3to be rezoned to R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz for 179 acres and
R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz for 32 acres. An average density of 6.35 dwelling units per acre (1,340 units) was
projected, although, the applicable plan.designation of medium density residential would allow for a
potential maximum density of 10.37 units per acre. The parcels are currently in part unused and in part
cultivated for row crops and limited tree fruit farming. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. T-5232, filed by
Centex Homes, is shown on Exhibit 5 that proposes to develop the residential portion of Area 3 with
approximately 687- single family residential lots, which includes. 32 acres of �R-2 zoning. The
R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz portion proposes 448 single family lots on 141 acres, while the R-2/BA-15/,UGM/cz
portion proposes 239 lots on 32 acres. .If approved, the subdivision map would reduce the number of
dwelling units within Area 3 to 687 as compared to the projected unit count of 1340 units based on an
average density of 6.35 units per acre.
The Clovis Unified School District proposes to develop an elementary school site on 16 acres located on
the southwest corner of the proposed Fancher Creek Avenue and the East Tulare Avenue alignment. In
addition, a'five-acre neighborhood park site has been planned by the City of Fresno located immediately
south of the existing Fancher Creek Elementary School.
Area 4: These parcels are located adjacent to North Clovis Avenue at its intersection with East Tulare
Avenue and totals 95 acres in area. The. parcels are intended for the development of a regional
commercial shopping center with retail and associated commercial uses. ` In addition, residential uses
may be proposed with 'the future consideration and approval, of a mixed use Zoning Ordinance
amendment by the Fresno City Council for office, commercial, and i industrial zone districts.
Approximately 43 acres are under the control of the applicant and are proposed to be rezoned to
C-3/UGM/cz.
Table 1 shows the estimated number of residential dwelling units and square footage of industrial and
commercial space projected for the Fancher Creek Development Project. The numbers represented in
Table 2 were used in the analysis of EIR No. 10133 prepared for the Fancher Creek Project. As
described in this report, the actual number of residential units will be less than the estimated potential
number. .
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-4.'. --
Conditional Use Permit Application`No. C 04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 8
TABLE 1 -
Projected Dwelling Units and Square.Footage, Fancher Creek Project EIR Na,'`70133
Zoning Acres Units or Square Feet/Acre Total
M-11UGM 107 14,000 sq. ft. @ .32 FAR ' 1,500,000 sq.ft.
R-1/UGM 211 6.35 units per acre 1,340 units
10 units per acre 320 units
R-2/UGM 32 :
C-2/UGM 11 ac.Commercial 10,890 sq. ft. @ .25 FAR 120,000 sq. ft.
4 ac.Offices 8710 sq. ft. @..20 FAR 30,000 sq. ft.
16 ac. Multifamily 15 units/acre 240 MF units
C-3/UGM 82 ac. commercial 14,810 sq.ft. ® .34 FAR 1,200,000 sq. ft.
12 ac. multiple family 20 units/acre 240 MF units
Total 476 'acres
-
FAR=Floor Area Ratio
The areas proposed for single family residential use (Location 3) will be developed at density less than
the maximum 10.37 units per acre allowed by the medium density residential designation. The range of
housing densities (4-8 units per acre) within the medium density residential area is consistent with the
goals and objectives of the "Landscape of Choice" document, which suggests higher residential
densities than what has typically developed in the Fresno metropolitan area. The developer's concept
for the residential component .of the project proposes to include pedestrian paths, bikeways, and open
space feature that create a pedestrian friendly environment and ultimately reduces the need for
dependence of vehicles.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 proposes to subdivide 234 acres into a 687-lot single family
residential subdivision with 5 remainder lots and 25 outlots. One.of these remainder lots will be
dedicated for a new 16-acre elementary school site for the Clovis Unified School District. The balance
of the 4 remainder lots (31 acres) will be developed with community commercial uses which may permit
mixed use. development at a later date.: Also within this proposed subdivision will be a 5-acre
neighborhood park (Outlot K) located adjacent to the existing Fancher Creek Elementary School site.
The remaining .outlots will either be developed as landscaped buffers or mini parks including a trail.
Within Location 2, there is an additional 32 acres of property proposed for R-1 zoning that could be
developed at a maximum density of 10.37 units per acre. No entitlements have been submitted for this
project.
The applicant is also proposing a 45-lot industrial subdivision through Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
No. 200436 (Exhibit D). Approval of the parcel map is viewed as a vital component to the economic
vitality of the City of Fresno. It is anticipated that this industrial business park will create hundreds of
jobs and will allow the potential to work, live, shop, and enjoy recreational activities within short proximity
to one another. The overall Fancher Creek project is one that encourages a pedestrian friendly
environment, promotes a jobs-to-housing balance, and potentially reduces the number of vehicular trips.
a
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 1
Apri120, 2005
.Page 9 I
Light industrial land use and proposed M-1/BA=15/UGM/cz zoning is being targeted for 107 acres of
property. Industrial land use provides a major economic base for most communities as has been stated
in all applicable plans and policies of the city. . The Roosevelt planning area does !contain one of the
largest inventories of planned industrial property in the city. However, development has been somewhat
restrained by a lack of readily available land with the necessary services to support nlew industries. The
light industrial component of the Fancher Creek Project targeted for office/high tech Aology users will be
located within a major.transportation corridor (Freeway 180 and major arterial streets Belmont, Fowler,
and Clovis Avenues). In. addition, the ongoing and planned facility enhancements at the Fresno
Yosemite International Airport (FYI) make the light industrial aspect of this project attractive to potential
industrial and office tenants. Surface street improvements to Clovis, Belmont, and Fowler Avenue will
serve as catalysts to the.transportation network in the vicinity of the Fancher Creek Project The
industrial goals of the 2025 Fresno General Plan and Roosevelt Community Plan are being served in
that it is providing a viable location for industrial development; ensures compatible development with
adjacent land uses given the project's overall mixed use approach; and it is assuring that necessary
public infrastructure improvements are being provided. I
The community commercial designation and proposed C-2/13A-15/UGM/cz :zoning ILovers 31 acres of
property. This proposed site is also at the intersection of two arterial streets, which is a locational
criteria- for shopping centers. Although there is no explicitly mixed use zone;district within the zoning
ordinance, a mixed use concept can still be attained through development of commercial and office uses
on the site. A residential component could be achieved through zone district amendment to the C-P or
R-P zone districts with appropriate entitlements. Mixed use development that!provides for a diversity of
land uses is encouraged by the 2025 Fresno General Plan and Roosevelt Community Plan. The city is
presently preparing a mixed use Zoning Ordinance provision that would be more conducive to the
mixing of commercial, office, and residential uses on a single site. It is estimatedAhe proposed mixed
use provision will be completed within 6 months. The proposed community commercial land use is
considered appropriate since it would contribute to the function of the Kings Canyon corridor (Chestnut
to Sunnyside). Although the proposed commercial location is slightly outside this corridor, the Fancher
Creek Project is expected to develop single and multiple family units which wouid dictate a need for
additional commercial development along a major thoroughfare (East Kings Canyon Road). The
Fancher Creek Project is proposing single family residential development along the East Kings Canyon
Road frontage, thus breaking up a potential strip commercial type of development similar to Blackstone
Avenue or West Shaw Avenue. Incorporation of design guidelines including;a potential boulevard area
(BA) overlay zone district along. Kings Canyon Road will create an aesthetic transition between the
Fancher Creek Project and existing land uses, which is consistent with the goals and policies of the
plan: i
The proposed C-3/UGM/cz (Regional Shopping Center) zone district is consistent+with the 2025 Fresno
General Plan land use designation of regional commercial. This designated use applies to a 95-acre
area, however, only 43 acres controlled by Fancher Creek properties are being j rezoned at this time.
The remaining 52 acres are controlled by.MEGG properties with the project applicant having only a 25
percent ownership interest in the property. The circulation element of the 2025;Fresno General Plan
indicates that Tulare Street (a designated collector street) and proposed Fancher Creek Avenue (a
designated scenic drive) will extend through the proposed regional commercial site. The alignment of
the proposed Fancher Creek Avenue originates one-eighth of a mile north of existing Tulare Street at
Clovis Avenue, then extends east and south a distance of three-eighths of a mile to the intersection with
the Tulare Street alignment. Tulare Street, a designated collector street, then extends east one-fourth
mile to the Sunnyside Avenue alignment where Tulare then branches off into two`streets. Tulare Street
is
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION -
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-0.4 79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 10
will then continue in a northeasterly and easterly direction to intersect Fowler Avenue. Fancher.Creek
Boulevard commences at the Sunnyside.Avenue alignment and,extends in a southeasterly, east, and :
then northeasterly direction to Armstrong Avenue as a scenic driver
Land Use Plans and Policies'
The subject project contains an area of 476 acres as noted on Exhibit A. Location_1 on Exhibit A is
designated as a business park use by the 2025 Fresno General Plan and is being proposed for
M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz zoning. Location 2 is partially designated for a business park use (107 acres),
which will also be rezoned to M-1/BA-15/UGM/cz, and partially designated for medium density
residential land use (32 acres) proposed to be rezoned to R-1/BA-15/UGMIcz. The property noted in '
Location 3 is planned for medium density residential, public facility (elementary school site -16 acres),
open space (neighborhood park - 5 acres), and community commercial land uses. The proposed
respective zone district requests for Location 3 are R-1/BA-1.5/UGWcz (161 acres—including the school
and park sites), R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (32 acres), and C-2/BA-15/UGM/cz (31 acres).
The recently adopted 2025 Fresno'General Plan provided a comprehensive restatement of goals,
objectives, .and policies that formulate the city's strategies for the growth and development of the
metropolitan area. The following overall guiding general plan goals are applicable to the proposed
Fancher Creek project.
Enhance the quality of life for the citizens of Fresno and plan for the projected population within the
moderately expanded Fresno urban boundary in a manner that will respect physical, environmental,
fiscal, economic, and social issues (Goal No. 1). .
• Support the Growth Alternatives Alliance "Landscape of Choice-Principles and Strategies" as based
upon the"Ahwahnee Principles" (Goal No. 5).
• Coordinate land uses and circulation systems to promote a viable and integrated multi-modal
transportation network (Goal No. 6).
• Manage growth to balance Fresno's urban form while providing.an adequate public service delivery
system, which is fairly and equitably financed (Goal No. 7).
• Provide opportunity for a 'variety of affordable housing throughout the Metropolitan Area (Goal
No. 8).
• Provide activity centers and intensity corridors within plan areas to create a mix of land -uses and
amenities to.foster community identity and reduce travel (Goal No 9).
• Provide quality open space, park and recreational facilities and programs to support the projected
population (Goal No. 10).
• Protect, preserve, and enhance significant biological, archaeological, and paleontological resources
and critical natural resources, including, but not limited to, air, water, agricultural soils, minerals, '
plants, and wildlife resources (Goal.No. 11).
• Develop urban design strategies to improve Fresno's visual image and enhance its form and
function (Goal.No. 12).
i
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79 -
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 11 .
Plan for a healthy business and diversified employment environment, and provide adequate timely
services to ensure that Fresno is competitive in the marketplace (Goal No. 13).
Protect and improve public health and safety (Goal No. 14).
Adopted 2025 GeneralPlan policies strongly support the development of mixed-use projects and the
infilling of bypassed vacant properties. The following objectives and policies;are specifically directed
toward the mixed land use.concept:
Land Use/Sphere of Influence
Reinforce the Roosevelt Community Plan (update adopted 1992) strategies as amended by the
2025 General Plan objectives and policies to sustain its many desirable community features and use
its substantial growth potential (land area, transportation, sewer collection, 1water, and natural
resource capacities) to accommodate projected population growth and economic development
within a pleasing and desirable environment (Policy C-2-e)
■ Apply development standards and design strategies to accommodate expanded and
appropriately intensified residential development within the eastern quadrant of the community
that ensure existing neighborhoods are respected and enhanced.
■ Aggressively promote economic growth through (1) redevelopment of existing poorly designed
and maintained commercial/industrial areas that do not presently provide adequate land use
buffers, (2) development of new commercial and industrial uses in the southern and eastern
sectors of the community, and (3) assure that regional transportation funds are utilized to
complete regionally important facilities such as state Route 18.0 (east) freeway/expressway.
■ Utilize innovative strategies to establish appropriately located mixed use developments such as
the area east of Clovis Avenue and north of Kings Canyon Road that might include retail
commercial/entertainment, business/industrial, residential and public)facility activities within an
aesthetically pleasing and healthful environment.
Land Use/Activity Centers
Adhere to a multiple community center concept of urban design for the Fresno metropolitan area as
conceptually shown on General Plan (Objective C-4).
Strategically locate areas appropriate for more intensive concentrations of urb i n uses (Policy C-4-a).;
Activity centers should include commercial uses, employment centers, schools, higher density
residential development, churches, parks, and other gathering points where residents may interact,
work, and obtain goods and services in the same place (Policy C-4-b).
Place emphasis on pedestrian activities and linkages, and provide for priority transit routes and
facilities to serve the activity centers (Policy C-4-c):
Activity centers should provide for mixed uses and shared parking facilities, including multi-story and,
underground parking facilities (Policy C-4-d).
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14:.--
Conditional Use Permit.Application No..C:704-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 12
Land Use!Mixed Uses
Facilitate the development of mixed uses toy blend residential, commercial, and public land uses on
one site (Objective C-8).
Develop zoning regulations that.facilitate the appropriate mixing of commercial and noncommercial
uses, either within a,single structure or multiple structures within a defined area (Policy C-8-a).
• Create an appropriate environment for the inclusion in mixed-use development of higher density
single family. residential dwellings, senior housing, a small open space, and_community facilities
(C-8-c).
Ensure land use compatibility between mixed-use districts in activity centers and the surrounding
residential neighborhoods (Policy C-8-d).
Land Use/Commercial
• Commercial land uses shall be classified, located, sized, and developed to meet needs for goods
and services while minimizing travel requirements, infrastructure demands, and adverse impacts
(Objective C-12).
Ensure that all commercial land uses are developed and maintained in a manner complementary
to and compatible with adjacent residential land uses, .to minimize interface problems with the
surrounding environment and to be compatible with public facilities and services (C-1 2-,a)..
Plan. for office commercial developments of the appropriate amount, location, size and intensity
necessary to meeting regional, metropolitan, community and neighborhood area needs consistent
with the planned urban form and other applicable planning and zoning provisions (Policy C-12-c).
• Locate office projects to provide a transition between more intensive commercial uses and sensitive
residential uses.
Facilitate office development in conjunction with, and adjacent to, institutions and employment
centers.
Plan for the appropriate location, size, and distribution of neighborhood and community commercial
uses to implement the planned urban form, promote the stability and identity of neighborhood and
community area, and allow efficient access without compromising the operational effectiveness of
planned major streets (C-12-d).
Neighborhoods should be anchored by commercial centers with a mix of uses that meet the area's
need to achieve activity centers that create a sense of place.
Community commercial centers should be located at designated activity centers.
Retail commercial goods and services shall be provided in planned unified shopping centers,
carefully designed small-scale commercial centers, and in neighborhood-oriented stores.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14 I
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20,2005
Page 13
- 1
f
Plan for the strategic location, size, and distribution of regional commercial centers to promote the city's .
economic growth and allow access from the entire region via major transportation facilities (C-12-e).
New regional commercial centers shall be located with immediate and adequate access to freeway
and/or other major transportation facilities in order to ensure access from throughout the region.
Regional shopping centers shall have internally-unified building design, landscaping, and signage
standards.
Land Use/Residentiat
I
Plan for the diversity and quality of residential housing, at locations necessary to provide for adequate
and affordable housing opportunities. Housing patterns should support balanced urban growth and
should make efficient use of resources and public facilities (Objective C-9). i
i
Allow for residential density transfers when a site is developed at less than the maximum density and
the density transfer will not reduce the desirability of surrounding areas for development of planned uses
(C-9-c). 1
Facilitate the development of new elderly,housing projects that are accessible to public transportation
and services (C-94)
Medium density residential land shall be developed to maximize efficient use" and affordability of
residential property through a wide range of densities. New residential projects within this land use
category should not be permitted to develop at a density less than the minimum shown in Table 2 in
order to better achieve the goals of the City's Housing Element (C-9-j).
Promote the development of more compact pedestrian friendly, single family residential projects to aid in
theconservation of resources such as land, energy, and materials (Objective C-1.0).
i
Facilitate the construction of higher density single-family residential development while maintaining a
pleasant living environment. Amend the planned unit development ordinance toy reduce the minimum
parcel size requirement (currently at two acres) to facilitate such development on infill or bypassed
parcels (C-10-a). f
I
Land Use/Industrial
Plan and support industrial development to promote job growth while enhancing Fresno's urban
environment (Objective C-13).
Plan for unified, high quality, geographically dispersed business and industrial park sites that are of
sufficient size, unified in design, and diversified in activity to attract the full range;of business types and
supporting uses necessary to provide needed economic and employment growth (C-13-a).
Plan industrial land use. clusters with respect to their common needs and concern for compatibility of
uses in order to maximize the operational efficiency of similar activities (Policy C-13-b).
I.
i
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14`
Conditional Use Permit Application No.`C704-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005:
Page 14
Provide access to a'range of public_transportation modes through the development of plans, and
incentives, ensuring that local, regional, and national connections are readily available to industrial
uses.
♦ Develop a strategy to better utilize rail accessible industrial sites for. industries which need such
capability.
♦ Ensure timely access to the full range of urban services for industrial development. projects by
coordinating proposed plans with the Capital Improvement Program and the Urban Growth
Management process. The programs should encompass phased extension of water, sewer, and
street improvements to facilitate the timely provision of public facilities and services to all industrial
areas in an equitable manner.
♦ Industrial development should be supported with the necessary level of fire protection/suppression
and law enforcement services. On-site improvements may be substituted as allowed for fire
protection services. .
Plan industrial land that lies in close proximity to residential areas for the least intense categories of
industrial activity (C-13-d).
Ensure that an adequate amount of area is planned for light industrial uses at appropriate locations
where transportation, public utilities, and other necessary resources can be provided in an economically
advantageous manner necessary to attract substantial economic and employment growth (C-1.3-h).
Land Use/Public Facilities and Institutions
The City will support establishment of public facilities and institutions to meet needs for services and
administration in a manner consistent with general plan policies and provision of adequate access and
utility systems (Objective C-14).
These facilities will be sited and developed in a manner that protects the integrity of surrounding
neighborhoods (C-14-a).
The proposed mix of commercial, recreational, office, public, and residential land uses within this
neighborhood will also support the policies and strategies of the "Landscape of Choice" document as
endorsed by the City Council and adopted as Appendix A to the 2025 Fresno General Plan.'
Based upon the applicability of adopted development standards, plan policies/implementation
measures, applicable mitigation measures of the above-referenced environmental documents, and staff.
recommended conditions of approval, it is concluded that the Fancher Creek project will further promote
the achievement of the planned urban form and land use objectives of the 2025 Fresno General Plan
and amended Roosevelt Community Plan.
Staff has concluded, based upon the above-noted considerations and modifications, that the Fancher
Creek project` is compatible with the applicable community plan goals, policies, and implementation
measures intended. to provide for the efficient use of natural resources and public facilities; the
construction of adequate public improvements by the development which generates the demand for
these facilities; and, the implementation of a functional land use pattern consistent with the population
and economic growth projections of the 2025 Fresno General Plan.
{
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
'Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April:20, 2005
Page,15.
Vesting Tentative.Tract Map No. T-5232 and Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 is proposing to subdivide 234 acres of j property located on the
northwest and northeast corners of Fowler Avenue and Kings Canyon Road. The tentative tract map is
proposing a 687-lot single family subdivision that will include 5 remainder lots and 25 outlots. One of
these remainder lots will be dedicated for a new 16-acre elementary school site for the Clovis Unified
School District. The balance of the four remainder lots (31 acres) will be developed with community
commercial uses, which may permit mixed use development at a later date. Also, within this proposed
subdivision will be a 5-acre neighborhood park (Outlot K) located adjacent to the existing Fancher Creek
Elementary school site. The remaining outlots will either be developed as landscaped buffers or mini
parks including a trail (Outlots T and U).
Y �
The R-1/13A-15/UGM/cz zoned portion of the subdivision will include 448 single family residential lots
covering 140.8 acres resulting in a density of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. ; The' ,R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz
Portion, of the project proposes 239 single family residential lots on 32.2 acres of property yielding a
density of 7.5 dwelling units per acre. The overall project density is 3.97 units per acre. This density is.
permitted within the designated medium density residential planned land use provided that the overall
density is greater that 2.18 units per acre. The Fresno Municipal Code allows a project density within
the next lower residential one designation below the current planned residential land use designation.
Conditional Use.Permit Application No. C-04-79 requests reduction of the minimum lot size; and the
front, side, and rear building setbacks for the R-2 zoned portion of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
for 239 lots covering 32 acres. The conditional use permit proposes reduced front: yard setbacks of 10
feet, side yards of 4 feet, and rear yards less than 10 feet in some locations. The reduced lot sizes
range from 3200 square,feet to 3300 square feet in area. There is also a 30400t wide private road that
will serve as an alley access to garages that open to the back of lots fronting! onto Fancher Creek
.Avenue. . These lots will not have front yard driveway approaches but will be allowed curbside parking
along the street.
Major Street Improvements
The 2025 Fresno General Plan designates East Kings Canyon Road and South Fowler Avenue as
arterial streets with Tulare Street a designated collector street. The proposed Fancher Creek Avenue is
a designated scenic drive. This subdivision will be required to dedicate j rightlof-way and construct
improvements along the project's street frontages: Improvements include the construction of curb,
gutter, and sidewalk within the limits of the tract; construction of an underground.;street lighting system;
and relinquishment of access rights to East Kings Canyon Road, South Fowler Avenue, East Tulare
Street, and Fancher Creek Avenue from all residential lots adjacent to this major street frontage. These
street improvements are outlined in more.detail in the. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM
Conditions of Approval dated April 6, 2005.
.This subdivision is proposed to have two access points on north side East Kings Canyon Road, west.
of Fowler Avenue. Fancher Creek Avenue is expected to carry a vast majority of the traffic from this
subdivision to Fowler Avenue and Kings Canyon Road. 'Tulare Street will also! provide access to the
subdivision. All new local streets will have access to either Fancher Creek Avenue or Tulare Street. The
Public Works Department Transportation Planning Section reviewed,the rezone and tentative tract map
applications and determined that the streets adjacent to and near the ,subject site will be able to
accommodate the quantity and kind of traffic generated, subject to the dedication and improvement of all
appropriate major streets as spelled out in the Conditions of Approval dated April 6, 2005.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.:: . _ .-
Rezone Application No. R-04-14 _
Conditional Use Permit Application No. G-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map.No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 16
Roosevelt Community Plan Area Open Space Requirement
Roosevelt Community Plan Policy 1-17.1 requires that single family residential developments provide 5
percent of the total project area for open `space use. Vesting Tentative Tract Map Application No. 5232
dated September 7, 2004, depicts open space areas in the amount of approximately 9 percent of its
total area and, therefore, complies with the open space requirement.
Landscaping/Walls ,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 will incorporate 10-foot and 15-foot wide landscape setbacks
from the major streets. There will also be a multi-purpose trail along Kings Canyon Road.(north side)
and Fowler Avenue (east side) as well as along Fancher"Creek within the project boundaries. The tract.
map is also proposing 25 outlots that will serve as landscape buffers or mini parks. There will be a
separate 5-acre neighborhood park developed immediately south of the existing Fancher. .Creek
Elementary School. The project is also proposing 6-foot decorative solid masonry walls and fences. The
solid.walls proposed along the major streets (Kings Canyon Road and Fowler Avenue) will be of
sufficient height to address noise impacts generated by vehicular traffic.
Water Resources and Public Water Supply
The Water Division of the Department of Public Utilities has indicated that an adequate source of water
is available to serve the project with the implementation of the mitigation measures noted below. The
nearest available water service lines are located in South Fowler and East Tulare Avenues and East
Kings Canyon Road adjacent to the site. More detailed water requirements for Vesting Tentative Tract
Map No. 5232 are listed in the Conditions of Approval dated April 6, 2005.
Implementation of the Water Resources Management Plan and the applicable mitigation measures of
the environmental review of the project will address the issues of providing an adequate, reliable, and
sustainable water supply for the project's urban domestic and public safety consumptive purposes. It is
noted that property west of Fowler Avenue is within the Bakman Water Company Service area. . The.
applicant will be required to meet with Bakman officials to determine the necessary improvements
required for the portion of the tract that lies within the Bakman service area.
Sewage Collection System Capacity
Several major facility.improvement projects have been implemented at the .City of Fresno's Regional
Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility in order. to accommodate the projected rates of
population and employment growth .up to a projected population holding capacity of 590,000 people.
These improvements have been completed to provide an expanded wastewater treatment and
reclamation capacity of 80 million gallons per day (MGD), which is sufficient to accommodate continued
planned urban development including the proposed project.
The Department of Public Utilities has determined that adequate sanitary sewer service is available to
serve the project. The nearest public sanitary sewer main to serve this project is located in South
Fowler and East Tulare Avenues adjacent to the subject site. More detailed sewer requirements for
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 are listed in the Conditions of Approval dated April 6, 2005.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 17
. ... is
FINDINGS PER FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 12-405-A=2.
a. All applicable provisions of this Code are complied with and the site of the proposed use is adequate in size and
shape to accommodate said use,and accommodate all yards,spaces,walls and fences,parking, loading, .
recycling areas,landscaping,and other required features;and,
Findmga '2.The applicant is requesting R-2 zoning, which would permit the proposed 239-lot single. .
family subdivision. The proposed reduced setbacks and lot size will stili enable the project
to incorporate adequate landscaping; parking, fences, trash enclosures, street trees,
t ofd ?t;f`� U etcetera. Staff is recommending approval subject to the applicant's compliance with the
> 2Y � �Y�r�����._conditions of project approval.
S.3^
..�si�1_ ,r-...u•. .. d,..,. .,«r...fir. :e8i'aN�.Mr.a s..axr..�",".`i w t.:a w.�:...,...'.:s1.
b. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry the
quantity and kind of traffic generated by the proposed use;and,
Findin"g`61TAl." The Public Works Department, Traffic Division, has indicated that traffic generated from
` �`�$` the proposed project can be mitigated with proposed development�of Fancher Creek
�Y Avenue as well as the street improvements planned for Fowler Avenue and Kings Canyon
. F1jt n i�_4 "a`.}$S " :"k.:," r ter 9;c f tkm. r, 'x ixC'N Sr-s 'G, "k �;rrc� "f+" act 2 i- sx a, � - r *,P:. :. �'ma^iaz PM, x '+'"aL1'a F.;rr yz. F.a. � '23.. •...
,b.,..�a',.,.:.w,kt.2a �ic"���.ttxa. �t;._ahsr,iii✓,siii„:.. ,.a."'+�,`..eu.:w>a..Fad”.s;.-x«1,..�3`1c�5.<k'��S�i�'32�s4y......at: �.�,�'.a�,<e+:�'?if 2t�waa�."a..r :!€+;E.aka'd.'.�,r?7i..ka. ,..•r� .�:PA:it� �.Y„e,...�:,.`,>..t'�.
c...The proposed.use will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the
area in which the property is located. The third finding shall not apply to uses that arejsubject to the provision of
Section 12-306-30 of this Code.
n Finding e� An Environmental Impact Report EIR No. 10133 was prepared for the project, which will
�kJxMgy}*, j implement a series of project mitigation measures that would reduce environmental
impacts to a level of less than significance.
I '
Tentative Tract Map Findings
The Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66400 et. seq.) requires that a proposed
subdivision not be approved unless the map, together with its design and improvements, is found to be
consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan (Finding No.' 1 below).
State 'law further provides that the proposed subdivision map be denied.if,any one of the Finding
Nos. 2 - 5 below is made in the negative. In addition,.State law requires that a subdivision be found to
provide for future passive and natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision development
(Finding No. 6 below).
1. The proposed subdivision map,together with its design and improvements, is consistent with the
City's 2025 General Plan (there is not: an applicable specific plan)', because the Roosevelt
Community Plan designates the site for medium density residential land fuses and subject to
Section 12-403-B-2-b-(1) of the Fresno. Municipal Code, the project design meets the. density and
zoning ordinance criteria for development in this plan designation.
2. This site is physically suitable for the proposed type and density of development because conditions
of approval will .ensure adequate access and drainage on and off the site.:
- is
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No-C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 18
I. The proposed subdivision design and: improvement .is not Likely to cause substantial. and
considerable damage to the natural environment, including fish,,wildlife or their habitat, "because
of the urbanized nature of the area in which the site is located.
4. The proposed subdivision design and improvements are not likely to cause serious public health and
safety problems, because the conditions of approval have shown and will ensure that the subdivision
conforms with city health and safety standards.
5. The proposed subdivision design will not conflict with public easements within or through the site,
because conditions of approval will assure. noninterference with any. existing or proposed public
easements.
6. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive and natural heating
or cooling opportunities in the subdivision because of the appropriate use and placement of
landscaping plant"materials and because of the orientation of the proposed lots.
The subdivision map, subject to the recommended conditions of approval, complies with the design and
property development standards of the Zoning Ordinance and local Subdivision Ordinance.
Based upon the plans and.information submitted by the applicant and the recommended conditions of
project approval, staff has determined that these findings can be made.
The appropriateness of the proposed project has been examined with respect to its consistency with
goals and policies of the 2025 Fresno General Plan and the Roosevelt Community Plan; its.compatibility
with surrounding existing or proposed 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 Impact Report No. 10133_ . Upon consideration of this evaluation,.it can
be concluded that Rezone Application No. R-04-14 and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM are
appropriate for the project site.
Traffic and Circulation
The project site is located on the northwest and northeast corners of East Kings Canyon Road and
South Fowler Avenue; the northwest and southwest corners of East Belmont and Armstrong Avenues;
and the northeast and southeast corners of Clovis Avenue and the Tulare Avenue alignment. Kings
Canyon.Road, Fowler, Belmont, and Clovis Avenues are designated arterial streets. Tulare Avenue is a
designated collector street while the proposed Fancher Creek Avenue is designated as a scenic drive by
the circulation element .of the 2025 Fresno General Plan. Armstrong Avenue is also a designated
collector street.
Fowler Avenue, a planned four-lane arterial, between Kings Canyon Road and Belmont Avenue has°a
Year,2002 traffic count of 8500 vehicle trips per day (VTD) and has a projected 2025 traffic volume of
19,840 VTD. Clovis Avenue has a Year 2002 count of 25,860 VTD. between Belmont and Tulare
" Avenues and has a projected 2025 volume of 61,180 VTD.` East Belmont Avenue, between Fowler
Avenue and Freeway 180, has a present day. count of 9550 VTD with a projected 2025 volume of
36,490 VTD. There are no current traffic counts for Tulare Avenue between Clovis and Fowler
Avenues. , However, the projected 2025 traffic volume between Clovis and Sunnyside is 5040 VTD.'
s.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14 r .
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 {
April 20, 2005
f.
Page 19
East ,Kings Canyon Roadbetween Sunnyside an
g y y d Fowler Avenues currently has a traffic count of
17,500.VTD with a projected 2025 traffic volume of 35,590 VTD. t
A traffic study was completed for the proposed project by TPG Consulting and is incorporated into the
technical appendices prepared in support of EIR No. 10133. The traffic analysis was prepared to
analyze worst-case traffic conditions related to the Fancher Creek project site. The analysis identifies
potential traffic impacts and necessary mitigation measures to address these impacts.
An important goal is to maintain acceptable levels of service along the highway and street network. To
accomplish this, Caltrans and local agencies adopt.minimum levels of service (LOS) in an attempt to
: control. congestion that may result as new development occurs. Caltrans minimum LOS is C except.
where prohibitive, according to information specified in Caltrans A'Guide For Traffic Impact Studies. The
City of Fresno's minimum LOS design.standard is LOS D. Traffic impacts are considered to occur
whenever the LOS exceeds D on the city street system or C on the state highway system.
A projection of the daily vehicle trips generated by the Fancher Creek project wasIcalculated by TPG
Consulting. The proposed project is projected to generate 89,423 VTD including and 4644 am peak
hour trips and 8489 pm peak hour trips. The traffic analysis outlines mitigation measures for the
Fancher Creek project and the pro rata fair share costs by project area (page 37-38 of Final EIR
No. 10133). These measures are broken down by street widening projects, intersection improvement
projects, -roundabout improvements, signal improvement projects, transit improvements, and bike
lane/trail improvements.
The existing intersection analysis shows that only one intersection (Belmont and Fowler) has a level of
service that is less than the adopted level of service D. Table 2.2-17 of Draft EIR No. 10133 shows
Mitigated 2015 Project Conditions where all study intersections have attained an acceptable level of
service of D or better. The same scenario holds true for the Mitigated 2025 Project Conditions Analysis
as depicted in Table 2.2-24 of Draft EIR No. 10133.
, L
The traffic study also included a signal warrant analysis for current conditions. The following
unsignalized intersections have met signal warrants: Kings Canyon Road at Temperance Avenue; Kings
Canyon Road at Argyle Avenue; Temperance Avenue at Jensen.Avenue; Belmont Avenue at Fowler
Avenue; Belmont Avenue at Temperance Avenue; and Ashlan Avenue at Temperance Avenue. In
2015, the following intersections would. warrant signalization: Tulare Avenue lat Argyle Avenue;
Temperance Avenue at McKinley Avenue; Belmont Avenue at Armstrong Avenue; .McKinley Avenue at
Fowler Avenue; Fowler Avenue at.Fancher Creek Avenue;:Tulare Avenue at Fancher Creek Avenue
(regional commercial).
The TIS also stated that the roundabout analysis would operate at or above the level of service B in the
2025 Project Conditions scenario. Public Works Department, Traffic Division, has indicated that further
analysis of roundabouts are necessary prior to the development of the any roundabout proposed for the
Fancher Creek Project.
The traffic study identifies specific mitigation measures necessary to reduce traffic congestion to
acceptable levels at various intersections adjacent to the project site. These measures are contained in .
the Draft Environmental Impact Report No. .10133 on pages 2.2.33 through 2.2.351 and 2.2.44 through
2.2.46 and are referenced in the monitoring checklist.' I
IF ,
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14.`
Conditional Use Permit Application No:C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 20..
State Department of Transportation(Caltrans)
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), District 6, Office of Intergovernmental Relations
has asserted that new development within the Roosevelt Community Plan contributes a substantial
number of additional vehicle.trips during the peak hour traffic periods (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and
4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) which will impact the proposed State Route (SR) 180 interchange at Clovis and
Fowler Avenues. Caltrans has generally requested that projects be required to pay a proportionate
share of mitigation costs for various improvements such as auxiliary lanes and additional ramp lanes to "
proposed interchanges,at Freeway 180. The city has typically not recommended that the piecemeal
application of a state facility traffic impact fee be imposed as a condition of project approval, as it is not
evident that Caltrans has accurately documented a project description and cost, a reliable estimate of
funding sources, a justifiable nexus or connection between a project and the need for the state facility
improvements, and the reasonable proportionality of the project's share of the improvement costs that
are necessary to justify the imposition of,a traffic impact fee for the improvement of state facilities.
Although the city has met its legal obligations for addressing impacts to the transportation system for
purposes of CEQA, the city has not ruled out working with Caltrans to obtain fees for the state,highway
system for development projects. At this time, the city is .working with Caltrans to develop a legally
permissible means for collecting impact fees. A legally permissible means for collecting impact fees
under the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code §§ 60000, et seq.) among other things,
would require a capital improvement plan, a nexus/rough proportionality study that demonstrated a
property owner/developer's proportionate. share of costs to those capital improvements, and an
accounting system for using funds collected.
Along with other-cities and Fresno County, the City of Fresno has partnered with the Fresno County
Council of Governments and Caltrans on. a regional study for the greater Fresno-Clovis-Madera
Metropolitan area: This study rmay provide the nexus/rough proportionality study necessary for
determining a developer's proportionate responsibility for capital improvements to the state highway
system.
In addition to a proportionate share study, a mechanism would be needed for the city to collect monies
and to either hold those monies, or hand over those monies to a separate agency, for improvements to
facilities the city does not, control or maintain. The city has offered to cooperate with Caltrans in
developing such a mechanism, including using the model used by the city for collecting fees for
FMFCD, entering into a Joint Powers Authority, and/or entering a Memorandum of Understanding.
Airport Land Use Commission
This project is subject to review and recommendation by the County Airport Land Use Commission
(ALUC) for consistency with.adopted airport plans and policies. The ALUC recommended approval of
the project subject to conditions relating to submittal of an avigation easement and notification to buyers
F of the presence of the Fresno.Yosemite International Airport.-
Roosevelt Community Plan Implementation Advisory'Committee
Rezone Application No. R-04-14, Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79, and Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 were presented to the Roosevelt Community Plan Implementation
Advisory Committee on March 28, 2005. It was the consensus of the Committee that the proposed
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14 }'
Conditional Use Permit Application No:C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 21
Fancher Creek Project (R-04-14, C-04-79, T-5232) be continued to a later date to further evaluate
impacts as addressed in the Elft prepared for the project. The Committee did voice the following
concerns regarding the project: circulation on Kings .Canyon Road; roundabout design; truck route
designation; adequacy of reduced setbacks for solid waste; parking, pedestrian access across
roundabout; noise mitigation south of Kings Canyon Road; utility boxes; and adequate open space in
9-2 zoned areas. 1
- l
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Staff recommends that the following list of conditions be placed on the on all proposed zone districts as
requested through Rezone Application No. R-04-14. Condition No. 1 is designed specifically for the
proposed C-3/UGM/cz (Regional Shopping Center/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning)
zoning proposed for the southerly portion of the subject property.
1. The developer, or its successor in interest, of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 313-101-22 and 24, to be
zoned C-3/UGM (Regional Commercial) by the approval of Rezone Application No. R-04-14, shall
acquire, construct, and dedicate to the city the necessary public street right-of-way for Fancher
Creek Avenue and that portion of Fancher Creek Avenue between North Clovis Avenue and the
segment of Tulare Street east of the Fancher Creek canal as illustrated in Exhibit E (hereafter called
"Fancher Creek Avenue"). As part of this condition, the developer, or its successor in interest, shall
acquire the necessary public street right-of-way from the owners of the abutting property (Assessor's
Parcel Number 313-021-01) for Fancher Creek Avenue. Acquisition, construction, and dedication of
Fancher Creek Avenue shall be at the expense of the developer, less any applicable
reimbursements such as UGM reimbursements. This requirement shall be a condition of approval
for any special permit such as a site plan or conditional use permit, or other applicable development
entitlement authorizing.the development.of this property in accordance with the C-3/UGM zone
district. i
In the event that developer and owners of the abutting property are unable,to acquire the necessary
right-of-way within a reasonable period of time and the necessary right-of-way is acquired by
eminent domain, this condition shall be satisfied. In the event the city is required to acquire said
public right-of-way by use of its powers of eminent domain,the city will proceed with a public hearing
to obtain a resolution of necessity pursuant the eminent domain law of the State of California,
including but not limited to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.210 through 1245.270.
This condition shall run with the land and bind any successor in interest 'developing parcels
313-101-22 and 24 pursuant the approval of the C-3/UGM zoning.
2. Dedication of an avigation easement to the City of Fresno.
3. Recordation of a'covenant stating that it is understood by the owner's and owners' successors in
interest that the real property in question lies close to Fresno Yosemite International Airport and that
the operation of the.Airport and the landing and take-off of aircraft may generate high noise levels
which will effect the habitability and quiet enjoyment of the property.
i
The owners shall also covenant to accept and acknowledge the operation of the Fresno Yosemite
International Airport.
i
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION _
Rezone Application No. R-04-1.4
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005
Page 22
The above easement, covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall run with the Land and shall be
binding upon. the present and subsequent owners of the property.
4. The property zoned R-2/BA-15/UGM/cz shall be limited to the 239 single family residential dwelling
units as requested through Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79 and Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. T-5232.
CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION
The Fancher Creek project site is one of the most prominent vacant properties in southeast Fresno.
This is due to the relatively large size of the site and the fact that it is located in an area that was under
agriculture for several decades with incremental growth being developed around the periphery of the
Fancher Creek project site. The southeast portion of the Roosevelt Community Plan area has seen
numerous single family subdivisions approved and under construction since the adoption of the 2025
Fresno General Plan in November 2002. The unique location of the site makes it an attractive property
between the primarily residential area to the north and south and the extensive office and retail
development along Kings Canyon Road and Clovis Avenue.
Although the project applicant has not submitted any formal site plans for any of the commercial
centers, it is the intent of the applicant to move forward with the single family residential portion of the
project. The business park component of the project is expected to follow through with a parcel map
entitlement in the coming months. The applicant has indicated a willingness to meet with area property
owners to discuss future projects within the Fancher Creek site as these plans become more developed.
The above-recommended conditions of approval, which are resultant from the. EIR process and
meetings with neighbors and concerned citizens, are intended to sufficiently control the development of
the property at the time a formal application is submitted. It is staff's position that the above-noted
conditions.of approval will ensure that the development of the site is accomplished in a unified manner
that is sensitive to the surrounding properties and the adjacent circulation system.
The appropriateness of the proposed project has been examined with respect to its consistency with
goals and policies of the 2025 Fresno General Plan and the Roosevelt Community Plan; its compatibility
with surrounding existing or proposed uses; and, its avoidance or mitigation of potentially significant
adverse environmental impacts. These factors have been evaluated as described above and by
accompanying Environmental Impact Report No. 10133. Upon consideration of this evaluation, it can be
concluded that the proposed Rezone Application No. R-04-14 is appropriate for the project site, subject
to the conditions of zoning recommended above.
1. RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION of the Final Environmental Impact Report
No. 10133 (SCH No. 2004021.0710), dated September 2004.
3:
1
I ,
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Rezone Application No. R-04-14
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
April 20, 2005 j
Page 23
is
{
2. RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE.CITY COUNCIL of Rezone Application No. R-04-14 to rezone.
424 acres of property,from AE-5/UGM (Five Acre Agriculture Exclusive/Urban Growth Management)
and AE-20 (County) to R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz (Single Family ResidentiaU Boulevard Area — 15-foot
Landscaped Setback/Urban Growth Management/conditions . of zoning) for 211 acres, to
R-2/BA-1'5/UGM/cz (Low Density Multiple family Residential/Boulevard Area — 15-foot Landscaped
Setback/Urban Growth Management/conditions of zoning) for 32 acres, to C-2/BA-15/UGM/cz
(Community Shopping Center/ Boulevard Area — 15-foot Landscaped Set6ack/Urban Growth
Management/conditions of zoning) for 31 acres, to C73/UGM/cz (Regional)Shopping Center/Urban
Growth Management/conditions of zoning) for 43 acres, and to M-'1/BA!15/UGM/cz (Light
Manufacturing/Boulevard Area — 15-foot Landscaped Setback) `Urban Growth Management/
conditions of zoning)for 107 acres.
3. Review and Rec9rrrn Intent APPROV�FJ Conditional, Ilse' Permit ;Application No. C-04-79
requesting a duction ' them nimum.lot sVe and re uotlon in the front,, side, and rear-building
setbacks the R-2GBA-1 /l GM/cz portion/'of Ve ' g Tentative Tract Map Np.--52' 2 or 239 lots
cover. 32 acres. ermit is also reque a private road that will,�& as pan alley for a series
of lots within the R-1/BA-15/UGM/cz portion of Vesting Tentative `FracfMap No. 5232. ;
4. Review and 6mmend ntent to APP�C�VE esting Tentative Tract'
-Ma No.No. T-5232/UGM
proposin ubdivide 23 'acres of ,property into 687-lot single Fm-l sub r�i #afi avtfl'iPrclude
5 re der parcels and 5„ou ' subject to the 4 onditio s e`*O.proval p�C ril 6, 2005.
K:\Common\Master Files-2004\Fancher Creek EIR No. 10133\R-04-14 C-04-079,T-5232 RPC 11-17-04.doc
Attachments: Exhibit A - Vicinity Map for R-04-14
Aerial Photographs of Site (2002)
Exhibit B - Vicinity Map for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232
Exhibit C - Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 and Building Elevations (C-04-79)
Exhibit D'- Proposed Parcel Map No. 2004-36
Exhibit E - Fancher Creek Avenue
5
Final EIR No. 10133 M igation Monitoring Checklist
Minutes from Roosevelt Committee dated March 28, 2005
Draft Final Environmental Impact Report No. 10133, dated April 2005,,+including Written
Responses to Comments, dated April 2005, and Draft EIR dated October 2004
.(distributed to the Planning Commission on March 31,2005)`
Letters from Caltrans dated November 29, 2004 (Response to Draft EIR), March 29,'
2005, and February 8, 2005, April 4, 2005) oA 1 l.b1 j6�c�s
Letter from Sunnyside-Fancher Creek Association?
Letter from Barg, Coffin, Lewis, and Trapp dated April 13, 2005 and April 6, 2005
Letter from Tom Lang April 6, 2005
Letters of Support (Mullen, Dodson, Silverwood)
c4 (;,q
Sn ra
:O'0.4'!JJJJJJJc
ago
:Ni:Or�00'JJJJi
4004 i':44'JJi4 i
• 3li LII■■111 ■r�■■.■ ��//111■1■ -- ■■■.■l11i1■!11 ■■ -■ wi-x'v''v.3v.'s .wwovwo�•L•���•i• 4`:�
.� a �� �- ■11lIS ��' ��I�I-ra ■!■■■111■11■1■ ■■ I p'�:ipi��•Ji••i'i•'i❖04'J••�:•:pi':;P O'iii:;:'��;
� i� � ■- � a► I\ �� -- '�- w■ �•;'�;�.JO�«•«�:�i•J i i«�f i❖i0 JJ.• ♦••J.J4J
1.111!111!1111\�� 'M..•Oi�3.«•«•«•i«'.�':•✓�a i•:ii;«❖:�:•:':i'`` ••i i 44
11■111■111111111!- - � Ji•J JJOOJ�"••••iJ•OOJ••J JJiJJO
� A - h- ��• �� �- -- -- �- _ r� � iiJJ J JO.O ii'i:4�'ii•i.0 0•e0 0•.0•i•J
,� R.,' RRA �� • - -■ 1!1■/■u1■ - ••:�Ji•••�i! Ji :�i«�••�.'❖i«•i:�;
R 1'r � � 711111111r1■►,- -a r .r
' RRRR �,,� ■'♦' f11■■■■1u111■• �� 111■1■1■■■ r- J:•i�•S�r•400 0•• I.Ji•4•i0L'Ji1
••RR�� _�. ■1!!■r -1\�,- ■!11111111\�i �, �'��'ti'.i1•:�3i4r:. :❖:J:�••J
�. ��. '•��� �r r,\.- -,�,r 1■111111111111■ �� I/��/�••vii;'J«''O: iiii«JJ•i•�i:•i«JO:�
. wr - a � 7///Lai 0.••.••04••OOyy�
', •� -- w\ �i ilk it r- 11■!■111111■ •r:ri•0• •0••JO
', ••� aI �� -i -� -- ar 1/■■1111111/�r Iiq���•' '��11111111 ��«ii�«ip: ::�'.'��.�«i•i
... 1�• �� �s -r a� as �. �� f 1111 �I, a as a �•�::•'�«:iJJ Jiii•
•//I/II - �: :/`.� fi�� � r ��JI 1`'-1rr- �•J y;v:O.Jij
R1��1� �� �' �I♦�I��- as r / •.�«.;JJ .;Ji�.,�
•R•,�r�� �1��..♦..,'a as: �♦•♦••40.p������:�
'� '���'. ��® �1■'� 111
fill
�., 111 '• _�'
X111
■ 'il���,,•;•' %�� • ; 11111.111. :1%�i11111
� �.�. /�/� / � 11!.11!■!■ a�
y • : 1r■1■1!t/■ '�1111111111
® �'� % 1111!lIIr1 �� ■!1111.111
■11!1!111■
� �.� a wr• ■111!11111
ti,
mumNNW, 1/ : '�; I� Hill■� t!� 1", �I/��l\`'1!\ %`U/ ,:: `sem♦O,��I�'�� -_I-
' ice.® � j \ iaball
�►= ���'1
� 111l111l111 1■r\� •
wines memolloom
Joe
sells so
��� � f `� 111111111111��'�7\Q �I►
•� , � i jlttitt�tit �t/ttttttt �� �
■� ���+tee��„,���������t,■■■■■■ �� i�iiii �� ii
se■wr■■■ a■■■■■■■ ■���J► ■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■..-
®
.r v.4.❖i: .�
•...44.4;
REZONINGAPPLICATION • R-04-014 DEPARTMENT
VESTING TENTA-17IVE TRACT MAP
NO. \/ - 1
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. C-04-079(ForTentative Tract Map) ZONE MAP: 2356- 2456
Between Clovis, Kings Canyon,Harvey and - • TO 1 /
� - -
. .
�-
._ i.
� '
, .
. �
.. �
_ �
{.
- _, �
k1
I
}
� '
r
i
ti
t
, .
:.
Fresno
tk 'lS 3+`�� j1�ty: {�{��. A+ �`'' � k�R tbt� k'�eH..i�'`�`"f�. .n 'ss•-i+an
Incorporated Cities
Unincorporated WA iA
Parcels
Parcels.
Aerials t,.�t. i. ,p �gm qg%} + rpt ,zsuid mow. 4 s.sp ro^ t
+'�
� 7z Nit o
City Limits
Fresno County
7;M
5� •: 3 fir"
P£ � n "�,� }Y R � >�� r�,� � F s I""+• � „err p
��"pY�4 �� xq��} �+•-n + � .. %.�q� r ' f s �,'���i.�a y M k� v� ��
Ag t
,y..�� +a�braN v t o �n•3��. af,'",�� r t -c # r r � ��
.6 + .
'4 •�f til '� 1-416,f• iv
R '•:..6� � .,SLdI �� � Z7,.���� 51 .btr'"tl ry`F'`+ aS 1.-+ '"`x�r C� Pr � ft •'"Ct t�
Tt
nry t 7
'fit 1v
s-.' S./cep'� .{gyp y� s� C 1 ltMv."kY• 'iy„
® Y+• �"� � �.a1k��w^ 79+� '"' �� E�:r ,t )k 4 i,4;'..# 1 S �,F >^'�s.
logo
F � t
y�� ° Xr x3+,� r .,i..._ � fi�xs�, ",Z'3'��•a �,yn`,41� OF f..,Jp .. *.m a Yf"'+"'4.�w�, � r`�Y.,tgv�� y �.}�y�y x
.. . .. ... ..
Aft
• � 'E.+3 �al, i'r'"4' a3`-94t"` � �+��. .� �Vii` �fd 1 �,,y J�y �C.
1
• • • - ��AM yi737 �' °`{!
;pace,
3'1 xe y54�ry'�i"LS'+x�lia �Yi�' tr Aja°` �4,r pv'J:+f'iwat'Yk�P.cA+ti`4-raN
• • • - • i to "7N�t+2 5,.w—,CK
• �'� � �+ ti ti S�o�ag.�'�i a7 � :.r u�w al�bi>~� � ��':5'a5��� � fti�° ��..
"��1PtS,�yw�' � ��� +•; � y��'N trt�h � l r 24t*'.0 �t 4sA1;'�t':i3g°�, _� �; ,
"''y a fr ..., F+7�" �`�a rnF.�+.i `wa'� Ci ,, .at•� ', 6,we ±�,
6& k -� ' ' `►-,�h�r ,at.�g�-r��,t am3 +' +�ri,�y :Zw.rh 0irss. IN E� .�,.^' liti Plop
tnxs
, , a„Jr
,]ii
- 7�- N7
"�k�7W�u�° +x yy,11y �.a � � ,�u�'�a'�%A .�+j�'p17? i4�
� n�kW .yP'�k4�At Y e YS
�y
• • �J ..:rrx'�`n�,r''sgqgg` ,� c, Fkl` '�*�y�.'a++"�,,,��. i�t^^� ��° `M �����" iw ��► ��rS���Y�
"li n S{,.E
,�i. s,r ii, r-
t
t
Iry
OV
LFA ��e�r _� S r ` �i•t `` •r S� � �, �a r 3 1 � r
C'+ '_ y`✓ �l y�]"+ r' "Z" ZMZM} r to 5 d@
gc a r. �'�yyi ��' -'k' .- + w .. v z�t '' �k � �r ✓ xrti� � 5,��, .i� .a�„J
R
ii �.7..f F {t i> cFY 4 +'yT" r w.�t ! i r4 � t c3. k,� �p'^�+� 4 ➢IIN
z� „w� 5 rpt§ *u •+!a.;:e r k�i+r���,� aw^ > .~�it,bre tine �� R6;`t+s��',
a`R
{.A"`� lp �i,1'•#1•"„tii .c',
6:a te�dr 'l� F94�✓?$ i
i
Y��*SjSF ""rr4
r fl��.t ll}zrrl�i. � --•"'rte4,pCir��'$Y�I'yl��.� y�ys moi.' ?1.p,S,'����`. „� „�
.P, CAN,
' `7'�'� �`"�
.ems,k '+2, m ,'y��Y
Lh67t e � � '� W,�rrC�''y��;��e� a..�yi��s��A'4� �7�9•G�*,4,�.r*1'r IL y"r�l � �A �" 35�'N� �7. P�." � .
c.j t r,*�r 3 ' �'qr M�„.ryA.GO 5 �R�' e b✓o:, ^,� y„� .+��.,y r�"y$�..�
�¢���p��pee���A T�'�' ��� •-�'� wd�A.�^4*aY �°J�.'��� ��'"u, Y�i "r��M�vY 31 y��i1'f�Vi t'w>1! �t
f jiEi � Yc R �t
{� a�' R r 2��'.N�' 9��'' rn'�ia"*�'=� ++�.� t.. n�'^ A'a<"' '�y ��Y, :7 IP�i'�43.�ddW@�.aal �tf N"�'$� •4�#i'
• K • '
MKIL
ba� , u sr
Fresno
s
r+;',r� . ,xi k ffiw�n Incorporated . `,�
r z ai { � f UY(Ss,�i„s r•:: a t <h, k ? 't i` �y�,,:�H�����z rix
MEL �h�'
Unincorporated Cities
a &•a
Parcels
it ' � c 3 c z"9GiE �i iepi3 b � � + ee y'
40
'7Parcels
Aerials
y d'r5 Edi 1 . N 7r a Y }? F iF
aid �city Limits
Fresno •
s4 � .r,� °� � ���' •t"'
MID
Q3w �i'.r 5 i ti:o ' •rip�Ys cti �
��•. � a�j� ��eY i.,� Fs ,��z .e' ^.�� �+j-k�,� +�,., Y . ba�,�i 4"� h �' `-S�tiBS �'"'h�{
Ign
All
x
w*' _. , a����- S�• � � 2� x °'r w i j._.em 3 �•tx. �Y ' � ��Prl.� � �t�
-
aq 2=; i`` � z z t � *' ,�� x�� 3 �f9t FF��,q f'`�,•�q � n
a ` c �xct�t a }}4 f��3 ��. 'fs ,�rr`�-' d'�r��-� y 7 � � "* i'•
�?w.1s ✓ � 3� r*�r� r r #'§q ,tom °� `.. �rwah� ,�' � �
! *,� t���a3 � a?�: ����ry� treed.�a"�r �'��;�; fir.. � �Y � a•�;.'�
9 {{� i eS `��$ i ,� �¢�'���'��^ ���7��wya�r� C,e•"�x�i� �� ��j �rj �a'''��f i." `y�
e
,4Y:IM a�:[� ,'�"' "'1::� fl� x � „� 4 ..•7iIM",`33,y t� Yd; _ M
.fir � � � '�3�. �,+'ff5 �'�Y:� � � � 2 �• SY.
r� * �-, .g� y � '�p t ,.rte S•s'�"Y.�k"�`jE tib '(,vc ,y P'.
• � + •• ��.�i°`""� �Y;�""'fin /lc e�tt7�.a ��.
i
{
II�
' I f
EXH I 511T
U
x aL,7.,17 —
AE-
rx
OR bw
III APF
S4
-
�.., �? u .
pr,`e - x w '.+�,�`a`' .T✓ x 'a �, hw ,�"`.sh r �"
,{ £.���-•�� � �6'a t� .�+ .:.,v s ;.' a�;, e kak �mux: �� "�.$ �N k^ ,, n`�ta r ,S
.;�
w
R-,
-
i`w ':..vo- �Y*^a3 .�+t. �d� f L'� F �`c Ohl t j Y"v=•,o°A "*d+ �"i 4'l �' S
Nk3
S`P ' ia -
� y±.� R����l _
�•r^� a+ a4 n r §?r i s� v �a �s �;t xaa � � "+m�C*� '4 ll �� wr ne. aA-3
":*fix
f............_..ANYO
i C-1 R-1-AH SPLIT
ty
o ny
77
0
LEGEND
Subject Property
s�� °: U.G.M.Area
"CINITV PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 5232/UGM N 313-021-19;313-060-26
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. C-04-079 A.P.N.:X13-270-01:313-280-01.33
::�IZ
ZONE MAP: 2656
North of Jensen btwn Sunnyside & Burgan Aves. O NOT TO SCALE BY/DATE` J.S. / 11-22-04
i .`
I
.. .. -
- - j .. - -
.. � - �
.. ��.
_ - - ,. ..
�., ., .- -
- - - �� i
.. .. '.
� - - - � ..
.. �
.." '. .'.
.. ` - .. i
-. _.
,.
.. � _
_ - �, - � }�
.,
. -
., _ .. .. -
.. .. � - �
..
.. - _ I � -
�'7,
s
•
1 . •
•
' ���; 711�411�1®��.,���4lr�sr�■dr!erv�a��■■���r�®�, -„
�� � • � ,�1�a®■■L. ■�■ ®� .`. SII
�, .�>__mss_ _ 4■�I ®� 7i' SSI, �'I
®®�� ®® �.� ;oma !..■. �! . � �y®®®.p� �J� ���i ,
"�eat -��;��dhi�e a■■■■.■��i'
lel psi; �� �, '0�� °���!►inn, ,ire, ,!■�1
� h
. 1
1�!i'la _ v �i�lIW11111iiM���
- j
i I
j
i
k TM� S'rv3h�jv`K�
yi
"1gg}
�ar`
l
ti
IN 4 PLAN 5 PLAN 6 i.
+ATION"B" ELEVATION"C" ELEVATION"B"
A BARBARA MISSION OLD PASADENA SANTA BARBARA MISSION
j
iOMES
f
N v,
f
11
4-$��
u�`L#Wt" ro�,�*.-.
,t�
" 4� Y•.„ �'a"” jfl,�3 n��•{��y t"'N .,� Fr* `j � �*� 4 Y�f+s+ tS�'
Pt(741�S x 4 F .x°•'c " 4,"s+ ---- •Y� Z
§�SM1b�n'' - b�. "' �' t - r
$ {SFS Y�
t
,
� r•
r
w
-
PLAN 1 PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PL
ELEVATION"A" ELEVATION"C" ELEVATION"A" ELI
MONTEREY COTTAGE OLD PASADENA MONTEREY COTTAGE SAl
CENTEX HOMES C E N T E X
CENTRAL VALLEY DIVISION - - _ - A V A L
. VISALIA.CALI
� � � ,
- � ; �,, `
}.
i
i
; .
,,
, .
�.
,. .
i
i
` �
,.
e
Co. 1 SIT`5_' (H 1?
•
cd 15SC\2
l� V 3=j epi 23deZ
�a F= 'jN,:jN o �o"v��l'1 0 cl yn:,r., % 2QsQ _ } -
=O m '8 K ��,- 2wq W 60y W I.d ltl` ld` N 1mii8 l
� o O�t7 V �� Rv F. G
U70 m g�4 gFFi'xEi ogo_o ���� rc a3rc 'd"'
rc rc I �ow� w o w <g
avt C351dut cvl8m�<uc4 A_20
W O W
�Win
z
MY WIM
� aMY SNOW
S
•'"'1 .3/IN34V ONOUISRHY NLOOS
. F,SBI
4F;A9 F.691 _TX i F,OLITAte F,991 a BE
:CO'S
ADI
it 91
' g y� 0 w i/p�• ( FALL F.OLI - Al b 1 1 4��<< J _
i ;w r ,9w gae��y°ar �? .w ''a�, � 'w s•1.r . . 9
m ^� /M1°$w r .$ ,ems` x ♦,Iw N I�� ..
•�qd ,�<-�-aa t�+a`°o ' a S,o �i•'a "1 •w II y.
9 F.Z6/ *Z91 .lL .. ..
—~
LBB
2 . ' -
e s o « ,
Ln
FZBt F.ZBI
} ssB1 sAtz
* *Or,U
-
m FALZ
a
F.S61 FAiZ
F.SOY I II I
(~� g �! I
,1
IIIL : I
—_ ---- — -- ------ ———— -------
30N31Y N3AIOi Woos d_�- ♦. '�—'—_ I - .
A
}
I ,
_ I _ EAST HARVEY AVENUE ea'
----r--- - - - - -_ � h�PP
—— J; M CAPPRo1C
' 76 CONC.SP
z �� ..
40 40 P31,92AC±
245'* 238'*
* 00 'N + IMCTURE - -
�O 1� W/O PADayO.92 ACt N (APPROK *LOCATION) Tr
M 1.70 ACtH ss fNN 4!0.92 AC.*10 oOCt_0 n 3.23 AC.* � 238'*
N "29
N
P
I
. I I 193'* g96't
& ® h
N 1.49 AC.* Z
c 0.91.AC*o "'0.76 AC* �!toNc SP
STRUCIURE N - N
w/a PAD - lll177•t METAL 245'f 238't
192'*
*
< I P
N .E 198' .•PuwP 245'3 238't 47•
. J LL s C RE
1.32 AC.* .m-R A}6s '
1} APPROXI LOC) i( 11
n KK QpSL�`� 1 N .1.45 AC* m
. III518 AC** PQ r I of
.,
• .. I - : 60 ( n 288 ACf 'N 232.*
Vv�'HWY 180 R.O.W.
CALTRANS _ N HH .
. I 3.85 AC H 1.49 AC* N 55'.�
N 1/�31'4 R.. I= .
EAST BELMO T v AVENUE' SEC. /21 89' f \ -
LA
MATCH UNE SEE SHEET 1
l
11/29/2004 15:10 FAX 415'228 5450 BARG COFFIN LEWIS TRAPP R014
.I
CLO VIS. AVENUE
m SEC: UNE
------------------------
-W _-__ - _
s00.1T16x00'36'14-W SOO-17'16•w 1 — 1 NOM 7'20'E
--_----- ---
297.95' 362.55' 332,21" 64313' .1
u PROPERTY UNE
u
U Im I ' I C) I
Z Q D1 I jrri
=1
^ ` 1 -7:0 H�7
�N u
I jl ��OQw mx
1 O 00 �
nl rn Rl ::0
r- N
l
1
>- (4
C)
4
o I i
MOOZO.55-E
I
uo'� rz 1 1 r
morn 0 O g Au 1
gjQ1Q- A-5—M,
'IR
. Cy
rr C 4
y N Ig
n.rrrrrrrrr � � "� = e
r A
a u.r�+�a_rn
a �� o9Asl�n q � _g�
RES X21
.r
MC £ Y ' ' n �,
a o m N.z z � � Fi9" , � Ra nom= Q -
N m wC.u m m N n m EE a $p�sxBg�
4 4 30 �'g •��" s
j z N z z V v mz to j O®OOO ■� C3q ,pe9S4�p� , ��m� g'
ct M
m a u ui m r. r m r.tp
sill
rn
eaxs�41
a gE� q l � a
` .. II 0 9 ►9C tori
•P x II a - 4 g �= "Sg g
cj
1
n n 0 c� n nab
_�
Aw-1 i-C�"
a4 �n �;
g� a ss 92 ps Y,
e , � ad b
.; ,.
,. ,.
..
,.,. .
-:;
> .
. .
. . :
_ .
_.
: , � .
. .
_ .
� . _
. .
, .
�.
,. ..
...
`_ ;:
i
�; . ,.
�.
,.
;.
, ,
i
�.
_.
..
;..
CITY OF FRESNO
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Revised)
April 6,2005
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 5232/UGM
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. C-04-79
Northwest and Northeast corners of East Kings Canyon Road and North Fowler
Avenue.
All tentative maps are subject to the applicable provisions of the State Subdivision Map Act;
Fresno Municipal. Code, City policies, and City of Fresno Standard Specifications. The following
specific conditions are applicable to this vesting tentative map. The Urban Growth Management
(UGM) Service Delivery Plan requirements are included in the following conditions of approval
and are designated by the caption "Urban Growth Management Requirements."
NOTICE TO PROJECT APPLICANT .
In accordance 'with the provisions of Government Code §66020(d)(1), the
imposition of fees, dedications, reservations or exactions for this project are
subject to protest by the project .applicant at the time of approval or
conditional approval of the development or within 90 days after the date of the
imposition of the fees, dedications, reservations or exactions imposed on the
development project.
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Upon conditional approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM entitled
"Exhibits A-1 to A-8," dated March 16, 2005, the subdivider may prepare a Final Map in
accordance with the approved tentative map.
2.. ' Submit grading plans and a soils report to the City of Fresno Planning and Development
Department for verification prior to Final Map approval (Reference: Sections 12-1022
and 12-1023 of the Fresno Municipal Code). Grading plans shall indicate the location of
any required walls and indicate the proposed width of required landscape easements or
strips. Approval of the grading plan is required prior to Final.Map approval.
3. At the time of Final Map submittal, the subdivider shall submit engineered construction
plans to the City of Fresno Public Works, Public Utilities, and Planning and Development
Departments for grading, public sanitary sewer system,.public water system, street
lighting system, public streets, and storm drainage, including other technical reports and
l` engineered plans as necessary to construct the required public improvements and work
and applicable processing fees. Engineered construction plans shall be approved by the
{ City prior to the approval of the Final Map. If, at the time of Final Map approval, such
plans have not been approved, the subdivider shall provide performance security in an
amount established by the City to guarantee the completion of plans.
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79 {
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005 ,
Page 2
4. Public utilities easements, as necessary, shall be shown on the Final Map and dedicated
to the City of Fresno. Public utility easements beyond the limits of the Final Map, but
' required as a condition of development, shall be acquired at the subd'iv.ideris cost and
shall be dedicated by separate.instrument at the time of Final Map approval. The
relocation of existing utilities necessitated by the required public improvements shall be
paid for by the subdivider. The subdivider is responsible to contact the appropriate utility
company for information.
5. Comply with the conditions, policies and standards set forth in the City of Fresno,
Municipal Code, Article 10, Chapter 12, "Subdivision of Real Property'- Resolution No. ,
68-187,"City Policy with Respect to Subdivisions"; and City of Fresno; Standard
Specifications, 2002 Edition, and any amendments thereto.
6. The developer/owner shall pay applicable fees for, but not limited to, plan checks for
street improvements and other grading and construction; street trees,',street signs, water
service, sewering, and inspections in accordance with the City of Fresno Master Fee
Schedule (City Resolution Nos. 79-606 and No. 80-420) and any amendments,
modifications, or additions thereto; and in accordance with the requirements of State law
as related to vesting tentative maps. The developer shall also pay the applicable Fresno
County Fire Protection District transitional fee. 1
7. . The subdivider shall furnish to the City acceptable security to guarantee the construction
of the off-site street improvements in accordance with all applicable provisions of the
Fresno Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act. The subdivider shall
complete all the public improvements prior to the approval of the Final Map by the City.
If, at the time of Final Map approval, any public improvements have not been completed
and accepted in accordance with the standards of the City, the subdivider may elect to
enter into an agreement with the City to thereafter guarantee the completion of the
improvements.
8. As a condition of Final Map approval, the subdivider shall furnish to the City a
subdivision guarantee listing all parties having any right, title or interest and the nature of
their interest per State law.
i
9. Relinquish access rights to Kings Canyon Road, Fancher Creek Drive, Tulare, Fowler,
and Armstrong Avenues from all residential lots which abut these streets. Ref. Section
12-10114-3 of the Fresno Municipal.Code.
LANDSCAPING AND WALLS
10. Provide a landscaped and irrigation improvements within the 15-foot wide landscaped
and pedestrian easement along the side or rear property lines of lots which side-onto or
back-onto Kings Canyon Road and Fowler Avenue, and a 10-foot landscape and
pedestrian easement along the side or rear of Fancher Creek Drive, Tulare±and
Armstrong Avenues. (Ref. Roosevelt Community Plan Policy 2-3.9 and FMC Section 12-
1.0114-3). .
Provide landscape, irrigation system improvements for all outlots designated for
development as community open space features and include trail improvements within
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 3
Outlot"U" and Outlot"T' subject to the submittal and approval of acceptable trail
construction plans.
..When the grading plan establishes a top of slope beyond the required landscape
easement noted and the construction of the required wall is to be established coincident
with the top of slope then the required minimum easement width shall be expanded to.
include the full landscaped area up to the wall location.
11. Maintenance of the required landscape easements along Kings Canyon Road, Fancher
Creek Drive,Tulare, Armstrong, and Fowler Avenues and open space outlots, including
Outlots "U"and "T" developed with trail improvements may be the responsibility of the
City's Community Facilities District No. 11. Contact the Public Works Department,
Engineering Services Division staff for information regarding the City's District. The
property owners shall petition the City for annexation to the City's District prior to Final
Map approval.
12. If the developer/subdivider elects to petition for annexation into the City's Community
Facilities District No. 11, he/she shall be required to provide the City of Fresno,
Department of Public Works, with a petition consisting of the following items:
a. A letter(petition)from the landowner or the owner's representative requesting the
Final Tract be placed into the District. The name, address, phone number and fax
number of the developer/landowner must be included in this letter. See attached
letter form.
b. A District Tentative Plan for the entire tentative map, signed by the
landowner/developer, showing landscaping locations and total areas by type to be'.
added to the District. The plan will also show locations, areas by type and quantities
of any other features to be added to the District.
c. Complete plans for the current final tract map showing all features to be added to the
District.
13. Should the City Council not approve the annexation of such landscape areas into
Community Facilities District, then the property owner/developer shall create a
homeowners association for the maintenance of the landscape areas. The proposed
Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's)and the proposed
instruments for the homeowner's association shall be submitted to the Planning and
Development Department.for review two (2)weeks prior to final map approval. Said
documents shall be recorded with the final map or alternatively submit recorded
documents or documents for recording prior to final acceptance of subdivision
improvements.. Said documents shall include assignment of responsibility to the owner's
D" association for landscaping and other provisions as stated in the Development
Department Guidelines for preparation of CC&R's dated January 11, 1985.
14. Improvement plans for all required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be submitted
to the Planning and Development Department for review prior to Final Map approval.
l-
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval - -
April 6, 2005
Page 4
15. Construct a 6-foot or higher solid masonry wall, as determined necessaryto comply with
the 2025 Fresno General Plan noise mitigation policies, along the rear or side property
lines of all lots which back-onto or side-onto Kings Canyon Road, Fancherl:Creek.Drive,
Tulare, Armstrong, and Fowler Avenues (solid wall to meet the requirements of Section
12-306-H, Fresno Municipal Code). Construction plans for required,walls showing
architectural appearance and location of all walls shall be submitted to the'Planning and
Development Department for review prior to Final Map approval.
16. Prior to final map approval, the owner of the subject property shall execute a "Right to
Farm" covenant with the City of Fresno. Said covenant is to run with!the land and shall
acknowledge and agree that the subject property is in or near agricultural districts
located in the County of Fresno and that the residents of said property should be
prepared to accept the inconveniences and discomfort associated with normal farm
activities. The "Right to Farm" covenant shall be recorded prior to or concurrent with the
recording of the final map of Tentative Tract No. 5232/UGM.
17. Per Roosevelt Community Plan Policy No. 1-17.3, provide a minimum of 5 percent of the
total project area (or 9.7 acres)for open space use or contribute to a'comparable open
space feature as may be allowed by plan policy at the time of final map approval. This
acreage does not include the proposed 5.0 acre neighborhood park to be located south
of the existing Fancher Creek Elementary School.
F
BUILDING SETBACKS
18. Building setbacks shall be in accordance with the R-1/UGM zone district and the
provisions of Fresno Municipal Code Section 12-207.5-E-1-c as shown on Exhibit "A"of
Tentative Tract No. 5232/UGM dated March 15, 2005, 2004. Conditional Use Permit
No. C-04=79 is seeking reduction in lot size, lot dimensions, and building setbacks to
facilitate a planned unit development that will encompass 32.2 acres for 239 single
family lots.
19. . Building setbacks for residential lots within the R-2 zone district shall.have a minimum of
10-foot front yard, four-foot side yards, and a minimum five-foot rear yard setback as
depicted on Exhibits "A-6 to A-8" dated March 16, 2005 as part of Conditional Use
Permit No. C-04-79. :
20. There shall be a 35-foot building setback from East Kings Canyon Road for Lots 1-10,
98, 99, and 146 through 157. There shall be a 20-foot building setback from East
Fancher Creek Avenue for Lots 240-243, 255, 279, 280, 293, 294,300, 301,306, 307,
331, 332, and 509 through 531. There shall also be a 25-foot building setback from
Fowler Avenue for Lots 410, 427, 428, 470; 471, 483, and 484.
INFORMATION
21. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. T-5232/UGM is subject to Council approval of related
Rezone Application No. R-04-14.. Rezoning of the site shall become effective for any
portion of the.tentative map of Vesting Tentative Tract No. T-5232/UGM for which a final
map is recorded.. If multiple final maps are recorded, the requestedrezoning will
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 5
become effective only for each phase of the tentative map upon recording of each final
map.
22. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the subdivision,school construction fees
shall be paid to the Clovis Unified School District in accordance with the school district's
adopted schedule of fees.
23. Contact the United States Postal Service, Fresno Office, for the location and type of
mailboxes to be installed in this subdivision.
24. Pursuant to Section 66456.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, which.states "The right of the
subdivider to file multiple Final Maps shall not limit the authority of the local agency to
impose reasonable conditions relating to the filing of multiple Final Maps," any multiple
final maps filed by the subdivider on this tract shall fully and independently conform to all
provisions of Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 12, Article 10, Subdivision of Real
Property. :
25. The developer/owner shall obtain any and all permits required for the removal or
demolition of any existing building or structure located within the subdivision boundaries.
The developer/owner shall also obtain any and all permits required for the proper
abandonment/closure of any existing water well, septic tank/leach field or cesspool, and
irrigation pipeline on the subject property. All such permits shall be obtained prior to
commencement of tract grading work, in accordance with Chapter 13 of the Fresno
Municipal Code.
26. If archaeological and/or animal fossil material is encountered during project surveying,
grading, excavating, or construction,work shall stop immediately.
If there are suspected human remains, the Fresno County Coroner shall be immediately
contacted (business hours: 559-268-0109; after hours the contact phone number is 559-
488-3111 for the Fresno County Sheriffs Department). If remains or other
archaeological material is possibly Native American in origin, the Native American
Heritage Commission (phone number 916-653-4082) shall be immediately contacted,
and the California Archaeological Inventory/Southern San Joaquin Valley. Information
Center(phone number 805-644-2289)shall be contacted to obtain a referral list of
recognized archaeologists. An archaeological assessment shall be conducted for the
project, the site shall be formally recorded, and recommendations made to the City as to
any further site investigation or site avoidance/preservation measures.
If animal fossils are uncovered, the Museum of Paleontology at U.C. Berkeley shall be
contacted to obtain a referral list of recognized paleontologists. An assessment shall be
conducted by a paleontologist;.if the paleontologist determines the material to be
significant, a recommendation shall be made to the City as to any further site
I
investigation or preservation measures.
27. Apportionment of Special Assessment: If, as part of this subdivision,.a division will be
made of any lot or parcel of land upon which there is an unpaid special assessment
levied under any State or local law, including a division into condominium interest as
f
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
..Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 6
' l
defined in Section 783 of the Civil Code, the developer/owner shall file a written
application with the City of Fresno Director of Public Works, requesting.apportionment of
the unpaid portion of the assessment or pay off such assessment in full _4
If the subdivider elects to apportion the assessment, the application shall contain the
following information:
a. A full description of each assessed lot, parcel or interest to be divided and of how.
such lot, parcel or interest will be divided;
b. A request that the Engineer apportion the amount remaining unpaid o the
assessment in accordance with applicable law; and
c. Written consent of the owner(s) of each such lot, parcel, or interest to the requested
apportionment.
The application shall be filed prior to the approval of the Final Map(s) by the City and
shall be accompanied by a fee in an amount specified in the Master Fee Resolution for
each separate lot, parcel, or interest into which the original assessed:lot, parcel or
interest is to be divided. The.fee shall be in an amount sufficient to pay alIpsts of the
City and the Engineer of Work responsible for determining the initial assessment in
making the requested apportionment. f
i
28. The subdivider shall comply with Regulation VIII of the San Joaquin Valley;Air Quality
Pollution Control District for the control of particulate matter and fugitive dust during
construction of this project.
29. Solid waste disposal for the subdivision shall be provided by the City of Fresno. The
method of collection to be utilized in this tract shall be subject to approval of the Solid
Waste Manager. Please see memorandum dated February 23, 2005,for specific
requirements.
PARK SERVICE
30. The developer/owner shall comply with the street tree requirements in the attached
memorandum from the Department of Public Works dated January 27, 2005, for Vesting
Tentative Tract No. T-5232/UGM. These conditions include requirements for median
island landscaping, buffer landscaping and maintenance, outlots, and trailrequirements.
Urban Growth Management Requirements i
31. The subdivider shall be required to pay the appropriate UGM Park Capital Fee at the
time of final map approval. Fee payment may be deferred until time of building permit
issuance in accordance with the requirements of Section 12-4.509-C-3 of the Fresno
Municipal Code.
l
j
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 7
FIRE SERVICE
32. Fire service will be provided by Fresno County Fire Station No. 88, which is located
within a three mile radius.. Fire sprinklers may be required in certain residential
structures that are situated on cul-de-sacs greater than 450 feet in length. The applicant
shall verify this with Fire Department staff prior to final map submittal. The project is
subject to UGM fees for Fire Station No. 15.
33. Provide residential and commercial fire hydrants and fire flows (1500 gpm) per Public
Works Standards with two sources of water.
34. There shall be at least two points of access to the subdivision during construction.
Urban Growth Management Requirements
35. The subdivider shall be required to pay the appropriate Fire Station Capital Fee at the
time of final map approval. Fee payment may be deferred until time of building.permit
issuance in accordance with the requirements of Section 12-4.509-C-3 of the Fresno
Municipal Code.
STREETS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY
36. The subdivider shall furnish to the city acceptable security to guarantee the construction
of the off-site street improvements in accordance with all applicable provisions of the
Fresno Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act.
37. The subdivider shall make provisions for disabled persons in accordance with the
Department of Public Works standards and as required by State law. Handicap access
ramps are required to be constructed in sidewalks at all corners within the limits of the
tract. Where street furniture is located within the sidewalk area (fire hydrants,
streetlights, etc.), a minimum of 48 inches of unobstructed path shall be maintained to
satisfy the American Disabilities Act requirements. If necessary, dedicate a pedestrian
easement to accommodate for the 4-foot minimum unobstructed path requirement.
38. All of the required street improvements shall be constructed and/or installed in
accordance with the City of Fresno Standard.Specifications (2002 Edition).
39. The subdivider shall install all existing and proposed utility systems underground in
accordance with Fresno Municipal Code Section 12-1011(H).
40. The subdivider shall construct an underground street lighting system per Public Works
Standards E-1 and E-2 within the limits of the tract. Spacing and design shall conform to
Public Works Standards for local streets.. Height, type, spacing,.etc., of standards and
luminaires shall be in accordance with Resolutions Nos. 68-187, 78-522, 81-219 and 88-
229 or any modification thereto approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to Final Map
approval. Upon completion of the work by the subdivider and acceptance of the work by
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 62005
Page 8
the City, the street lighting system shall be dedicated to the City. .Submit engineered
construction plans to the Public Works Department for approval.
.41. All dead-end streets created by this subdivision shall be properly barricaded in .
accordance with City standards within seven (7)days from the time the streets are
surfaced.or as directed by the Engineer:.
42. The developer shall comply with Rule 8060 of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District for the control of fugitive dust requirements from paved and unpaved
- roads.
43. Handicap access ramps are required at all corners within the limits of this tract. Identify -
corner cut dedications on all interior streets.
44. All required signing and striping shall be done and paid for by the developer/owner. The
signing and striping plans shall be done per the current Caltrans standards and shall be
submitted along with the street construction plans for this tentative map to the Public
Works Department.
Frontage Improvement Requirements:
General Conditions:
Provide curb ramps at all corners within the limits of this subdivision.,
Underground all existing offsite overhead utilities with the limits of this map in`accordance with
Fresno Municipal Code Section 12-1.011 and Resolution No. 78-522/88-229.
i
Submit the following plans-, as applicable, in a single package, to the Planning ands Development
Department for review and approval: Street Construction, Signing, Striping, Traffic'Signal,
Streetlight, Landscape and Irrigation.
..Major Streets:
Tulare Avenue: Collector(both sides)
45. Dedicate 42' of property, from centerline, for public street purposes within the limits of
this subdivision to meet the current City of Fresno Collector Standards. See Exhibit C
for Tulare east of out-lot I.
46. Construct concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk to Public Works Standard P4 .The
sidewalk pattern shall.be constructed to.a 10-foot residential pattern.
l -
47. Construct twenty (20)feet of permanent paving (measured from face of curb)within the
limits of this subdivision.
I
{
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79 -
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 9
48. Construct an underground street lighting system to Public Works Standard E-1 within the .
limits of this subdivision. Spacing and design shall conform to Public Works Standard E-
8 for Collector Streets:
49. Relinquish direct vehicular access rights to Tulare Avenue from all lots within this
subdivision.
Kings Canvon Road: Arterial(State Route 180)
50. East of Fowler(4-lanes): Dedicate 55'-57'and of property, from center line
West of Fowler(6-lanes) Dedicate a total of 106' (14'-12'-12'-16-12'-12'-12'-6'-10')
north of the existing frontage island curb face, for public street purposes within the limits
of this subdivision to meet the City of Fresno's Arterial Standards. An additional 9' of
right of way are required adjacent to the bus bay at Fowler for a total of 115'.
51. Construct a concrete Multi-Purpose Trail in accordance with Planning and Development
and Public Works Standards P-59 and P-60. Identify and provide a cross section for the
proposed Multi-Purpose Trail (bike/pedestrian) on plans and submit to Traffic
Engineering for review prior to Planning Commission.Hearing:
52. ' Construct concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk to Public Works Standard P-5. The
sidewalk pattern shall be constructed to a 10-foot residential pattern.
53. Construct an 80 foot bus bay curb and gutter at the northwest corner of Kings Canyon
Road/Fowler Avenue to Public Works Standard P-73, complete with a 10 foot monolithic
sidewalk.
54. Construct twenty(20)feet of permanent paving (measured from face of curb)within the
limits of this subdivision.
55. Construct an underground street lighting system to Public Works Standard E-1 within the
limits of this subdivision. Spacing and design shall conform to Public Works Standard
E-7 for Arterial Streets.
56. Relinquish direct vehicular access rights to Kings Canyon Road from all lots within this
subdivision.
Fowler Avenue: Arterial
57. Dedicate 110'-114' of property, centered on section line, for public street purposes
within the limits of this subdivision.to meet the City of Fresno's Arterial Standards
a. Construct concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk to Public Works Standard P-5:
Construct sidewalk to a ten (10)foot residential pattern.
58. Construct a concrete Multi-Purpose Trail, (Planning to identify which side of the
street.) in accordance with Planning and Development and Public Works Standards P-
a,. - 59 and P-60. Identify and provide a cross section for the proposed Multi-Purpose Trail
jj
l
o U Permit N -
Tentative Tract Ma No. 5232/Condifi nal Use Pe m t o C 04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005 - -
Page 10
(bike/pedestrian) on plans and submit to Traffic Engineering for review prior to Planning
Commission Hearing. A dedicated Multi-Purpose Trail Easement is required with the
map. The Multi-Purpose Trail will substitute for the sidewalk requirement.
59. Construct twenty(20) feet of permanent paving within the limits of this subdivision:
60. Construct eighty(80) foot bus bay curb and gutter at the northeast and southwest
corners of Fowler and Fancher Creek Avenues to Public Works Standard P-73,
complete with 10-foot monolithic sidewalks.
.61. Construct an underground street lighting system to Public Works Standard E-1 within the .
limits of this subdivision. Spacing and design shall conform to Public Works Standard E
7 for Arterial Streets
62. Relinquish direct vehicular access rights to Fowler Avenue from all lots within this
subdivision.
Fancher Creek Avenue: Scenic Drive (both sides)
63. Dedicate 90'-99 , 96'-105' and 139' of property for public street purposes within the
limits of this subdivision to meet the City of Fresno's Standards. A transition is required
at the west end where Fancher Creek intersects Tulare. (existing 42''-42').i
64. Construct concrete curb and gutter and a 6' wide sidewalk to Public WorkslStandard P-5.
65. .`Construct twenty(20)feet of permanent paving within the limits of this subdivision.
- t
66:. Construct an underground street lighting system to Public Works Standard�E-1 within the
limits of this subdivision. Spacing and design shall conform to Public Work Standard
E-7 for Arterial Streets:
j
67. Relinquish direct vehicular access rights to Fancher Creek Drive from'all lots within this
subdivision.
Armstrong Avenue: Scenic Collector(both sides).
68. Dedicate 55% 57' of property, from center line, for public street purposes within the
limits of this subdivision to meet the City of Fresno's Standards
69. Construct concrete curb and gutter and sidewalk to Public Works Standard;P-5,
70. Construct sidewalk to a ten (10)foot residential pattern.
71. 'Construct twenty(20)feet of permanent paving within the limits of this subdivision.
i
72. Construct an underground street lighting system to Public Works Standard E-1 within the
limits of this subdivision. Spacing and design shall conform to Public Works Standard E-
7 for Arterial Streets.
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005.
Page 11
71 Relinquish direct vehicular access rights to Armstrong Avenue from all lots within this
subdivision.
Interior Streets:
74. Design and.construct all curb, gutter, sidewalk (both sides), permanent paving, cul-de-
sacs, and underground street lighting systems on all interior local streets to Public Works
Standards. Sidewalk patterns shall comply with Public Works API Standards for fifty
(50), fifty-four(54), fifty-six (56), and sixty (60)foot streets.
75. Identify comer cut dedications for handicap.ramps at all intersections.:
76. Any temporary dead-end streets created by this subdivision shall be properly barricaded
in accordance with the Pubic Works Standard P-44.
Specific Mitigation Requirements:
77. This tract.will generate 514 a.m. /693 p.m. peak hour trips, therefore, a Traffic Impact
Study (TIS) is required to comply with the mitigation measure requirements of the 2025
General Plan circulation element. A Traffic Impact Study has been prepared and :
submitted to Traffic Planning: Comply with the attached response letter from the Traffic
Engineering Manager, dated October 15, 2004. See Exhibit D.
78. Relinquish.direct vehicular access rights to:
a. the north property line of lot(s) 512, 530, 674
b: .the south property line of lot(s) 511
c. :the east property line of lot (s) 1,173, 231, 242, 341 536, 342.
d. the west property line of lot (s) 174,209, 225, 232, 239, 378 and 535.
79. The intersection of
a. Kings Canyon/Sunnyside shall be limited to right-in and right-outturns.. Construct a
Median Island to prohibit left turns from Sun nyside.Avenue'
b. Kings Canyon/Renu and Kings Canyon/Bergan: shall be limited to right-in and right-
out turns. ..
80. The first order of work shall include a.minimum of two points of vehicular access to the
major streets for any phase of this.development.
81. Irrigation/Canal Requirements: The developer shall enter into an agreement with the
Fresno Irrigation District providing for piping the canal(s) and submit an executed copy of
the agreement or commitment letter from FID to the Planning and Development
Department. All piping shall be located outside of the proposed street right of way.
Any piping across city streets shall be rubber gasketed reinforced concrete pipe
`(RGRCP) constructed perpendicular to the street. Submit engineered plans to Pubic
Works Department, Engineering Division for review and approval. Please see
memorandum dated December 2, 2004.
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 12 .
1
82. Full offsite improvements on the north side of the remainder on the southeast corner of
Fowler and Fancher Creek Avenues shall be required for public health and safety and
the orderly development of the surrounding area. Reference"The Subdivision Map
Act", Chapter 1, Section 66424.6.(Route to school)
83. Full offsite improvements on the west side of the remainder on the northeast corner of
Fowler and Fancher Creek Avenues shall be required for public health and safety and
the orderly development of the surrounding area. Reference "The Subdivision Map
Act", Chapter 1, Section 66424.6. (Route to school) j
84. Proposed Roundabout: Shall not be approved until further studies clearly indicate that
such will not exceed the City's accepted LOS "D" in the year 2025, ad indicated in the
response to the Traffic Impact Study, dated October 15, 2004, from the Traffic
Engineering Manager.
85. Armstrong Avenue: Construct a concrete median island to match existing.
86. Laverne Avenue: Construct a frontage island in accordance with Public Works Standard
P-16.
87. Design interior streets using a 250' minimum radius.
88. Sunnyside Avenue: Design and construct a median island and bulb-out(choker) of
Outlot B. See Exhibit B.
i
89. Sunnyside Avenue: Design and construct a mini circle at Inyo. See Exhibit E.
90. Design and construct a Major Street Bridge (full span) at the intersection iof Fancher
Creek and the Fancher Creek No. 6 Canal.
Fancher Creek Avenue: Scenic Drive
a. Construct center sections of asphalt paving and a 16' raised concrete Median Island
within the limits of this subdivision. Construct 250' left turn pockets at all major
intersections. Details of said street shall be depicted on the approved tentative tract
map. Dedication shall be sufficient to accommodate arterial standard and any other
grading or transitions as necessary based on a 40MPH design speed.
b. Install three signal poles with 150-watt safety lights to Public Works Sta,dards at the
intersection with Tulare.
c. Install three signal poles with 150-watt safety lights to Public Works Standards at the
9 P Y 9
intersection with Armstrong.
d. Coordinate design and alignment with Tentative Parcel Map 2004-36.
i
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 13 = .
UGM Requirements:
91. This Map is in UGM major street zone.D-1/E-2; therefore pay all applicable UGM fees.
a. Tulare Avenue: Collector
92. Dedicate and construct (2)two center section travel lanes with 250' left turn lanes, at all
major intersections. An additional 6' of paving shall be required adjacent to the 250' left
turn lanes. Dedication shall be sufficient to accommodate additional paving and any
other grading or transitions as necessary based on a 40 MPH design speed_. See
Exhibit C for.Tulare east of outlot l:
Kings Canyon Avenue: Arterial (West of Fowler-6-lanes) (East of Fowler-4-lanes)`
93. Dedicate and construct (2)two 17' center section travel lanes and a raised concrete
Median island within the limits of this subdivision. Construct a raised concrete median
with 250' left turn pockets at all major intersections. Details of said street shall be
depicted on the approved tentative tract map. Dedication shall be sufficient to'
accommodate arterial standard and anyother grading or transitions as necessary based
.on a 55 MPH design speed.
Fowler Avenue: Arterial
94. 'Dedicate and construct (2) two 17' center section travel lanes and a raised concrete
Median island within the limits of this subdivision. Construct a raised concrete median
with 250' left turn pockets at all major intersections (Fowler/Tulare and Fowler/Fancher
Creek). Details of said street shall be depicted on the approved tentative tract map.
Dedication shall be sufficient to accommodate arterial standard and any other grading or
transitions as necessary based on a 45 MPH design.speed.
95. Dedicate and construct the two center 17-foot lanes separated by a.16' median.
Construct a raised concrete median with a 250' left turn pocket for southbound traffic at
Kings Canyon.
96. Design and construct a Major Street Bridge at the intersection of Fowler and the
Fancher Creek No. 6 Canal.
97. Install 2 signal poles with 200-watt safety lights to Public Works Standards at the
intersection of Fowler/Kings Canyon.
Armstrong Avenue: Scenic Collector(both sides)
98. Dedicate and construct (2) two 17' center section travel lanes and a raised concrete
Median island.within the limits of this subdivision. Construct a raised concrete median
with a. 200' left turn pocket at Fancher Creek Details of said street shall be depicted on
the tentative tract map. Dedication shall be sufficient to accommodate arterial. standard. ..
and any other grading or transitions as necessary based on a 40 MPH design speed.
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 14
SANITARY SEWER SERVICE +
99. The nearest existing sewer main is a 39-inch sewer main in South Fowler Avenue and
an 8-inch main located in East Tulare Street. The following conditions are,required to
provide sanitary sewer service to the tract.
i
100. Construction of a 12-inch sewer main in East Fancher Creek Avenuel west from South
Fowler Avenue to South Bundy Avenue.'
1
-101. Construction of a 10-inch sewer main in East Fancher Creek Avenue west from South
Bundy Avenue to.South Sunnyside Avenue.
102. Sanitary sewer mains shall be extended within the proposed tract provide sewer service
to each lot created.
103. Separate sewer house branch shall be provided to each lot created within the
subdivision..
104. All public sewer facilities shall be constructed in accordance with Public Works
Department standards, specifications and policies:
105. A preliminary sewer design layout shall be prepared by the Developer's Engineer and
submitted to the Department of Public Utilities for review and conceptual approvals prior
to submittal or acceptance of the developers final map and engineered plan and profile
improvement drawing for City review: ;.
106. Abandon all existing on-site private sanitary sewer systems.
i
107. Engineered improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer shall be
submitted for Department of Public Utilities review and approvals for proposed additions
to the City Sewer System.
Sanitary Sewer Fees
108. The following sewer Connection Charges are due and shall be paid for the Project;
a. Sewer Lateral Charge
b. Oversize Sewer Area: #37
c. Trunk Sewer Charge: Fowler
d. Wastewater Facilities Charge(Residential Only)
Urban Growth Management Requirements
109. Sewer connection charges are due and shall.be paid for the project.
I
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval _
April 6, 2005 .
Page 15
WATER SERVICE
The portion of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 located west of South Fowler
Avenue is within the service area of the Bakman Water Company. The subdivider
shall meet with officials from Bakman to determine.water service requirements for
this portion of the tract.
110. The nearest existing water mains to serve the site area 16-inch main located in South
Fowler Avenue, a 14-inch main in East Tulare Avenue and a 14-inch main located in
Kings Canyon Road. Water facilities are available to provide service to the site subject
to the following requirements
111 Construct a 14-inch transmission grid water main (including-installation of city fire
hydrants) in East Fancher Creek Avenue from North Fowler Avenue to the east
boundary of the tract at East Tulare Avenue.,
1.12. Construct a 14-inch transmission grid water main (including installation of city fire
hydrants) in.North Armstrong Avenue from East Fancher Creek Avenue east to the
existing 14-inch.water main in North Armstrong Avenue.
113. Construct a'1.4-inch transmission grid water main in.South Page Avenue from East.
Tulare Avenue north across Fancher.Creek to the existing 12-inch water main in North
Sunnyside Avenue.
114. Construct a 14-inch transmission grid water main in East Tulare Avenue from East
Fancher.Creek Avenue east to the existing 14-inch water main in East Tulare Avenue.
115. Construct a 14-inch transmission grid water main in East Fancher Creek Avenue from
East Tulare Avenue southeast to South Sunnyside Avenue.
116. Construct a.14-inch"transmission grid water main in South Sunnyside Avenue from East
Fancher Creek Avenue.south to Kings Canyon Road.
117. Water mains (including installation of City fire hydrants) shall be:extended within the
proposed tract to provide water service to each lot created.
118. Separate water services with meter boxes shall be provided to each lot created.
119. Construct-a water supply well(s) on a site(s) dedicated to the City of Fresno. The well(s).
shall be capable of producing a minimum total demand of 600 gallons per minute,
sufficient to serve peak water demand for the project. Well site(s) shall be of a size and
at a location acceptable to the Water Systems Manager. The cost of acquiring the well
site(s) and construction of the well(s) shall be reimbursed from UGM Water Supply Well
Service Area Fund 501s, in accordance with established UGM policies.
i
Tentative Tract Ma P No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79 >'
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 16'
120. Water well construction shall include wellhead treatment facilities, if required. The cost
of constructing wellhead treatment facilities shall be reimbursed from',UGM Wellhead
Treatment Service Area Fund 501 s, in accordance with established UGM policies.
121. Existing agricultural wells within the boundaries of the proposed development shall be
sealed and abandoned in compliance with the California.Well Standards, Bulletin 74-90
or current revisions, issued by California Department of Water Resources,land City of
Fresno standards.
122. Two independent sources of water, meeting Federal and State Drinking Water Act
Standards, are required.to serve the tract including any subsequent phases thereof. The
two-source requirement may be accomplished through any combination ofwater main
extensions, construction of supply wells, or other acceptable source&of water supply
approved by the Water Systems Manager.
123. All public water facilities shall be constructed in accordance with Department of Public
Works standards, specifications, and policies.
124. Engineered improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer are required for
proposed additions to the city water system.
Water Fees
125. The following water connections charges and fees shall be paid for the protect:
a. Wet-ties,water services, and meter(s) installations to be performed by the City.Water
Division
b. Frontage Charge
c. Transmission Grid Main Charge
d. Transmission Grid Main Bond Debt Service Charge.
e. Service Areas: No. 501 and No 308
f. UGM Water Supply Areas: No. 501.and No. 308
Urban Growth Management Requirements
126. Payment of appropriate water connection charges at the time of final map approval
subject to deferral to building permit issuance as appropriate.
Public Utilities Department, Solid Waste Division
127. The owners, lessees or other.tenants of the residential`dwellings must, on service days
before 6:00 a.m., place their solid waste containers at the edge of the curb
approximately four(4)feet apart and,not blocking any vehicle accesses in accordance
with the City of Fresno's Solid Waste Management Division Standards. Nolsolid waste
container nor residential rubbish shall be allowed to remain at the curbline after 8:00
p.m. on the collection day. I
f
I
i
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 17
128. Developer shall provide a turning template for the round-about located on North Fowler
and Fancher Creek Avenues. The round-about shall be large enough to accommodate
a solid waste truck that is approximately 35 feet long, 10.5 feet wide and has a turning
radius of 44 feet.
129. There shall be no parking allowed in the street, in any cul-de-sac, on the solid waste
service day. -All lots that are part of a cul-de-sac shall be clear of all vehicles by 6:00
a.m..
a. South Stanford Avenue, Lots 276, 277. 278, 279,280, 281, and 282
b. 'South Fordham Avenue, Lots 292, 293, 294, and 295 `
c. East Fillmore Avenue, Lots 305, 306, 307 and 308
d. East Platt Avenue, Lots 330, 331, 332, and 333
e. East Kerckoff Avenue, Lots 426, 427, 428, and 429
f. East Fillmore Avenue, Lots 469, 470, 471, and 472
g. East Platt.Avenue, Lots 482, 483, 484, and 485
130. There shall be no dead end streets. All dead end streets shall be turned into a cul-de-
sac. All cul-de-sac rules will apply.
131. Project phasing. During the phasing process, all streets shall connect to one another or
a temporary.turnaround shall be provided until the street runs through. Turnaround shall
be large enough to accommodate a solid waste truck with a turning radius of 44 feet.
132. The developer shall redesign the cul-de-sac at the end of South Laverne, along outlot
"U„ or provide an exit at this.end.
133. Details required on the frontage road along South Laverne Avenue. Solid waste
requires 18 feet of unobstructed clearance in the path the truck travels.
Fresno Irrigation District
134. Comply with'-the memorandum dated December 2, 2004 from the Fresno Irrigation
District.
Right-of-Way Acquisition
135. The developer will be responsible for the acquisition of any necessary right-of-way to
construct any of the required improvements.
a. Rights-of-way acquisition shall include any rights-of-way necessary for proper
drainage, signing, pole relocation, and shoulder grading. In general, this will require
right-of-way to be provided approximately 10 feet outside the travel lane. The exact
requirement must be determined at the project design stage based on the existing
conditions and-detailed design information.
b. In the event an acquisition of any easement or right-of-way is necessitated by the
subject development, said acquisition will be accomplished prior to final Map
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
`: . Page 18
approval..The developer/owner should contact the Real Estate Section of the Public
-Works Department to receive procedural guidance in such acquisitions.
c. Should such acquisition not be accomplished by the subdivider prior to Final Map
approval, the subdivider must request and grant to the City the full authority to
attempt acquisition either through negotiation or through its power of eminent
domain. The subdivider shall furnish to the City Public Works Department,
Engineering Division/Real Estate Section, an appraisal report or'a request for an
estimated appraisal amount (to be determined by the City of Fresno Real Estate
Section) prior to preparation of a Subdivision Agreement.
d. The subdivider shall submit adequate security in the form of a cash deposit to
guarantee payment of all costs associated with the acquisition, including staff time,
attorney's fees, appraisal fees, court costs, and all related expenditures and costs
necessary to effect the acquisition of such easements or rights-of-way.
FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE
137. The subdivider shall be required to pay any applicable storm drainage fees to comply
with Fresno Municipal Code.Chapter 13, Article 13.
138.. The subdivider shall be required to comply with the specific requirements imposed by
the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District(FMFCD)for the subdivision,or any
amendments or modifications to those requirements which may be grantedby the
FMFCD Board of Directors, pursuant to Section 13-1307 of the Fresno Municipal Code..
These requirements are identified in the District's letter to the Planning and,Development
Department dated January 21, 2005.
139. Any temporary ponding basins constructed or enlarged to provide service to the
subdivision shall be fenced in accordance with City standards within seven (7) days
from the time the basin becomes operational or as directed by the City Engineer.
.Temporary ponding basins will be created through a covenant between the City and the
Developer prior to final map,approvai. Maintenance of the temporary'ponding basin
shall be by the Developer until permanent service for the entire subdivision is provided.
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
140. The developer/owner shall comply with the requirements in the letter from the.San
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District dated November 24, 2004; for EIR NO.
10133 as it pertains to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM.
CLOVIS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
141. Comply with letter from Clovis Unified School District dated March 9, 2004. The letter
states that current development fees for residential uses are $2.53 per square foot. The
project will be subject to the fees in place at the time of development. Clovis Unified is
considering revising its fee schedule. The applicant shall contact the school district to
coordinate location of pedestrian gates for schoolchildren at both the existing Fancher
r
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional_Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 19
Creek Elementary School and the proposed new elementary school site located on
Fancher Creek Avenue.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
142. The City of Fresno Historic Preservation Project Manager required that an historic study
be completed for the project site because there were structures on the site which were
dated pre-1954. A historic study was completed by Jon L. Brady of J&R Environmental
Services. The study concluded that the buildings on the site do not.meet the CEQA
definition of a "historical resource"; therefore, the buildings may be demolished.
URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS (GENERAL)
143. The developer of property located within the UGM boundaries shall comply with all
sewer;.water and street requirements and pay all applicable UGM fees imposed under. .
the Urban Growth Management process (with appropriate credit given for the installation ...
of required UGM improvements) in accordance with the requirements of State Law as
related to vesting tentative tract maps.
144. The developer will be responsible for the relocation or reconstruction of any existing
improvements or facilities necessary to construct any of the required UGM
improvements.
DEVELOPMENT FEES AND CHARGES
145. This project is subject to the following development fees and charges:
PARKS DEPARTMENT FEE / RATE
a. Street Tree Landscape Plan Review fee $56.00
b: . Street Tree Installation fee $129:00/tree
c.. City installed tree
d. Street Tree Inspection fee $30.00/tree
e. Developer installed tree
f. Maintenance District Plan Review fee $176.00
g. Maintenance District Inspection fee $305.00
h. Reinspection Fee $29/Hour
FRESNO METROPOLITAN FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT FEE / RATE
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 20-
i. Metropolitan Flood.Control District Fee " Contact FMFCD for new
gees. Rates increased as of
March 1, 2003
SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES FEE.RATE
j. Lateral Sewer Charge . $0.10/sq. ft. (to 100' depth)
k: Oversize Charge $0.05/sq. ft. (to 100' depth)
1. Trunk Sewer Charge $344/living unit
Service Area: Fowler_
m. Wastewater Facilities Charge $2,119/living unit
n. Copper Avenue Sewer Lift Station Charge N/A
o. Fowler Trunk Sewer Interim Fee Surety N/A
P. . House Branch Sewer Charge N/A
q Millbrook Overlay Sewer N/A
WATER CONNECTION CHARGES FEE RATE
r. Service Connection Charge Fee based ons,service(s) and
meter(s) sizes specified by
owner; fee for service(s)
and Meter(s) established by
the Master Fee Schedule.
S. Frontage Charge $6.50/lineal foot
9 9
t. Transmission Grid Main Charge $643/gross acre
U. Transmission Grid Main Bond Debt
Service Charge $243/gross acre
V. UGM Water Supply Fee
Service Area: 501-S (203.68 ac.) $582/living unit
Service Area: 308 (30.32 ac.) . $563/gross acre
w. Well Head Treatment Fee $238/living unit j
Service Area: 501 1
x. Recharge Fee $75/living unit ; j
Service Area: 501
Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/Conditional_Use Permit No. C-04-79
Conditions of Approval
April 6, 2005
Page 21
y. 1994 Bond Debt Service $244/living unit
Service Area: 501
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
x. Northeast Fresno Policing Area N/A
xi.. Traffic Signal Charge $414:69/living unit
URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FEE RATE/CHARGE*
z. UGM Fire Station Capital Fee $605/gross acre (R-1)
Service Area: 15 $2277/gross acre (R-2)
aa._ UGM Park Fee $2392/gross acre (R-1)
Service Area: 2 $4785/gross acre (R-2)
bb. Major Street Charge $3531/adj. acre
Service Area: D-1/E-2 '
cc. Major Street Bridge Charge $196/adj. acre
Service Area: D-1/E-2
dd. UGM Grade Separation Fee N/A
ee. Trunk Sewer Charge N/A
Service Area: Fowler
gg. *Street Acquisition/Construction Charge N/A
Miscellaneous
146. Please contact Fresno Area Express regarding bus bay locations along Kings Canyon
Road.. Please note the comments made by FAX regarding Vesting Tract No. 5232 in
the memorandum dated.December 7, 2004.
147. Please comply with the memorandum from Fresno County Environmental health dated
December 8, 2004.
148. Consult with PG&E regarding easement issues and potential requirements. Please note
comments in the memorandum dated December 13, 2004.
KAMaster ResMact 5232-COA
LO
o �
04 c Wcu
ff
!
Qzm c �
O Q J W Q
Za LL o
O '� O x c >
tU
rn
a) U
7
LY
C o (L)
- O
U ~
O >' Z Z O
U V W W
22 aaci c .
� w m a) .-0
ap Cl) (U
o` -o 'Q
c c a .
a m
c o -o >. a) a) o �; a) >, a) a) a) rn p -o
uic CU - £ cN ° cu cu cu .- •FNm
Wim . c � � _DMCUlu (n C c occ rnc
�.: cu � � p 'a) c: N w cpn oj:? L ° 'uc-ia
J N) oa) >_.� CU � cC a) CU p tea)
p C r U .�
N CU O CU c .� p cn U p a) p' a) c
M 2 m c <n N N N � . cpi -0 " -0 °- N (D
cu o o � c N,. >
a) o
U m '� c � c .� °-N o.— � � cu a) cU c
o � 3v oma- o c ui p � ,� vim L cn
p . c N > L ' N
Z > L cu p 4) m . . m •X > v c o � c �� 3 cu
mz 0 � . 0 (n cEc`na (nc (n � � � ° � N0 Nco
= W Z = c p � cU -L j L p cU N O N
W � O (n ° m n o 3 p ami c 'a�i � a- "A) � o rn
m m ' x ._) o .. r
Qv voi a7 L cu 0 o' � -o .. c L <n U �_
ZZ o o •- p aE rnpL cu cn .� '� ° o p
m � � .4) L LL tiX 'y o _0 � rn� 2 c ,o cn - � o
W 'a L C'. a) L -C p a) p c `� a) c 'p O "O (U C a)
0) CU C N .. o ll -0 a) ado' (� cn a x cn 0 -0 � 'o in " -0 L � - 0
[� C -0 • L I 'o
NU _o � � � ¢¢ c > a) fl- a� a) E � � cu
c cp � "ao-
W' � � m=3 0 ` � 3u m - c ca � � o � � ° cn `+ m CU
An c � c aci .p LL 2 c p 0 LL p p c cu a aa)) a) � � c 0
Z �° ' - > c °) mL 0) C. a) o- p U U °- mom
Q o• N o 'cc C L p N N U (U C N U C p (U r. L rL a) a)
(� CU 0
- :aa)) E � m � 'N aai o a (n m a`n c—0 aa) 3 E mai
cu E -o inL ._ 0 cuN rnmmpc0a o--oU
p cu
cr) Z cm m y- c c � :o E rn � �'N 'x m °' ? � � m a) c
o Z
(n a- cUcnoEY .a) cp00 - a) o .D �
o Z a) a) o.� a � o o � c�a � .o a`ni '� m` .� � ° o N ui ` O
Z.t5 Q cn .a L a U � 'O p T a) fl-•- 1] ' U cu a)
U J U) p Q o U O C L rn rn cn -o U L ` Q c .0 y �'
o .� a � � cU � 3Qca-o _a.� f° — ccN =3-C QU •- c ._ C 'C
CL a) a) c ai� � •N p o 3 � � p a) o p ,
a) a - c � � � � cu.mQ � ,NL c �.S o -o p C a E cL
Q N U o ti c C a) c cn O ;_ N d) N > C cu u) O C
` in Q•` cu o _ m. L U L m cCn
na a.� m �'c � � aoo � � vMimm3Qaic° � m °) m � �
E o 2 ... N a a Q cn cn in a) L -o -o . LL
> —a°) ° Nmaoip_ pU °) '> >'� $ op � � � p00, atop
� p Q p .a) •- cu. 0 Q ,�U .c cO ca E > c 0 ;- a- _ a) .
EY _ EU c LLL U Cu a)c n o" �- C E mNU
p `� L Q) L c cn '0 'r a cu -675 a) -p L o N L cn L cu
•� U N H w H a)'= a LL cu U Q Q N CU H U CU U o o H LL cu
c 0, U
LL! v p a .- N M d LO (D f�
Tac = . O
ii
U- W ~
U) N
O. C_
N W 0
m
L Q 0 (U E
CL J W rn.Q
Z ¢ d Li. C O
C �'
oL O cm
Ca Uj ap
o = .
Q
00
cv w E
a)
o • ZZ o
UU 2 CLCL aci c
� w `° Wo
J O U) cU
d L C U
O -0
0-
Cl-
cc C_cc
� c L Cl) 0) cn.0) 0) Q) c cn
N OL 0 C'' c CU c u cu cu C U CU C
O. L a) O •> L -0 C "E cn N cn 9 � .O
c a) C (U .. V O -p s L cU X cu a)
N0 � cU rn 0 a) n cn 0 O L O a) "0
_ L C .. U .> N a) 0 . a) O Q Q O
J a) C C 0 c 0 2: E cu E -c-
> t9
Y " j L cu p cu Q C- E +� N (C9 CU
E a�
V m to L c a) _ 0) L L >, o O C > (D
V O>.O E > : O Q O cua) 0 •X > O cn "O C a) CU cn �
�- O +- cn +� c Q) C C " C
0 (7 CU CU cu
0 c9 O C_ m cn N .' Qc o (9 . N E c cu L
Z +�.c C_ Q U C_.. E C Q (U. ::.. (U a) - O c a) cu
-0 a) a) CC a? 0 cn c a) L � m cn c'
W Z — O '0. "O cu O N U N " "� .. — cu Cl)
OLLJ _j a) c CU (U a) C_ c N-p O (n "O 0 C c (U 0 ,G .
CU -0
ZZ CU -o o L cU • E cu cu
� . — � CU 0Y , L C o E E cn 3
u. O cn c 5 O a) n -00 Y o o cn a) Q -C o C O ;0
LU eco oa� 0 � � a) -0 N a) � cn
Q c c9 Q (c9 00 -0 c 0 O a) rn— c -0 cu > N
Ue o C. cn N -p L C fU cu
< -o0E0 >, c mcn � - -o � cnC, cU L *= cn � �
w a)
CU b c09 C cn = o L O cCU 09 0.�C - — O CU cn
0 0)� a) cn Cu � . E U c `� C_` in a) >' "NO L cn C a) L
Z rn- •3 N rn' N O � c0) C O E D aX) E a) `m rn co a) 0CU
..
O CN -o •- Corn -0 — a) a) ca) oo -o c. aNi m � 0
p •> •O a)CL L L -p L a) cU > Q O cn O O 0 L cu •3 �_L- cn2 cu > O a) '
U C CU .�. Q Q L CL Ocu C � a). cn D U O to C
LD N 0 cn L L. Co O o � 0 0 y -0 c0 a) c O L L 'O U
M (C9 cu cu cn
0 — j ) cu cu C "0 fl (U -Oc^ a) -C- '� cn
C_— C O a) X CU •0' N .- '0 a) CU '0 0 0 N N +.
C Q.CT 3 N L� o s om a"ci -o ° c cn E . . � _0 � mom--- acn mi
i N cn CU — cu E — Z •L C O a) C O Ccl) E cLU cn .••7 a) ocn
N. N _ C_cu cn N.c9 O L J 0 0 -0 C N "0 cn C- C L � � � (U C
ca E cU C L N C w 5 a) � F- J cU O cU � cu >, cu — L 0 N CCL CL to c
E o O (U 0) O C'C u' c Cl) cU cU LCU 0 a) a) a) U -0 O C C '0
'076 > cu Y +� .0. CU N L CU cn a) 0 � U) Y' a) cn E •_C- a) C_ >,"0 F- 0 003 -S -0
N �. C L
p C cn. cu C O N X O �>- Q U C_ cu _ C C- E 0
O '> aEC_Qa) c9Q � u- -Oppc`9Qami C)- 0 0 7
a) ._
U ci -o cn0 -0 H c9 -a
cu x
I` co
LL LL w .
LO ch
CD
04 of 0. t U
Z �Wry-,
T .
d.Q —i w
Z CL
rn �
0
O
LU
cn
m c,
0
Lu
U U W W
2 �
z� w
n.
o cow a) ate) ca0E (n �
o c ca 0 c c 0 -. ca
co Q. o cc ° c°ic � aU �' N
.. � 00 -c o m 0 � v,,.c
Y � c ° � � ° � ` 0 ca r- 0 o � ocu
V E -o — :. o n .. ° .°
w c. c0. 3ca ' � v > �n � co_- = (ncN, � .
M 2 t a) a) °.o C C a) o axi m a Q ca a) l.L C. o
C9 ca c m e U . O O- O E O a) p
+. -0 O cu
Z U a. U C (II D C Fes- cc >+C
.. C (a 3 L ` a) O U c a) '
m Zp E OL a c � ° c a) � aU 0 oV'�
1- ° sca) ciao � co- n :0b ° vi
00 rnrn caOOOc 5Cta)
W .Z rnN ca �'0F C .� C O � p ca O t
>CwO oa s0ca ` 00 Ucn = "
LU < 2, N0 O � ° rn-° E cart U (D 0) : a0
� ° CU cu
H' Nca' ° CU > -0 � c � � c ca ° c .«.
•-
to ) 0 ° oc� � .. coC0 (D00
F- . ca c
_ Eca aZZ .. 0
Q � a •o
g w E c 3 o a� cn cc n `0. (D � o
axi N E °, ca ca — c- 0 ccmwo 4~
Z (D -0 •cinEcc cc v0c-•30 0 () 0 -0
O ai ° > -0 0 0 -0 � � -a0) .0 a� .E -o cu � � cu
Q
cc -a -aCL< caXa34) > c -0cco o () --
0 : .0 3. o cam :,=.r - 0 0 . cow cnc _ cm
1- c `� -d �Ow, c � � O0 - aCL 0)"> Em ' a) 0Ec
c cn a) c v_ ca. a) •- � o c c O c «. _ �- ca =p
CY) Or COcaL_ -00 ° 0 Oc- caoc � o '— ca
-o ma- 0) CL CU ° c � 0 ca 0 •. — c c ca r rn 0
o is N 0 a).— U ' 0 w 5 4 C C UO ca O � cn 0
T U a) O C-CC _0 cB C -0 U O C _ ca a) >,�
Z cn Q)c0 cn- � SOL ` LOc cY0 -0 r0
a� Or o ° 'cc asac° � 00 -oca0 aca � c"ao
0 o cam- c.0 cn0 Dia rn— o � c 0 c 0 — ° a CL
� ' (D cU
cn
ca>iiaaia� rc-ecu
c c • cn o c .
`0 0 c3 m (D Ze c > 0 ° _° c > o _ U 0 � � 0
E 0 � E 0 �° c 'cc°i a�i � c cn
c a�cc � � N .rn•o-a '� E .It
> ca O —N-- O rn 0 c t 0 ccn L ui C E 'C o a) a) -p °O
a) J E O m 'cn 0 cn cn LL ca `c� D � .0. m E c aJ 0 O N
a, o Los0 ra �
EY ca acnUtLF- c0
C N
O
= U U -0 () p)
C N O
w
C: s
C c3 x
U_ W
Lo Nr
cV N W pC c p p c c p
d U Cl) O ca «.. Cl) O ca «.
zma � . L cu
a
Q ¢ p O E O
-1W ocm n on
z a, a � O N•E o cn CL. o
c .5 0 � c c c c
oM Ow � cLamay � c`acao
o = ,
p o c(L) o .aci
.Z3 o w
cU � o > o
o ZZ o aw
U U 2 CL aa) c CL aa) c
LU Ca a) .O t0 O
:r a� :r
o ca o cn
ca
�. o -o .Q a -0CL
a cu aCUcu
C: CMM a cn a rn ami _r_ ami
3 :3 " c � c =3 `
mca arca O � Otm 0) �
0 0
cu
a) N a) 7 7 m 'O co 'O
w c a w _' _ a) cu. ccu
(� Cl) Cl) T c m .-. cQ N N
ca a) a)
ww T c C c w e
cu
CD c 4C . w c c CM
CU =3
E C4
Zc Tu cu cu
cu0 a) mcQ M M
= z arW .o co -o c cp O Q E Q E a) a) N N
W � 0 cu O � 2 � O 'er a ? a ? N= Ns
Q c , _0 i c cQ • cu
Z Z v co a) I > 0 fQ vi fQ uS
tip > 0 E � > -o a� cn � m � m � m � m
LU � � o p` ca -o ff k � � � � c � �
O E —
cn CL aci m e o o aa) CL (D � c � �
LU cn
a � � QU caLo _.N s
m m r a—o) w
N
30 > � V o0 0 ° ° Na—^� cn
Z O N o _ U N N a) (D fQ N a) N
O Wim . °r° O ca rn . -Q -o scca . � cca m � 3 �
1— m � � .olL c °? � ca s0 s0
C¢7 coca - = a o � a' m o = CL o o cu
o
1_- Z o 2 aa) o o c a w a'�= n a� o m
C ca CL
O O r � Q aci d,° —r > � � � o .. �'cad CU cCL ca
C) ~ � � a) >,< a L Q c c c c c -0 c -a c
Q O > a� Q (D o o 5 (D ca M ai ca a) c c
Q c a) � U w 0 O cam cam > 0 0
> 0 � C.o o� � .n n c N rn � s
00 oc 0 4-- nc a) 0a oa am a 'v'
CL U m m.. 0 a) c s cn s a)
a� a p cnE E o a. c cE a) mca � a) ca � Wim. � c�0a
� � z .. E o � � a, of � s � 0sa0 � s � sL
U C O w `� `►- > O w e +- c �.. fQ +- fQ
Q .(D a� a) a) Q a� v ca c ca -C c ca ca c`a c CL
Q mcn � (D a)a) maw mom
E o U 0) c c a) L � -0 a� -a m � � s � OL
� a) a) a) aD m v u� o ca. - c c c CU o CU o
� � LL Cl) � > > > c c. L 0 3 ca ca 3 ca ca .: m 3 � •c 3 -a
a� Q ca Q Q Q- ca W cu r a) s : > a) c a) c
Ems ' > � CL c o c—� rn � rn � G N aN 0)
mai N aim 033E a30 cao -. a ° � cap ° a � °
o — O O m c c
� U (N � � ULLLL rnaEi �j � w ca � � ca � � caws caw
cep U :_ > .. > a) :
LU a) 0-ffiC � a E n E a rn . E
tiW H .� H .� Y
{
LO LO
00 CL c a °'
I
m m a)
N � W p ,c ' p p.
�-
en o m -o
am o cua m ca oQ
ap
oQ -jw o rno. o' aU
— _ cn c
W
0 •� ,� w cCo a 0)
aoc�n
o =
u, —
c p o aci o ac>
_ ..
0
�
>. ~ > �LU E
� �
O = Z Z O O
UU 2 uj C N cL N 0
� J a) .: _ a) :=,
a Cn U O U) U
o` -o o. o.� •Q
m aimCU
--o Lm U) .: 0)
cc cc 0c 0) 0) c c
(U m m o m N cm) .N
N N O N O N O
0 0. 0 0 0 0 m (n c E
L L N ^ a) p c '�
N 0 .. 0 ^ 0 r c -= �._
E
cu
V (a c L O N L
O — O O O c +. N
CO = EL � L � L �U c �ca 0
C 70 CC
V, o ^ o ^ o ^ c ` L
p � � CU L' c,CN ` .D 0
mL L L w I '0 O .
Z O ,. �... o !� in
F_ to C (n cu N a) N I0 c .
_ Z CL a a) a m a) �' p 0 3
�C J O ((aa (_ca (a (a A � aa)) " ca i� � 0)
c Q > c
WZZ m � m _ (aj amnio . o- j �>, a) -
cn Cha
u. 0 u1 o w o , o , ca (13 w, �a o (ten
Q .. a) w- a) E a) J N o
_ W L m L m L m ^ 0) m I(B E O_
.r o .� o o N 0 0 0 -0
o � � � � � _ .: �
Z N N c N m N O c c
a) ..
Lc Lc Lc a) � 3a) � a �
I— (a (a m O L ccII L U
CC a) CIOc ` -=0 =_
m aCL CL - CL -
ch (Q L (Q L O_ . O_'- c U
Ch 'o Cn -0 0) "o CD m L m L c .0 0
0 =O �: O c 0 CU O_ C
CD
Z U L 0 L a) L (a ar �_ �_ a) 0 �)L U
a). oaai � cao- (—ca o.aoi (ca � ° a) (nc- (cv mEcC
o •
Na > ctnL a) c (On (n (n - a) c ma)
- � c
QmmCn > C. mE3 `� (D (nE morn =
.. Q a) a)
O m i w. w.
M C m = C m L c m - .c m +� c c L o `o U
E D U -0 a) O` (n '00 0 'r-00 "00 N L '00 a) •� Q 3 3 .CL
a) m > cL Q .3 c o .3 c o .3 0 �._ c p � � (D E
> m ~- �- (a — (a ..- — 3 m � C1 0 c
a� a) -0 m () m a) m a) -0 a) m — m c � c >.
Q C .O C a) 0 p.L " p,L L- .a C: p,L " X m to O
�c a) =3 -r— rna 0) cum Cno. c `
a) > N pL c � .0 a) (n =o a) N a) CU. N o .a) Q ac a) o
o � Q. a) � (n a) � (n a) � (n a) C: a) � (n �') E - CL
� � � o Q � L. owl o � (a (n � � m N o _ =
cy �_ o N_ U U3Qm
LIJ L E • > • • • • a - '
pct a) o O ,
iiiiW N
06
00 a) Cc CL
Q c Q. . n c -
CL
CD CD _ a)
Nca
W p cp p c0 � ' cp
cn o cu "-' cn c0m "- cn O cu �-
Z0° as Yaa baa
Z a� W� Uc oWW -oQ 0orna
; � ° a-
,
CLCL S n.5 o
NcacaU
CDcc
� 73 > c >0c �
cuca co aa j o CL a
Ua � Ha �
o =
m Z.
� c
0 C oa) 0 C
cU W iE mE -aaE
> o > a) > a).
?� - _- -
2 � aac) o aac) o nac) o
�w
ca a) a) as a) ,
ocncu ocnco 0inm
oa . oma a o � n
` cQ I= cQ
aeras arca arca
CD —Q) > o
tea) c > cn
cm CC �.
a) o fl• 3 U OFD Q)
N p-O O N E
pp
O
c •o m
O O v a _
_ N Co
O oW ca
3
3 c a) . o ` _ . a)
CD C7 a) cm c >+ E N co a) o >
Z . (6'` m p C >O CL U
�- 0 � ` � Co a) U ca E Q) ca
ca
m Z O cu �' a Co o a) " 3 E cn
C as L
W Z "O �: 0 0
.U O N c0 =O O. +. o ` C
WJO cca ? c a) U L . -0 a)Q a)
Q � -a � L -off o 0
u. O (a CO as � 3 c vQi a) � n
w o c a) °� c L -Q) Q) o c �. cn
- 3
coon) � =3 aci � v' o L ' . �. c`a Ta :
CO a) E > c cn �, Q L c
F"' Q U CU -0"O O L U ca �C N .. O co U .
w � o -� aoc x � � � aa)) cna)i as
co (D
a) CL
O U a] — U o .. rn ca «- _ L — L O ca
Q N a) a) L a) "O a) .- — U c_`a t a3 a3
C fl• `O O C L ; N C x,
> aS c`6 - ECD co m . teaCl$ ) .. a) v °)
CV) U O a) O L C c L > > a) a)
CV) �. L- CC L � ._ Oco _ Co
u� . QL .
n � > m c ca3 �. cc 0 _0cn
cn
s .o Vocc.E ` cu
0U .fl cnnLOII a
?
cn jO a) pUa3p 0 — L
0 '6U ) D UL NQa) O
O•
Q L cco —o
`coo c; a `) ccn
aco
CL� m cow- v .- � E cL-c) > � �, � E �
oa oa ado c = .� � � °? � asacioa) Ea) 'n �
E o of 3w °)� E � o v' o � aw 3. 0 v
>
CL =1 � as coN � o ` U �oQ) `n oon
•- a� N a) L "O L o Q)CL CDas �' is to c-
a) � � � is 'cn Co 0 10 —.c u) 75 o a -0 a o
a � as � cv >,_ a) Ea) oN � c cnc`a � � Lc0o� >;
CoQ rn Q. aa)) IL- F--- S0 w a�ici� � " - U x cu
ws
_ � as 3Q asW �
u`a. w M cn co ti w ai ..
od
o � a �a
CD
m:, c
Ncu W 0 '� 0
n U >- �-
z m -V o m
L m a)
a
< 0 0 tfE
-
ZF a a a S o
rn � - _ cnca�'
cc p � � ccco >
° ca W � L - a)
o =
L)
0 o m
i
cU W m E.
a H m .
° zz o :
U L) W W CL C. .
2Z am. c
� Jm0
o .cn m
CL `
-a =
a
- a0CL
ca
m E ,p vi 3
L
cn +. a)
- m
m 3 Y
m o _
c c _
L N
O
C — _ o r N c
J cm U cn a) -0.
Y c
C!«- o d o -o :� o
V c L a) � L c L cn v ° ( o
a� o, o m . — (D ca cm c -o c
.� m
e� = m CL c — o . c � . cn._ a m a) a)
T ms
cn c N 3 m e 0 U
O .0 .. 0 0 asci a) �
❑ gip Nail � >, 0 3m � mo �
~ Z 0 — ca . 0 cmn -0 = co � >, ca
uUi E
O �. o- . m m m m � o o rn rnoo 0
CL o a) c or -o m te a) � -o m
2 — Z fa0 c cn om c c Lasa- m
W cn — — Z'
C: 0) Q,. a L o. m o a--o a�
W � o m 0) N = = .- ca v m c U) aS � F-
Q L
ZZ L '" ° rn.-. cM - � 3 :mom �'o CD
C
m .� E x CD
Q 0caY wxocCD � c m Lm � u mma cCa
> �. cn
� mmo SE.oac m•c0 Ncmca cc0 m .
w ° 3 a)0 m m a aai p 'a) -o cu :a ;_ 0 c
c c N .0 a. m CL -C -C m rn c c cn m
m c o __ c o m - as cn ui m L rnm c �
O ° E c : 6 aa) c me. � c a � C)) a) � °� �
oCL 3 (n d) U) M cnp_ f CCL aN °
QO '� � -Ncnrn U) a0Eoai4- � m >+ umi
p s m o � CP-0 c > cam= c � 0 C.) a°i m a) �
1- � U) voorn o � � m � � m � ° `� a3i � -0
c`� .,. o CU
m c 0. .� -a N S = N rn N a L W a--0 0
N E a) _N E E N 0 cLa a) N E O N y `
ca .2 -0 EE •co � . o3Nm '�nsviEccc3cc m
a ` . c cn 3mmmcnL �' o o � m °) ia
Z �Y m'E m a) c N � N a� ° o o acil a�
r a� c a� E m 3 E t3
CL cn 0 a L > 0
N � co.� 3: 3coma"( o � = E-0 > 8
c, ca
a) E a) c m a) •� -0 cn a� U c — o. m " aa) .C- m a)
Eo Ec -0 a� 0mea) ca`U .NmCLoaa) a ia' toa) s,>
- � cnm • - -a cna). � crnccnU •La) a) aca •-I
� 3ccacc co, � cno, - rn
�. m - m L
EY v, o .. ma� � a�.Noomo0EmE > a) � '= oE �
c ° c .E o c �' a.'v� CL CL N E .L m _ :a o f 0
° (_j � �pt � o �s � mNCa0cr ia) o � ooN �
ws � .. 0 U a.� > 0 a» o � � � w :EpDCL � U,�- U) LL
°
C C c CN c 7d CO 1� Cp 0) C ) r CV C'7 LO �co
U-
cu
W r CN CV CV 04 CV.CV 04
ao ;. ..
oa) a ca a .
o a) a) a)
04cc
d CL
11J p c p p
oQ' -jW � � E rn � .
a — n:.E0 co .
z m w c — � —
c .S � cc > c >
o O ca as as
Cc
La a
ch —
O
p o aa)i o aa)
cU :� a) > aa)) -0
o . zZ o oma- c
UU W W n.c ac 0
_ 2 CL a) Ca) on
J O Ncu- NCU
- p)
2 o -o a 0 -o n
cu � cc4�
` N o �
cu s � s ocu ma' O0
c _ _ _
y 3 ca a) •� 0 a) >, a) 3 a) cu C
cLi c s Z a° c CO 0
w ° 3 �, tea) E ° -oho 0 n `
U . cca00 wcas ` a) En
3 En � Z
W ac a) E � 0 a) L 0 ca •- QOM a)
� — -o `� � o ° me cn
� E Y o � a) ca3 L- CL
F_ p �
cm cu oQc ° - 0Ncm0 � Q- L oc
c m _ a)
mZp o c . N -0 0a)cu a) cm 0 �- - cep `,m > c
0 fn
>CJ0 ° cam- a ° ca a) a) � � ��: � Oa)
c0a) - wacmN � 0 coLa.
Lu _j
° E Hca) 'cu ,� Q > o (n
LZ � c ° ` ° °
cu CL.� .
rL0 �u � 0 00 caicNC ; cu cn
o � o avic0ioL
Q c oaf �= � c > o >> —° "
p a) a as
cn c -o c -o a) c -o c c a) a) 0 -0
wC's cu E °oocu cm= cu CU >—i0s
2 a) cu � 3CLcna� E .-.� cno
ca a — E o ° N c c cn.-o. s a) C � ca '3
z CLcnc L ._ rn c 0 a0 a -0
O aL- L) -,.,e Eii Ir_0 a) 0 � ca cn - o
F- Oc O0 cu
Uco CU a) >, Nc .. Ocn
U_ s � a ca— c00` a) N ° cLa � 3c)0
� � a) Eoa) acEao aa, � -o3 'a
M � a cu I ca a) = >,(D 0 0- E - cu °
o O o ' E a) cc a) a ° � c � 3 cn °� ca Nm o L.
c CDcuas C7 cp caz � as — o 00 � c m
o o a) c C cn L O ca cu OPLL c � a) � L o a
Z c) L O O W cn L E 'c O N 0 M 0 p cn .. s c o rn
O •p N C a3 3 OLL _ (a .� ac a) .0 0
c a) O a) � c c 3 cn
a) Z N W �- .O C O U c O a) o L = O` o O O a)
Q OU M a) (n ca a) a) — 3 c a) rn0 > c a) O � a) c a) ..
Via) >- oa) � E W a) E ` -CcuosE >= >,—a I-- cu a .:
OFu > _j � � U U L- � m aa) 3 'o aim m.
a) O � 0 •c m -o - m a0 ) a0 ,0 p � = p Qm ca.
> L O U
U 0CL
U ° '= a pp c Lmm0 � � .c �
ca) vn. aac cn CU — a)iccL3 � .
ui
0 a) a O U- �C ca U '0 a) O O O cn .....:.
` U N Q ca v' c N a) ._. as N 0 •_ L ca cC -0 0.-0 a)
L- 0 U_ U_ L L L 'X a) ca a)
WLR a_ �'.UL cad""cu c a). LUm E
C CL O O
it. LL cu W 1-- F-N
N W
r ZQ Q _ C C C c
C
a
� �' � — a) cu Ca ca
c
� _ Ow � Q Q
0
cn —
" � c o o � io �
0
c-0 := I0 cu
U U WW a - r L -L Y
2 Gc CL C
\ O O Q +� O
J C > cu O Ncu
(Lp O a) •C L :3
CL= CL
0caac) ca� arca
a) o I
c
F- cn cn O a) C O C ca.-C 0
y C c+0 O (� ` cCa ca U LL
-o = o : O 3 cn ca - b
Y C ca O 4)i : O 'p la 3 U _ c -'
W N U ca
C O O_ L a) C O O a) 00
U O O ca O a) a) � =M C ca cn
cmcn 0 —
cu O -0 o w E c o t 0.
I-- p � = c (D 4) U L 0) con C.) .0 � c �
z Q 'c0 L +-' (0 O -' d N O a) (a L
XWO �_ � � cn� � o a) 3 L � � 0 L � �
W Q � 3 � N o .� � - oa — O Lv L �
cnL � a 0 . CL �a a° m ocnL
z z � � -0 o v E a) u5 L - Cv � C ca
LL _O � c o � � -00 -o — .- - 0ca � Oc
Q ? N N d O 00 -p 0 N cII . 'a) N N ,
C9 ca cn a) O c cm O to a) -C ca 0
-C cu � � 3 � 0 cup . oC � L -- a) c --
g w a) cm ,— cn m •L a iv .- ° 3 ; �--o ami
3 3 c o o c � O a) 2 ', -o E a) —
O N O 0 0cu (n O O � N a) cn cC O
_ C C O -.-0 v O O O O cn c0) E > cu -00 (Ca a) O
� ca ca 0 .2 — cn in U c 3 m E o cu-o (-o -0 a
Q " a-0 cn rn a) L a) cn N
CD OCC � EOa� c -oL cm oc � �aa) co '
0 ca N — n cn 0 � 0 C " aa)) -0 -- m v <n
— — Ca C .3
2 c — — —
cn c
Cl) o � o m '� v_ _O tea) ma) in .'n v� > � c
Cf)r L 'N VC/ V 3 O .O y '� '� a) Ca
� � .� 0 -0 a -. E cn cn 75 0) ca) � NEC oaf
o L 0 O (!1 0 0 - 0 -' (a V V 0 I ca a) Q
U cn L — a) a cd
' a) a) a) o 2 -Ev -C m m co ..o N a) a) r .L
CL � D ? — � N3 -r9w0o, o0 � --a c-acaa) °
�a . Y -. M -o ,3 c L
CL
a) c 3 cn p p 4-- N o i o 0 .2 CL 0 a) cu c iE m N cu
U
N J c ca Z "_" M "C p N (y0 O (a rJ J W O C O
CL a) � o � Z'.0 Ls 3 N oc c 'caTaI- o � O n aNi o
L �.
baaCa > : ° Nw cca � � � > E ° cu Z N0) cni�
�.Q
-C (M O t$ E CU � U o ca cn Hca U ca caCL m cu
Q m coa .S a)
E cn o c .. z o c cn fl. o c° CL c c E 0Q ca ` a) V -0p
OC a) U ca L CO 0 U. ca 0. C �° .a L N '. W U O L CL p
U a�.� ° c.,i ' 0 C o � � .o a (-- - '� c�i � a c
> L O a= U co �, � ) E o X � a) o°O '� � am U 4 cvC� ca
W L �. a a U Q ca cn � CN 42 Q) cn 2 -o d LL ca 0 EL
LL li W M `- N MLn
j
I
tn o
C) �. ._
C) a)
N m w
Z CO
cc a c 0 C
Z ¢ A LL C 1=
c m 2 — a c a)
O � > 06
� ami U > CL (La �
o = ,
N
W
— � 1. p o. ac)
c 0 w E
F- > a) -0 .-
F-
:3 ZZ Oma- c
W W LZ= w E
UU 2 aa) CO Q
J
ca
b N cacm
+� O V C
ca
'O
CC
fa
Cl) C
Y O Y Co
as
W rn3 c
cn = N ca
`- V a) (D
❑
-0 -2 a3
c cm
d ccC
m Z C
w w W
Ed aS
WZ a) cl; 3
W
QCL
0
Z Z 'Oo cn
� O � c �
Co c
Q
_r_ (n
(D
C7 U) o r.
F= Q La
,
w •- 2
ai (D (n
Z ._
O 3
F- w ca 0 0
Q U a) 0 cn
C) L)cc
� � .
.r
W — c
M " cn (1) 0
C) O :3 CL.
ao
cm ca
a)
vas UQ cc c �
cc
CL
E.o U — eco
Co
am
� -0 a) 0
Cap N cn (�
O N E La-) U
N U a3 cQ (Q L
W � Q
O
C
m ?C
s
C_
U- U- W
cri .�
o � Q
NCD
W
oia . Um c
Z n o
Qp CL o
D
ZCL
Q au. � o
o � O � ° >
a) U j CLCLa19 i
o
cn —
w
— � (1)�
0 °
•0 o Ip o
cU � � cn
o z o c -
UU ww ac ca E
22 E a) oa
� w a) .0
a ° ° .�
o -o 'n°
a � ��
o ° ° °
` o
~
C c ° c
76 (D ca c cn o ai o U) a�
rtt ° yJ `
1•- s ° c c ca ca u. cn u. cn U-
J c .m 0) o m c ca CL-0 CD _ � ° ' � o _
— cn
cu CD 0) c .c cu
_o >%°cn cn in U a) U f a� U CD
cu i
� V . E cn
ccq u > c � �' � -D o o -o E ( -o�E ( _0
c z . 0 .. m o c c ca -- -- a� o CD a) o CD a� ° °
0 CU cn co cu >.- rn rn o cn
F.. O � c _0 Y ca a� cn c m (n cn CL a CLCCD n o d
mZp 3 -0 3 c o oCY) o a� o. Eoc E :oc E
2 � a� E a) � ca � .. ca K aci -a -v o 'a) c o o ,c9 ° o .- o
LV -J 0- 0 c n a) a) >, m e rn�cu E s c -0 coi E >, c
Q cn c o 0 0 v 'n L c •. c +- > >. x o �>, x D c x
ZZ � � c ca .cc om � o � o Ec0) Elco EQa)
vi
a o cn
n-0 cu o L0 -o � v EL-a nc .Eac {. E ;a� c Etc
O . � ° aa) n ° c U) C, � c arc carol ° :� 0 ca o .
F- CD cc
Q c E cc U) E c N > v co ,> v ca > v
uj ° •- CD .c rn rn
no a afQi .E c rnm c -o :c -0 CU >4 � >,� CU v
�, E ca cc c n L n . o M a) � v -0 t Ic -o s c .°
Z -0 a� L c o cn c ° a�
0 cCD o E � E � Ec � ns �° ca U,. a, E .' Na, E Ua, E
CD
C7 ' o a� o
t- ca o o a � oc a � m o o.> o > o o ° o £ o o
M � � °� 0 0) CU Zvi ° acaa`� � � � � � °?
mac
.. cn S . o ca ca a) a� c a� c a) c 0
C) � � ° vi Ern �? � � � '- ° N - > � _ off
� .o x -0 � a� > > �, � � � L m � mon CoQ mea
z •E c 0) ca c a� a) .c � n a) cn cn ° �, E ° >, E >. o
a� ca ° ca >,.a a..- rn v a) a� U c o c o c a) c c a) c c a�
CL 0 o ,a) ca ca — c D v :c a) cn a) cn o c ° o is ° ° c ca
a) a- c -o ° ° � csca ° c ° Ec Ec = ca .� ° �. �
•cn - cu ° to Q) c ca in ca in cn Q) 0) cn Q) 0)- cn -0.= 0) -
cu .. .. o ca cn 3 a� n'> . n> -0 ca -o - ca ca ca
c- a -° c crn > ` '` � `c � oo >, a' .o a) o .` ccsC) cn IaLN •L oscn
o c 0 cn a) C O Q? ca 0 a) > >,L Q a +- ° 0 �- p 0 �. .. to
CD > a) ° � - ACL- Xa) inEccu -Ta (a 0) _co Ecncna) 'Ec� cna) E -2
c 0 � N � c v°i � c° c (1)Lm- -— 0 Cc .° ca a°) m ca aa) (D ca as a>i a°i cc cu �
Y. �. U ca Q-0 c`a 3 a) t c" vi 0 cn a 0 0 0 rn-o '0 ` rn-0 'D ti' 0)"0 "0
occE 'eroai L- CU .camc � scocacocaccasMmccas NQ
- U co � va.. � om m Hca .Hm HcncnaHzcnnH
' � � (' cmc xoc � oc
c E {
a� c
Wim .- :2 cis a) L — cn0.. — M ";r LO
C ca X
LL lL W • • • • •
LO N .,
O r' n
N 0) W p
ca
d U m
Z
` Q d o6 a)
CLE
o Q .I W p n
C
z 0, a �, . —
o
c: C: Ooh � .�
� Ca UW ohm
o = > aap
a� U ..
0
p o
= U ca.
0 (j W W 2 ca E
2 � nation
ca
d 0 N ca
-- =3 c) .�
O -0 = -0
CL :3
IL igm -0
vi
-o _0
cacu
-o.-0 Q. o =- :. -o
N cu c° n c CO c L m e
a) ca ca a) N p a) ) � L ..
Y "O �« N E :3N
—
C 1 C L o a) ca O '� O O a)
cn N C `) .0. C cM V ca "0 O �
ch V c a) N O U 0 a) : C N a)
C � E "0 +� � a) a)CIS CCc$ a).ca C.d
O � U N o L O N Z+ ca O
� O � vQ c � cu E Qa) �� cu � �
CU L �L c L
m z � p N N E 0 m � vim m
_ � ~ — a) (n a) c a) Qa . aa)) � E am
W Z ca `' i ca. 0 a) N w N N
X J O , . n u- O N 0 -0 m c — ,� L' a)
WQg � � � t c Hca CU ca 0
Z z c c) N 4) v c a) ° . .
t� O ca a) N - a) L (� ..� o N U U a) n -
W ALL :3 0 p � L � g
o0' EQ) cO
.� Ca
Q '•3 ca a) U O Q� U N ca
W O U c-) c ULO a) (C (� N LL O ..
Z a) ca � ca c . L cn ca ca 3
O. U U L -0 C 0 O O C cn Q)
LL +_ C U
c0.� L p >, c N coq '0 0 p C:) O C
Q3 E
Q � ca 0.` c cn C' cn a) Ca a) a)
O 0 E ca
Q p a) Z N � O O . nac) > CL C:� ,C
r ? •C a) ` 0 '0 i N ca G -0 U Cn n}
cn . E � c n U
Z U n N U -0 'O 0 Q.� C Q) ca CL a) cu ca .0
C a) N a) N `,� C n C C C �'t L "- ca
L +� CCL
C)
N N >,'V .n C) U L N Q
d' a N N n cn L :n = a) N. -0. a) O 0 ca A
v a� ca O ca t ca LL n Y -� 'j cn -0 N cn a)
C ?' 0 n h. cn 0 t L c 'L O in c U ,. a) ca 3 a)
C L
Ea Qua 5 a) in a? m Nam) > b 3 _oN
a) 0 o C o � 0 � ca 0 - 1p cn .4) E 0
�', L o o �, m iii 4oL- m e `� � .'nC N a1) > >,
� o a? ' � n Uoo tea) — C � � o: �_ a) � o � =
�o U Q U n a nca CL -a s < U) 3 0) n �-
CN CY) LO
—
W stl! a0 o) .
C L
ca x
LL LL W
uo ch U a ..
m a
a�
ai C14 a)
U } a p
a > -° cam •;CL m c
CL
Z Q a 1LL. � 0cL� co _ c 0
c .� ca) ca � 'ca� ..
O � c > a_ � c > .::
o ° °
U > FLclQD (L �
o =
p o (ci o m
o w �_
C.) U I— .> 0 -0 > 0 -0 I
o ZZ o = c E o f
UV 2 �Lu Cacio .cc a Cacico
oa
0 ca co CD
-oo -� a o Qocc
-0
c -Ca) --
c
° mai o �- � caoc � � .. f
� � � o cc 0 ca I
a) _ mom •- - I.
L CL
Co ca
W. � Co•E ` C -0 - E. c (D ° c
ca
V Co
N N cn U ? _ .� o U o � co
0 0 0 c � ° �,—= • ca a) °a
rZ w U C c N (� = N a) U
a) cnO cn cn
mZ0 O ° ( 0 �..� -C _C CL H +� •' Co cn ° b .- E c ° Cl) c
_ z a"i c n CoC "_ X cca ° . N ca °
W C N -0 cn .� caw caa (D
X J O :-. c cs (D Cn 0 z c LL cn
Z z -C U •U a. 0 N C fa w Q...E (D ca E o c N —
ca
f w . Q.
° cn . . Q. CD
CL (D oo -c c-)
(D Wca ca -C c ° c 0 cn U rn
F- Q E o ° Lam ° 0- � Ca ° cmcarn
w co ° EQ - c"_a � n Lm � =
Ncn E cn (DOON � _ oa� � ca o
O 3 (Dcac°i ' a) a) ca ccCL cn EowCo (D
-p n.o cn cn 0 ,� E " 0 E ',-
Q (D O` Lm a j 0 L C N .cn C ca
CLIO a� L •- 3
_ a�iso. �� Looe ° cc � � 3a°iu=im �
�_ �� cn :R c L 3 � -0 _ cam os •
co cn ° c E-c c am ° m 7 ms c � � Qi
�
0 000 - � " 0 � o � Cunca3ca
o c "t m c w -o -o --a E c i N -° 2 rn a� ca ca >
Z � (? nLcOn ° -occa <n > Eamcmaca3ca .3ca
o p (D ca -0 U U ui M N 0 U � N ca Lm p U U N
acid . c � � cca c ca � Co �-0 cn
Co a3 � � `t W
U a� E S cn.— cn � Ca C .U' n (D:;t � ,Cn u) _C
0 0._ � — O N ca o "o p ca -0
� o °� `� m ° " aaN '� vi -j (DEc3mm ° 3 °� -o i
o
Ea mo ° 'aa -uc) CScaECL 0 0) O •orn �°, a>> c � aoia�i � �
,
� o (D (D � c,cn � o � :? aa o � � 2 ( o m
c �
(D_a
cn � cn cn = F=- .E3 � 1=- Q:Ec°accn
0 CaU cn
CL j (n NI- �OLLFU
Lm � nj
CC` s � U
WCp LR N c74to
5 C L O
LL LL W' -
LO It Q .
O r Q
C4 o) W, ;
C cu C)
Z in
Q cl = off
o Q J W a
Zcn
�L-
c O � c >
m
a� U >
o =
o.a)
0
— E
c U H. > u»
o ZZ o c
U U W W n c ca
3a) oc _
� � o aC13 ) —0)
S C13
o Q�
c. c am
a
cu cu
_0 ..
c
U) (D �,
m c ,
_0 o E coi c >% . •o
cn .. c cm E
• �. a) ca o
- cm - c
cn cn — — ) O
J m � ,�a3 �' aci -o Vic° .: -o .mccn
U — a) cca c � � o . '. cn c
LU a� = cn o —a_ :. -o cn o
M =
CL C5 3 c � a — c c a) m . c o
cn a)
C
oO mss Ec°i n3 ° a) Jc�a °� o �
� w
Z "= "_ m w- °� U —
cu.. .. M
cn3o, - c:. .�cu mccaa°i c � coi. s
mZp c 3cn 3ccn - ao cn °
F- a) -o a) U U c . o
U) a) � c as = a) m a) o o �
Cu o M c E c � s •t �-
>C O c CL N E. o a) c 0 ca .° cn
0 0 00
W Q � c = -o o o m -o ..
Z Z a, s a) a) M ° a) -o •« E >> '
u. O E a 3 cam. -o o m c E m
LU m �, ca o — �. a) m m m
CL M
O 2Q3caocu a) L ° . � aoim ca
f= Q -o C rn a) ° E O in : c m L c
W ca) cQ ° a n �.,_ � m. 3cNm` ca -o
N CCU n cn
v cn aa) ao cn a)i a) -0 a) 0
c.'x � c -o > Eoca n.cl. rca)
-
�
C.) a m"= o a) CL c -o o ca a) cn -a) L- cac
�
Cl) cin m ca m U O '0 a) 0 a cn . cu
3 a) N n N
o = c 'ta`niacn -o 'cn -o � .ocn0Ccac - a) cvi
30 � wV $ CL a) � 3n' ` cEc ncl- Ec
C's
Z cna)a) -r
Q '� m � Z'=_ = � o me _c � = �
o 0 3 a) N U ca c v voi m oU v EU
c�aa' c $ co-omc`a = c .oQmmcv � mCU
a s _ a� a) a m ' 3 @ '- -o Q >� o a) c Q. E .
Eo � Ev ,._ > _ o a) > 0 E o
a > o- oCM M0 -o Wim _ -0 ca - cam _ >,
aci � (D c a`ni s �.U a) a) m CM I a ca 0 m m
E � z m -oH ca � cn 3,� voiH 3u nu cu c3a
c
o
c -
W .
a) N
L •— CD f� a0
TO •-
U
C L
LL LL W
Ul) Ul) .�
o � a 1
clq
zQ m
oQ _jW. 0) a• E � n
Z Off . C O
rn . .cam
O �
U > ADD � D
o =
o w 0 p
c U I— > a�Ei -o � c c -0
o . z C) � � .pp CE
V U W W a.C n`_ 4-• E
_ d• a) n O a) C a)
4) +� O Cu
J p (n (UC > C (U
Q. L p U .— 'p p O U .—.,
O D Q� O Q a) d.�
•` C CL= C .Q (D Q5
a (U O (U p (U
U) Q a) a)
� ..
(U
U C
F- C O O p
N U) (U . U : >1=- CU rte. +>- .0 (D
J (`U O C(U UAL CZL (U (n
W c)
CU <n o .<n (D a) c) cu t
a) U) (� E o 'c o .�'. tf
M V p (U ` p C a) p p
O (� v� (n 0: .E O n v�.N N "
Q r � a) C O N
Z CUUYs � 00 COff. ns
F_ O Cr c �0 3 (u E (n c CL o
m Z O CU U) >,. a) U) — = p p C () �
F,. C a) cu "' c > cu.cu O — cu L- a) U)
a) 4) 0 3 �+ O V t U U (u '0 (U
o
>C O
cu 0 >,(p c O �c C a) c c
LV J � tm C cuu o 0. 0 .E ns (n
zZ �n°_cmn c 3 � EQ � �
u. 0 ca`))'0 °� ami 0ca) � � � ° 0
E:. W a) V C 5 (nom 0 0:0 ` cu
.. O .
E a) (D (D 0 D Z C
•• (U p u)
F„ � cu m -0 " (u cu (D "� C "� >, E U
Z V .Q( n C O `►- O C_•• Q p (U (D
CEcu cu � E .(mEciuE2cuc
Q 0 E (n U) vi 'c =c CU cu = •O -c E 0 E O
�- C V api C vi (>U 4) C .O O p Z
_ — 0p c � 3 c 0 U - E a) .—
r�
CU' O Z' ° (U (D a) -E cu 00 (D
o a? c(DE : Q � w o f CL 2D U) C
o 0 -0 CU.0
() a) � � . c 'v in 0 o o c ECL U) �
Z a) O �-Np OC p 0 .0 (D �. t N '� j p (cu.
o '°' c0 c'=CU CU LL rn ` s E p ') -c
Q � W N 0 CN p (Cu � � 0 � 0) -0
E O C N p O D ` (n M C O (D a) O
(o > fn N '�O'O ('Q J Q V O V p (D `p C
C W > "O E C a) CU O +- a) C >' (n = +� 0 O
C N = E O C -Op O E E U .-
CV F—O Q Q N (U C a) .a) a) r_ cu (n
Ivo U U E '� L E a) E � E >
Wt .. a N a H. v_ 04 ESQ (n � .S
cU C L Q O
o co o_
O
04W ❑
-o
� d Zmc
Qcu
OQ Jw rnQ
Z a lL c p
rn
C 0 � C �
,C.
(9 >
CU uiO
cn
� U
C ❑
c O w
pw ZZ :Ocu � � E
C-) C-) W W a ,� E -
;.2 � 0 c W
� CL
W vimrn
J C > C CU C
O O U
C Q N Q =3
0 .m =3co _0
a) 0 O
UC -0CU CU
-p
o
J0 r- Ccn
a) O =3 .NL>� c >'
Y
CU 'y 0- 0)-. O O L —
U V N 0 O cu C. U -p ca
w 0EoEO
E c ca
DC7 -C U) � L c cu
ca - (A V cu
O C. O L a) L C O C
m Z cu O)
a) c a) o' N
= W Z c 2: U) o� N a) r a)
�. O v) ` m
X t9 C U a) a) U) _Q
W Q U O L L U C,
u' W E > naa)) >N >: Na
QE Q —_ O N 0 a) ca .
C7 O a) ca ca Q E
U) L �>— ,U a) o cu
a)
W -0 Z O a) "� N a)' c �'
:3 p O — Q N
O •- La) W r_n E
p c � � UE
- .O 0)
�E
O `-
a) Cc � Q
(L)
rn)
Oa) c -a
O E o O O
'o ' ocpUa)
co _ w
0 U -
0 CU Q O
O -0 CU — 'L' 'p 0
ca .p _ O C
p O E t O L "� "O:N O
Z o .Q + m C m
.� a) O
C N N a) c _a N m > Q
O p .> p — E U
a) CLcm -0cuU) nc �`� �
� C EzQ):nmo � o
ca
ca E CU a) vi o Z. n _0
y� co cn � cccaoa) ca = c
O N O a) C cn N ca
O U (� cB N .a) �
cn w rn
❑ 4— cn o p p E U O O O
C:
�. E ' cu � � � `° `° cZ .
cv ❑ -Co. E o c o � 'm � :
ws wEcu cu
c°
iiu. w •
O r CL
O 0 ,
N Cl) W
O d. Z '
Q p ca 0
oQ
J W m CL
— c
— °
.c .c ° W
o Ow � � '
a)
o =
w —
o
D o m
r ' (� H � .
UU WW o "' caE
2 � CL 0 13-
C m
S w `° m -
J 0 cn .cu
p Q�
` C Q.� i
cu L
NL C (9
N N ` C +. (U
(LU— O 3 0 cam
m cu`~ .� ' Q "0 C
C ..: " L– a) p a)=p
N. . 0 O C N O N 0
J V -0 -0 EN
Y 0 +0 a). O O — .
N
N _ _
W _0 > ca Q > E CU
TM' V= m XUUc )
mm >, O i
H O o 0 0 v .
cam N o N� �
m � O CD
o �� cu � 3� 0
>C � O m ' a �.5 ; off `
WQ � -oma L � mcnQ
zz ca -p00 cn C ° NN
cu
0 CU
U) .o ca > c>a-° m E
Q O cn0— — =3c ) 0 �
F=- Q CL. 0 m '� o m o
LU . 0 . CU >•:3.00N oN . .
CD
0 U) CD ca m.5 N .�
OZ t.U) cu > 00 CmC �
�. � 0 �— ca >t � Co—
�_ .'. 0 XwL X-0 O ?� U 0
Q N.a� � Na� oo EO E.
L E
� cu
CD cu >,
o� m �> daCU-0
Cf) C-) U)C " CU :.c _ 00tU)
QN O O > mt CD
o Z t � » a-°i `''cast n cu-a 0 N
Z C.0'ca� - � CU� a� OOC) Ec0)
(D a- �— c-o'� 3 E ai 0i(D -0 CD 0 in CU o ati
C CD 0 U) t t a� a�
cu Ev=j : 3cca0.0) ca `LaoCo o >
aQ w � � 3aDmNm .. ca'�
.. EcnU � �
E aoi od C E OQ� >�o mccU cam N c o .
w > C� CSO N � a�� .` > 0t•— . 11
o ca:_ o .�
EaYi QvC= o �c0ic�aEN ° u' u'
N U O N ai 0 C
pU N — —t'— ca= (D= XL E cu O
Q 5< ch -0Q mQ 01-4. 3U
c U
W t a r N cM �t Lo co
V _
C Ccu x
LL LL W
LO 00
o Q
m
N W U
O 0 U +�
r. d Zm C C
Q C) cu.
oQ JW rn •
O LUC
(� UW O a) O
O = m 0
O
O. Q O a)
U W
CU ; � -C �N
O
O := - Z Z : 0
UU " WW
aaci o Q
LU Cu p �
0 cn v �'
0 "C -0 ..
O d
L C d =
d a) L
a) O C '0 a) 0:, N ca 'O w.. .. 0)a) •� L
> - N U "- C -0 C O _ C > N C "-
L ca C _0 0 C a) cn o . c -o 0 3
L O C 0 .0 .. cu C O ,a) a3 :. o
i- ca° N : N ca p O O cn. 0
cn EL o �_
`� 3 s 3 a) ` C a)
ca.
V 0 Ca Q C 3 N N C p. , .0 0 . 06 :_p a)ca 0 a) N CO
W CD
O
'0 N L L p C 7
cn a) > cu .� a) 3 m
c. <n <n N 3
E E ° ca : � o a) C C (n m (n °� c a) L 0 � a) -o
mZ0.. � La)-o E o . 'LEc°) a) 0LO- 0 . cD a" `.CL0 E �
0• .O•— cn o CCU a).� a) 3 a) m
= wZ a) -oma a) C Cp � cn � _ C a L) a) .
) > .
WQ •o �.: p ..L . .� E � xo � L-0c 3
CD N C1 = 0 a) +� . • O 0 "' a) w- '0 O = a3 a) a) ca
Z p c cu m 3 ( rn` � E 0 a) ccu cM .U) CD CU CD c
O L V7 C Y �'X D c 0 c0=-0 LL-0 U •-L ° a)
. . �_ a) c E c) a) 3 O C a) co cn a)
(n cn CL
a) a) .� 0 0 C . a) O-00 CD N a L CD 0 0 0 a) N cu a)
Q a): 3 C ...-;O N 0 a) a) '0 > a) U 0 p
W E N a) a) E � C U C o 9+L= N-0 cu Q� cn
.- `.. C
z N-0 H. d C � O E i 3 E U a) a) N a) L C C cn L N p
Z L cn- — 0 > U d N � i N N N C L L O '� V7 w O
N a) c0 a) 0 Ca 0 a) O C_O 0 C cn L rn L s � a) -0-0 O
> 0 (n > C U a) rn a) rn L 0 - a)Ca CD 3: C0 0 a) O ca C. C
� a) a) 7� C -0 N •C .fn .L. C CL w N E co 0
0)"= cu ` a a) O o 0 vj C a).- c0 O U) -Q = N N a)
r) g M.- N CL> C 0)� w `L n E(n 0 CD cc N a) N E E ca 0-0 — 3 C "=LL O �
O i 0 a)O•QC 'D > '0 O a•C O o m U O-0 C-cu� O > vi O
U a) - �- C C N 7•- E -o= Z 0.0 0 EQ.- ;. .: C N. 0-
O` ` N C .cu 0)3 0•E= a) 0 C— O 'er-'- cc 0 U co p
O (a a 3 a) U •- > fLQ L a) N a3 C i a) d c0-0 0 Q C
Z U
-0 _C 0 0 c0 O = C.� 0 OL( (0 E L C C C N rn� O 0 O
C a) cn CD N O �'O DwO- cOn cOn U Com= N C•0'a) N p a) > a) C N CD
a"O
cis Q o 0;= C O L a) N C O U'- a) O D L E-- o f N'U.0 L Q L
a) a_ ��C O E O j E N- �L O cc N N>� U Cr cc N E CLC 0 0-O~ C O
c E 0 cc C o 3 cmE� c E;.= Z`-o cn N CD EL in :3
m� vi aCi
V O 7L O yL_ ELY-0 0 a) a) o a) a) C N"0 C 0 a)~ C N m 0 0
�p N-0 p a) C 'L cc L N co= C ` a) E
O a 0 a)� 3 V O O aN a) 3 0 0 C C to �Y 0 a3 U a)� N O� �'� N �.C-
meCU C0)Nco�Dc)� 0"000:a) L.a) oO �- 3ON0 cn CU C �,0m cr
`'. ` C-p ` ..- a)_.->•- U " C "' 0._ a) N-0 a) 0)0 `_ O N N
� � �-o E j �-o O �. o Q� 0 In a��—°o o Cn,a m > rn� ��
E Y'.. fQ N 0 .-•,.S O d>,.`.- Q. a)- C a) ca a) O-,�'� C a) Q C•C �•_
r 7 0) U O— U X (p 0 E a3 L a) O L"C C N O 0 O a) a) 0 O
O` U w- NU) c0 UQ a)W'00 EU CCU >.Uw-� (OQ .LH aoH- - 0)o a�
WLR I*- 00 .0) 04 04
C (CO X
LL LL W
Ln m
C) Q
o
N CJ1 W
ca .�
� Q. Z
Q QCIO
CL JWrnQ.
oQ a c o
CC
° m ' OW � a>i �
U > aoa
o = ,
o _
c U w a3 N.
a) -0 +�
7
U U W W L- C.
" o f I
2 Q Oa)
� w `a � ° Q.
J O N ca O)
d ` :3 U .0
O -Oa=
ca
I.
C c N � 0--
Ca a,a) a) a) {
.— o _ �
N
3 � . o - . � occ
c3
ca Cl) .• � (L) Nom ; cgai� ' ,a)
Uo ; X a °^a�icn
r� = � o� �o � o �' ccca) o
V ° 0 3c - ° a) 2 o ;
_ _ U--
0 CU
� � Z uiCD a � in
=`- � � 3 � � X � c ,m
m Z O v 2 -c) L- c 0�° o
21
t c'3 ° .o° a� u-)u-) E
a� cu a�
W ca 3 0 Qc'o °� . n c° 3
X .Q O E co j— �
o w o
ZZ '- � Z.� sE� c`a s •� :QEc m y
t� O >,mca ° 3 � •-s ° rn
Ca ° No oon E�E `a
H W 3 > cnC ° ° L � o
Q . ca > NcLacm v a) caCa= m
Na) =3 C:, a) N om' 0) &.--
H ` Q Via) co a)> ca) Kaci o.a.Ein E cu cn�
a) inuj (D — c-0 cn c=.0 -0
z -o'o a'~ 3 � a� aci 0°� � 3m~ oa�i
O 0 c° `o N N�CL o ..� -0 ° L
w
3° a� N' .� acv aci C CL Q�-0 0 o
co � N ° � a� o 000cE—
F C �� a� E " � E > v � LNca)w, � �
_ Oca c La) 0CL 7a) ncrn- >,Oa7
ca ca-
O-0 U c c ca _0 (a- Cl) Ca'C�cr O —t'a
a ° °�-o ° cucn a� os=� "- � 3" a) EE
ca= c-oN.E N— ° - a) caN � � ` Q
ixa X'3o'v� � a)•L5-i 6 > a� 3Q:�Q - CacCO ao
Q) Q V N o Q-v > N+= c c o �� N EQ
CIO �� a) cN.o.o ° a�� � L-aLo
E acidca° a— 'Qc0)a) vcn (Dcn�-aE10cn
o Eboa�o= 0.5N � a) �- c �in oQco ,
(D 'JEoN ° Q_Q ° � cca
E ° N arc'°
❑ �L ago o ° o o �.a� s mcn— o
0 ca
" o V
�
❑. c\i vi 4 LO co ti ao 6 o
LU t = N N.CV N N N C4 N cn
(� C L
ca X '
4L LL W _.
ROOSEVELT COMMITTEE AGENDA
March 28, 2005 Minutes
Page No. 3
d. Rezone Application No. R-04-14 /.Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM /
Conditional Use Permit Application No.C-04-79
Staff: Mike Sanchez
Address: None Assigned
APN: 313-270-01; 313-280-01, 33; 313-060-12; 313-021-19
Size: 234 acres total
Zone District: R-2/UGM (Low, Density Multiple Family Residential/Urban Growth
Management)
Location: Bounded by ;East Tulare Street, East Kings Canyon Road, South -
Sunnyside Avenue, and the South Burgan Avenue alignment.
Project Description: Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM: Proposes a 686-iot
single-family residential subdivision.
Conditional Use Permit Application No. C-04-79: Proposes a
241-lot: single-family residential subdivision non-clustered
planned development on approximately 32.2 acres of the 234
acre site within Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM.
Rezone Application No. R-04-14: Request to zone approximately
XX acres M-1 (Light Manufacturing) to allow for industrial
development.
NOTE This project was reviewed by the Committee on December 20, 2004 as follows:
Presentation by Mike Sanchez, Planner ill:
■ The Final EIR is .currently being drafting, which involves responding to all
comments received on the Draft EIR.
■ No dates have been set for Planning Commission or City Council:
Further analysis is forthcoming from the developer on the proposed
roundabout.
■ Fancher Creek Drive is a scenic drive with a special standard proposed (cross-
section provided).
The Planning Division has.yet to meet with the applicant to request clarification
on a number of issues.
The Committee had the following questions/comments:
■. Can the truck route designation be deleted from Fowler Avenue and how does.
(or can) the presence of the roundabout play a role in the deletion?
Sanchez: The deletion of the truck route designation might require a plan
amendment and may be added as a mitigation measure to the EIR.
■ What is the extent of the trail along Fancher Creek?
Sanchez.- The trail is proposed now only to be implemented on property
controlled by the developer.
■ How will the trail be maintained?
Sanchez. Through a Homeowner Association (HOA), Community Facility
District (CFD), or Mello-Roos Assessment District, which the developer is still
gathering information on. -
How will Tulare function in conjunction with the existing school (pick-ups, drop-
offs, etc)?
' .
,,
{
i
. : , _
,. i.
i
� ..
' �
,_ !
,.
f '
i
ROOSEVELT COMMITTEE AGENDA
March 28, 2005 Minutes
Page No. 4
■ The interface between the proposed small-lot single-family residential (R-2) and
the existing single-family residential to the east should be revisited to provide a
more compatible edge.
Rezone Application No. R-04-14, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232/UGM,
Conditional Use Permit Application No.. C-0479 and the associated Environmental
Impact Report are scheduled to be heard by the Planning Commission on April 6,
2005.
"* Mike Sanchez, Planner III and a representative from. Quad Knopf will be present to
answer questions regarding the project as a whole (Mr: Sanchez) or Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. 5232/UGM (Quad Knopf representative).
The Committee with a vote of 5-0 recommended the Planning Commission
continue the item until such time all documents are provided for adequate review
includingthe Final EIR which at the time of this meeting had not been released. The
9
Committee has felt the review of this project as a whole has been piecemealed.
In addition to the request for continuance, the following concerns were addressed and
comments made:
How do.the six lanes required along Kings Canyon relate to the street patterns
to the west and east of the project site? What transitioning has been required
Is the proposed roundabout able to accommodate busses and trucks?
■ Delete the truck route designation from Fowler Avenue.
Are the reduced side yard setbacks able to accommodate trash bins to be
taken to and from the front to back yards? W VO
■ Parking provided for the smaller lots will be insufficient — the Committee would
like to see additional parking for these areas provided to accommodate guests!�
• How is the pedestrian access across Fowler and Fancher proposed —
particularly in relation to the roundabout? What safety mea§ures or designs will
be incorporated to ensure safe crossings?
■ What does the EIR identify for noise impacts along the south side of Kings
Canyon Road on the existing residential and what mitigation measures are
proposed to address the noise impact? Num- �L(. � -
■ Is it p le to ct the ber of rentals that are permitted in the
co unity icularly a=ler
■ Have there been accommodations made for the Comcast/SBC boxes such as
easements along street frontages to prevent the placement of.such boxes
within landscape setbacks? 011 �`r°j
Is there adequate open space provided on the smaller lots per the R-2 zone
district?
1
STATE OF CALTORNIA—BUSINESS'.TRANSPORT A": N AND HOUSING AGENCY ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER,Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE '
P.O:BOX 12616
FRESNO,CA 93778-2616
PHONE (559)445-6666 Fles your power(
FAX (559)488-4088 -� Be energy efficient!
TTY (559)488-4066 .
November 29, 2004
213 1-IGR/CEQA
6-FRE-180-64.41+/
.. . . . ' FANCHER CREEK DEIR
SCH#2004021071
C-04-79&T-5232
E.
Mr.Mike Sanchez
City of Fresno Development Department.,
Planning Division
2600 Fresno Street.
Fresno, CA 93721
Dear Mr. Sanchez:
We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR) for the development known as
Fancher Creek. The project consists of four major project areas and is generally located between North .
Clovis;North Armstrong,East Kings Canyon(State Route 180) and East Harvey Avenues. Caltrans has
the following.comments: „
Utilizing the Council of Fresno County Government's traffic forecasting model and ITE trip generation,
it has been established that trips generated by this development would impact the future State Route (SR)
180 interchanges at Clovis and Fowler Avenues:
A comparison of the 2015 and 2025 turning movements at the SR 180 eastbound ramp intersection at
Clovis Avenue indicates that there would be little or no change in volumes over the ten-year period. A
Similar comparison of the intersections at Clovis and Belmont,Fowler and Belmont,and the SR 180
eastbound ramp intersection at Fowler Avenue indicates a similar moderate change in volumes over the .
ter.-year period.
At the SR 180 eastbound ramp intersection at Clovis Avenue,the initial off--ramp configuration will have
two right-tum lanes and two left-turn lanes. Based on the 2015 volumes,the analyst is indicating that
three right-turn lanes and three left-tum lanes would be required in the future; however, an analysis by
this office concluded that the initial configuration should be sufficient until the year 2025.1 At the nearby
intersection of Clovis and Belmont, the analyst indicated that the initial southbound movement
configuration would contain a right-turn lane, three through lanes, and two left-turn lanesDue to.the
. very high number of projected southbound through movements at the Clovis and Belmont intersection
and the limited capacity for the southbound left-tum movements, the study indicated that some of the
southbound left-turn movements would bleed over and block some of the southbound through
movements. However,this office discovered that the initial configuration would actually contain a
shared right/through line, three through lanes, and two left-turn lanes. Based on the correct initial
configuration, this office concludes that the Clovis at Belmont intersection should operate sufficiently .
through the year 2025. This office does concur with the analyst that a dedicated right-turns lane would be
_required from westbound Belmont to northbound Clovis. This improvement is not currently planned as
part of the SR 180 freeway project.
"Caltrans improves mobility across California."
Mr. Mike Sanchez
November 29,2004
Page 2
At the SR 180 eastbound ramp intersection at Fowler Avenue,the analyst is indicating that the initial
configuration should be satisfactory through the year 2025. At the nearby intersection of Fowler and
Belmont,the initial southbound movement configuration will have a shared right/through lane, a single
through lane, and a single left-turn lane. Due to the high number of projected left-turn movements and
borderline through movements at the Fowler and Belmont intersection, the study is recommending that
the southbound movement configuration should be modified to a right-turn movement,two through
movements, and two,left-turn movements. Due to the close proximity of these two intersections and
'based on the projected volumes in the study,this office concurs with the study'.s recommendation
regarding improvements to the southbound movement configuration at the intersection of Fowler and
Belmont. These improvements,would be required prior to 2015 in order to address.congestion that would
impact the SR 180 interchange at Fowler Avenue.:
The EIR identifies two Fresno Area Express fixed-routes within the project area. The EIR also indicates
that the developer may propose a Mello-Roos district for the project area. If such a district is formed, the
City should consider using this assessment district to fund transit service for the development.
According to our Transportation Concept Report(TCR),this segment of the existing SR 180 is planned
for 124 feet with an offset alignment to accommodate dual left-turn lanes. Caltrans right-of-way shows
this segment existing at 106 feet. An irrevocable offer of dedication will be needed to.accommodate the
ultimate configuration of SR 180. Due to the offset alignment,the two sections of the project, separated
by Fowler Avenue,will have different requirements. The section of the.project.on the northwest corner
of the existing SR. 180 and Fowler will require 6 feet; the section on the northeast corner will require 12
feet. Dedications required by the Lead Agency need to be shown on a revised site plan and forwarded for
our review. A summary.of the requirements for right=of--way dedications is enclosed.
An encroachment permit must be obtained for all proposed activities for placement of encroachments
within,under or over the State highway rights-of-way. Activity and work planned in the State right-of-`
way shall be performed to State standards and specifications, at no cost to the.State. Engineering plans,
calculations, specifications,and reports(documents) shall be stamped and signed by a licensed Engineer
or Architect. Engineering documents for activity and work in the State right-of-way shall be submitted
using Metric Units. However, dual units may be used for activity and work in the right-of-way costing
81.,000,000 or less,or by an exception approved by the Director.The preferred method of delineating
dual units is by showing the English unit first then the Metric unit next to it in parenthesis. The Permit
Department and the Environmental Planning Branch will review and approve the activity and work in the
State right-of-way before an.encroachment permit is issued. Encroachment permits will be issued in
accordance with Streets and Highway Codes, Section 671.5, "Time Limitations."Questions regarding the
encroachment permit process need to be referred to Kirk Anderson,Transportation Engineer, at(559)
445-6483.
While it is indicated that the development will pay a traffic signal fee,it is not clear if the applicant or
someone else is responsible for the other mitigation measures recommended in the DEM,nor is there any
clear indication as to when said mitigation would be required. The DEIR also states that the fair share
percentages are provided as information only,and the City as lead agency will determine what mitigation
measures,if any,will be required of the applicant.. Leaving this to a later date does not provide the
decision-making body or the general public with a clear picture of what mitigation will be implemented
and what impacts from this project will remain unmitigated. The FOR should clearly state what
mitigation will be required,who will be responsible for the mitigation,and at what project phase that the
mitigation will be required. The timing of the mitigation could be based on a specific year(i.e.: 2015), a
"Caltrans improves mobility across California"
Mr. Mike Sanchez.
November 29, 2004
Page 3
Spec
ific project phase,or on specific conditions, such as traffic monitoring at critical.locations. This
should be spelled out in the DEIR..Not only will this make the project and its responsibilities clearer to
the decision-makers and to the general public,but it will prevent problems arising at the required
Mitigation Monitoring stage of the project(please see the next two paragraphs). .
i
Recent 2601 legislation, (Assembly Bill.(AB) 1807, amending CEQA,PRC Sect. 21081.4,21081.6 and
21081.7); required that the California Department of Transportation(Department)establish mitigation
monitoring submittal guidelines for public agencies. The guidelines affect agencies that have approved
development projects which may have had an impact of statewide,regional,or area-wide significance,
and are required under CEQA to provide the Department reports on transportation related,mitigation
monitoring measures. The "Guidelines for Submitting Transportation Information from a Reporting or
Monitoring Program to the Department of Transportation"(TMM Submittal Guidelines)',are enclosed.
The TMM Submittal Guidelines discuss the scope,purpose and legal requirements for mitigation
monitoring reporting and submittal, specify the generic content for reports, and explain procedures for
.timing, certification and submittal of reports. '
To aid local agencies in fulfilling their CEQA reporting requirement, the enclosed Mitigation Monitoring
Certification Checklist form is being provided. Please complete and sigma Certification Checklist form .
for each approved development project that includes transportation related mitigation measures and
return it to this office once the mitigation measures are approved, and again when they are.completed.. .
Additional copies of the TMM Submittal Guidelines and the Certification Checklist are downloadable
from the Department's Division of Transportation Planning,.Office of Community Planning,
Intergovernmental Review Guidelines website.
(htip://www.dot.ca. og v/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/igr guidelines Drocedures.htm).
Please be advised that any future development adjacent to a.State Route, whether the entitlement is
deemed by the lead agency to be discretionary or ministerial should be sent to Caltrans for review. If you
have any questions, please call me at (559)445-6666.
Sincerely,
MOSES STITES i
Office of Transportation Planning ,
District 6
Enclosures .
f.
C: Ms. Barbara Goodwin, Council of Fresno County Governments
State Clearinghouse f
b.
''Caltrans improves mobility across California"
:MAR.29.2605 1:22PM CAL TRANS PLANNING N0.571'--P.3i11_., -
MU OFF 61 T RN1A—BUST rb TRAN_SPORTAT• .gyp HO[]SI1 fQ AC3FNC1' IRT'OLD7 f.(SR finVPTnf
Si�eB 1
DEPARTNmNT OF TRANSPORTATION
1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE
:. P.0.13OX 12616
FRESNO,CA 93778-2616
PHONE (559)445-6666 FTeryourpower!
FAX (559)488-4088 Be energy efficient
TTY (559)488-4066
February S,2005
2131-IGR/CEQA
6-FRE-180-64.41+1-
FANCHER CREEK
SCH#2004021071
VTPM NO. 2004-36
W.Paul Bemal -
City of Fresno Development Department
Planning Division
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Dear Mr.Bernal:
We have reviewed thr.map proposing to create a 45-acre parcel industrial subdivision located on
the north and south sides of East Belmont Avenue betweem North Fowler and North Temperance
Avenues. Caltrans has the following comments:
Caltrans questions how the City can proceed with this map prior to certifying the EIR for the
Faucher Creek Development. There is no question that these parcels are included in the Fancher
Creek Development as they are identified by parcel number in the Draft EIR. This map should be
processed after the EIR has been certified. The light industrial(mixed use)portion of the
development will have a significant impact on the transportation/circulation system, an impact that
cannot be fully understood until the Elk has been completed and all public and agency comments
have been addressed. CEQA does not allow projects to be segmented or to be reviewed
"piecemeal." This rule arises from the definition of a project under CEQA. The definition states
quite clearly that a project is the"whole of the actiou.
One of CEQA's main objectives is public disclosure and the enhancement of public participation
in the planning process. The separate approval of a portion of alarger proj ect still under
environmental review does not further this cause. How will the City impose Conditions of
Approval on this map when the impacts of the project have not been fully evaluated and mitigation
has yet to be identified? If the EIR identifies mitigation for this portion of the project,how will the
mitigation be imposed if the map has already been approved?
The remainder of our comments on the Draft MR are still applicable.
Utilizing the Council of Fresno County Government's traffic forecasting model and UE trip
generation,it has been established that trips generated by the Fancher Creek Development would
impact the future State Route(SR) ISO interchanges at Clovis and Fowler Avenues.
-Caltrans improves mobihry across California"
.I'1111M G7.GUU-) 1-GGI'1'1 - k-HL- IMMI 10 !-LnIII11117
Mr.Pa 1
u1 Bernal
February 8,2005
Page 2
A comparison of the 2015 and 2025 turning movements at the SR 180 eastbound ramp
intersection at Clovis Avenue indicates that there would be or no change in volumes over the
ten-year period_ A similar comparison of the intersections at Clovis and Belmont,Fowler and
Belmont, and the SR 180 eastbound ramp intersection at Fowler Avenue indicates alsimilar
moderate change in volumes over the.ten-year period.
At the SR 180 eastbound ramp intersection at Clovis Avenue,the initial off-ramp configuration
will have two right-turn lanes and two left-turn.lanes. Based on the 2015 volumes,the applicant's
traffic consultant is indicating that three right,-tum lanes and three left-turn lanes would be
required in the future,-however, an analysis by this office concluded that the initial configuration
should be sufficient until the year 2025. At the nearby intersection of Clovis and Belmont, the
applicant's traffic consultant indicated that the initial southbound movement configuration would
contain aright-tarn lane, three through lanes,and two left-turn.lanes.. Due to the very bigh
number of projected southbound through movements at the Clovis and Belmont intersection and
the limited capacity for the southbound left-turn movements, the study indicated that some of the .
southbound left-turn movements would.bleed over and block some of the southbound through
movements. However,this office discovered that the initial configuration would actually contain
a shared right/through line,three through lanes, and two left-tarn lanes. Base 'on the correct
initial configuration,this office concludes that the Clovis at Belmont intersection}should operate
P
sufficiently through the year 2025. This office does concur with the applicant's traffic consultant
that a dedicated right-turn lane would be required from westbound Behnont to northbound Clovis.
This improvement is not currently planned as part of the SR 180 freewayproject_
At the SR 180 eastbound ramp intersection at Fowler Avenue,the applicant's traffic consultant is
indicating that the initial configuration should be satisfactory through the year 2025. At the
nearby intersection of Fowler and Belmont,the initial southbound movement configuration will
have a shared right/through lane, a single through lane, and a single left-turn lane. Due to the high
number of projected left-turn movements and borderline through movements at the Fowler and
Belmont intersection,the study is recommending that the southbound movement coiffiguration
should be modified to a night-turn movement, two through movements,and two left-turn
movements. Due to the close proximity of these two intersections and based on the projected
volumes in the study, this office concurs with the study's recommendation regarding.
improvements to the southbound movement configuration at the intersection of Fowler and
Belmont. These improvements would be required prior to 2015 in order to address congestion
that would impact the SR:180 interchange at Fowler Avenue: 1
The EIR identifies two Fresno Area Express fixed-routes within the project area. The EIR also
indicates that the developer may propose a Mello-Roos district for the project area. such a
district is formed,the City should consider using this assessment district to fund transLf it service for
the development
t .
According to our Transportation Concept Report(TCR),this segment of the existing]SR 180 is
planned for 124 feet with an offset alignment to accommodate dual left-tum lanes. Caltrans right-
of way shows this segment existing at 106 feet. An irrevocable offer of dedication Neill be needed
to accommodate the ultimate configuration of SR 180. Due..to the offset alignment,the two
"Caltrans hnprova'mobiliryacross rahrornia"
jhAR.29.2005 1:2-PM : CAL TRANS PLANNING NO.571— P.5i11 - - -
V.
Mr-Paul Bernal - -
Febmary 8,2005
Page 3 .
sections of the project, separated by Fowler Avenue,will have different requirements: The
section of the project on the northwest comer of the existing SR 180 and Fowler will require 6
feet; the section on the northeast comer will require 12.feet. Dedications required by the Lead
Agency need to be shown on a revised site plan and forwarded for our review. A summary of the
requirements for right-of-way dedications is enclosed_
An encroaclunent permit must be obtained for all proposed activities for placement of
encroachments within,under or over the State highway rights-of-way. Activity and work
planned in the State right-of-way shall be performed to State standards and specifications, at no
cost to the State. Engineering plans,calculations, specifications, and reports (documents)shall be
stamped and signed by a licensed Engineer or Architect. Engineering documents for activity and
work in the State right-of-way shall be submitted using Metric Units. However,dual units may be
used for activity and work in the right-of-way costing S 1,000,000 or less,or by an exception
approved by the Director.The preferred method of delineating dual units is by showing the
English unit first then the Metric unit next to it in parenthesis. The Permit Department and the
Environmental Planning Branch will review and approve the activity and work in the State right-
of-way before an encroachment permit is issued. Encroachment permits will be issued in
accordance with Streets and Highway Codes, Section 671.5,"Time Limitations."Questions
regarding the encroachment permit process need to be referred to Kirk Anderson, Transportation
Engineer,at(559)445-6483,
While it is indicated that the development will pay a traffic signal fee,it is not clear if the
applicant or someone else is responsible for the other mitigation measures recommended in the
DEIR, nor is there any clear indication as to when said mitigation would be required. The DEIR
also states that the fair share percentages are provided as information only and the City as lead
agency will determine what mitigation measures,if any,will be required of the applicant.
Leaving this to a later date does not provide the decision-making body or the general public with a
clear picture of what mitigation will be implemented and what impacts from this project will
remain unmitigated. The FEa should clearly state what mitigation will be required,who will be
responsible for the mitigation, and at what project phase that the mitigation will be'required_ The
timing of the mitigation could be based on a specific year(i.e.:2015), a specific project phase,or
on specific conditions, such as traffic monitoring at critical locations. This should be spelled out
in the DEIR. Not only will this make the project and its responsibilities clearer to the decision-
makers and to the general public,but it will prevent problems arising at the required Mitigation
Monitoring stage of the project(please see the next two paragraphs).
Recent 2001 legislation, (Assembly Bill(AB) 1807,amending CEQA,PRC Sect-21081.4,
21081.6 and 210$1.7),required that the.California Department of Transportation(Department)
establish mitigation monitoring submittal guidelines for public agencies. The guidelines affect
agencies that have approved development projects which may have had an impact of statewide,
regional,or area-wide significance, and are required under CEQA.to provide the Department
reports on transportation related mitigation monitoring measures. The "Guidelines for Submitting
Transportation Information from a Reporting or.Monitoring Program to the Department of
Transportation"(TMM.Submittal Guidelines) are enclosed. The TMM Submittal Guidelines
discuss the scope,purpose and legal requirements for mitigation monitoring reporting and
"Calirans improvesmobdiry across California"
I'1"M C7.CUU-) 1•CJr I %-r9L "I 111nl iJ I Lr11 n ill iv I iv.Li L I U, L L ...
Mr. Paul Bernal
February 8, 2005
Page 4
submittal,specify the generic content for reports, and explain procedures for timing,certification
and submittal of reports.
To aid local agencies in fulfilling their CEQA reporting requirement,the enclosed Mitigation
Monitoring Certification Checklist form is being provided. Please complete and sign a
Certification Checklist form for each approved development project that includes transportation
related mitigation measures and return it to this office once the mitigation measures;are approved,
and again when they are completed. Additional copies of the TMM Submittal Guidelines and the
Certification Checklist are downloadable from the Department's Division of Transportation
Planning, Office of Community Planning,Intergovernmental Review Guidelines site:
„ (hft://www.dot.ca.koi lie/fip/offices/oMrigE 81 idelines_procedures.�itm).
Please be advised that any future development adjacent to a State Route,whether the entitlement
is deemed by the lead agency to be discretionary or ministerial should be scat to Caltrans for
review. If you have any questions,please call me at(SS9)445-6666.
Sincerely,
MOSES STITES
Office of Transportation Planning
District 6
Enclosures '
C; Ms:Barbara Goodwin,Council of Fresno County-Governments
State Clearinghouse
4
1
I
}
"Caltrans improves moblliry across California
I.
MAR:29.2005 1 23PM CAL TRANS PLANNING -� — NO-571 – P.7i11 -- -
Cgliforoia Department of Transportation (Department)
GUIDELINES FOR SUBAUTTING TRANSPORTATION
INFORMATION FROM A REPORTING OR MONITORING
PROGRAM TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (DEPARTMENT)
INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CPQA) requires, under,
Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21081.6, the adoption of
reporting or monitoring programs when public agencies include
environmental impact mitigation as a condition of project
approval. Reporting or monitoring takes place after project
approval to ensure implementation of the project in accordance
with mitigation adopted during the CEQA review process.
As Bill 1807.(effective January 1, 2001) amended the PRC
in a number of ways. Section 21080.4 was amended to add a
requirement that lead agencies submit Notices of Preparation
(NOPs) to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research when
they determine that an environmental impact reportwillbe
required to approve a project.
Section 21081.7 was amended with two additional provisions.The
first provision required that transportation.information resulting
from a reporting or monitoring program adopted by a public
agency in accordance with Section 21081.6 be submitted to the
Department of.Transportation (Department) when a project has -
impacts that are of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance.
The second provision required that the. Department adopt
guidelines for the Submittal of those reporting or monitoring
programs.
PURPOSE The purpose of these guidelines is to establish clear and consistent
statewide procedures to be ,used by both Department District
Intergovernmental Review (IOR) Program Coordinators to identify
the scope and timing of transportation information needed from
lead agencies, and public agencies when submitting transportation
information to the Department, in accordance with Section
21081.7.
MHK.Gy.GJbS 1:. _`JFM UHL 1 KHNS t LHNI`I1N6 NU.t�(1' H.6/11 --
Mitigation-Reporting or Monitoring Submittal Guidelines
Page t
PROCEDURES A. The-District IGR Program Managers and/or Coordinators
shall: l
1. Prior to implementation of mitigation measures:
a_ Notify the . CEQA :lead agency by letter during
"early consultation," the Notice of Preparation
(NOP) stage, or the Initial Study (IS) phase of the
CEQA review process that the transportation
information included in the reporting or monitoring
program.will need to be provided to the Department
following project mitigation agreement.
b. Provide the name, address, and telephone number of
the District IGR contact to the lead agency.1
e: .Provide, as an enclos a to the notificatio n etter, a
Pro x ur 1 ,
copy of these "Guidelines" and the Department's
"CEQA Lead Agency Checklist/Certification"
form. (Part 1 of the form, Checklist, is to be signed
by the lead agency following project approval, and
- a copy submitted to the District along with the
transportation reporting or monitoring information.
Part 2 of the form, Certification, is to be signed by
the lead agency and the District upon
implementation of all agreed-upon mitigation
measures.).
2. Following implementation of mitigation measures as
identified 'in Part 1, Checklist, of the CEQA" Lead
Agency Checklist/Certification form, and certification
of implementation by the lead agency in! Part 2,
Certification:
Ensure sign off of Part 2, indicating that the mitigation
measures have been implemented.
1) If the project required encroachment onto a state
highway, obtain the District Permit Engineer's
signature in Part 2.
2 If the project did not involve encroachment onto:
P J
a state highway; the District IGR Coordinator
shall sign Part 2. ;
I
f
��10.571- P.9i11
h1AR:29.2005 1 23PM CAL TRANS PLANNING'. —' --`
Mitigation-Reporting or Monitoring Submittal Guidelines
Page 3 .
3) The..District IGR Coordinator shall: (a) Retain .
the original document; (b) forward a copy to the
District Permit Engineer(if the permit Engineer
signed Part 2); (c) forward a copy to the
Department's Headquarters IGR Program
Manager; and, (d) send a .copy to the...,lead
agency. .
B. . . : The CEQA lead agency shall.
1. Following project approval:
Submit the following information to the Department
District IGR contact: .:
1) Name, address, and telephone number of the
CEQA lead agency contact responsible for the
mitigation reporting or monitoring program.
2) Location. and'custodian of the docurments or
other material, which constitute the. record of
proceedings upon :which the lead agency's
decision to approve theproject is based.
3) Assurances that the Department can obtain
copies of the aforementioned documents. and
materials, if needed, to clarify details or resolve
issues related to the mitigation adopted._
4) Detailed information on impact assessment
methods, the type of mitigation, specific.
location. and implementation schedule for each
transportation impact mitigation measure
included in the reporting. or. monitoring
: pmgram-
5) A copy of the "CEQA Lead: Agency
Checklist!Certification form, with: Part 1,
Checklist, signed and dated, and the reporting or
' monitoring program transportation information
attached or enclosed. The CEQA lead agency,
at its discretion, may. submit :the complete
reporting or monitoring program with the
required transportation infonnation highlighted.
I'll"IR.G7.GlJ!'JJ 1'GJrll 1..1'1L IRM IJ I LI"I 111111V - I7V.'JI 1 (-.1CJ/ 11 -
Mitigation Reporting or,. amtonng Submittal Guidelines
Page 4
2. Following implementation of mitigation measures_
a. Sign. and date Part 2 Certi ccation "
f , of the CEQA
Lead Agency Checklist/Certification" form.
b.' Forward the "CEQA Lead Agency
ChecklistlCertificatioit" form, with appropriate
completion documents attached, to the District IGR
contact, certifying that the mitigation f measures
agreed upon and identified in the reporting or
monitoring program have been implemented, and
that all other reporting requirements have been
adhered to, in accordance with PRC Sections
21081.6 and 21081.7_
APPROVED:
BRLAN MITH Date LARRY ORCUTT Date .
Deputy Director Acting Deputy Director.
Planning and Modal Programs Maintenance and Operations.
f
1
MAR.29.2005 1:24PM CAL TRANS PLANNING N0.571 P.11/11
CEQA LEAD AGENCY CHECKLIST/CERTIFICATION
TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION FROM A REPORTING OR MONITORING PROGRAM
Partl - Checklist
... _ L........r.... ......uu.rr..� _
t'roject Name:
Lead Agency:
Lead Agency Contact(Name,Title,Agency,Address & Phone):
State Clearinghouse(SCIT)File Ws:
Document Type/s:
.Findings&Approval Dates:
Project Proponent(Name,Title,Company,Address &Phone):
For each specific Transportation Related Mitigation Measure associated with this Project,The following
information items are iaclpded in the attached materials:
Yes No
❑ ❑ Location/Custodian Of CEQA Documents,Proceedings,Records
El ❑ Description Of How To Obtain Copies Of Above.Documents
❑ ❑ Mitigation Measure Name&Identifying Number
❑ Detailed Description of Measure& its Purpose (attach blueprints if necessary)
❑ ❑ Measure Location Description,Latitude/Longitude,& Vicinity.Map
[] ❑ Location of Impacted State Highway Component(County,Route,Postmile)
❑ Caltrans Encroachment Permit Number(if one was needed)
r] ❑ Copy of Other Agency Permits required for this Measure(if needed)
[❑ Completion Criteria (including detailed performance objectives)
❑ ❑ Implementation Schedule
❑ ❑ Estimated Monetary Value of Completed Measure& % Local Agency Funded
❑ ❑ Responsible,Contractor(Name, Company,.Address&.Phone)
The above project mitigation measures will be implemented as indicated in the adopted reporting or monitoring
program, and the California Department of Transportation will be notified upon implemerdation
CEQA.Lead Agency Date
.................................ti
Part2 - Certification
.................................... :
We certFfy that the agreed upon mitigation measures have been implemented, and all other requirements have
been adhered to, in accordance
with PRC Sections 21081,6 and 21081.7 Attached.- 1. Completign evaluation
(includinz field_inspection report . Photogr=h Qfcom_,qleted r1wasure.
Signature
&Date:
Name:
Title:
CEQA Lead Agency California Department of Transportation
chis form is to be used by public agencies to submit their mitigation reporting or monitoring programs to the California Dcpartment of Transportation
(Department)when a CEQA project has been fottad to have transportation or circulation impacts that are of statewide,regional.or area-wide significance.
Copies or this form,and the DepartmeatGuidelines developed pursuant to PRC:Seetion 21081.1,can be downloaded from our website
(httn;/hvwu.dof.ta.eovlha/tan/fees/orn/iQr iruidellns arocedures.html. Completed form with attached materials may be post-mailed,s-majltd,or faxed to
the Appropriate Department District Planning Office.Attentiou-lrttergovernmentat Review(IGR)Coordinator. (Form Version 07/20041
..I'IHK.G7-GelrJ� 1•C.trl'I -4—HL i KHi1J rL-Ri 1i'fv - `1v rJ f 1 r.1/11— ---• .
�`PAT�' .QF AT TFt� NL.4—gf)QTNFSS'S'R1114SPOATA STD H4Ufi►N('ArSN V !i
i C AI�nTDS['HWArz�m�m�GE�
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE
. w �
P.0.BOX 12616
FRESNO,CA 93778.2616
PHONE (559)445-6666 c
FAX (559)4884066 Lvi� Flex your power!
�D
' 'ITY (559)488-4066 : ,
Be energy ejf clew
OR 2 9
2005
March 29, 2005
Planning Division
evelo ment Cin"'" Tent 2131-IGRJCEQA
CITY OF t '.;PJ'.} 6-FRE-180-64.41+/-
FANCHER CREEK DEUR
SCH#2004021071
Mr.Mike Sanchez
City of Fresno Development Department
Planning Division
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Dear Mr. Sanchez:
We have received the Notice of the Planning Commission Hearing for the development known as
Faneher Creek, The project consists of four major project areas and is generally located between
North Clovis,North Armstrong,East Kings Canyon(State Route 180)and East Harvey Avenues.
Caltrans has the following comments: -
Caltrans made comments on the DEIR on November 29,2004. CEQA requires the Lead Agency
to provide a copy of its responses to any public agency that submitted comments at least ten days
prior to certifying the Final EIR. Caltrans understands that it is the City's interpretation that the
10-day response time only applies to the decision-making body(City Council) and does not apply
to the Planning Commission as they only make a recommendation to either approve or deny.
However, how can the PIanning Commission make an informed decision on the appropriateness
and adequacy of the document when they do not have all of the information before them; i.e.: the
Final EIR.
One of CEQA's main objectives is public disclosure and the enhancement of public participation
in the planning process. Proceeding to the Planning Commission prior to responding to the
comments received on the DEIR does not further this cause, {
We also-note that the Notice for the Hearing includes a statement that"If you challenge any of the
above applications in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues, you, or someone else,
raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered to the
Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing." How can public agencies and the general
public comply with this when the document in question is incomplete and there is still so much
information unavailable? This is a very large and high profile project and should therefore include
every opportunity for all public agencies and the general public to review and commeI t on the
project_ .
Caltrans requests a copy of the Response to Comments at the.City's earliest convenience. We need
this early enough to review and prepare our response.We cannot prepare meaningful testimony
before the Planning Commission without all of the information before us.
"Calfr[tns improves mobility across Cpllornia"
"1AR.29.2005 1:22PM CAL TRANS PLANNING - --NO.571 - P.2i11 --
Mr.Mike Sanchez
March 29,2005
Page 2
Caltrans made comments on a map(No..2004-36;letter attached)proposing to create a 45-acre
parcel industrial subdivision located on the north and south sides of East Belmont Avenue between
North Fowler and North Temperance Avenues..Caltrans never received a response to the
comments we made on that map. It is clear that these parcels are included in the Fancher Creek
Development as they are identified by parcel number in the Draft EIR. Will the City address our
comments on Map No. 2004-36 in the Final EIR for the Fancher Creek project?
We request that this letter be made a part of the permanent record for this project and that copies
of our letters be included in any staff reports..This will provide the decision-making body and the ,
general public with a complete and accurate environmental evaluation for the project.
Please be advised that any future'development adjacent to a State Route,whether the entitlement
is deemed by the lead agency to be discretionary or ministerial should be sent to Caltrans for
review., If you have any questions,please call me at(559)445-6666.
Sincerely,
W'0�Q.a
MOSES STITES
Office of Transportation Planning
District.6
Enclosure
C: Ms. Kathryn Phelan, City of Fresno Attorney's Office
Mr. Martin Deck, Caltrans Legal Department
State Clearinghouse
Ms.Barbara Goodwin, Council of Fresno County Governments
"Caltrans brwvver mobrllly across California"
HriC. v.GYJYJJ C.._?c 't - l.nL {Rnl lJ.rL!'1,l{ 111V. w.oc.J
ST ATE QE r A1.TFr �it[6SS_TtiANSPORTATi, -M NOTISR�JG AQIMNI V ARTiOLD,Sc1�vAA75LyEOCi R,f7ovcmRr
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1352 WEST OLIVE AVENUE
P.O.BOX 12616
FRESNO,CA 93778-2616
PHONE (559)445-6666 FTcr your powerl
FAX (559)488-4088 Be energy efjicleral
'TTY (559)488-4066
April 4, 2005
21;3
1-IGR/CEQA
6-FRE-180-64.41+/-
FANCHER CREEK DEIR
SCH�#2004021071
C-04-79 &T--5232
Mr. Mike Sanchez
City of Fresno Development Department
2600 Fresno Street -
Fresno, CA 93721 -
Dear Mr. Sanchez.
The.project known as Fancher Creek is scheduled to go before the Planningtonunission on
April 6, 2005. The project consists of four major project areas and is generally located
between North Clovis,North Armstrong, East Kings Canyon (State Route 180) apd East
Harvey Avenues. Caltrans has received a copy of the Final EIR_ We have the folio
vVlng
comments_
Caltrans commented in our November 29, 2004 letter that a dedication of right-of way from
this project would be needed to accommodate the ultimate configuration of State Route (SR)
180 at this Iocation. The Response to Comments document includes the following response:
"3. Right-of-waydedications and encroachment permit issues will be dealt with as a
part of the site plan review process.
Caltrans is not concerned about the reference to the encroachment permit_ If the permit is
needed prior to our relinquishing this section of SR 180 to the City, as is likely,the permit will
need to be issued by Caltrans. We are more concerned,however, that the right-of'way.
dedications will be "dealt with as a part of the site plan review process." Please clarify what
this means. Does the City intend to request right-of-way from the developer?
Caltrans has reviewed the letter from the City's Public Works Department and the,subsequent
responses contained in the FEIR. While we concur, in principle, with the Public Works
Department, we would like to see how the percentages were arrived at that are presented in the
Traffic/Circulation 1Vlitigation Measure Responsibility matrix- Please provide this'information
for our review prior to the Public Hearing on April 6, 2005
The City's Public.Works Department has required mitigation to a portion of SR 180 and
references improvement to some intersections that may or may not include State right-of-way,
"Caltrans linproyes mobility across California"
1
i
'APR. 4.2005 2:52PM CAL.:TRANS. PLANNING N0.625 P.2i3
Mr. Mike Sanchez
April 4, 2005
Page 2.
depending on the extent of the required`construction. Should the identified mitigation to SR
180 need to be implemented prior to Caltrans relinquishing the facility to the City,the
applicant Will need an encroachment permit from Caltrans. The Mitigation Monitoring Report
needs to be submitted prior to submittal of the application for the encroachment permit. When
he City prepares the program for reporting or monitoring mitigation measures as required
under CEQA, Caltrans should be included in the "Compliance Verified By" column. The weed
to complete and submit the State-required Mitigation Monitoring Form to Caltrans should also
be included
The FEIR provided to Caltrans does not include the City's program for reporting or monitoring
mitigation measures_ While CEQA does not require that this be included in the environmental
document, it is recommended that it be. Additionally, the City's Public;Works Department's
Traffic/Circulation Mitigation Measure Responsibility matrix has a footnote that:
"3. To be identified as Conditions of Approval during CUP, Tract Nlap or SPR process.
Without the City's program for reporting or monitoring mitigation measures, it appears that
mitigation is being deferred to a later stage (CUP, Tract Map or SPR). Adding the information
from spreadsheet provided by the City's Public Works Department to the program for reporting
or monitoring mitigation measures and including the program in the FEIR would ensure that
the project stages at which mitigation would be required will.be clear to everyone. Including
the program in the FEIR provides full disclosure. Caltrans recommends that this information
be provided prior to the Planning Commission hearing, allowing the decision-making body and
the general public an opportunity to fully review the project's impacts and required mitigation.
Caltrans notes that a comment letter makes reference to a"MEGC"parcel and the fact that it is
not under the applicant's control. While Caltrans would ordinarily applaud the City for
including all possible aspects of the project, and thereby avoiding a`piecemeal" approach to
the environmental analysis, we must concur with the.comment letter. As this parcel is integral
to the circulation issues associated with the project, an analysis should also be prepared that
will provide information as to what will happen should the parcel not be available to
accommodate the Fancher Creek development. Will eminent domain be invoked? Will it be
necessary to change the traffic circulation as analyzed within the EIR in order to utilize other
parcels should the MECG parcel not be available to accommodate the project's necessary
infrastructure? Such realignment would change both the project's traffic impacts and the noise
impacts associated with this traffic,possibly impacting new noise receptors that have not been
analyzed- Without a thorough analysis of the possibility that traffic circulation and noise
impacts may change due to the unavailability of the MEGC parcel, the decision-making body
and the general public cannot make an informed decision on the impacts of implementing the
project.
We request that this letter be made part of the permanent public record for thisproject and that
a copy of our letter be included in the staff report for the Planning Commission hearing to be
"Caltrans improves mobilky across Cgllfarnta"
.I-tl'IC. -1.GYJYJJ G'JJri'1. VI-1L i r:r'n7a rLru tirttru IYV S bGJ h'..3/d
Mr.Mike Sanchez '
April 4,2005
Page 3
held on January 5,.2005. This will provide the decision-making body and the general public
with a complete and accurate environmental evaluation for the.project.
Please be advised that an future development adjacent to a tate Route hether the
Y P J S , w
entitlement is deemed by the lead agency to be discretionary or ministerial should be sent to
Caltrans for review. 'If you have any questions,please call me at(559) 445-6666.
Sincerely, .
MOSES STITES
Office of Transportation Planning
District 06
C: Ms. Barbara Goodwin,Council of Fresno County C oveznments
State Clearinghouse
I
"Caltrans improves mobiiiry ocross Cattfornia"
- i
OX
1W
R
I A I
A t
P.0 Box:1665 .Fresno, California ;93717:= 559=456 3426
Commissioner Lee$ran.
City of Fresno Planning. Commission., 205
Fresno City,Hall APR 0 4
2600 Fresno Street
Ptanrnng bmsion
Fresrio, CA<�93721` merit Department=
Develop
DITY CSF FRESNO
RE. Vesting Tentative Tract 1Viap No 5232
Honorable Commissioner$rand,
We would like to requesf that the Aforementioned enti lementr scheduled for hearing on April 6;.
2005,be continued to a later date,no.sooner than.the next scheduled Planning Comrrnssion
=meeting on April 20 The final.EIR for the Fancher Creep Project was notmade available until'.
-:Friday;.April 1, which has not given'•us Buff cient time to:,revieW the: ocumentand meet with our
assoeationmembers to discuss the EIR and.-mrtigahng measures proposed
Due to'&size and.Ti-nTact. of the Fancher Creek Pro�eat,we would appreciate any;cons deration
you may allow us to reasonably review and discligs the issues,with our members,and neighbors,
in order to help contribute to the well planned growth of our southeast neighborhood
Thank°you for you •consideration
Sincerely;
°Joanne K. Tolladay
Secretary; SFCA
_,. .. .
:, .
i :: _
`' �
._
A _ � �.
'. -� _ .�
1 ..� .. ..
.. .. � - '.
..
.. � �
.. t ..
� '
_ � .� ..
:. .., n
..
• .. � �.
.11lj
�,
�.. -
.. � .: .'
.. � ..
- - - _ .. �
..
- _
E
}
_ -
,:
f...
; .
'.
i
1
�. .
L
Sent 6'y: LAW OFFICES ; 5594423164; Mar-31 -05 -34AM; Page 1/1
PAT I lE~ N-C £ _ `---- ..-
-M I .L-R-O
Ln®rHR/Lit:tNUAnA PR Lerts: . k'
_lldarr.}i31�1US
Nick YovinoAR 3 1 205
Director of Planning and L3evefopment Planning Division
City of l rasnu Development Department
CITY OF FRESNO
by fax to 498-1912
RI:: April 6,2005 Planiung Comm'ommission item: DEIR No. 10133`a .
(Fanchcret k)
Dear Mr. Yuvino:
I write on behalf of Medical'Adwcates for Healthy Air to request a continuance of
the Planning Commission hearin&on this,project.-.al which the Commissioners_will
(according to your T}epartment's.notice) "consider-the.proposed Final MR,and.make'
a recommendation.to.the City.Councilonthe appropriateriess-m d--adequar-}c Ql�tlie
document." }
I've just spoken to Mr. M n ifi, who m.forms a that the Fina; EIR is not yet availabb
to the public-he believes it-May be ready-this afternoon. Hovmv–er,this-short a time-
frame
imeframe will not allow-aderluate-opportunity.for.public evaluation and comment on the
FEIR (setting aside the question Gf haw-the Coma—iissioners dwatselv_es.will have time
to review it. :) itis-doubttul-that on-this-scliedule-tite Pfarfhing.Commissiori-=,Wd-'
a meaningful public hearing on this comp lex and extensive project_
As you know,our review-ol'ifre-Draft£tR raised serious questions about the
adequacy of its air quality and public health impact analyses. I am also now aware
that (in-apparent contravention of our settfejh:nt agreement on the General Plan) the
City has not applied the San Joaquin Valley Growth Response Initiative tools to this
project; my clients have-requested,that.I.expr.ess.to.yau.their.concern..on-this
'subjact.
I hope to.hear from you an-tiiisregtrest nu-later drarr ctose'of business-tomorrow, in
order to make calendar adjustments if necessary.:Thanking you for your attention to
these matters,.1 remain,
Very truly yo
J
PA=
CE MILROi?L
PM-eh
cc: Lee Brand,Chair;Planning Commission—by fax to 228-6. 799-,
Medical Advocates Rjr Healthy Air Fx,^^, Carffnsnia
a< Mike Slater—by fax to 488-1084` 372e
Mike Sanchez --by.fax.to:498-10.12
5591442.31 l 1
- pm�47(al¢wt�snu'etu
U4/ 10/ GUUO I -LJ rn.,% '1lJ LLO ;),1 DAX%k-k Urr In 1'r,T1 1J _Inarr - tl{J. U U Z
One Market
BARG
Steuart Tower,Suite 2700
COFFIN San Francisco,CA 94105-1475
LEWIS Tel 415 328 5400. _
TPAPP Fax 415228 5450
www.bc1.tlaw.com
ATTORNEYS _ j -
<<r `
}
April 13, 2005
Via Facsimile
Fresno City Planning Commission
Fresno City Hall—Council Chamber,Second Floor
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno,.California 93721
Re: Supplemental Comments on Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR No. 10133 -Fancher Creek Development Project)
Dear Planning Commission Members:
We are.writing on behalf of Drs.Armen Michaelian, Shiro Ego and Arnold Gazan'an,
owners of a 75-percent undivided interest in a property in the City of Fresno bordering Clovis
Avenue known as the"MEGGparcel,"APN 313-021-01. The MEGG parcel will be directly .
and significantly affected by the Fancher Creek Development Project("Project"). Previously,
we submitted comments in response to the Notice of Preparation of the Environmental Impact
Report("EIR") for the Projectt and in.response to the Draft EIR.2 In addition,on April 6, 2005,
we submitted our preliminary written comments on the Final EIR.3 This letter contains our
supplementary written comments on the Final EIR. These comments further explain the
deficiencies in the EIR that must be cured for the document to be legally adequate.
If, despite the deficiencies explained in this and prior letters, the Commission
nevertheless decides to certify the EIR and approve the Project, the Conu-nission should, at a
y
t See March 16,2004 letter from B.Haughton to M. Sanchez, with attachments("NOP Comment Letter"),
on file with the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department: A copy of this letter without the submitted
attachments is contained in Appendix A of the Draft EIR.
2.
See November 29,2004 letter from B.Haughton to M. Sanchez, with enclosure("DEIR Comment Letter"),
on file with the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department. A copy of this letter is contained in the
Final EIR following page 20
See April 6,2005 Ietter from B.Haughton to Fresno City Planning Commission, with attachments("FEIR
Preliminary Comment Letter"),on file with the Planning Commission: The Doctors hereby incorporate the FEIR
Preliminary Comment Letter and its attachments in their entirety as part of the comments contained is this letter.
338491,1
{
04/13/2005 17:15 FAX 415 228 54BARG COFFIN LEWIS TRAPP 0 003
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 132 2005
Page 2 .
minimum,modify staff's proposed condition of approval number one(as specified in the April 6
staff report`) to partially address the Doctors'concerns.s
THE EIR IS DEFICIENT BECAUSE IT ERRONEOUSLY ASSUMES THAT THE MEGG PARCEL
IS AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT APPLICANT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FANCHER DRIVE,
WHICH IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY TO THE PROJECT
We previously submitted five comments on the Draft EIR related to the inclusion of
Fancher Drive in this Project. See DEIR Comment.Letter at pp. 2-7. Fancher Drive is a new
connector street that the EIR envisions will be constructed on and around the north and east sides
of the MEGG parcel as part of the transportation infrastructure necessary to this(wholly private)
project. We explained how the Draft EIR's analysis of Fancher Drive is predicated on the
flawed assumption that the necessary rights-of-way on the MEGG parcel are controlled by the
Project applicant, which is not.currently the case. We further explained in Comments 1 through
5 that numerous deficiencies in the Draft EIR.result from this flawed assumption and render the
Draft EIR legally.inadequate. As described in more detail below, the Final EIR does not
adequately address our comments,and the EIR remains. legally inadequate.
Comment 1: The project description is deficient because, contrary to the description, the
EIR describes the MEGG parcel as an integral part of the Project, rather than
as a separate property relevant.solely to the EIR's cumulative impacts analysis.
The E1R's project description states that"Fifty-two acres within the Regional.
Commercial area(MEGG properties) are not under the applicant's control and will not be zoned,
but are included in the EIR for cumulative analysis." Draft EIR at 1.1 (emphasis added). We
previously explained that this description is incorrect because portions of the MEGG parcel are
necessary for Fancher Drive, an essential part of the Project's transportation infrastructure. See
DEIR Comment Letter at pp. 2-3.1 .
City staff have effectively conceded that Comment 1 is correct. The April 6, 2005 staff
report includes (at Exhibit-C)a drawing showing the rights of way across the MEGG parcel that
will be needed for construction of Fancher Drive. The report also recommends (at page 22) a
condition of approval requiring the Project applicant to acquire the necessary rights-of-way from
the owners of the MEGG parcel prior to_beginning development of the commercial portion of the
Proj ect.
See April 6,2005 Report to the Planning Commission From Planning Division Staff,Subject:
Consideration of Rezone Application R-04-14, Conditional Use Permit No.C-04-79,Vesting Tentative Tract Map
No.T-5232 and Environmental Impact Report No. 10133 (SCH No. 2004021071)for the"Fancher Creek'.'Project,
on file with the Planning Commission.
s -
For a discussion of why this modified condition of approval should be adopted,see FEIR Preliminary
Comment Letter at pp.4-7,and Part III of this letter,below. The exact text of the Doctors'proposed languap'is
found at Tab 9 to the FEIR Preliminary Comment Letter and is restated later in this letter.
-
338491.I
U4/13'/ZUUb l/ :it) 1'h) 41b ZZ6 04:' 1 BAKU UUr`rliv. LE.WIS TRSPY 10004'
Fresno City.Planning Commission
April 13, 2005
Page 3
Although City staff now expressly recognize the MEGG parcel is part of the Project,
however, the Final EIR fails to revise the EIR's project description to take into account this
recognition. The City's response (in the Final EIR) to our Comment I provides no rational basis
(let alone substantial evidence) supporting the City's failure to correct the EIR's project
description. In fact,the City's response is so confusing as to frustrate the EIR's chief purpose:
to clearly communicate to the public and the City's decision-makers the nature and impacts of
the Project. The only portions of the response that appear to directly addressComment 1 are the
following statements:
the proposed commercial designation controlled by (the Project applicant] (not
including the MEGG parcel) does not require the construction of... . Fancher Drive for
approval and.operation';
(b) "The EIR must assume that the MEGG parcel will develop with regional commercial
uses at some point in the future as shown on the 2025 Fresno General Plan and therefore shows
and analyzes the planned circulation system as adopted as part of the.General.Plan'?;
(c) "Figure 2.2-1 [showing Fancher Drive] was prepared by the traffic consultant . . It
is not intended to be an engineered drawing with exact locations of future roadways"; and
d "The MEGG parcel is not integral to the develo ment of the balance of11the project
but it is integral to implementation of the General Plan circulation system. . . Because
development of the balance of the project does not require the MEGG parcel, the project
description is considered adequate for purposes of describing the planned circulation system in
the project area." .Final EIR at 117 14.
None of these four statements—whether read alone, in combination, or in the context of
the rest of the Final EIR—renders the current project description legally adequate. Response (a)
appears to state that the commercial portion of the Project does not require construction of
Fancher Drive. However, this cannot be.true, because the Draft EIR's entire analysis is
predicated on the construction of this street to serve the commercial portion of the Project (as
discussed in more detail in our Comments 2 through 5). Response(b) merely states!,that the
EIR's cumulative impacts analysis must include the MEGG parcel. This is a non sequitur, as we
never said it should be excluded from that analysis,,but rather that it must also be included for
more rigorous analysis as an integral part of this Project. Response (c) suggests'there may be
some doubt as to whether Fancher Drive will actually be built on portions of the MEGG parcel.
Yet the April 6 staff report erases any such doubt by(1) proposing a condition requiring the
Project applicant to acquire rights-of-way on the MEGG parcel and (2) including a detailed map
showing the location of those rights-of-way on the MEGG parcel. Response(d) is another non
sequitur. Even if(as the response suggests without supporting evidence) the MEGG parcel were
not integral to the non-commercial portions of the Project, it is integral to the commercial portion
of the Project; a fact which should be reflected in the project description and impact analysis.
338491.1
'04/13/2005 17:16 FAX 415 228 54n BARG COFFIN LEWIS TRAPP. 0]005
.Fresno City Planning Commission - -- -- - - —
April 13,2005
Page.4
In any event, the City has chosen not to revise the EIR's Project Description to render it
accurate and complete, as required by law. County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles, 71 Cal.App.3d
185, 199 (1977); City of Santee v. County of San Diego, 214 Ca1.App.3d 1438, 1450 (1989). The
EIR therefore artificially narrows the Project Description to minimize the project's impacts and
undercut public review,rendering the EIR legally deficient.
Comment 2: The EIR is deficient because it is internally inconsistent: though admitting that
the MEGG parcel is not under the Project applicant's control, the EIR assumes
that the Project applicant has the right to build transportation infrastructure
necessary to the Project on the MEGG parcel.
As we explained in Comment 1, transportation infrastructure necessary to the Project is
planned for construction on the MEGG parcel as part of the Project,yet the project description
admits that the MEGG parcel is "not under the applicant's control." Draft EIR at 1.1. The Draft
EIR contains no discussion of how this key issue will or could be resolved, and therefore is
internally inconsistent. See DEIR Comment Letter at p. 4.
The Final EIR does not address this internal inconsistency. Instead;relying on the
inadequate analysis contained in its response to Comment 1, the City merely responds by stating:
"The fact that the MEGG parcel.is not under the applicant's control is not relevant." Final EIR
at p. 14. As discussed above, however, the staff report concedes the Project requires the
construction of Fancher Drive on portions of the MEGG parcel. Yet the Final EIR fails to
address the key question: what scenarios are likely if the applicant.fails to gain control of those
portions? Will there be no connecting street? Will there be one somewhere else? Are there -
other possible scenarios? What will the traffic(and other) impacts be in each scenario? The
EIR's failure pose or answer these questions renders it legally inadequate as an informational
document under CEQA by depriving the public and decision-makers the opportunity to fully
understand the environmental impacts of the Project. Pub. Res.Code § 21061; 14 Cal. Code
Regs. §15121.
Comment 3: The EIR is deficient because it may mislead readers to believe that.the City will
resolve the internal inconsistency described above by using the City's eminent
domain power (to condemn portions of the MEGG parcel for construction of
transportation infrastructure to serve a wholly private Project), which the City
cannot legally do.
We previously explained that using the City's eminent domain power to take portions of
the MEGG parcel from its current owners to facilitate the development of private land owned by
.the Project applicant would violate the state and federal constitutions. See DEIR Comment
Letter at pp. 4-5; U.S. Const. Amend. 5; Cal. Const. Art. I, §14; Hawaii Housing Authority v.
Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229, 241 (1984). City and County of San Francisco v. Ross,44 Cal.2d 52, 59
(1955). We also explained why the City's condemnation of rights-of-way on the MEGG parcel
for the construction of Fancher Drive would not be for a legitimate public use and therefore
would be illegal. See Part III below, and FEIR Preliminary Comment Letter at pp. 4-7.
338491.1
V'It 1d/ ZuVO 1f I raA `t 10 440 OW"" wiAu rrllr,Lr.YY1J 1tuirr - - 10006' c
Fresno City Planning Commission .
April 13, 2005
Page 5 1
1
. . .Therefore, we requested that the EIR explicitly state that the City cannot"use its eminent domain
power to condemn property to facilitate the applicant's wholly private project." DEIR Comment
Letter at p. 5.
The Final EIR does not revise the EIR to include the requested statement. Instead, the
City's response to this comment.states: "The use of eminent domain is not discussed in the EIR'
because such action by the City. . . is not presently contemplated, and is therefore considered too
speculative for discussion." Final EIR at p. 14.. Additionally, the response states (also at p. 14): `
The City may use its power of eminent domain to secure right-of-way,for
public.streets but uses that right infrequently and is not anticipated in this
case. . . . Eminent domain would only be usedfor broad public benefit, in
this case, to secure right-of-way for a public street designated on the
General Plan Circulation Element.
1
Thus,the City indicates it has no present plans to condemn for this Project, and, if it does
condemn in the.future, it would only be for a legitimate public use. Unfortunately,the Final EIR ..
ignores the key issue: whether construction of Fancher Drive would be a legitimate public use,
or would instead be for the private benefit of the Project proponent.
}
Comment 4: The traffic impact study on which the EIR is based is deficient because it does
not analyze the traffic impacts resulting from the Project if transportation
infrastructure necessaryfor the Project cannot be built on the MEGG parcel.
As previously explained, the Draft EIR's traffic impact study (TIS) is deficient because it
depends on the erroneous assumption(unsupported by any evidence)that the applicant will
acquire the necessary portions of the MEGG parcel and build Fancher Drive. See D!EIR
Comment Letter at pp. 5-6..
The City does not dispute that the adequacy of the TIS is critical to the adequacy of the
Draft EIR, because the Draft EM's analysis of traffic and circulation impacts resulting from the
Project is based wholly'on the TIS. DEIR at 2.2.1. Moreover,in the Final Ea's response to
our Comment 4, the City explicitly recognizes that"an EIR should not include speculation or
unsubstantiated opinion." However, the City's response then goes on to state: "There is no
evidence to suggest that the components of the planned street system on the MEGG property will
not be constructed in the foreseeable future."..Final.EIR at p. 16.
1
Not so. The NOP Comment Letter, the DEIR Comment Letter, the EIR itself, and the
City's records regarding.the history of this Project and Fancher Drive provide substantial
evidence that (1)Fancher Drive will not be built if the Project is not approved, (2) if!the Project
is approved, the Project proponent does not have the right to construct Fancher Drive, on the
MEGG Parcel, (3) no alternative location of Fancher Drive has been proposed that does not
require portions of the MEGG Parcel, (4) use of the City's eminent domain power to I obtain
right-of-way for Fancher Drive is "not anticipated" and "not presently contemplated (as stated
338491.1
04/'13/2005 -17:16 FAX x415 228 5a"'` BARG. COFFIN LEWIS TRAPP 9 007
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 13, 2005
Page 6
by the City in the Final EIR) and (5)the Doctors,who own a 75 percent undivided interest in the
MEGG parcel, believe`construction of Fancher Drive,as proposed, is contrary to the public (and
the Doctors') interest.
The Final EIR's assertion that there is no such evidence is false and misleading,
rendering the EIR legally inadequate for this reason, as well as the EIR's failure to correct the
previously-noted deficiency in the TIS.
Comment 5: The traffic and circulation analysis in the EIR (section 2.2) is deficient, because
it does not evaluate the potential for significant traffic impacts resulting from
the Project if transportation infrastructure necessaryfor the Project cannot be ;
built on the MEGG parcel.
Also as previously explained, the Draft EIR"is deficient because it does not identify or
mitigate the significant impacts that may result from the Project if the MEGG-based traffic
infrastructure is not constructed, due to the Project applicant not controlling the MEGG parcel.
See DEIR Comment Letter at pp. 6-7.
The City's response in the Final EIR is curiously brief in light of the 7.5-inch-thick TIS
l that is 1 the sole support for the EIR's circulation analysis and 2 wholl predicated on
O PP Y O Y
construction of Fancher Drive and an extension of Tulare Avenue across the MEGG parcel.
As stated in response No: 1, in the unlikely event that planned road
improvements are not constructed on the MEGG parcel,'redistributed
traffic is not expected to result in adverse effects on project area
intersections.
Final EIR at p. 16. The referenced.text in response No. 1 notes that, in response to the Doctors'
concerns, "the traffic consultant for the EIR (TPG Consultants)was asked to review circulation
issues"assuming Fancher Drive and the extension of Tulare were not built. The sole results of
that review (as far as can be determined from the record) are two paragraphs found on the bottom
half of page 13 of the Final EIR. The second of those paragraphs concludes that elimination of
these streets "would not have a significant effect" on traffic circulation in the area. Final EIR at
p. 13.
p
In other words, City staff concede the study of this issue is essential to the EIR but assert
that half a page of unsupported conclusions should suffice where a 7.5-inch-thick detailed
analysis was deemed necessary before. We are told that 1,450 PM peak hour,trips were
projected for the Tulare Street extension east of Clovis Avenue. Where does this number come
from? There is no citation to any source. Nor does the City's response even address how many
peak hour trips were projected for Fancher Drive..For traffic on the west side of the Project, the
City's response assumes the traffic that would have passed eastward through the site on Tulare
will instead head south and north pmClovis and thence east on Belmont Avenue and Kings
Canyon Road. The response then concludes (with one general citation to the entire TIS, but no
338491.1
VY/-1J/ LV V 1/ 11 -i'AA 4 t 440 1)40 llnl\U uvrr l-1V Lnff1J lilnrr - WJ UU4$ ..
Fresno.City Planning Commission
April I3, 2005
Page 7 j
Page citation) that the levels of service (LOSS) at the Clovis-Belmont and Clovis-Kings Canyon
intersections will not be significantly affected. Simply stating the conclusion in this way does
not pass muster under CEQA. The supporting evidence must be articulated, and the rational
connection between the,evidence and the conclusion must be explained. CEQA requires that the
entire analytical pathway be laid plain for all to see and critique.
Moreover, there is no discussion at all of what will happen at the intersections of(1)
Kings Canyon and South Argyle Avenue and (2) South Argyle and East Fancher Creek Avenue.6
These intersections can expect significant additional traffic loading from the residential portions
of the project, and the failure to analyze them is especially troubling in light of plans' to build a
new school near them
Further, the City's response states (without support) that 800 of the above-referenced
redirected 1,450 PM peak hour trips will flow in and out of the Project's dead-end driveway
emptying into Clovis. There is no discussion of the resulting impact on the LOS for the (1)
Clovis-driveway intersection, (2) segment of Clovis between Belmont and Kings Canyon
(which,presumably;will have some effect from an additional several hundred left turns into and
out of the commercial portion of the Project per hour) or(3) the Tulare-Clovis intersection.
To comply with CEQA, the City should revise and recirculate the TIS and EIR to address
these issues.
II.
THE EIR IS DEFICIENT BECAUSE THE DRAFT EIR's INADEQUATE {.
ANALYSIS OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE Fi{NAL EIR
We also made the following comment regarding the Draft EIR's analysis of'cumulative
impacts: y
Comment 8: The EIR's analysis of cumulative impacts (section 3.4) is de ccient because it
p f
lacks the required specificity and detail regarding the assumptions!on which the
analysis is based.
We delineated why the Draft EIR's discussion of cumulative impacts is legally
inadequate. See DEIR Comment.Letter at pp. 10-11. Specifically, we explained that the Draft
EIR does not comply with the CEQA Guideline stating that the following are "necessary to an
adequate discussion of cumulative impacts": (I) a summary of projections contained in an
adopted general plan or in a prior adopted or'certified environmental document which described
or evaluated regional or areawide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact,.and(2)
6 The City's notice of the April 6,2005 Planning Commission hearing on this Project(Exhibit 8 to our April
6 letter)called the latter street"East Fancher Creek Avenue,."while the conceptual roadway alignment drawing
included in the traffic impact discussion of the Draft EIR(at p.2.2.14)refers to it as"Fancher Creek Boulevard.
7 Again,seethe.City's notice of the.April 6,2005 Planning Commission hearing on this Project:
•
338491.1
04/13/2005 .17:17 FAX 415 228 5a r." BARG COFFIN LEW:IS TRAPP Z009
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 13, 2005
Page B
definition of the geographic scope of the area affected by the cumulative effect, and a reasonable
explanation for the geographic limitation used. 14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15130(b). We said section
3.4 of the EIR should be revised to include these two necessary elements.
The Final EIR fails to revise section 3.4. Moreover, the City's response to our Comment
8 articulates no basis for the City's decision not to make the suggested revisions. The City's
response does not even directly address the comment, instead merely stating that:
(a) the Project is consistent with the General Plan,
(b) "many potential environmental impacts of the project have been evaluated in the Final
Master.EIR" for the General Plan, and
(c) the Master EIR contains an analysis of cumulative impacts of general plan"
implementation,and should therefore be consulted for a full discussion of those impacts.
Final EIR at pp. 19-20.
The Doctors do not disagree with points (b) 6r:(c),8 but, even assuming all three points
are true, these assertions do not respond to the.Doctors' comment, which concerns specific,
necessary information and analysis missing from section 3.4 of the EIR for the Project. The EIR
f fails to (1) include a summary of the projections in the 2025 General Plan or Final Master EIR
upon which the EIR relies or(2) define the geographic scope of the cumulative effects related to
the Project, much less provide any explanation(reasonable or otherwise) for such a scope. As a
result, the public and.City decision-makers have no basis for understanding the EIR's findings
regarding significant cumulative impacts, much less assessing whether such findings are well-
founded. The EIR should be revised andrecirculated to correct these deficiencies.
IIh
BECAUSE EVIDENCE SUGGESTS THAT FANCHER DRIVE WAS
ERRONEOUSLY AND IMPROPERLY INCLUDED IN THE 2025 GENERAL PLAN,
THE CITY SHOULD ADOPT THE DOCTORS' PROPOSED REVISION
TO STAFF'S CONDITION OF APPROVAL REGARDING CITY USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN
In our preliminary comments on the Final EIR, we submitted evidence indicating that the
addition of Fancher Drive to the City's 2025 General Plan was erroneous and improper, and that
Fancher Dave is therefore not properly apart of the 2025 General Plan. We further described
how this conclusion has two implications. First, the Project, as proposed,is inconsistent with the
2025 General"Plan,properly viewed without the erroneous addition of Fancher Drive. Second,
the first condition of approval proposed by City staff.in the April 6 staff report does not cure this
s The Doctors disagree with point(a),as discussed in the NOP Comment letter at pp.2-3,the FEIR
Preliminary Comment Letter at pp.4-7,and in this letter,at Part III,below.
338491.1
lrAW DAN" l Urr11v L1 YY1J lKAYY Lgi°1°
I
Fresno City Planning Commission .
April 13, 2005
Page 9 .
inconsistency, nor doesitensure that the City's use of its condemnation power to secure the right
of way for Fancher Drive,if needed, is for a legitimate public use.9
If the Planning Commission, despite the legal deficiencies we have identified, is inclined
to recommend certification of the EIR and approval of the Project following the he on April
20, staff's first recommended condition of approval should be revised to allow the City to ask for
and hear any additional evidence on this issue as part of a noticed public hearing before any
condemnation decision is made. The Doctors therefore propose that the City amend the second
paragraph of the condition of approval to read as follows (the Doctors' proposed language is
underlined):
In the event the City is required to acquire said public right-of-way by use
of its powers of eminent domain, City will proceed with a public hearing
to obtain a resolution of necessity pursuant [to] the Eminent Domain Law
of the State of California, including but not limited to Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1245.210 through 1245.270, and the resolution shall i
contain, in addition to other requirements imposed by Section 1245.230, a
finding by the City as to whether Fancher Drive/Boulevard was included
in the Transportation Element of the Fresno 2025 General Plan as a result 1
of clerical or other error or oversight.10
_i
Should the City ever need to use its condemnation power to take portions of the MEGG parcel
for Fancher Drive—which the City states is "not anticipated" and "not presently contemplated"
this addition would ensure that the City makes an informed decision at that tine as to whether
the resolution of necessity authorizing the taking is in support of a public use and therefore
authorized by state and federal law.
1
9 See FEIR Preliminary Comment Letter at pp.4-7 for a fuller discussion of these points.
t0. Prior to release of the April 6 staff report containing the first condition of approval, the Doctors proposed
that the condition be amended to include the underlined language, Staff considered,but ultimately rej ected,the
Doctors'proposal.
338491.1
04/13/2005 . 17:1.8 FAX,415 228 54" BARG,COFFIN, LEWIS TRAPP Q101.1
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 13, 2005
Page _10
The Doctors appreciate the opportunity to discuss their concerns regarding the EIR and
Project with the Commission. We request that this letter be included in the record and any
reports prepared by City staff concerning this Proj ect. Should the Commission or staff have any
questions regarding the comments contained in this letter, please feel free to contact me. I can be
reached at the telephone number and U.S. Mail address shown above or by e-mail at
bshna,bcltlaw.com. ThankY
ou for our consideration.
Y
Very truly yours,
Brian S. Haughton
cc: Dr. Armen Michaelian
Dr. Shiro Ego
Dr. Arnold Gazanan
433a91.1 9
�is .
One Market
BARD Steuart Tower,Suite 2700
COFFIN . San Francisco,CA 94105-1475
LEWIS Tel 415�228 5400
TRAPP Fax 415 228 5450
.. A T T O RN EYS - www.l)C1t1aW.00[Il. - .
L L P
April 6, 2005
i
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Fresno City Planning Commission }
Fresno City Hall—Council Chamber, Second Floor f
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, California 93721
Re: Preliminary.Comments on Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR No. 10133 —Fancher Creek Development Project)
Dear Planning Commission Members:
We are writing on behalf of Drs. Armen Michaelian, Shiro Ego and Arnold lGazarian,
owners of a 75-percent undivided interest in a property in the City of Fresno bordering Clovis
Avenue.known as the "MEGG parcel,"APN 313-021-01. The MEGG parcel will be directly
and significantly affected by the Fancher Creek Development Project("Project"). Previously,
we submitted comments in response to the Notice of Preparation of the Environmental Impact
Report ("EIR") for the Projects and in response to the Draft EIR.2 This letter contains our
preliminary written comments in response to the City's recent release of the Final EIR. Dr.
Gazarian and I also plan to make oral comments to the Planning Commission at the;hearing
today. The purpose ofthese written and oral comments-which cannot be comprelensive for
i
See March 16,2004 letter from B.Haughton to M.Sanchez,with attachments("NOP Comment Letter"),
on file with the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department. A copy of this letter without the submitted
attachments is contained in Appendix A of the Draft EIR. The Doctors hereby incorporate the NOP Comment
Letter and its attachments in their entirety as part of the comments contained in this letter.
Z See November 29,2004 letter from B.Haughton to M. Sanchez, with enclosure("DEIR Comment Letter"),
on file with the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department. A copy of this letter is contained in the
Final EIR following page 20. The Doctors hereby incorporate the DEIR Comment Letter and its enclosure in their
entirety as part of the comments contained in:his letter.
33
8362.1
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 6, 2005 -
Page 2
the reasons stated immediately below—is to inform the Planning Commission that there are
deficiencies in the EIR and the Project as currently proposed, and the Commission's action on
the Project should therefore be deferred until those deficiencies are cured. If the Commission
nevertheless decidesto take.action today, the Doctors propose the adoption of a condition of
approval, described below, that would partially address the Doctors'ors concerns.
THE DOCTORS,OTHER CONCERNED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC,
AND INTERESTED GOVERNMENT AGENCIES WERE GIVEN
INADEQUATE NOTICE OF THIS HEARING AND THE CONTENTS OF THE FINAL EIR
We received legal notice last Tuesday, March 29, that the Planning Commission would
today "consider the proposed Final EIR and make a recommendation to the City Council on the
appropriateness and adequacy of the document." As no Final EIR had yet been released by the
City, we immediately sent a letter to the City requesting a copy of the Final EIR, so that we
could prepare our comments.3 It was not until late on Thursday, March 31 only six days before
this hearing that the City released the Final EIR to the public.
The is no need for this rush to judgment,particularly in light of the considerable public
interest in—and controversy surrounding—.this Project. The Doctors are not the only ones
affected by this unusually accelerated process. The nineteen comment letters contained in the
Final EIR.are evidence that this project has raised a host of issues and concerns among numerous
City residents and property owners, government agencies, and community groups. Whether or
not such an abbreviated review period is contrary to law,it is unfair to those who have invested
significant time and energy in commenting on the Draft EIR:. Those commentators should be
given a reasonable time to review the Final EIR, which contains over fifty.pages of City
responses to the numerous detailed points raised in the nineteen comment letters
The lack of reasonablenotice inhibits the ability of the Doctors and others to provide
informed feedback-and the ability of the Planning Commission to make an informed decision—
on the adequacy of this EIR and the desirability of this Project.4
THE EIR IS DEFICIENT BECAUSE IT ERRONEOUSLY ASSUMES THAT THE M[EGG PARCEL
IS AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT APPLICANT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FANCHER DRIVE,
WHICH IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY TO THE PROJECT
Based on our preliminary review, it appears that the Final EIR does not adequately,
address many of the serious concerns raised by the Doctors concerning the role of Fancher Drive
in the Project. Fancher Drive is a new connector street that the EIR envisions will be constructed '
on and around the north and east sides of the MEGG parcel as part of the transportation
3 A copy of this March 29,2005 letter from D.Sobelman to M. Sanchez is attached at Tab 1
a We understand that Caltrans submitted a letter to;the City on March 29,2005 expressing concerns similar
to those raised here by the Doctors.
338362.1
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 6, 2005
Page 3
infrastructure necessary to this (wholly private) project. In their DEIR Comment Letter, the
Doctors explained at length how the Draft EIR's analysis of Fancher Drive is predicated on the
flawed assumption that the necessary rights-of--way on the MEGG parcel are controlled by the
Project applicant,which is not currently the case. We further explained that numerous
deficiencies in the Draft EIR result from this flawed assumption and render the Draft EIR legally
inadequate. In particular: y
I
■ The Project Description is deficient,because, contrary to the Description, the Draft
EIR describes the MEGG parcel as an integral part of the Project,'rather than as a
separate property relevant solely to the Draft EIR's cumulative impacts1 analysis.
The Draft EIR is deficient because it is internally inconsistent: though admitting that
the MEGG parcel is not under the Project applicant's control, the Draft HEIR assumes
that the Project applicant has the right to build.Fancher Drive on the MEGG parcel.
The Draft EIR is deficient because it may mislead readers to believe that the City will
resolve the internal inconsistency described above by using the City's eminent
domain power (to condemn portions of the MEGG parcel for construction of Fancher
Drive to serve a wholly private Project),which the City cannot legally do.
■ The traffic impact study on which the Draft EIR is based is deficient because it does
not.analyze the traffic impacts resulting from the Project if Fancher Drive cannot be
built on the MEGG parcel.
■ The traffic and circulation analysis in the Draft EIR(section 2.2) is deficient, because
it does not evaluate the potential for significant traffic impacts_resultinglfrom the
Project if Fancher Drive`cannot be built on the.MEGG parcel.'
Due to the inadequate public review period for the Final EIR,we have not had the
opportunity to thoroughly analyze the City's responses to the DEIR Comment Letter, let alone
the time to prepare extensive written comments for consideration by the Planning Commission.
However, our initial review of the Final EIR indicates that the City has not adequately addressed
these issues in the Final EIR,'and, therefore,the EIR for the Project remains legally inadequate in
its current forma
I
f :
5 In addition to these comments specific to the role of the MEGG parcel in the Project,the Doctors also
raised concerns regarding the legal adequacy of the Draft EIR's analysis of impacts on biotic resources,cumulative
impacts, and other issues related to the Project:
6 We understand that Caltrans, in a 4/4/05 letter.from M.Stites to M.Sanchez,takes a similar position.
33836
2.1
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 6, 2005
Page 4
FANCHER DRIVE WAS ERRONEOUSLY AND IMPROPERLY ADDED TO THE 2025 GENERAL PLAN;
THEREFORE,(1)THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND
(2)THE CITY MAY NOT PROPERLY USE ITS EMINENT DOMAIN POWER TO ACQUIRE FANCHER
DRIVE FOR THE PRIVATE BENEFIT OF THE PROJECT APPLICANT
The Doctors have conducted extensive reviews of the City's files and engaged in
numerous conversations with City officials regarding how Fancher Drive was added to the City's
2025 General Plan. The resulting evidence indicates the addition was erroneous and improper:
• Prior to the City's update of its General Plan in 2001-02, the Transportation Element
of the Fresno General Plan provided for a rational extension of the existing street grid
in the vicinity of the MEGG parcel,via an eastward extension of Tulare Avenue
connecting Clovis Avenue with Fowler Avenue.
• In 2001,the Project applicant applied for a general plan amendment and rezoning for
a variant of the current Project (Plan Amendment Application No. A-01-21, Rezoning
Application Nos.R-01-55 and R-02-02). That application included a proposal to
create a major new thoroughfare—Fancher Creek Boulevard—running from Clovis
Avenue(at,a point a short distance north of the intersection with Tulare Avenue)
eastward and southeastward across the MEGG parcel to Tulare—the original version
of Fancher Drive.8 Not only was this idea ill-advised from a traffic and circulation
standpoint, it effectively-and improperly—called for the City to exercise its eminent
domain power to benefit one private property owner at the expense of another. The
proposal would have carved upthe MEGG parcel—greatly diminishing its
development potential—and condemned much of the MEGG parcel for Fancher
Drive to enhance the development potential of the Project applicant's adjacent
property.
• The Doctors, along with Caltrans and other interested parties, objected to this
proposed general plan amendment and rezoning. In 2002, the Project applicant
withdrew its application,and the general plan amendment was never approved. Not
surprisingly, the Doctors believed that the issue of adding Fancher Drive to the
General Plan had been put to rest. However, the withdrawal of the application
occurred while the City was engaged in its periodic comprehensive General Plan
update process, which ultimately yielded the current 2025 General Plan. And
although the Project applicant withdrew its application, the City nevertheless added
' Fancher Drive to the Transportation Element Map made part of the 2025 General
7 See graphic entitled"Street Network as Depicted in 1984 General Plan,"attached at Tab 2,and
enlargement of portion of this graphic showing area around the MEGG parcel,attached at Tab 3.
$ See graphic entitled"2001/2002 Prior Fancher Creek Project Proposal,Including General Plan Amendment
(Withdrawn),"attached at Tab 4.
- 338362.1
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 6, 2005
Page 5
Plan.' This was done without any notice to the Doctors and without any discussion or
any CEQA analysis. This happened notwithstanding that(1) the application for the
general plan amendment to add Fancher Drive had been withdrawn, (2) the project for
which Fancher Drive had been needed was no longer pending;.and (3) there was no
other reason for construction of Fancher Drive.
• In 2004,the Project applicant applied for approval of a project substantially similar to
the project proposed in 2001; this is the Project at issue today. As the Draft EIR
shows, the Project applicant has revised its plans for Fancher Drive by moving it to
the northern and easternsides of the MEGG parcel, rather than having ilt bisect the
MEGG parcel.10 However, even given this new alignment, Fancher Drive still
requires part of the MEGG parcel. The major difference between the current and
prior versions of the Project is that the applicant is not seeking a general plan
amendment for the current Project. This is because the Project applicant and City
staff take the position that the inclusion of Fancher Drive in the 2025 General Plan
has already addressed the issue. 4
• On March 29, 2005,we received the City's notice that a public hearing n the EIR
and the Project would take place today. The "Vicinity Map"on this notice shows the
other major element of transportation infrastructure proposed for the Project
Fancher Creek Boulevard-but does not show Fancher Drive.11 In light of the
controversy focused on Fancher Drive, including the City's use of its condemnation
power to further its construction,,we are puzzled as to why the notice's map omits it. .
The best explanation of this evidence is that someone at the City- assuming the General
Plan Amendment portion of the priorapplication would be granted-put FancherDrive into the
2025 General Plan while that application was pending and inadvertently forgot to remove it
when the application was withdrawn. In any event,the evidence indicates Fancher Drive is not
properly a part of the 2025 General Plan
This conclusion has two implications. First, the Project, as proposed, in inconsistent with
the 2025 General Plan, properly viewed without the erroneous addition of Fancher Drive.
. 1
The second implication relates to a condition of approval we understand staff is putting
before you today:.
9.. See graphic entitled"Street.Network As Depicted in 2025 General Plan,Adopted in 2002,"i attached at Tab
5 and enlargement of portion of this graphic showing area around MEGG parcel, attached at Tab 6.1
I
10 See graphic entitled"2004/2005 Current Fancher Creek Project Proposal,No Proposed General Plan
Amendment(Pending),"attached at Tab 7. . .
See graphic entitled"March 2005 Current Fancher Creek Project Proposal,Notice for Planning
Conunission Meeting,"attached at Tab 8.
338362.1 i
Fresno City Planning Commission _--
April 6,2005
Page 6
1) the Project applicant shall be required to acquire the necessary public street right-of-
way for Fancher Drive from the owners.of the MEGG parcel, and this requirement
..shall be a condition of approval for any special permit, such as a site plan or
conditional use permit,or other applicable development entitlement authorizing the
development of the Project applicant's property in accordance with the rezoning of
that property to C-YUGM;
2) this condition shall run with the land and bind any successor-in-interest to the Project
applicant; and
3) in the event the City is required to acquire this right-of-way for Fancher Drive by use
of its power of eminent domain,the City will proceed with a public hearing to obtain
a resolution of necessity pursuant to the state Eminent Domain Law.12
If the Planning Commission is inclined to recommend certification of the EIR and approval of
the Project following today's hearing, the third portion of this condition should be revised. This
is because the Project applicant's desire for portions of the MEGG parcel to allow constriction
of Fancher Drive does not constitute a public use justifying the City's exercise of eminent
domain power. This absence of public purpose is underscored by the erroneous and improper
.addition of Fancher Drive to the 2025 General Plan.
The Final EIR, at page 14,reflects staff s position that the City may use its eminent
domain power to take private land (i.e., the Doctors'property) to facilitate the private
development of.another landowner (i.e., by providing an internal street,Fancher Drive, that
enhances the developer/applicant's profits). Staff contend this taking is nevertheless for a
"public use"— a legal prerequisite to condemnation—because Fancher Drive is shown as a
connector street in the 2025 General Plan.
If, as the above evidence indicates, Fancher Drive was added to the General Plan as the .
result of an error, then even staff seems to concede condemnation would be improper. If the
Commission has any-doubt that Fancher Drive was erroneously added to the General Plan, it
should, at a minimum, ask for and hear any additional evidence on the issue as part of a noticed
public hearing before any condemnation decision is made.
Therefore, should the Commission choose to recommend approval of the Project today, it
should, at a minimum,revise the third portion of the above condition to provide that:
iz As of the time these written continents were prepared,we had not yet been provided with a copy of the staff
report for the April 6 hearing. We are therefore unaware of the exact language that City staff will recommend to the
Planning Commission with respect to this condition.
338362.1
Fresno City Planning Commission
April 6, 2005 1
^C I
Page 7 }I
3) in the event the City is required to acquire this right-of-way for Fancher Drive by use
of its powers of eminent domain, the City will proceed with a public hearing to obtain
a resolution of necessity pursuant to the state Eminent Domain Law, and that
resolution shall include a finding by the City as to whether Faucher
Drive/Boulevard was included in the Transportation Element of the Fresno 2025
General Plan as a result of clerical or other error oroversight.13
Should the City ever need to use its condemnation power to take portions of the MEGG parcel
for Fancher Drive—which the City has stated is unlikely1' —this condition would ensure that the
City makes an informed decision at that time as to whether the resolution of necessity
authorizing the taking is in support of a public.use'and therefore authorized by state and federal
law. .
The Doctors appreciate the opportunity to discuss their concerns regarding this EIR and
this Project with the Commission. For the reasons stated above, this letter should not be viewed
as an exhaustive discussion of the potential deficiencies of the EIR, and the Doctors reserve the
right to supplement this letter at a later date with new or revised comments. We request that this
Tetter be included in the record and any reports prepared by the City concerning this Project. .
Should the Commission or City staff have any questions regarding the comments contained in
this letter or made orally by myself or Dr. Gazarian at the hearing,please feel free to contact me.
I can be reached at the telephone number and U.S. Mail address shown above or by e-mail at
bsh cr bcltlaw.c' Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
Brian S. Haughton
BSH:efp i
I
cc: Dr. Armen Michaelian
Dr..Shiro Ego f
Dr:.Arnold Gazarian 4
13 We recently proposed exact language for this revised portion of the condition to City staff,but we were
subsequently informed that this language would not be included in the version of the condition that staff would
recommend to the Planning Commission. The text we presented to City staff is attached at Tab 9.
14 Final EIR at p. 14,response to Doctors comment 3 ("The City may use its power of�emine�t domain to
secure right-of-way.for public streets but uses that right.infrequently and is not anticipated in this case.").
38
3 362.1
I
One Market
BARD
Steuart Tower,Suite 2700
COFFIN" San Francisco,CA 94105-1475
LEWIS Tel 415 228 5400
-
T1tAPP Fax 415 228 5450
:. www.bcltlaw.com
AT T0FtNEYS - -
<<r
March 29,2005
VIA U.S. MAIL AND FACSIMILE
Mike Sanchez
City of Fresno
Planning and Development Department
.2600 Fresno Street,Room 3043
Fresno, CA 93721-3604
Re:- Proposed Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR NO. 10133 —. Fancher Creek Development Project)
Dear Mr. Sanchez:
We represent Drs. Armen Michaelian, Shiro Ego and Arnold Gazarian, owners of a 75-
percent undivided interest in a property in the City of Fresno bordering Clovis Avenue known as
the "MEGG'parcel, APN 3I3-021-01. We previously submitted written comments (dated
March 16, 2004)on the Notice of Preparation of the Environmental Impact Report(EIR) for the
Fancher Creek Development Project, as well as extensive written comments (dated November
29, 2004)on the appropriateness and adequacy of the Draft EIR subsequently prepared by the ,
City.
Late this morning l received,via U.S. mail,the City's notice of a Planning Commission
hearing on April 6, 2005 to consider the Project and the Project EIR. In part,the notice states
that the Planning Commission "will consider the proposed Final EIR and.make a
+ recommendation to the City Council on the appropriateness and adequacy of the document." We
previously requested that the City provide us with a copy of the proposed Final EIR for our
review as soon as it was completed: Although the Planning Commission hearing is now
apparently set for eight days from today, we have not received the proposed Final EIR or any
other written response to our November 29, 2004 comment letter.
Given the very limited timeframe for us to review the proposed Final EIR and prepare
our comments regarding this document prior to the April 6 hearing,please contact me today to
338'45:1
March 29, 2005
Page 2
discuss how we can most expeditiously obtain a copy of this document. My direct aelephone
line is (415)"228-5456.
•
•
ince el ,
Donald Sobehnan
DES:ecr
Enclosure: Notice of City of Fresno Planning Commission hearing
I
cc: ' . Michael Slater,Deputy City Attorney(via facsimile)
1
j
I
33824'.
f
't
.Im •
• 1
•
ID
4 t
n
Pill
WE-me
MEN
- upu0,wwurrr ��i■uelu- uuuulmut .. �■ `:•::+,.;:�•:,•::;.•..r.•��:;.::::
_ _ _� tertr�- ■�,•t■ av L.��rrrr■rrrrrrrr■•. -� .:a':::::�.:: '::�:•:•.•::
ANN
raw
Imago is "legal.
as� �r1� uunuuue.�- -� ■unuu■ � i
''�atr1 ■■ • -- 4uu=-r•JC .uuour.�. IiI .t•i'•:j��.•::3:•' ;;:
' �� urUlUtu• 111 '✓'11111111 •••••••••••:
• •aII ••'= — - � ":` ' 111►�.• — �✓.•::•::•::•:•:•:S.
rr��?� _'iii��i��� _ ��•,.�%��;v;
�S•�i�,� rt i�� •r��s ,/Ililll N �.
• ♦�� X1/11/11
a• r-■
15�� 'p.a:�r�� j -wool
. : 4111814161■ II •M Rr%Y / -•: 4111814161 i1���t11/1
_ '� �•r•• /•.: IIIItIrrrl -- alrrrll■
•• n—ploguruar nuntrlr. nrrrt
trn
1111111162
-- �•• � / y1 i� ��_�unnuu
i � //���i�1 �i �� }�i►��+.;��I��'_colli w
�j■®� t■I� L� // "�Yi,���i//M�- ` \,,IIS, �•• Ir
■ia � ■. j �i� \. .�.+..� , .iri��• 'sir
+L7� !�(rR ` `. ` : 111IU UIIr Ilat•
�:u!(K`t■I••:• I.1! 1.�III�/�III�1 111 /�l1/1 m'
■ r ■ ���r ������uaun mvuuun
�•
law.rrAll ■t1�1�1�t�►� ■�ri1������D1 114
■ • •• ♦� ♦- r•.�.t.•■
� � •rt►J, 111■�► '■ �rii../!�• i�1
CITY OF FRESNO
PLANNINGAND DEVELOPMENT.DEPARTMENT.
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMM ISSIOiV HEARING -PROPOSED ' FANCHER CREEK ' DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 10133
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fresno City Planning Commission in accordance with the procedures.of Articles 4
and 6, Chapter 12,of the Fresno.Municipal Code,will conduct a public hearing to consider the following applications,filed
by Fancher Creek Properties, pertaining to the proposed development of approximately 476 acres (Fancher Creek
Project) located on the northeast and northwest corners of East Kings Canyon Road and South Fowler Avenue (242
acres); the northwest and southwest corners of East Belmont and Armstrong Avenues(139 acres);and the northeast and
southeast corners of,East.Tulare Street alignment and South Clovis Avenue(95 acres).
1. Rezone Application No. R-04-14: Request to rezone 424 acres of property from AE-5/UGM (Five Acre
Agriculture Exclusive/Urban Growth Management) and AE-20 (County). to R-1/UGM (Single Family
Residential/Urban Growth Management) for 211 acres, to R-2/UGM (Low Density, Multiple Family
Residential/Urban Growth Management)for 32 acres, to C-2/UGM(Community Shopping Center/Urban Growth
Management)for 31 acres,to C-3/UGM(Regional Shopping Center/Urban Growth Management)for 43 acres,and
to M-1/UGM (Light Manufacturing/Urban Growth Management)for 107 acres. +
2. Conditional Use Permit No. C-04-79: 'Request to reduce the minimum lot size; front, side; and rear building
setbacks for the R-2 portion of .Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 5232 for 239 lots covering 32 iacres. The permit
is also requesting a private road that will serve as an alley for,a series of lots in the R-1 ;portion of Vesting
.Tentative Tract Map No. 5232.
3. Vesting Tentative Tract Map No.5232: Request to subdivide 234 acres.of property into a 687-lot single family
subdivision that will include five.remainder parcels and 25 outlots. The R-1 portion of the subdivision will include
448 single family lots covering 140.8 acres. The R-2 portion of.the project proposes.239 single!family lots on 32.2
acres of property:
4. Draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR) No:10133: An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for
the proposed project(rezone, conditional use permit, vesting tentative tract map, and parcel map applications)
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the-Planning Commission will consider the
proposed Final EIR and make a recommendation to the City Council on the appropriateness and adequacy of the
document.
FRESNO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Wednesday., April 6, 2005, 6:00 p.m., or thereafter .`
Fresno City Hall .- Council. Chamber, Second Floor,
2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721 I
I
The PlanningCommission's public hearing may be continued as needed to dates and times as determined necessary
P 9 Y ,
without further notice. The Planning Commission may close the public hearing at the conclusion of public testimony at its
April 6, 2005 meeting, or any other subsequent meeting. 1
Any interested person may appear at the public hearing and present testimony in regard to these matters. If you
challenge any of the above applications in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues,you,Ior.someone else,
raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission
at, or prior to, the public hearing, f
i
If you wish additional information, contact Planner.Mike Sanchez, Planning and Development Department, Planning
Division, Fresno City Hall, 2600 Fresno Street, Fresno, California 93721-3604, or by telephone at(559) 621-8040.
NICK P. YOVINO, Secretary
Fresno City Planning Commission
PUBLICATION: 'March 27, 2005
STREET NETWORK AS DEPICTED IN 1984 GENERAL PLAN
LEGEND ,
,
Freeway .......... Seedc Dma i .. _ @ L
aa f!
Eapreaeyray ' _ Callattar
r
. SmNe Fspr l m, .. ...Socar calbetor Y- - t '° - B ..C��..
SuPer Anodal. -------.gpedal CalkQar i
-_--_Arterial •-'---"Spedal Treatment , er'rr:on.l
t=
M
.........SCeni,-Adedd TrampanadonCorrldar - r -_ Bdrfmr
8 € ' g = _�' _ ♦,♦ t Penh
■ ,
Mae,
Is
An■ra
♦♦� , • r,
Aal(ald ,
t Y01,
_,eaoare
show. i ♦♦� �� 1 t
. I _/ • �- _;' T_«�'- _�_- --r _-!'«_-..,.« _ �.r_ -T-- --r-- •• _�. ala
t
AWaAdgm
F-� r _ ♦♦� t e t / i t _- t r /
Uidik
-- - ---Etii"
CL".. / . T
YeCIWy i . i i ♦ . LL■on
cr
Wood
Jr
�M .. ........ ....Z.. �. t ........
-
CalNaala-- 1 ..�.. .ter . �� ♦ r ..�
t
ca.ad. /
t t t t ' • , , . 1 Used.
N
Anrdr4.
� a
MGM : non
Et
c..a,l camel
xr € --------- -- - ---- -
I.r .e
JuOlw
_� s
STREET NETWORK AS DEPICTED IN 1984 GENERAL PLAN
1
Olive
Belmont
779 Tulare
Kings Canyon
lmrrr-r -Tr {
cn
U
L ?. E I
11 11 • ' ' " • " • '•
• • . . . 1 .
O
r i = -= �� .1..11/ ■r■■■■■ ��d1l1.1. .. . \ "- -� —
.� 11..!!1!/!/1/! ■■ ■
�� ' =: C� ■!1lr�� ■���1■ :\%��%: pp ■!/!11/1/1!/1■ ■■ `■ \ \`\ ``
� -ice- .. \tom V •• �• s. .. 1. -
. -. -� i� r11♦, �,�� �- �- -- .. 1/111!/1/!/I!■\�-
�� � �• s= -= f_.� '�' �- -- -. �� 111!11/11/11//111- =� � \
�/' •! •• �� \�I� ��� 1/1.1//11/111. �� 11101////■ �- 1■■ ����
�� ��/� � � �/ �� f11/!/.111/1/1■ �• !!!/!/111■ ..
�'' , ♦:� Ot �^ -,�� :���. 1/1111!11/11111 .�
,,� , �� \ • � .. .. 11/1/1/1111■
�/ ■. �• Z /111/r 1111111111'
\: .�
- 11.111111/II i �I - --
••. - ' I ryry��IIII��,IIIINI�, �• ,a . .• ,. •.x..11111 ��/,
-
-
XMIMannm�O�Bro
AS
.■■ - ® aNNEEM .
■ _ / // ` ,
. `� ■ t®ail1 j� �%/ . ■11■1111!1! 111�� ��
•� �j�u��\ /IIIIIIIIIIIIIMII\� ���
IL's !■��� �.� 1�,.■■�. . � .
■ :.an���;�� :�� •/ 111111111 1111111111 �: �■� ��
s � 11111111 1111111111 ��
;;ice s�� 11►�� -
■
Ag/OpA R-02-02 From AE-20(County) R-02-02 From AE-20(County) F R-01-65 FromAE-20(County)
R-01-65 From AE-&UGM A-01-21 From .. n Space.
to Mod.High Density
R-02-02 From AE-61UGM R-02-02 From AE-20(County)
:.A-01-21 From Med.Density Resid. A-01-21 From ..
to Community Commercial Mixed Use to Light Industnal
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT
• •
E
AMENDMENT310-120-27;310-130-35 60,
PLAN ' • tNT
• • • • �� , 08
:.
REZONING • NO. • •2 ZONE MAP:-2355.2356,24,9,5�W6
•
STREET NETWORK AS DEPICTED IN 2025
GENERAL PLAN, ADOPTED IN 2002
N
W
s 5 LEGEND
E i
LL Freeway
h
S e Expressway
Scale in Miles srCa
0 ...........I :.....
Scelnic Expressway
::z"•:._.. . -Cooper
City of Ftesoo t
Super Arterial
e
Planning&Development Depanmenl i ° °ef -
Planning Division 3 ♦ ---------
e 5 }.. shn Scenic Arterial
.
/ T..a.. Scelnic Drive
C—aq t t �,da ' Colllector
.Herndon .
• ■ 1 r 1 __Scelnic Collector
�.J. t 1 ■ ' 51... .......... l ..
r '
1
Bdlerd 1 ♦ ��.t.. ..�.. ..}. ..F .T----} .� �Brilard -
Shaw _ .T t.. .�.. ..f. ..�..��.}. Spew
1 t
Day.Wrg 1 - t ■ wnY.bur a _ ;' C c ; .
_Achim
Deco[. -
/ 1 • 1 1 / r 1 e e
SMdds ..�,. ..t.. �.t.. ..F.. ..F ..i. ..�.. ..�. ..� +..T. ..}.. r. Shield,
M.—
mmm�
t
�{..IN t . 1
Lr ...t. ..}.... ...�....T� .t MCXW.V� -
1 1 ■ 1 / .1 t / 1' t 1 1
Dllw
Bdmp.l L. . ..L. ..F. ..+.. }.. .�.. .�.. -
� .r _ Balmmt.
: .NLL.n � ■ 1 1 - ■ t t 1 11 111
--
..}. ..�.� ..�.. _'
Kinge Corryon _
1
. CaBlmlre ..t.. ..�.. t 1 CdllarNa _
. Church $ t - -
� Chweh
Janaan r. ..}. ..F. ..� .._.. Jens.
AmW / �� ■ .5p BaS f A—W.
NDnhNorth
/ a
teu.er
Cannel
1 l
. .. w E.:� •• .1 - 141./, i ..
1�. Y W
STREET-NETWORK AS DEPICTED IN
2025 GENERAL PLAN; ADOPTED IN 2002
Olive
z
Belmont
k
r
■
y = _ Tulare
6
. e '-
®
Kings Canyon
T O
U
Q
2004 / 2005 CL RENT FANCHER CREEK.PRC CT PROPOSAL
NO PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (PENDING)
I
J
..
.0
»
Q
22% 116% 6%
f�.
BELMONT,
0 5 �3a Y 9%
t .ys a 77t`t`
x 7
r•zz& � �h sr I�zh� �tr M°kTzi%eke?
`M, -
nk t �
yd �rtyN
;
'P4`ik rNf�,„ ,�y„L�- ty•fSS fi'^e �zy'�s Y.� y
' -'"� S-�F
Sit J nyn Y r p t> a Mow'- f .�
nk1 ri''•ft-l�hi;'"� 1 .at�'�k sV+c ✓
it
�? TULARE " y? :jw5i$ vTo
+tS(.rRAy'tr41'r'�N^¢ � t 1 a+� x t" U+t�^„5..i` E�v1'y,ar''•X-d 3' � '�Ic"z��`� :�X�. �5.r h>*eyN,ii {
mat
�S4•"��7��y" F5��:��jf+x�tNy`t j.r�7Y'-0,"}}n� sr?�+" N,:;( €�1'�`4=tYv MR,9% u r«r7�d . �'.us�'rki�s�!4`�.r,'l#'N.bµ•Xt��CgU jdi ata�s�3�
1!
������ ��'��k�q� r t,r��.•�'` z�rw 5 ,�cF7�r.i`F.(�'r�,7?:`r�d�"'`,��tu�v +,�-fT,nm'k �y�':Y f x�+ryi�.i+s� �rrr�
"'W. :niY's3F �.. r b h 1 •.x
a L y4 J'�tr,ya> G ti rm � G. x s� ?�51W,p�ynr
i?,`7ri.L +�S xCf Vis!` J•"'"x `+fit t YY�.:e'S(p` y1'Sw Y'm rvr S`Ss Mil
_
d�
'"7:�.a1t•.J?aS.+6�tu' ,,x�'.'.c �s.- '+-E "^ktti''•t�`ut�t�� 6 � ,� +,'�.r+ R. �Ya r vy is `x'�#�aalss sir 1
-W 3',y
>r+r� '�+,s s s spat,,,+ ".zk�E1tD' -•+' '�,,
j1Y,y%s���ay�ry'{ft'R�,Graty?v'�kw'���t?5°Y{_-I.��t8�+*`�'��}+�'rr`sx�euxF�,bk7'ctf"n��+K,'e`�o�ur rAx.r3�rlsvyar'�.xfpe`'y'x��u"ksw�T-v�'��i.i2"'i���sat.sc�a�3r,r�fc+?mY�rs.'pa`Ya�L+�t�-•'��r-k fiN`�1vbx"'p Sk�✓�r're���E�`'#s-,xL,,",k,,�,�'e�s'.,,s,p`'is#hre x3',.y}*a7r�yxs•a�rYfi5,r'-•J A�sk r°�;a34'�..'r a•d,it�r.i`frut+utr'
,7��s,t.�'
t
(N
j
N��1{I
.
'
GS CANYON
ktiIle
6%
6% 2%7/ LEGEND
-
,
` - Project Site
\ - Roundabout N
- NOT TO SCALE -
. _ - - (ROAD WAY ALM MENr CONCEPTW LQWY)
s � '
�0
RX
e .J.
I \ O•i4.• ••J:
_'•L'���=�utoaavua■91■�.irurr WA
814@191�..■uumununn■■r■ HEE
�
o �. .J��•:�03
rt►. •+• ■�� tttrttuuuur�=�■ .•...❖.�;;:;�,:•:;�:.%;J:.•:;;,.,.•.J;:
I ��=�� �� itAa S■■�■�.0��:�::tttnttnur■tt■t: � .. •••:'•'••.:d❖.❖:•�•:.❖:
a •••• �� ■� ■■�1 iiiiiiiiii
i Inuutu �� �••• .J.•Jo,.o�J3
r JJ •��:'•❖�• •JJ❖.•.o
� �1���I�/��'���C=���C unuano"t. �:.,J,J:;;�'I,.••. 3J
�j�� .tltttttt■tt1�� r11��I:'j�1111111C i O'i•'J•�ii•JiJ�•'
• •,, >>r/rrll �_ /,��O• ►�i r�1I��I I,1��=� % .JJ J.�•s••�.❖II
O',.: 1,r/ Ott '�����.• � I J�I�JI��e. � ••✓J'•�•••
.. rrrti i C�����i�Ia111111 C � :•:�.•2�
■ t .. �.. � e �.C ttuno.t�e a�aetat
1112111156
uunua.0 tnruuu
_uuxtru=p uuuuu
SAP
O�CpI �tnuan■
NEW
Moo
Msell
\• •uwuuu w
'7 ® .� —
'� -� ■ t11r11r111rISidHtQ %►
y-�lr1�!.�■� ..�prrrrrrre rrrlerrrrl ���®����,
r ��r ���ulrrrl6 9996199919;. ■��/�0��01�■re'
oil ■or■61111,91►!
■�111111■M 1/
�■a�tt� as mom � .■ �
* OIL
jl�'���■ll.\ala■■0��® �� WN Ran N'l
■ 111111IIM1111 a1■
rar r�•■•■r■•s■■■■Now
A
1
i.
Proposed lanauaae for insertion in condition of approval for Fancher ,Creek Project
}
{
In the event the City is required to acquire said public right-of-way by
use of its powers of eminent domain, City will proceed with a public
hearing to obtain a resolution of necessity pursuant to the Eminent
Domain Law of the State of California, including but not limited to
Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245.210 through 1245.270, and the
resolution shall contain, in addition to other requirements imposed by
Section 1245.230, a finding by the City as to whether Fancher {
Drive/Boulevard was included in the Transportation Element of1the
Fresno 2025 General Plan as a result of clerical or other error o
oversight.
}
{
1
r.
i
:l
i
t
1.
338344.1
{
Agft p 6 2095
Pfanning.Division ,
April 6, 2005 Development Department
CITY OF FRESNO
Memorandum
TO: . The City of Fresno Planning Commission, for inclusion in the project file.
FROM: Tom and Aletha Lang
5541 Columbia"Drive North
Fresno, CA 93727
RE: Fancher Creek Properties development plan
We applaud the Fresno Planning Commission's decision at their. March 23 meeting to require
Fresport Partners to help pay for improvements to the Shaw Avenue Freeway 99 interchange
and I have encouraged the City Council to unanimously support this action by upholding this
condition of approval in its final Ordinance for the Fresport project. We also applaud Deputy City
Attorney Kathryn Phelan and her office for advising the City's planning staff to begin proposing
such fees on.any project that meets the 100-trip threshold as was reported in The Fresno Bee.
In regards to Mr. Richards and Mr. Kashian's Faucher Creek. project, let me say at the.outset
that there are many of us in the Sunnyside neighborhood who are generally supportive of,the
proposal. It has the potential to be a great asset to southeast Fresno.
However, we are very concerned.that the project's-EIR as submitted is not specific enough in
addressing issues we know from experience will occur. This project amounts to "River Park II
and we are very concerned that Sunnyside area traffic will face gridlock if Mr. Richards and Mr.
Kashian are not required to. widen Clovis Avenue and improve intersections, including
signalization, landscaped medians„ left turn lanes, right-turn pockets and transit pockets along
Clovis. Avenue from.. Ashlan to Kings Canyon as conditions of approval in the. city's .final
ordinance.
Specifically, Clovis Avenue should be re-built to the same width and standards of Blackstone
Avenue in front of.River Park in north Fresno of the applicant's expense. The residents of
southeast Fresno deserve to be treated the same. The corner.of Clovis & Tulare should be
configured just like Blackstone & EI Paso.
Mr. Richards and ' Mr. ..Kashia-n should also be required to pay additional future Caltrans
mitigation fees for necessary widening of the 180 freeway exits and entrances serving Clovis
Avenue. This interchange was not designed with their project's massive average daily trip
generation in mind and is poised to become a repeat of the Friant Road fiasco off of.Freeway 41
unless it is improved as a condition of this project's approval.
We remind the "commissioners that at Friant.Road, when we finally realized we needed an
expanded off-ramp, Mr. Kashian -the same Mr. Kashian before you today— sold the property to
Caltrans.
. 1
-
To avoid this happening again, Mr. Kashian must be'required, as a condition of his new project's
approval, to relinquish an adequately. sized strip of property fronting Clovlis Avenue for road
widening. He and Mr. Richards should also be required to pay for widening of the Clovis Avenue
bridge over Fancher Creek, and for the acquisition of additional right-of-way for widening all the
way to Kings Canyon Rd. where the intersection already operates at an E or F deficiency
according to their own traffic study:.
It is not as if Mr. Richards or Mr. Kashian haven't been granted special treatment on this or
previous projects in the pasta In : fact, on :April .26, 2001, the Council jof Fresno County
Governments voted to ask Caltrans to re-design a section of the new Freeway 180 between
Fowler and Temperance on behalf of this very project; according to a conversation I had today
with Mr. Tony . Borenof COG. Lobbying by : Mayor.. Autry, Representative . Jim' Costa,
Assemblywoman Sarah Reyes, Nick Yovino and Bob Madewell caused COG`to take this section
of. freeway, out of Measure C. .and place it tinder the state's STIP program, which spent
approximately,$7 million of taxpayer money to redesign the freeway so it could accommodate
Mr. Richards and Mr. Kashian's Fancher Creek "multi-purpose trail" plans. !
i
This action, benefiting these developers, has held up completion of Freeway 180 to Temperance
Avenue because of state STIP fund cutbacks and Measure C's inability to fund the re-designed
freeway's completion at today's construction costs. Had Mr. Richards and Mr. Kashian not had
Mayor Autry, Representative Costa and others lobby for them and had left the original Freeway
180 design alone, Sunnyside would have its freeway completed to Teutperance today. If
i
Measure C fails to be.renewed,. we may have lost our opportunity to extend this freeway for
years.
None of this would be so bad if the applicant had agreed to reimburse the taxpayer for this $7
million as was suggested by Mr. Rory V: Quince of Caltrans in a January 12, !,2001 letter to Tom
Richards, or, at the very least, agree to pay future Caltrans mitigation fees for the 180 Freeway
Clovis, Fowler and Temperance Avenue interchanges improvements we know!will be needed.
In reading through the Final EIR, I have to raise the question who agreed to the scope of this
report? This document .includes. 53 acres of property not owned by the applicant as well as
property which has not yet been approved by LAFCo for annexation into the City of Fresno.
In fact, the property under Mr. Kashian's control amounts to less than half of the property along
Clovis Avenue that he is proposing for his "River Park 11" shopping center. The group of doctors
who own the other 53 acres have set a price for sale, but Mr: Kashian has refused to accept
their offer, according to their attorney, Brian Houghton of San Francisco. Is Mrd Kashian planning
to lobby the City of Fresno so they take the property through eminent domain and re-sell it to him
at a greatly-reduced price? We certainly hope not. Mr. Kashian needs to buy this parcel at its fair
market value before this EIR is approved.
It seems to me that this hearing is premature since the applicants should own all property
covered in the EIR, have LAFCo approval for annexation and allow more time for.all affected
agencies to comment fully on the Final EIR prior to coming before this commission.
2
I
To conclude, Fresno must learn from its past mistakes. It is simply not good planning or good
business to allow projects to not properly address impacts they will cause. Taxpayer subsidies
given to big developers simply have to end. We simply cannot afford it.
We cannot sit by and wonder why Fresno has a backlog of critical street and infrastructure
improvements in the billions of dollars when, at the same time, we allow developers to get by
without paying their fair share of costs which are a direct result of their projects. If we really care
about air quality and improving our city's infrastructure for the future, we cannot allow major
developers to tell us that they will not pay to improve roads or provide specific mitigations for
their impacts, except directly in front of their projects. Most other.cities in California have this
figured out. Fresno needs to join them.
Respectfully submitted,
Tom Lang
Attachments:
COG Annotated Agenda and Minutes, April 26, 2001 (6 pages)
Caltrans letter to Thomas G. Richards, The Penstar Group, January 12,2001 (2 pages)
}I
3
Pont-tr Fax Note r., ; M1,
COG Annotated Agenda,April26,2001,Page 3 To JDaptActSon: Information/discussion itc Phone.committee. Fan.
III. . TRANSPORTATION ACTION/DISI .
A .2002 State Transportation Improvement Program(STIP)Fund Estimate ff
i
Sgramary: Caltrans and California Transportation Commission(CTC) staff are currently in
the process of developing the 2002 State,Transportation Improvement Program(STIP)Fund
Estimate. In general, the fund estimate.provides a forecast of available transportation funding
for future years, based upon a series of revenue and expenditure assumptions developed by
Caltrans and CTC staff and approved the Commission. The STIP consists of two broad
programs, the regional program funded by 75% of new STIP fitnding and the interregional
program funded from 25%of new STIP funding. Under the statutes as amended by AB 2928,
the 2002 STIP will cover the five-year period from FY 2002-03 through FY 2006-07. A flow
chart that explains the STIP process in general,and a time schedule are included in the agenda .
package.
Initial discussion of the 2002 STIP Fund Estimate viill occur at the May 2001 C(C meeting,
however preliminary estimates which were recently released show that Fresno County shares,
for the 2002 Fund Estimate period would be approximately 581,929,000 (attachment): This
figure has the potential to increase or decrease based upon population changes that are
identified in the 2000 census. The first level of review and discussion on the 12002 Fund
Estimate will occur at the May 2001 California Transportation Committee meeting;
The estimated funding available for 2002 is nearly equal to our current STIP advance for SR
180 between Clovis and Temperance Aves, and rosy make it possible to repay this advance
and request another, advance for additional project improvements. . The current advance
includes funding right of way acquisition and design for the 180 East corridor allthe way to
Ftankwood Ave—which would make these segments "ready to deliver" and thereby good
candidates for a future advance. (BOREN)
Action. Information/discussion item. Direction maybe provided at the discretion of the
Committee.
B. 180 East(Clovis-Temperance)Potential Scope Cbange/Cost Increase
Summary: The Fresno City Council, on April 3rd,passed two resolutions that affect the 180
East (Clovis to Temperance) project_ This project is a major portion of the $89.5 million
advance recently secured from the California Transportation Commission, and is currently
scheduled for a construction.allocation vote (encumbrance) in May of.2004,just before the
end of the 2000 State Transportation Improvement Program timeframe..
This segment of 180 is already far along in design and is about to be sent to Caltrans'
structures division for engineering. The requests by the City of Fresno wouldiresult in a
design change, and an $11,213,000 cost increase to the project, (As of Apri! 17, 'these costs
may be adjusted due to further meetings between the City, Caltrans, and the developer) The
COG is being requested to identify and request appropriate funds for the changes `The most
lr7cely fund source is the State Transportation Improvement Program. The;impact of
requesting a cost increase at this time would be to request our advance also be increased from
$83:5 million to 594.7 million. This advance must be repaid from future Fresno County STIP
i
revenue:.`.
Staff has contacted.Cornmission staff to assess: 1) Does the State have sufficient cash to
.
provide the advance?,and 2)What likely impact would thin have on our ability to bid another
I
G
COG Annotated Agenda,April 26;2001,Page 4
additional project in the.2002 STIP cycle? Staff believes,the answer,to the first question will
be"yes". Commission staff confirms,that if the current outlook remains stable,the answer is
"yes". 'They also agreed with COG staff'that the answer to the second question at present is
we don't know". The issue of whether we could get a new advance while sitting on a large
existing advance becomes a factor of competition from other counties. If money is tight and
there are marry projects bid,the Commission may want to spread the dollars around the State, .
and a new advance would be less likely if we already have an existing large advance.
Included in your package are letters from Caltrans, and a trap of the area provided by the
owner of the property showing proposed changes to the zoning and circulation. The Wrap is
also being revised as a result of discussions with the.City of Fresno,but they will explain this
during their presentation on the 26th
The.March 23 letter from Caltrans to Barbara Goodwin, COG, reflects a request trade by
Barbara Goodwin to clarify the costs associated with revising the design of the State
Highway. What was desired was the ability to distinguish between what was requested to
accommodate the recreational potential for continuity along Faucher Creek (identified as
Alternative One by Caltrans) and what was requested to accommodate revised circulation
designs being proposed to the City(included.in the section identified as Alternative Two by
Caltrans). Caltrans has indicated a decision on design changes is needed by May, 2001, in
order to remain an track for the 2004 date.
The Roosevelt Community Plan identifies Faucher Creek as a rrtnln-purpose trail, and the
current design would have been in conflict, interrupting the continuity of the multi-purpose
trail. Alternative One identifies the changes needed at an increased cost of$2,381,000.
Alternative Two identifies an increased cost of 38,832,000 to allow two circulation system
changes being proposed to the City, and.for Fowler interchange improvements (31,943,000) .
needed to accommodate the increased traffic volumes, . The circulation system changes
(S6,889,000).are:
• a new under crossing to allow a realigned Armstrong Avenue with direct access to
Belmont.Avenue,and
• an extended Belmont Avenue structure(greater width)to allow for a proposed traffic ;
intersection east of Fowler Avenue.
c
Staff understands and supports the cost increase proposed as it relates to the Faneher Creek
multi-purpose trail.
Staff requested City of Fresno Planning and Public Works staff as well as Caltrans. to be
present.at TTC to better explain.the status of the proposals outlined in Alternative Two.
At the TTC meeting,this item resulted iu a great deal of discussion. COG Executive Director..
Barbara Goodwin explained her hesitation on making a recommendation regarding the
circulation system changes, specifically noting that it was not"clear" that the City of Fresno
was including the land use and circulation system changes that would need to be approved by
the City. Specifically;Resolution 2001-116 "requests the Fresno Council of Governments to
allocate appropriate funds for the design and construction of Freeway 180 west and Freeway
180 east in a manner that is consistent with the City of Fresno General Plan, r¢leva. t
community plans and which will also aeeommodatefuture growth.in the area."
Given the status of the City of Fresno General Plan,the lack of any current or pending general
plan amendment or circulation map (other than the owners proposal) showing the proposed
revisions, .Ms. Goodwin was reluctant to put COG at the front line of making a land use
decision as it would impact the freeway design absent clarity from the City of Fresno. `-
COG Annotated Agenda,April.26,2001,Page 5 Ii
I
There was mus .i ----
h discussion relevant to process and the proper order of approved laud use.
being the determining factor in transportation infrastructure design The owner off the subject
property was also present to answer questions and provide information to the ITTC. The
adequacy of the Fowler intembango was discussed, as well as the circulation changes .
.proposed.
The final outcome of the TTC.vote was to recommend support of the Fancher Creels multi-
purpose trail cost increase as being consistent with adopted plans, but that the oth,r elements
noted appeared not to be consistent with any currently approved plans.
At the PAC there was again a great deal of discussion However,the City of Fresno clarified
that the proposed land use changes are a part of the 2025 General Plan Draft just released for
review by the City. . In addition, to ensure appropriate action, a parallel general plan
amendment for the land use and circulation system is being processed which should make this
proposal a formal land use change within a 120 day timeframe. ` Mayor Autry, Council
President Perea, and Susan Good (Senator Costa's Representative) were all present to lend
support.to the action requested by the City of Fresno. The property owner was also present.
The PAC still had a number of questions, and ultimately voted to remain �eutral, but
presented a list of questions which are to be answered before the COG Board considers the
item at its April 26 meeting. The questions are.-
What
re:What is the County. of Fresno's position relative to the proposal and cost .
increase?
• is there a better refinement of costs which can be presented?
•. What timelines,projects,or funding are affected by the proposal? - -
• What is the Need. and Purpose for the Armstrong and Belmont structure
changes?
• What is the impact on the surrounding area in Fresno? This question#was in part
relative to other access points to the Fancher Creek Linear Park.
• What is the impact of this proposal on scheduled projects and other subsequent.
projects?
[Goodwin) JIt
tion
A : Staff recommends support of the Faneber Creek multi-purpose trail cost increase
.�.— PP Pure ,
and seeks guidance on the remainder of the proposal. A staff position on the remainder of the.
elements may be better clarified at the COG Board meeting, pendinganswers to the list of
questions. .
1
1
I
C. PUBLIC REARING:.2000-01 thru 2005-06 Federal Transportation Improvement Program
Amendment#9(Formal Amendment);Resolution 2001-10
Summary: 77tir type of item, in the future, will be covered by the,Memorandum of
Understanding between Caltrans and COG.for lump-sum programming. However, that
agreement is "in process"and nor yet,effective, hence this request. FTIP Amendment#9 is a
. request by Caltrans to amend Caltrans'.State Highway Operation & Protection Program
(SHOPP) by increasing construction costs fora median barrier project Located along 5R 94.
This project.extends for a total of 11 miles in three separate locations. The first location is
just south of the City of Selma (Mountain View Avenue to Second Street). The second is
along a six-lane segment of SR 99 extending from Fowler into Malaga(Fowler Switch Canal
to the South. Calwa Bridge). The third location is along a 4-lane urban freeway segment
located south.of the Fresno/Madera.County line (Biola Junction Overhead to the Herndon
}}
1.
I
;1FR-06-2005 12:02
P.04
COG Minutes, April 26, 2001, Page 3
B. 180 East(Clovis-Temperanvc)Potential Scopc Change/Cast Increase
The Fresno City Council, an April 3rd, passed two resolutions that affect the ISo East (Clovis to
Temperance) project. This project is a major portion of the $83.5 million advance recently secured from
the California Transportation Commission, and is currently scheduled for a construction allocation vote
(encumbrance): in May of 2004.just before the end of lite 2000 State Transportation-Improvement
Program timeframe:
This segment of 180 is already far along in design and is about to be sent to Caltrans'structures division
for engineering. The requests by the City of Fresno.would result in a design change, and an$11,213,000
cost increase to the project. (As of April 17, these costs nrav be adjusted due ro furrher meetings between
the City, Caltrans and the developer) The COG is being requested to identify And request appropriate
funds for the changes. The most likely fund source is the State Transportation Improvement Program.
The impact of requesting a cost increase at this time would be to request our advance.also be increased .
from S83.5 million to 594.7 million., This advance must be repaid from future Fresno County STIP
revenue.
Staff has contacted Commission staff to assess: 1) Does the State have Sufficient cash to provide the
advance?, and 2) What likely impact would this have on our ability to bid another additional project in
the 2002 STIP cycle? Staff believes the answer to the first question will be Commission staff
confirms, that if the current outlook remains stable, the answer is "yes". They also agreed with COG
staff tlu-tt the answer to the second question it present is "we don't know". The issue of whether we
could get a.new advance while sitting on a large existing advance becomes a factor of competition from
other counties. if.money is tight and there arc many projects bid. the Commission may want to spread . .
the dollars around the State, find a new advance would.be less likely if we already have an existing large
advance.
Included in your package were letters from Caltrans, and a map of the arra provided by the owner of the
property showing proposed changes to the zoning and circulation.
The March 23 letter from Caltrans to Barbara Goodwin, COG, reflects a request made by Barbara
Goodwin to clarify the costs associated Mth revising the design of the State Highway. What was desired
was the ability to distinguish between what was requested to accommodate lite recreational potential for
continuity along Fanchcr Creek (identified as Alternative One by Caltrans) and what was mquestcd to
accommodate revised circulation designs being proposed to the City(included in the section identified as
Alternative Two by Caltrans). Caltrans has indicated a decision on design-changes is needed by May,
2001, in order to remain an track for the 2004 date.
The Roosevelt Community Plan identifies Fancher Creek as a multi-purpose trail.and the current design -
would have been in Conflict, interrupting the continuity of the multi-purpose trail. Alternative One
identifies the changes needed at an increased cost of 52,381.000:
Alternative Two identifies an increased cost of$8.932.000 to allow two circulation system changes being
proposed to the City, and for Fowler inrcrchange improvements($1,943.000) needed to accommodate the
increased tra8'rc vohtines. The circutarion s%stem changes($6,889,000)are:
a ncnv under crossing to allow a re,aligued Armstrong Avemie With direct access to Belmont
Avenue.and
an extended Belmont Avenue structure (greater didlh) to 111110%V for a proposed traffic
intersection east of Fowler Avenue.
j
r
.F9J?
COG Minutes,April 26, 2001.Page 4
I
At.the TTC meeting, this item resulted in a great deal of discussion. COG Ex=rive Director Barbara
Goodwin c\plained her hesitation on snaking a recommendation regarding the Circulation system
changes, specifically noting that it .ras not'clear' that the City of Fresno was including the land use and
circulation system changes that would need to be approved by tilt City. Specifically, Resolution 2001-
116 "requests the Fresno Council of Governments to allocate appropriate funds for the design and
construction of Freewav 180 west and Freewav 180 east in a manner that is consistent ivith the City of
u
Fresno General Plan, relevant conndntry plans and.which will also accommodate future growth in the
area,"
Given the status of the City of Fresno Gcnernl Plan, the lack of any current or pending general plan
amendment or ciratlalion.map (oilier than the owner's proposal) showing the proposed revisions, Ms.
Goodwin was reluctant to put COG at the front line of trraking a land use decision as it*ould impact the
freeway design absent clarity from the City of Fresno. j -
Mere was much discussion relevant to process and the proper order of approved land use being the
delennining factor in transponation infrastntcture design. The owner of the subject property was also
present to ansttir questions and protide information to.the TTC. The adequacy of the Fowler
interchange was discussed,as well as the circulation changes proposed.
The final outcome of the TTC vote was to rccommend support of the Fancher Creek multi-purpose Vail
cost increase as being consistent with adopted plans, but that the other elements noted appeared not to be
consistent with any currently approved plans. At the PAC there was again a great deal of discussion.
However, the City of Fresno clarified iliar the proposed land use changes are a pan of lite 2025'General
Plan Draft just released for mvimv by the City. .In-addition, to ensure appropriate action, a parallel
general plan amendment for the land use.and circulation system is being processed which should inRk-c
this proposal a formal land use change within'a 120 day limefran►e. Mayor Autry, Council President
Peres, and Susan Good (Senator Costa's Representative) were all present to lend support to the action
-
requested by the City of Fresno. The property owner was also present. f
The PAC still had a number of questions. and ultimately voted to remainneutral,but presented a list of
questions which were to be answered before the COG Board considers the item at its April 26 meeting.
The questions nre. �
• What is the County of Fresno's position relative to the proposal and cost intrtrtse7
• Is there a better refinement of costs which can be presented'?
i
• What timelines.projects, or fitnding arc affected by the proposal?
• What is the Need and Purpose for the Armstrong and Belmont sttvcturethatiges7
• What is tile u
e impact on the surronding.area in Fresno? Tltis question was in part relative to
other access points io the Fimcher Creek Linear Park.
• What is the impact of ibis proposal on scheduled projects and other subsequent ptojects7
At the-Bonrd there were several presenrations and discussion of the issues. -
Barbara Goodwin noted COG staff supports increases for 1) Fancher Creek stnwjum and 2) Fawkr
Interchange improvements. With regard to City street circulation, COG staff deferred to City staff and
their presentation as this aspect of the changes requested had continued to evolve throughout the week.
Attention was called to several handouts in support of the projects requested by lite City Included in the
handouts were:
• An April 25 memorandum from Trinidod Rodriguez. Mayor of KErman and Chairman of the
COG Board
• An April 26 support letter from Steve Cortncr, Vice President,.Resources. Vulcan Materials
Company
APP-06-2005 12=02
® P.06
t COG Kautes, April 26.2U 1,Pagc
4.
• An April 234. letter from Senator Costa addressed Wividually'.-to each member of the COG
Board.
Henry Peres, City Council President introduced Senator Costa. In his presentation, Senator Costa
sought to answer two important questions; would this project cause delays of other scheduled projects
and would it preclude borrowing future funding? The answer to both those questions was no.
Presentations were also made by Assemblywoman Sarah Reyes, Mayor Autry, Nick Yovino and Bob
Madewell(Fresno City Staff and Rory Quince(Caltrans staff).`
Concern was expressed by Mayor Simonian. (Fowler) regarding the noise that may surround the
California Armenian Horne. Rory Quince(Caltrans) responded there would probably be sound walls. It
was.requested that city staff meet with representatives from Elie"Honic"and explain to them what would
occur. .
Manuel Cunha. Nissei Fanners League spoke in favor of ttac project.
Sandy Neri, Sanger City Council and Chamber questioned Whether they could change the design to
complete the project without using a full$8 million. Rory Quince{Caltrans)explained that to change
the,
design. Caltrans would have to redo the study which would cause delays and more expense. It was
clarified that the City's recommendation includes all the structures al F8.031.000.
There being no further public comment. John Wright(Kingsburg)made a motion than thechanges to this
project not exceed S8 million. The motion died for lack of a second.
A substitute motion was then made by Councihnember Ronquillo (Fresno) and seconded by Supervisor
Koligian (Fresno County) to support the Fanclier Creek multi-purpose trail cost increase and further
support the City of Fresno recommendations as follows
• A total increased cost of$9.031,000 to allow:
a new under crossing to allow a realigned Annstrong Avenue with direct access to Belmont
Avenue,and
• Fowler interchange improvements needed to accommodate the increased tratFic volumes.
A roll call vote was 61 led.for with all menibcrs present voting aye.
C. PUnLtC]REARrru;: 200041 thru 2005-06 PederaJ Transportation Improvement Program
Amendment#9(Formal Amendment); Resolution 2001-111
This type of ilenr, in the future, will be covered by the Alemorandum of Understanding between Caltrans
and COG for lump-suat prograpinring. However. rhai agreement is "in process"and not yet effective,
hence this request. FT1P Amctadnient#9 is n request by Caltrans to amend Caltrans' State Highway
Operation & Protection Program (SHOPP) by increasing construction costs for a median barrier project .
locoed along SR 99. This project extends for a total of l 1 miles in three separate locations. The first
location is just south of the City of Selma (Mountain View Avenue to Second Street).' The second is
along asix-lane segment of SR 99 extending from Fowler into Malaga (Fowler Switch Canal to the
South Capra Bridge). The third location is .along a 4-lane urban fnnvay segment located south of the
Fresno/Madera County line(Biola Junction Overhead to the Herndon Canal Bridge). There are mature
oleanders planted within the existing median at all three lorttions.
The Project Study Report (PSR)prepared for this project was approved on September 29, 1998. Tlae PSR.
prdposed metal beam median barriers for all three locations at an estimated cost of$2.6 million. The
project was subscquernly prograinined into the 1998 SHOPP Mid-Cycle for S2.8 million. The PSR was
prepared at a time when new standards for median barriers were being proposed. it was known that if
TOTAL P.06
n ,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS.TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY' GRAY DAVIS,Govemor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION t
2015 East Shields Avenue, Suite 100 _
FRESNO, CA 93726 .. e
TDD (559)488-4066
OFFICE (559)243-3463
FAX (559) 243-3426 L,
January 12, 2001
i
Thomas G. Richards 1
The Penstar Group
4910 E..Clinton Way, #103
Fresno, CA 983727-1505
j
I
Dear Mr. Richards: i
In July and December of.2000 you -met with representatives of Caltrans to discuss the
proposed southeast. Fresno Fancher Creek community development pians. The
Fancher' 'Creek development pians include a major street.: network, ,j 500 Acre
development, a linear park of Fancher Creek, 1600 to 2000 residential units, and a new
regional center. :
Caltrans freeway/expressway design considers a structure for Fancher Creek- and a box ,
culvert Briggs Canal. You requested Caltrans to, consider design modifications, and
proposed two design alternatives. Your. .requested modification',' Alternative :1,
considered raising the profile. to meet.standard_vertical clearance. requirements and a
single structure with a decked median that spans both Fancher Creek and Briggs Ditch.
Alternative 1 is estimated to cost an additional $8.1 million. Alternative 2 proposes the
same.design modification as Altemative 1 with the exception-of not decking the median.
Alternative 2 is estimated to cost an ,additional $6 million. In addition to the cost
mentioned above a new crossing positioned between Fowler Avenue and.Temperance
Avenue would cost an estimated $1.4 million for both alternatives.
The proposed'. design modifications increases project cost and additional scope
considerations that were not included in.the recently.programmed project incl>I ded in the
2000 STIP and the approved Freeway Agreement (March 2000). Any cost increases
that occur from the proposed scope change will be the responsibility of the developer to
.fund:
In order to include the modifications proposed in the Fancher Creek development plan as
discussed with Caltrans, the following is necessary:
• Acquire approval of-the proposed modifications to the scope,, cost and schedule from
the Council of Fresno County Governments (COFCG).
r
Richards
;lanuary 12, 2001 -_
Page 2
• Acquire approval from the appropriate local agencies, the City of Fresno and County
of Fresno, for which the project area involved lies within their jurisdiction.
• Acquire additional funding from (COFCG), FCTA or provide additional funding for the
proposed design modifications and the,related planning and environmental funding
issues.
Any changes to the scope and cost of the project may cause a subsequent delay to the
current schedule. It is necessary to acquire funding and project approval from (COFCG)
and/or FCTA by March .30, 2001. -
If.you have any questions, please contact me at-(559) 243-3463.
Sincerely,
Origlnal Signed by.
RORY V-- QUINCE .
RORY V. QUINCE
Project Manager
Program/Project Management
Rpr 11 . 05 04: 32p Obi R . Silverwood 55S . :'97-2857 P; 1 ''
FAX TRAlySMISSION r
DATE: tApril 11,2005 j
}
i
TO: Councilman Larry Westerlund i
Fresno City Council V D
b. FROM: Obie R. Silverwood AA 1 2 2005
.7001 Palomino Dr. .
Sanger, C4 93657 Planning Division
Tel. (559) 787-2245 Development Department
F.4X(SS9) 787-2857 clnl�OF FRESNO
OBIESILVERWOOD@,AOL.com
1
RE: Fancher Creek Project
E
Dear Councilman Westerlund: I
I read in the paper today that the Fancher Creek project is being considered by the
City Council and the Planning Commission. I live in Wonder Valley and woluld love
to have some decent commercial amenities (restaurants, theaters, etc.) within a
reasonable driving distance. Presently, my wife and I must drive to the River Park
or Fig Garden areas for any quality entertainment. Please approve the Fancher
Creek project as soon as possible, to accommodate those of us on the east side.
Thank you, 1
Obie R.Silverwood'
Co� ies: Mayor Alan Autry
P Y r}'
i
Fresno Planning Commission
NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER: (` 1 )
4
;
t ,
Mike Sanchez Fancher Creek Protect Page
.t
From: <Afmullen@aol.com> .
To: <mike.sanchez@Fresno.gov>
Date: 4/5/05 1:56PM
Subject: Fancher Creek Project
This email is to inform you of my strong support for the avove mentioned
project.) believe the development will benefit this entire area.ltis about time
that those of us who live in the south east Fresno area have the chance to
spent our money in our own neighborhood.
Anne Mullen,homeowner
598 S.Argyle#109
Fresno,Ca 93727
"Mike Sanchez Fancher,Creek Pro ect " Page 1
r
From: <Afmullen@a'ol.com> .,
To: <mike.sanchez@Fresno gov> j
Date:
4/5/05 2:02PM.. ;
Subject Fancher Creek Project
We are homeowners living in the general area of the proposed
Fancher Creek Project and we would like to be counted as supporting this
project.
James and Clara Dodson,homeowners
598 S.Argyle#108 -
Fre8no,Ca.9M7 I
j.
`�p04,
ltcr.
�-regw
t
-