CITY OF FRESNO PROPOSED ACQUISITION FOR
SENIOR CENTER AND HOUSING PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Initial Study prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
Prepared for
City of Fresno
Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services 1515 E. Divisadero Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Prepared by
Precision Civil Engineering, Inc.
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
June 2022
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 2 Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 7
1.1 Regulatory Information ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 7
1.2 Document Format ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 8 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 9
2.1 Project Title................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 9
2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address ................................ ................................ ...................... 9
2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number ................................ ................................ ................. 9
2.4 Study Prepared By ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 9
2.5 Project Location ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 9
2.6 Latitude and Longitude ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 12
2.7 General Plan Designation ................................ ................................ ............................... 12
2.8 Zoning ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 12
2.9 Description of Project ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 15
2.10 Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Setting ................................ .............................. 15
2.11 Site Preparation ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 16
2.12 Required Project Approvals ................................ ................................ ........................ 18
2.13 Technical Studies ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 18
2.14 Consultation with California Native American Tribes ................................ ................. 18 3 DETERMINATION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 20
3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................ ................................ ... 20
3.2 Determination ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 21 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................ ................................ ....... 22
4.1 AESTHETICS ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 22
4.1.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 22
4.1.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 23
4.1.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 26
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ................................ ................................ .... 27
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 3
4.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 28
4.2.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 28
4.2.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 29
4.3 AIR QUALITY ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 30
4.3.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 30
4.3.2 Thresholds of Significance ................................ ................................ ....................... 33
4.3.3 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 36
4.3.4 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 39
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................ ................................ ................................ 40
4.4.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 41
4.4.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 45
4.4.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 47
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 48
4.5.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 48
4.5.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 49
4.5.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 51
4.6 ENERGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 52
4.6.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 52
4.6.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 54
4.6.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 56
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 57
4.7.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 58
4.7.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 60
4.7.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 63
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................ ................................ ....................... 64
4.8.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 64
4.8.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 68
4.8.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 70
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 4
4.9 HAZARDOUS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ................................ ................................ ..... 71
4.9.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 72
4.9.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 77
4.9.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 79
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................ ................................ ............ 80
4.10.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 81
4.10.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 81
4.10.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 88
4.11 LAND USE PLANNING ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 89
4.11.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 89
4.11.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 89
4.11.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 92
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................ ................................ ................................ . 93
4.12.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 93
4.12.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 93
4.12.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 94
4.13 NOISE ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 95
4.13.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 95
4.13.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 96
4.13.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................... 98
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING ................................ ................................ ...................... 99
4.14.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ............................. 99
4.14.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 99
4.14.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 100
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 101
4.15.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 101
4.15.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 103
4.15.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 105
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 5
4.16 RECREATION ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 106
4.16.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 106
4.16.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 107
4.16.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 107
4.17 TRANSPORTATION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 108
4.17.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 108
4.17.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 109
4.17.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 111
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................ ................................ ................. 112
4.18.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 112
4.18.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 113
4.18.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 114
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ................................ ................................ .............. 115
4.19.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 116
4.19.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 117
4.19.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 120
4.20 WILDFIRE ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 121
4.20.1 Environmental Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 121
4.20.2 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 122
4.20.3 Mitigation Measures ................................ ................................ ............................. 123
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................ ............................... 124
4.21.1 Impact Assessment ................................ ................................ ................................ 125 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ................................ ................... 126 6 Report Preparation ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 131 7 APPENDICIES ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 132
7.1 Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files (Annual) ................................ .............................. 132
7.2 Appendix B: CHRIS Record Search Results ................................ ................................ .... 133
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 6 Figures
Figure 2-1 Regional Location Map ................................ ................................ ................................ . 10 Figure 2-2 Project Vicinity Map ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 11 Figure 2-3 City of Fresno General Plan Land Use Map for Project site ................................ .......... 13 Figure 2-4 City of Fresno Zone District Map for Project site ................................ ......................... 14 Figure 2-5 Project Site Plan ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 17 Figure 4-1 CNDDB Occurrences ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 44 Figure 4-2 SJVAPCD’s GHG Thresholds of Significance ................................ ................................ .. 67 Figure 4-3 Existing Water and Sewer Infrastructure in the Project Vicinity ................................ .. 85
Tables
Table 2-1 Existing Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zone Districts of Surrounding Properties ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 16 Table 4-1 SJVAPCD Recommended Air Quality Thresholds of Significance2F .............................. 34 Table 4-2 SPAL Thresholds for Applicable Uses ................................ ................................ ............. 37 Table 4-3 Special-status Species Occurrences with 5-mile Radius of the Project Site .................. 43 Table 4-4 Project Energy Consumption ................................ ................................ ......................... 55 Table 4-5 Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update - CEQA Consistency Checklist .............................. 69 Table 4-6 Safety Zone Land Use Compatibility Standards ................................ ............................. 74 Table 4-7 Summary of Total Water Demands by Land Use ................................ ........................... 84 Table 4-8 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Policies ................................ ........... 90 Table 4-9 Fire Facilities Fee Program................................ ................................ ........................... 102 Table 4-10 Police Facilities Fee Program ................................ ................................ ..................... 102 Table 4-11 Park Facilities Fee Program................................ ................................ ........................ 103 Table 4-12 Park Facilities Fee Program................................ ................................ ........................ 106
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 7 1 INTRODUCTION
Precision Civil Engineering, Inc. (PCE) has prepared this Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) on behalf of City of Fresno (City) to address the environmental effects of the Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project (“Project” or “proposed Project” ). This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. The City of Fresno is the Lead Agency for this proposed Project. The site and the proposed Project are described in detail in SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION.
1.1 Regulatory Information
An Initial Study (IS) is a document prepared by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 14 (Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.), also known as the CEQA Guidelines , Section 15064 (a)(1) states that an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed Project under review may have a significant eff ect on the environment and should be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less than significant levels. A negative declaration (ND) may be prepared instead if the lead agency finds that there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. An ND is a written statement describing the reasons why a proposed Project, not otherwise exempt from CEQA, would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why it would not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a ND or mitigated ND shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either:
a. The IS shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b. The IS identified potentially significant effects, but:
1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed MND and IS is released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur is prepared, and
2. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 8
1.2 Document Format
This IS/MND contains five cha pters plus appendices. SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION provides bases of the IS/MND’s regulatory information and an overview of the proposed Project . SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION provides a detailed description of proposed Project components. SECTION 3 DETERMINATION concludes that the Initial Study is a mitigated negative declaration, identifies the environmental factors potentially affected based on the analyses contained in this IS, and includes with the Lead Agency’s determination based upon those analyses. SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analyses for all impact areas and the mandatory findings of significance. A brief discussion of the reasons why the Project impact is anticipated to be potentially significant, less than significant with mitiga tion incorporated, less than significant, or why no impacts are expected is included. SECTION 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM presents the mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND for the Project.
The CalEEMod Output Files and CHRIS Record Search Results are provided as Appendix A and Appendix B respectively, at the end of this document.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 9 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section describes the components of the proposed Project in more detail, including project location, project objectives, and required project approvals.
2.1 Project Title
City of Fresno Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project (“Project” or “proposed Project”)
2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Fresno
2600 Fresno Street
Fresno, CA 93721
2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number
Lead Agency
Will Tackett, Planning Manager
Planning and Development Department
(559) 621-8000
Applicant
City of Fresno
Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services 1515 E. Divisadero Street
Fresno, CA 93721
2.4 Study Prepared By
Precision Civil Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
2.5 Project Location
The Project site is located on the west side of North Blackstone Avenue between East Holland Avenue and East Swift Avenue at 4343 North Blackstone Avenue and 4323-4333 North Blackstone Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726, approximately 0.29 miles west of State Route (SR)-41 (see Figure 2-1). The site consists of two (2) parcels identified as Fresno County Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN) 426-253-17 (4.25 acres) and 426-253- 19 (1.26 acres), totaling approximately 5.51 acres. The site is a portion of Section 16, Township 13 South, Range 20 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. Figure 2-2 shows the Project vicinity.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 10
Figure 2-1 Regional Location Map
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 11
Figure 2-2 Project Vicinity Map
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 12
2.6 Latitude and Longitude
The centroid of the Project area is 36.79683597136937, -119.79146471497464.
2.7 General Plan Designation
The Project site has Fresno General Plan land use designation of Corridor/Center Mixed Use (see Figure 2-3). According to the General Plan, Corridor/Center Mixed Use is intended to allow for horizontal and vertical mixed-use development in multiple story buildings along key circulation corridors (i.e., Blackstone Avenue Corridor) where height and density can be easily accommodated. Primary uses include ground - floor retail and upper -floor residential or offices , with s upporting uses including personal and business services and public and institutional space. Permitted residential densities range between 16 and 30 units per acre with a minimum 40 percent residential uses. The maximum floor area ratio ( FAR) is 1.5. No change in land use is proposed by the Project.
The Project proposes the development of a 29,000 square foot (sf.) senior center and 33,000 sf., 70 -unit affordable housing development for seniors on the parcel identified as APN 426-253-17 with site address of 4343 North Blackstone Avenue that totals approximately 4.25 acres. The proposed use is consistent with the permitted land use designation. The resulting residential density of the proposed Project would be 16.5 dwelling units per acre. Residential units would account for 46 percent of the development. The overall FAR for the site would be 0.3. As such, the Project is consistent with the land use designation.
2.8 Zoning
The Project site is in the CMX – Corridor/Center Mixed Use zone district (see Figure 2-4). According to the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC), the purpose of the CMX Zone District is to provide mixed-use development along key circulation corridors, including retail, office, residential, etc. No change in zoning is proposed by the Project.
The Project proposes the development of a 29,000 square foot (sf.) senior center and 33,000 sf., 70 -unit affordable housing development for seniors on the parcel identified as APN 426-253-17 with site address of 4343 North Blackstone Avenue . The proposed use is consistent with the permitted land use designation. Development of the Project site would be subject to the City of Fresno entitlement process to ensure compliance wit h the Fresno Municipal Code including the zoning ordinance, permitted uses, and development standards.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 13
Figure 2-3 City of Fresno General Plan Land Use Map for Project site
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 14
Figure 2-4 City of Fresno Zone District Map for Project site
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 15
2.9 Description of Project
The City of Fresno intends to acquire the subject property located on the west side of North Blackstone Avenue between East Holland Avenue and East Swift Avenue at 4343 North Blackstone Avenue and 4233- 4333 North Blackstone Avenue. Acquisition of the property by the City would facilitate the demolition of the grocery store to develop a 29,000 square foot ( sf.) senior center and 33,000 sf. , 70-unit affordable housing development for seniors . The senior center and affordable housing development would be located on the parcel identified as APN 426-253-17 with a site address of 4343 North Blackstone Avenue (“Area of Work”) (Figure 2-5). The proposed senior center would provide programs and services for senior residents including, but not limited to, meal and nutrition prog rams, information and assistance, health and fitness programs, wellness programs, recreation activities, educational and arts programs, etc. to serve approximately 1,162 to 2,323 seniors a year. The existing development located on the parcel identified as APN 426-253-19 with a site address of 4233 -4333 North Blackstone Avenue would remain with the City assuming the current leases. No development is proposed on this portion of the Project site.
For the environmental analysis, this initial study will analyze impacts from reasonably foreseeable development that would result from the proposed Project and occur in the Area of Work . Any future development in the Area of Work is subject to the City of Fresno entitlement process. Future applications required include a development permit and possibly a parcel map.
2.10 Site and Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
Project Setting
The Project site is fully developed with two (2) existing structures and improvements. The parcel identified as APN 426 -252-17 with site address of 4343 North Blackstone Avenue contains a 40,564 -sf. former grocery store structure and paved parking lot. This portion of the Project site is the Area of Work.
The parcel identified as APN 426-253-19 with a site address of 4233-4333 North Blackstone Avenue comprises an existing strip mall with six (6) separate tenant spaces, four (4) of which are leased to operating businesses (Figure 2-5). No development would occur on this portion of the Project site.
Topography of the Project site is generally flat as it has been previously developed and therefore graded and paved. The existing biotic conditions and resources of the Project site is composed of shrubs and trees as part of the site’s urban landscaping.
East Holland Avenue, a two (2) -lane, east-west collector forms the northerly site boundary and North Blackstone Avenue, a six (6)-lane, north-south arterial forms the easterly site boundary. Existing street frontage improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk, storm-drains, streetlights, etc.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 16 The Blackstone Avenue Corridor is classified by the Fresno General Plan as a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Corridor and Activity Corridor that is targeted for increased urban development through infill, rehabilitation, and mixed uses.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
The Project site is in Fresno city limits and is within an established urban neighborhood. The neighborhood has been within city limits since 1978. As referenced in Table 2-1, surrounding existing uses and structures include commercial (north, south, east) and residential (west). Beyond the adjacent parcels, a Fresno County Island is located approximately 145 feet west and 35 feet south of the Project site.
Table 2-1 Existing Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zone Districts of Surrounding Properties Direction from
the Project site Existing Use General Plan Designation Zone District North Commercial,
ponding basin
Corridor/Center Mixed Use;
Open Space – Ponding Basin
CMX Corridor/Center Mixed
Use; OS Open Space
East Commercial Corridor/Center Mixed Use CMX Corridor/Center Mixed Use
South Restaurant,
Church
Corridor/Center Mixed Use;
Residential - Medium High
Density
CMX Corridor/Center Mixed
Use; RM-1 Residential Multi-
Family, Medium High Density
West Residential Residential - Medium Density RS-5 Residential Single-Family, Medium Density
2.11 Site Preparation
Site preparation would be limited to the Area of Work which contains the former grocery store structure and parking lot. Site preparation would require demolition of the existing structure and parking lot. Trees and landscaped areas would also be removed and replaced. Site preparation may also include grading and minor excavation for installation o f utility infrastructure (if required) for conveyance of water, sewer, stormwater, and irrigation. Construction would take place following review and approval of the associated entitlement by the City of Fresno.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 17
Figure 2-5 Project Site Plan
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 18
2.12 Required Project Approvals
The City of Fresno requires the following review, permits, and/or approvals for the proposed Project. Other approvals not listed below may be required as identified through the entitlement process. In addition, other agencies may have the authority to issu e permits prior to implementation of the Project as listed below.
• Development Permit
• Building Permit
• Grading Permit
• Site Utilities Permit
• Fresno County Department of Public Health
• San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board
2.13 Technical Studies
The analysis of the Project throughout this Initial Study relied in part on the technical studies listed below prepared for the Project, as well as other sources, including, but not limited to, Fresno General Plan Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) SCH No. 2019050005 prepared for the City of Fresno General Plan and Development Code Update in 2020 . Technical studies conducted for this Project are incorporated throughout the IS and provided in the following appendices. • Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files (Annual)
• Appendix B: CHRIS Record Search Results
2.14 Consultation with California Native American Tribes The State requires lead agencies to consider the potential effects of proposed projects and consult with California Native American tribes during the local planning process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Resources through the Cal ifornia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the pro posed project. Such significant cultural resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial evidence, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a)(1-2)). According to the most recent census data, California is home to 109 cu rrently recognized Indian tribes. Tribes in California
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 19 currently have nearly 100 separate reservations or Rancherias. Fresno County has a number of Rancherias such as Table Mountain Rancheria, Millerton Rancheria, Big Sandy Rancheria, Cold Springs Rancheria, and Squaw Valley Rancheria. These Rancherias are not located within the city limits.
Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identif y and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See PRC Section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American He ritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
Currently, the Table Mountain Rancheria Tribe and the Dumna Wo Wah Tribe have requested to be notified pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) . A certified letter was mailed to the above- mentioned tribes on June 7, 2022. The 30-day comment period ended on July 7, 2022. Neither tribe requested consultation.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 20 3 DETERMINATION
3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
As indicated by the discussions of existing and baseline conditions, and impact analyses that follow in this Chapter, environmental factors not checked below would have no impacts or less than significant impacts resulting from the project. The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Mitigation measures are recommended for each of the potentially significant impacts that would reduce the impact to less than significant.
Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal and Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire
The analyses of environmental impacts in SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS result in an impact statement, which shall have the following meanings.
Potentially Significant Impact. This category is applicable if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant, and no feasible mitigation measures can be identified to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. This category applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures would reduce an effect from a “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” Th e lead agency must describe the mitigation measure(s), and briefly explain how they would reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced).
Less Than Significant Impact. This category is identified when the proposed Project would result in impacts below the threshold of significance, and no mitigation measures are required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 22 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
EVALUATION OF ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT ASSESSED IN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH NO. 2019050005 PREPARED FOR THE APPROVED FRESNO GENERAL PLAN (GP PEIR):
4.1 AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 21099,
would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock out -
croppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas,
substantially degrade the
existing visual character or
quality public views of the site
and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are
experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the
project is in an urbanized area ,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality?
X
d) Create a new source of
substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
4.1.1 Environmental Setting
The city of Fresno is located within Fresno County in the San Joaquin Valley in central California.
The Project site is located in the central area of the city of Fresno, situated west of North Blackstone Avenue between East Holland Avenue and East Swift Avenue at 4343 North Blackstone
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 23 Avenue and 4233-4333 North Blackstone Avenue , Fresno, CA 937 26. The Project site is within a fully developed, urban neighborhood surrounded by a mix of existing land uses including commercial (north, east, and west ), residential (west), and ponding basin (north). The area contains existing infrastructure including roadways, streetlights, parking lot lights, and ambient light sources.
4.1.2 Impact Assessment
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The Project site does not contain nor is it near any scenic vistas including but not limited to vista points or scenic corridors. The Fresno General Plan identifies “Vista Points” and “Scenic Corridors” within the Fresno Sphere of Influence. Identified Vista Points are situated near and along the San Joaquin River, which is more than four (4) miles north of the Project site. Van Ness Boulevard is identified as a Scenic Corridor and is approximately 0.5 miles west of the Project site.
Thus, because the scenic vistas are not on or near the Project site, it can be determined that the Project would have no impact on a scenic vista.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock out-croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. According to the California Scenic Highway Program, the nearest eligible state scenic highway (State Route-168) is approximately 2.3 miles northeast of the Project site. 1 As such, the Project would not damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway and no impact would occur because of the Project. c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? No Impact. The Project site is within an urbanized area surrounded by commercial and residential uses. According to the Fresno General Plan, the Project site has a planned land use designation of Corridor/Center Mixed Use. The Corridor/Center Mixed -Use land use designation is intended to allow for horizontal and vertical mixed -use development in multiple st ory buildings along key circulation corridors (i.e., Blackstone Avenue Corridor) where height and density can be easily
1 Caltrans. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed on June 9, 2022, https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 24 accommodated. Primary uses include ground -floor retail and upper -floor residential or offices, with personal and business services and p ublic and institutional space as supportive uses. The General Plan provides specific policies and objectives for the Corridor/Center Mixed Use land use designation including Implementing Policies UF-12-a. BRT Corridors, UF-12-b. Activity Centers, UF- 12-c. Local-Serving Neighborhood Centers, UF-12-d. Appropriate Mixed-Use, LU-2-a. Infill Development and Redevelopment, and LU-5-i. Housing for Seniors. Compliance with these policies would ensure that the Project would not conflict with regulations governing scenic quality.
The Project site is within the CMX – Corridor/Center Mixed Use Zone District. According to Section 15-1101 of the Fresno Municipal Code, the CMX Corridor/Center Mixed -Use Zone District is intended to allow for either horizontal or vertical m ixed-use development along key circulation corridors (i.e., Blackstone Avenue Corridor) in the city where height and density can be easily accommodated. Development of the Project site would be subject to the City of Fresno entitlement process for review a nd approval by the City. Through this process, the Project shall meet all applicable zoning regulations including but not limited to density, intensity, and massing development standards (FMC Section 15-1103), site design development standards (FMC Section 15-1104), façade design development standards (FMC Section 15 -1105), and other policies and regulations governing scenic quality (i.e., General Plan, Building Code).
Through compliance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance , it can be determi ned that the visual character of the Project would be compatible with the existing commercial development in the area and thus would not substantially degrade existing visual character due to its size and character. Therefore, the Project would have no impact. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Generally, lighting impacts are associated with artificial lighting in evening hours either through interior lighting from windows or exterior lighting (e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, landscape lighting, cars, and trucks ). The Project site is previously developed and is located within an urban neighborhood. As such, the site and the area contain existing infrastructure including roadways, streetlights, parking lot lights, and ambient light sources. Re-development of the Proj ect site would not result in significant increases in the amount of light from streetlights, exterior lighting, and vehicular headlights that otherwise already occur in the area.
Project construction may introduce light and glare resulting from construction activities that could adversely affect day or nighttime views. Although construction activities are anticipated to occur primarily during daylight hours, it is possible that some activities could occur during dusk or early
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 25 evening hours. Section 10-109 of the FMC permits construction work to take place between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm on any day except Sunday, for work that is accomplished pursuant to a building permit. Construction during these time periods could result in temporary and short-term light and glare from construction vehicles or equipment. However, once construction is completed, any light and glare from these activities would cease to occur.
Once developed, the Project would be required to comply with the General Plan and Fresno Municipal Code, which contain specific, enforceable requirements and/or restrictions intended to prevent light and glare impacts. Further, compliance with Title 24 lighting requirements would reduce impacts related to nighttime light. The lighting requirements cover ou tdoor spaces including regulations for mounted luminaires (i.e., high efficacy, motion sensor controlled, time clocks, energy management control systems, etc.). As such, conditions imposed on the Project by the City pursuant to Title 24 would reduce light and glare impacts to a less than significant impact.
Further, the Project incorporates Mitigation Measures AES -1, AES-2, AES-3, AE S-4, and AES-5, which are measures identified in General Plan PEIR to mitigate new sources of light or glare that could adversely affect day or nighttime views:
Mitigation Measure AES-1: Lighting for Street and Parking Areas. Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.1) Mitigation Measure AES-2 Lighting for Public Facilities. Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.2)
Mitigation Measure AES -3: Lighting for Non -Residential Uses. Lighting systems for non - residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.3)
Mitigation Measure AES-4: Signage Lighting. Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100-foot Lamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT -L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.4)
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 26 Mitigation Measure AES -5: Use of Non -Reflective Materials. Materials used on building façades shall be non-reflective. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.5) As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
4.1.3 Mitigation Measures
The proposed Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the aesthetic related mitigation measures as identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program dated June 2022.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 27
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farm -
land), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monito -
ring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non -
agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for,
or cause rezoning of, forest land
(as defined in Public Resources
Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by
Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due
to their location or nature, could
result in conversion of Farmland,
to non -agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 28
4.2.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within the city limits of Fresno . The Project site is zoned CMX – Corridor/Center Mixed Use and has a planned land use designation of Corridor/Center Mixed Use.
The site is fully developed with a 40,564 -square foot (sf.) grocery store , strip mall, and improvements such as paved parking lot , curb, gutter, sidewalks, landscaping, etc. The existing biotic site conditions and resources of the site can be defined primarily as urban landscaping with trees and shrubs. There are no water features on site. The Project site does not contain any agricultural lands or operations nor forestry resources such as forest land or timberland.
Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program
The California Department of Conservation manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) that provides maps and data for analyzing land use impacts to farmland. The FMMP produces the Important Farmland Finder as a r esource map that shows quality (soils) and land use information. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status, in addition to many other physical and chemical characteristics. The highest quality land is called “Prime Farmland.” Maps are updated every two years. According to the Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program, California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site is categorized as “Urban and Built-Up Land” as of 2018.2
California Land Conservation Act
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (i.e., the Williamson Act) allows local governments to enter contracts with private landowners to restrict parcels of land agricultural or open space uses. In return, property tax assessments of the restricted parcels are lower than full market value.
The minimum length of a Williamson Act contract is 10 years and automatically renews upon its anniversary date; as such, the contract length is essentially indefinite. The Project s ite nor the surrounding properties are subject to the Williamson Act Contract.
4.2.2 Impact Assessment
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
2 California Department of Conservation. (2018). California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed on June 10, 2022, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 29 No Impact. The Project site is designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land” and lands in its immediate vicinity are mostly designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land” according to the FMMP. As such, the Project site is not located on lands designated as “Prime Farmland,” “Unique Farmland,” or “Farmland of Statewide Importance.” For this reason, the Project would result in no impact. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project site is not zoned for or located within an area zoned for agricultural uses and is not under Williamson Act contract. Thus, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract and no impact would occur. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as de fined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The Project site does is not planned or zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland P roduction. Further, the Project site would not cause the rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Tim berland Production. As a result, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production and no impact would occur.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project site does not contain forest land and is not planned or zoned for forest land or forest uses. Implementation of the Project would therefore not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. As a result, no impact would occur. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their locat ion or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non -agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. The Project site is in a developed and urbanized neighborhood within the Fresno city limits. The site nor adjacent properties contain farmland, agricultural uses, or forest land.
Implementation of the Project would therefore not result in changes in the existing environment that would result in the conversion of farmland or forest land. No impact would occur.
4.2.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 30
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable
air quality plan (e.g., by having
potential emissions of regulated
criterion pollutants which exceed
the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control Districts (SJVAPCD)
adopted thresholds for these
pollutants)?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment
under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
4.3.1 Environmental Setting
The Project is located within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB). The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) regulates air quality in eight (8) counties including: Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanisl aus, and Tulare. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) oversees the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
Impacts on air quality result from emissions generated during short-term activities (construction) and long -term activities (operati ons). Construction -related emissions consist mainly of exhaust emissions (NOx and PM) from construction equipment and other mobile sources, and fugitive dust (PM) emissions from earth moving activities. Operational emissions are source specific and consist of permitted equipment and activities and non-permitted equipment and activities.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 31 Air pollution in the SJVAB can be attributed to both human -related (anthropogenic) and natural (non-anthropogenic) activities that produce emissions. Air pollution from sign ificant anthropogenic activities in the SJVAB includes a variety of industrial -based sources as well as on - and off-road mobile sources. Four main sources of air pollutant emissions in the SJVAB are motor vehicles, industrial plants, agricultural activities, and construction activities. All four of the major pollutant sources affect ambient air quality throughout the Air Basin. These sources, coupled with geographical and meteorological conditions unique to the area, stimulate the formation of unhealthy air . Air pollutants can remain in the atmosphere for long periods and can build to unhealthful levels when stagnant conditions that are common in the San Joaquin Valley occur.
Pollutants are transported downwind from urban areas with many emission sources whi ch are also recirculated back to the urban areas.
Further, the SJVAB is in non -attainment for ozone, PM 10, and PM 2.5, which means that certain pollutants' exposure levels are often higher than the normal air quality requirements. The air quality standards have been set to protect public health, particularly the health of vulnerable people. Therefore, if the concentration of those contaminants exceeds the norm, some susceptible individuals in the population are likely to experience health effects. Concentration of the pollutant in the air, the length of time exposed and the individual's reaction are factors that affect the extent and nature of the health effects.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The SJVAPCD is the agency primarily responsible for ensuring that NAAQS and CAAQS are not exceeded and that air quality conditions are maintained in the SJVAB, within which the Project is located. Responsibilities of the SJVAPCD include, but are not limited to, preparing plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollution, inspecting stationary sources of air pollution and responding to citizen compl aints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementing programs and regulations required by the FCAA and the CCAA.
The SJVAPCD rules and regulations that may apply to projects that will occur during buildout of the Project include but are not limited to the following:
Rule 2010 – Permits Required. The purpose of this rule is to require any person constructing, altering, replacing or operating any source operation which emits, may emit, or may reduce emissions to obtain an Auth ority to Construct or a Permit to Operate. This rule also explains the posting requirements for a Permit to Operate and the illegality of a person willfully altering, defacing, forging, counterfeiting or falsifying any Permit to Operate.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 32 Rule 2201 – New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule. The purpose of this rule is to provide for the following:
The review of new and modified Stationary Sources of air pollution and to provide mechanisms including emission trade-offs by which Authorities to Construct such sources may be granted, without interfering with the attainment or maintenance of Ambient Air Quality Standards; and No net increase in emissions above specified thresholds from new and modified Stationary Sources of all nonattainment pollutants and their precursors.
Rule 4001 – New Source Performance Standards. This rule incorporates the New Source Performance Standards from Part 60, Chapter 1, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Rule 4002 – National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. This rule incorporates the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Part 61, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Sou rce Categories from Part 63, Chapter I, Subchapter C, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Rule 4102 – Nuisance. The purpose of this rule is to protect the health and safety of the public and applies to any source operation that emits or may emit air contaminants or other materials.
Rule 4601 – Architectural Coatings. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from architectural coatings. This rule specifies architectural coatings storage, cleanup, and labeling requirements.
Rule 4641 – Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations. The purpose of this rule is to limit VOC emissions from asphalt paving and maintenance operations.
This rule applies to the manufacture and use of cutback asphalt, slow cure asp halt and emulsified asphalt for paving and maintenance operations.
Regulation VIII – Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions. The purpose of Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions) is to reduce ambient concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM10) by requiring actions to prevent, reduce or mitigate anthropogenic fugitive dust emissions.
Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review. The purposes of this rule are to:
1. Fulfill the District’s emission reduction commitments in the PM10 and Ozone Attainment Plans.
2. Achieve emission reductions from the construction and use of development projects through design features and on-site measures.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 33
3. Provide a mechanism for reducing emissions from the construction of and use of development projects through off-site measures.
Fresno General Plan
In regard to local measures and thresholds for air quality impacts, t he Fresno General Resource and Conservation Element outlines goals, objectives, and policies for addressing air quality. A sample of applicable goals and policies are as follows:
Objective RC-4: In cooperation with other jurisdictions and agencies in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, take necessary actions to achieve and maintain compliance with State and federal air quality standards for criteria pollutants.
Policy RC ‐4‐a: Support Regional Effo rts. Support and lead, where appropriate, regional, State and federal programs and actions for the improvement of air quality, especially the SJVAPCD’s efforts to monitor and control air pollutants from both stationary and mobile sources and implement Reas onably Available Control Measures in the Ozone Attainment Plan.
Policy RC ‐4‐b: Conditions of Approval. Develop and incorporate air quality maintenance requirements, compatible with Air Quality Attainment and Maintenance Plans, as conditions of approval f or General Plan amendments, community plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood plans, Concept Plans, and development proposals.
Policy RC‐4‐c: Evaluate Impacts with Models. Continue to require the use of computer models used by SJVAPCD to evaluate the air qual ity impacts of plans and projects that require such environmental review by the City.
4.3.2 Thresholds of Significance
To assist local jurisdictions in the evaluation of air quality impacts, the SJVAPCD has published the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (QAMAQI). This guidance document includes recommended thresholds of significance to be used for the evaluation of short -term construction, long -term operational, odor, toxic air contaminant, and cumulative air quality impacts. Accordingly, the SJVAPCD -recommended thresholds of significance are used to determine whether implementation of the proposed Project would result in a significant air quality impact. Projects that exceed these recommended thresholds would be considered to have a potentially significant impact to human health and welfare. The thresholds of significance are summarized, as follows:
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 34 (1) Criteria Air Pollutants: SJVAPCD adopted thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants, as shown in Table 4-1. The thresholds of significance are based on a calendar year basis. For construction emissions, the annual emissions are evaluated on a rolling 12 -month period. The following summarizes these thresholds:
Short-Term Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM10): Construction impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the feasible control measures for construction in compliance with Regulation VIII as listed in the SJVAPCD guidelines are not incorporated or implemented, or if project-generated emissions would exceed 15 tons per year (TPY).
Short-Term Emissions of Ozone Precursors (ROG and NOX): Construction impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the project generates emissions of Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) or NOX that exceeds 10 TPY.
Long-Term Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM10): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the project generates emissions of PM 10 that exceed 15 TPY.
Long-Term Emissions of Ozone Precursors (ROG an d NOX): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the project generates emissions of ROG or NOX that exceeds 10 TPY.
Table 4-1 SJVAPCD Recommended Air Quality Thresholds of Significance 2F 3 Pollutant
Significance Threshold
Construction Emissions
(tons/year)
Operational Emission
(tons/year)
CO 100 100
NOX 10 10
ROG 10 10
SOX 27 27
PM10 15 15
PM2.5 15 15
(2) Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation of Applicable Air Quality Plan: Due to the region’s nonattainment status for ozone, PM 2.5, and PM10, if the Project-generated emissions of either of
3 SJVAPCD. (2015). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. Accessed on February 2, 2022, https://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI-2015/FINAL-DRAFT-GAMAQI.PDF
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 35 the ozone precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NO x) or PM 10 would exceed the SJVAPCD’s significance thresholds, then the Project would be considered to conflict with the attainment plans. In addition, if the Project would result in a change in land use and corresponding increases in vehicle miles traveled, the Project may result in an increase i n vehicle miles traveled that is unaccounted for in regional emissions inventories contained in regional air quality control plans. (3) Local Mobile -Source CO Concentrations: Local mobile source impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the project contributes to CO concentrations at receptor locations in excess of the CAAQS (i.e., 9.0 ppm for 8 hours or 20 ppm for 1 hour). (4) Toxic Air Contaminants: Exposure to toxic air contaminants (TAC) would be considered significant if the probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual (i.e., maximum individual risk) would exceed 10 in 1 million or would result in a Hazard In dex greater than one (1).
As recommended by the SJVAPCD, the latest approved California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) methodology was utilized as the TAC screening methodology. According to the CAPCOA Guidance Document titled “Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects,” there are two (2) types of land use project that have the potential to cause long-term public health risk impacts. These project types are as follows:
• Type A: Land use projects with toxic emissions that impact receptors, and • Type B: Land use project that will place receptors in the vicinity of existing toxics sources.
In this Guidance document, Type A projects examples are (project impacts receptors):
• combustion related power plants,
• gasoline dispensing facilities,
• asphalt batch plants,
• warehouse distribution centers,
• quarry operations, and
• other stationary sources that emit toxic substances.
(5) Odor: The intensity of an odor source’s operations and its proximity to sensitive receptors influences the potential significance of odor emissions. Specific land uses that are considered sources of undesirable odors include landfills, transfer stations, compost ing facilities, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, asphalt batch plants and rendering plants. The SJVAPCD has identified these common types of facilities that have been known to produce odors in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin and has prep ared screening levels for potential odor sources ranging from one (1) to two (2) miles of distance from the odor -producing facility to sensitive
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 36 receptors. Odor impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered significant if the project has the potential to frequently expose members of the public to objectionable odors. (6) Ambient Air Quality: The SJVAPCD applies the following guidance in determining whether an ambient air quality analysis should be performed: when assessing the significan ce of project - related impacts on air quality, it should be noted that the impacts may be significant when on-site emission increases from construction activities or operational activities exceed the 100 pounds per day screening level of any criteria pollutant after implementation of all enforceable mitigation measures. Under such circumstance, the SJVAPCD recommends that an ambient air quality analysis be performed.
4.3.3 Impact Assessment
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (e.g., by having potential emissions of regulated criterion pollutants which exceed the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Districts (SJVAPCD) adopted thresholds for these pollutants)?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not conflict with the SJVAPCD air quality plan if the Project does not exceed the adopted quantitative thresholds for criteria pollutant emissions that are established in the GAMAQI, as d emonstrated in the Thresholds of Significance above. The SJVAPCD recommends a thre e-tiered approach to analyze projects for significant impacts on air quality. The first tier is the Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL) , which adopts a threshold of significance according to the use type, size, and number of vehicle trips of a project.
The proposed Project would not have any significant effects relating to air quality pursuant to the SJVAPCD SPAL based on pre-quantified emissions and determined values related to project type, size, and number of vehicle trips. According to the SPAL, projects that fit specified descriptions are deemed to have a less than significant impact on air quality and as such are excluded from quantifying criteria pollutant emissions for CEQA purposes . Based on the Project description, the applicable land use types for the proposed Project include the apartment (mid -rise) and health club land use (i.e., most similar use type to senior center). The corresponding thresholds for these land uses are shown in Table 4-2 below.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 37 Table 4-2 SPAL Thresholds for Applicable Uses
Land Use Type Size/Unit
Average Daily
One-Way Trips for
all fleet types
(except HHDT)
Average Daily
One-Way for
HHDT Trips only
(50 mile trip
length)
SPAL Thresholds
Apartment, mid rise1 225 dwelling units 800 15
Health club 64,000 sf. 1,100 20
For Mixed-Use Project 1,100 20
Proposed Project
Apartment, mid rise 70 dwelling units 249 5
Health club/
Senior Center 29,000 sf. 835 9
Project Total 1,084 14
Below Threshold? Yes Yes
Given that the Project is a mixed -use project, the higher SPAL threshold of 1,100 Average Daily one-way trips (ADTs) was utilized. Further, given that 225 mid -rise units are equivalent to 800 ADTs, the proposed 70 dwelling units would result in 249 ADTs. Likewise , the proposed 29,000 square foot Senior Center is equivalent to 835 ADTs . Altogether, the proposed Project generates under the 1,100 ADT threshold and thus the Project would have a less than significant impact on air quality and is excluded from quantifying criteria pollutant emissions for CEQA purposes. As a result, the Project would not conflict with the applicable criteria pollutants thresholds established by the SJVAPCD.
Regarding TAC, t he proposed Project does not consist of any of Type A land uses that have the potential to produce toxic emissions , including combustion related power plants, asphalt batch plants, and quarry operations. In addition, the Project does not propose facilities for gasoline dispensing, warehouse distribution centers, or other stationary sources that emit toxic substances.
Thus, based on this analysis utilizing the methodology outl ined by the CAPCOA Guidelines, the proposed project is screened out and does not require a Health Risk Assessment and would not result in production of significant Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs).
Lastly, the Project shall comply with all rules and regulat ions administered by the SJVAPCD including but not limited to Rule 9510 (Indirect Source Review) and Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions), which requires the approval of a Dust Control Plan prior to construction. The Project may also be subject to Rule 2010 (Permits Required), Rule 2201 (New and Modified Stationary Source Review), Rule 4402 (Nuisance), Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings), and Rule 4641 (Cutback, Slow Cure, and Emulsified Asphalt, Paving and Maintenance Operations ). The Project design anticipates such requirements and incorporates the measures regarding air quality impacts. Thus,
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 38 any impacts related to construction activities of the Project would be regulated through SJVAPCD regulations and requirements.
Overall, the Project would not have potential emissions of regulated criterion pollutants that exceed the SJVAPCD adopted thresholds. In addition, the Project shall be conditioned to meet additional rules and regulations administered by the SJVAPCD to minimize and mitigate on -site emissions. Consequently, the Project would result in a less than significant impact. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air qu ality standard?
Less than Significant Impact. The SJVAB is in non-attainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, which means that certain pollutants' exposure levels are often higher than the normal air quality requirements. The requirements have been set to protect public health, particularly the health of vulnerable populations. Therefore, if the concentration of those contaminants exceeds the norm, some susceptible individuals in the population are likely to experience health effects.
Concentration of the pollutant in the air, the length of time exposed and the individual's reaction are factors that affect the extent and nature of the health effects as analyzed in criterion a) above, the Project would have a less than significant impact on air quality and ar e excluded from quantifying criteria pollutant emissions for CEQA purposes. Therefore, the Project would not result in significant cumulative health impacts because the emissions are not at a level that would be considered cumulatively significant. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are defined as people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or envi ronmental contaminants. Sensitive receptor locations include schools, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling unit(s). Sensitive receptors in proximity to the Project site, includes residential dwellings adjacent to the west and Del Mar Elementary School 0.10 miles southwest of the site . As stated under criterion a) above, emissions during construction or operations of individual projects would not reach the significance thresholds and are not anticipated to result in concentrations that reach or surpass ambient air quality requirements. In addition, implementation of the proposed Project would facilitate the development of a senior center and residential units, which is not a use which results in excessive pollutant concentrations which could impact sensitive receptors. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact on nearby sensitive receptors. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 39 Less than Significant Impact. Specific land uses that are considered sources of undesirable odors include landfills, transfer stations, composting facilities, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, asphalt batch plants and rendering plants. The Project would not consist of such land uses; rather, implementation of the proposed Project consists of a senior center and residential development, and thus is unlikely to produce odors that would be considered to adversely affect a substantial number of people. Further , there are no major odor -generating sources within the Project vicinity. Although some odors may be emitted during construction of the site (i.e., through diesel fuel and exhaust from equipment), these odors would be temporary and last only during construction activiti es. For these reasons, any odor impacts associated with the Project would be less than significant.
4.3.4 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 40
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect
on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident
or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 41 f) Conflict with provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan.
X
4.4.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is fully developed within city limits and is surrounded by urbanized land uses.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife – Special-Status Species Database The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) operates an “Information for Planning and Consultation” (IPaC) database, which is a project planning tool for the environmental review process that provides general information on the location of special -status species that are “known” or “expected” to occur ( note: the database does not provide occurrences; refer to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Natural Diversity Database below). 4 Specifically, the database identifies 40 endangered species, 13 critical habitats, and 27 migratory birds that are potentially affected in Fresno County.5 The database identified 16 endangered species, no critical habitats, and 16 migratory birds in Fresno City.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife – Critical Habitat Report
Once a species is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, NOAA Fisheries is required to determine whether there are areas that meet the definition of Critical Habitat. Per NOAA Fisheries, Critical Habitat is defined as:
• Specific areas within the geographical area occupied by t he species at the time of listing that contain physical or biological features essential to conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection; and
4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Information and Planning Consultat ion Online System. Accessed on December 28 , 2021, https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
5 U.S. fish and Wildlife Service. Information and Planning Consultation Online System. Accessed on December 2, 2021, https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 42 • Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the s pecies if the agency determines that the area itself is essential for conservation.8F 6 The process of Critical Habitat designation is complex and involves the consideration of scientific data, public and peer review, economic, national security, and other relevant impacts.
According to the Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species Report updated December 10, 2021, t he Project area and its immediate vicinity (0.5 0-mile radius from th e site) are not located within a federally designated Critical Habitat. 7 California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Natural Diversity Database The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) operates the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), which is an inventory of the status and locations of special -status plants and animals in California in addition to the reported occurrences o f such species. 8 According to the CDFW CNDDB Rarefind database, there are 24 species and 36 species occurrences that have been observed and reported to the CDFW in the Fresno North Quad as designated by the United States Geological Survey (USGS ): tricolo red blackbird, California tiger salamander, Northern California legless lizard, great egret, California glossy snake, Crotch bumble bee, Swainson’s hawk, succulent owl’s clover, California jewelflower, Fresno kangaroo rat, Antioch efferian robbergfly, snowy egret, western mastiff bat, California satintail, Madera leptosiphon, molestan blister beetle, Hurd’s metapogon robberfly, Northern Claypan Vernal Pool, black -crowned night heron, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass, San Jo aquin pocket mouse, coast horned li zard, Sanford’s arrowhead, and western spadefoot .9 Of the species, seven (7) species are federally and /or state-listed special - status species. The CN DDB also provides CNDDB -known occurrences within a set geographic location feature, as shown in Figure 4-1. Table 4-3 lists all species CNDDB -known occurrences within the five (5)-mile radius of the Project site. Since the Project site is fully developed , mostly
6 NOAA Fisheries. Critical Habitat. Accessed on December 28, 2021, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/critical-habitat#key-regulations 7 U.S. Fish & Wildlife. (2021). ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System - USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report (updated December 10, 2021). Accessed on January 19, 2022, https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html 8 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Natural Diversity Database. Accessed on June 10, 2022, https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB
9 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Biogeographic Information and Observation System. Accessed on June 10, 2021, https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios/?tool=cnddbQuick
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 43 paved, and does not include water bodies, it does not provide essential habitat for any of the species listed.
Table 4-3 Special-status Species Occurrences with 5-mile Radius of the Project Site Special-status species Date Presence Location
Sanford's arrowhead 1980/x/x Presumed Extant* 0.4 miles west western mastiff bat 1958/11/20 Presumed Extant* 1.2 miles west Sanford's arrowhead 1980/x/x Presumed Extant* 2.8 miles northwest Fresno kangaroo rat 1898/4/23 Extirpated** 3.1 miles southwest tricolored blackbird 1975/4/9 Presumed Extant* 2.8 miles northeast Sanford's arrowhead 1980/9/11 Presumed Extant* 3.2 miles northeast tricolored blackbird 1975/7/x Extirpated** 2.9 miles northeast Sanford's arrowhead 1993/9/23 Presumed Extant* 2.6 miles east double-crested cormorant 2012/5/11 Presumed Extant* 3.1 miles southeast burrowing owl 1990/x/x Presumed Extant* 3.5 miles southeast western mastiff bat 1991/4/17 Presumed Extant* 3.3 miles south pallid bat 1909/10/6 Presumed Extant* 3.4 miles south
snowy egret 2012/5/10 Presumed Extant* 3.5 miles southwest Sanford's arrowhead 2018/11/4 Presumed Extant* 3.8 miles northeast Sanford's arrowhead 2018/11/4 Presumed Extant* 4.0 miles northeast western mastiff bat 1991/4/17 Presumed Extant* 4.5 miles southwest California tiger salamander 2017/2/10 Presumed Extant* 4.4 miles west Sanford's arrowhead 1953/9/9 Presumed Extant* 4.9 miles northwest Sanford's arrowhead 1954/5/23 Presumed Extant* 4.5 miles north Northern Claypan Vernal Pool 1980/1/x Presumed Extant* 4.9 miles north San Joaquin Valley Orcutt grass 1987/6/1 Extirpated** 4.9 miles north succulent owl's-clover 1981/6/2 Possibly Extirpated***
western spadefoot 1995/3/3 Presumed Extant* 5.0 miles north Multiple ( 5-mile accuracy ):
molestan blister beetle, Swainson's
hawk, California jewelflower, coast
horned lizard , Antioch efferian
robberfly, California satintail,
Crotch bumble bee, California tiger
salamander, Madera leptosiphon,
California glossy snake , Hurd's
metapogon robberfly, Northern
California legless lizard
188x-19xx Multiple N/A (5-mile accuracy)
* The most common entry. An occurrence is presumed to still be in existence until evidence to the contrary is received by the CNDDB.
** Only used when the element has been searched for but not seen for many years or when the habitat is destroyed at this site.
*** Evidence of habitat destruction, or population extirpation has been received by the CNDDB for this site, but questions remain as to whether the element still exists.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 44
Figure 4-1 CNDDB Occurrences
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 45 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – National Wetlands Inventory The USFWS provides a National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) with detailed information on the abundance, characteristics, and distribution of U.S. wetlands. A search of the USFWS NWI shows no federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) on the Project site or within the immediate vicinity (0.50-mile radius) of the Project site.10F 10 Environmental Protection Agency – WATERS Geoviewer
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WATERS GeoViewer provides a GeoPlatform based web mapping application of water features by location. According to the WATERS GeoViewer. According to the Waters GeoViewer, there are no surface water features on or in immediate vicinity (0.50-mile radius) of the Project site. 11
4.4.2 Impact Assessment
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The Project site is a fully developed sites within the city limits in an urban neighborhood. Topography of the site is generally flat. Site vegetation includes shrubs and trees in landscaped areas . There are no water features present. Further, there are no recorded occurrences of special-status or critical habitats on the Project site or within the immediate vicinity of the Project. For these reasons , the site conditions do not provide essential habitat for any candidate, sensitive, or special status specie s that may occur within the Project area. As a result, no impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
10 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed June 13, 2022, https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html
11 Environmental Protection Agency. WATERS GeoViewer. Accessed on June 13, 2022, https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ada349b90c26496ea52aab66a092593b
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 46 No Impact. According to the Fresno General Plan, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, there are no known riparian hab itats or other sensitive natural communities identified on the Project site or within the immediate vicinity. In addition, the site does not contain any water features that would provide habitat for such species. Further, the site is heavily impacted with very little vegetation which would not provide essential habitat. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project site does not provide any riparian habitat and thus, no impact would occur because of the Project.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. A search of the NWI shows no federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) on the Project site . Typically, the primary wetland indicators include hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and surface hydrology. The on -site topography consists of developed and paved land with no water features, including ponds or standing water.
The site comprises the following soil types, which are subject to low frequency of flooding and ponding: SdA – San Joaquin sandy loam (no flooding, no ponding).12 Lastly, the site is designated as Zone X on the most recent FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 060 1901570H dated 2/18/2009.13 Zone X is an area of minimal flood hazards with a 0.2 percent-annual-chance of flood (i.e., 500-year flood). For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project site would not result in any impact on state or federally protected wetlands. d) Would the p roject interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? No Impact. Wildlife movement corridors are linear habitats that function to connect two (2) or more areas of significant wildlife habitat. These corridors may function on a local level as links between small habitat patches (e.g., streams in urban settings) or may provide critical connections between regionally significant habitats (e.g., deer movement corridors).
Wildlife corridors typically include vegetation and topography that facilitate the movements of wild animals from one area of suitable habitat to another, in order to fulfill foraging, breeding, and
12 United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. Accessed on June 13, 2022, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx 13 FEMA. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Accessed June 13, 2022, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 47 territorial needs. These corridors often provide cover and protection from predators that may be lacking in surrounding habitats. Wildlife corridors generally include riparian zones and similar linear expanses of contiguous habitat.
As previously mentioned, the Project site does not contain habitat that could support wildlife species in nesting, foraging, or escaping from predators. This is based on the existing conditions of the site including the site’s heavy alteration and no cover, vegetation, or water features. Due to these conditions, it can be determined that the Project would not interfere with wildlife movement and no impact would occur as a result of the Project. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecti ng biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. While the Fresno General Plan calls for the protection of biological resources, the Project site does not indicate the presence of any sensitive habitat or wildlife features. In addition, the Fresno Municipal Code identifies tree protection and street tree policies. When the Project goes through the City of Fresno entitlement process, the Public Works Department will review the development for compliance with street trees standards and establish conditions during project approval. Due to the lack of any identified special -status species or habitat for special -status species, the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances pr otecting biological resources. Thus, the Project would have no impact.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The Project site is within the PG&E San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The HCP covers PG&E’s routine operations and maintenance activities and minor new construction, on any PG&E gas and electrical transmi ssion and distribution facilities, easements, private access routes, or lands owned by PG&E. The Project would not conflict or interfere with HCP. The Project is also located in the planning area of the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin V alley, which addresses recovery goals for several species. The Project would not conflict with the plan since the site does not provide appropriate habitat for the species mentioned. In addition, the City, County, and Regional Planning Agency do not have any adopted or approved plans for habitat or natural community conservation.
For these reasons, the Project would have no impact and no mitigation measures are required.
4.4.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 48
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
X
4.5.1 Environmental Setting
Generally, the term ‘cultural resources’ describes property types such as prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, buildings, bridges, roadways, and tribal cultural resources. As defined by CEQA, historical resources include sites, structures, obje cts, or districts that may have historical, prehistoric, architectural, archaeological, cultural, or scientific importance.
The city of Fresno has one (1) National Historical Landmark and 31 individual properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places as of 2019, including the Fresno Memorial Auditorium, Old Fresno Water Tower, Thomas R. Meux Home, Tower Theatre, etc., There are 31 properties listed in the California Register of Historic Resources.
The City of Fresno adopted the Historic Preservation Ordinance in 1979 and maintains a Local Register of Historic Resources that includes places in the National Register, buildings, structures, objects, sites, and districts that have sufficient integrity and are significant in Fresno’s history.
There are currently 277 individual properties listed on the Local Register of Historic Resources, including Fresno Buddhist Temple, Fresno Memorial Auditorium, and Helm Building.14 In addition, Fresno also designates four (4) official local historic distr icts: the Porter Tract, the Wilson Island,
14 City of Fresno. Historic Preservation Database. Accessed on February 1, 2022, https://cityoffresno.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=80d8d181234a46a6a102460db2e9a57a
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 49 Chandler Airfield/Fresno Municipal Airport, and Huntington Boulevard. There are also six (6) districts in Downtown and four (4) districts in the Tower District that have been proposed as historic districts.15
Tribal Consultation
Currently, the Table Mountain Rancheria Tribe and the Dumna Wo Wah Tribe have requested to be notified pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) . A certified letter was mailed to the above - mentioned tribes on June 7, 2022. The 30-day comment period ended on July 7, 2022. Neither tribe requested consultation.
Record Search
The Southern San Joaquin Information Center (SSJIC) conducted a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Record Search for the Project site and surrounding area (0.50-mile radius) on June 20, 2022 (Record Search File Number 22-238). The search results do not show any formally recorded prehistoric or historic archeological resources or historic buildings within the Project area or within the 0.5-mile radius. There are no cultural resources within the Project area or 0.5 -mile radius listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, Calif ornia Inventory of Historic Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks. The SSJIC Correspondence is provided in Appendix B.
4.5.2 Impact Assessment
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the CHRIS Records Search conducted on June 20, 2022, there are no known local, state, or federal designated historical resources on the Project site or within the Project area. However, while there is no evidence that historical resources exist on the Project site, there is some possibility that hidden and buried resources may exist on the Project site with no surface evidence. Thus, to further assure construction activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential cultural resources discovered below ground surface, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL -1. Thus, if such resources were
15 City of Fresno. A Guide to Historic Architecture in Fresno, California . Accessed on February 1, 2022, http://www.historicfresno.org/districts/index.htm
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 50 discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measure would re duce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project will have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified historical resources specialist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified historical resources specialist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency.
Appropriate measures for significa nt resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.
No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. (PEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-1.1) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant Impact. Based on the CHRIS Records Search conducted on June 20, 2022, there is no evidence that cultural resources of any type (including historical, archaeological, paleontological, or unique geologic features) exist on the Project site. Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non -visible, buried archeological resource may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. To mitigate the event of the accidental discovery and recognition of previously unknown resources before or during grading activities, the Project incorporates Mitigation Measure CUL-1 to reduce any potentially significant impacts to a less than significant impact. c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. There is no evidence that human remains exist on the Project site. Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non -visible buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. If any human remains are discovered during construction, CCR Section 15064.5(e), PRC Section 5097.98, and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 will
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 51 mitigate for the impacts. To further assure future construction activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential resources or human remains discovered below ground surface, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL -2. Therefore, if any human remains were discovered, implementation of this mitigation and referenced regulations would reduce the Project’s impact to less than significant. Therefore, if any human remains were discovered, implementation of this mitigation and referenced regulations would reduce the Project’s impact to less than significant.
Mitigation Measure CUL -2: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 705 0.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 ho urs notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b) , upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged o r disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. (General Plan PEIR Mitigation Measures CUL-3)
4.5.3 Mitigation Measures
The proposed Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the cultural resources related mitigation measures as identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program dated June 2022.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 52
4.6 ENERGY
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X
4.6.1 Environmental Setting
Appendix F – Energy Conservation of the CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of energy implications in project decisions, including a discussion of the potential energy impacts with emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources (Public Resources Code Section 21 100(b)(3)). Per Appendix F, a project would be considered inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary if it violated existing energy standards, had a negative effect on local and regional energy supplies and requirements for additional capacity, had a negative effect on peak and base period demands for electricity and other energy forms, and effected energy resources.
The California Energy Commission updates the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Parts 6 and 11) every three years as part of the Cali fornia Code of Regulations. The standards were established in 1978 in effort to reduce the state’s energy consumption. They apply for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings and relate to various energy efficiencies including but not limited to ventilation, air conditioning, and lighting.16 The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations, was developed in 2007 to meet the state goals for reducing Greenhouse Gas
16 California Energy Commission . (n/a) 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Accessed on February 10, 2022 , https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2019-building- energy-efficiency
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 53 emissions pursuant to AB32. CALGreen covers five (5) categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality. 17 The 2019 Building Energy Eff iciency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2020. Additionally, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) oversees air pollution control efforts, regulations, and programs that contribute to reduction of energy consumption.
Compliance with these energy efficiency regulations and programs ensure that development will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy sources.
California Energy Action Plan
The Energy Action Plan (EAP) for California was approved in 2003 by the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The EAP established goals and next steps to integrate and coordinate energy efficiency demand and response programs and actions.14F 18 Fresno General Plan
Energy resources and conservation are discussed in the Resource Conservation and Resilience Section of the Fresno General Plan. The following objectives and policies of the Fresno General Plan relate to energy resources and conservation of development in order to reduce community - wide energy consumption:
Policy RC-2 Promote land uses that conserve resources.
Policy RC-2-a Link Land Use to Transportation. Promote mixed -use, higher density infill development in multi-modal corridors. Support land use patterns that make more efficient use of the transportation system and plan future transportation investments in areas of higher - intensity development. Discour age investment in infrastructure that would not meet these criteria.
Policy RC-2-b Provide Infrastructure for Mixed -Use and Infill. Promote investment in the public infrastructure needed to allow mixed -use and denser infill development to occur in targeted locations, such as expanded water and wastewater conveyance systems, complete streetscapes,
17 California Department of General Services . (2020). 2019 California Green Building Standards Code . Accessed on September 17, 2021, https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CGBC2019P3 18 State of California. (2008). Energy Action Plan 2008 Update. Accessed on February 10, 2022, https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/REPORT/28715.pdf
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 54 parks and open space amenities, and trails. Discourage investment in infrastructure that would not meet these criteria.
Objective RC-8 Reduce the consumption of no n-renewable energy resources by requiring and encouraging conservation measures and the use of alternative energy sources.
Policy RC -8-a Existing Standards and Programs. Continue existing beneficial energy conservation programs, including adhering to the C alifornia Energy Code in new construction and major renovations.
Policy RC-8-b Energy Reduction Targets. Strive to reduce per capita residential electricity use to 1,800 kWh per year and non -residential electricity use to 2,700 kWh per year per capita by d eveloping and implementing incentives, design and operation standards, promoting alternative energy sources, and cost-effective savings.
Policy RC-8-c Energy Conservation in New Development. Consider providing an incentive program for new buildings that ex ceed California Energy Code requirements by fifteen percent.
Policy RC -8-d Incentives. Establish an incentive program for residential developers who commit to building all of their homes to ENERGY STAR performance guidelines.
Policy RC -8-e Energy Use Discl osure. Promote compliance with State law mandating disclosure of a building’s energy data and rating of the previous year to prospective buyers and lessees of the entire building or lenders financing the entire building.
Policy RC -8-h Solar Assistance. Identify and publicize information about financial mechanisms for private solar installations and provide over-the-counter permitting for solar installations meeting specified standards, which may include maximum size (in kV) of units that can be so approved.
4.6.2 Impact Assessment
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact. The Project proposes the development of a 29,000-sf. senior center and 33,000 sf., or 70 units, of affordable housing units on a 4.25-acre parcel. Energy would be consumed through Project construction and operations, further analyzed below.
Construction
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 55 Construction would be short -term and temporary. Construction activities include typical demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, architectural coating, and trenching. There are no unusual project characteristics or construction processes that would require the use of equipment that would be more energy intensive than is used for comparable activities. The primary source of energy for construction activities would be diesel and gasoline (i.e., petroleum fuels). All construction equipment shall conform to current emissions standards and related fuel efficiencies including applicable CARB regulations (Airborne Toxic Control Measure), California Code of Regulations (Title 13, Motor Vehicles), and Title 24 standards . Compliance with such regulations would ensure that the short-term, temporary construction activities do not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.
Operations
Operations would involve heating, cooling, equipment, and vehicle trips. Energy consumption related to operations would be associated with natural gas, electricity, and fuel. Energy and natural gas consumption were estimated using CalEEMod (Appendix A). Traffic impacts related to vehicle trips were considered through a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis containe d in Section 4.17.
Results are summarized as follows.
The Project site would be served by PG&E for both electricity and natural gas. Fresno County consumed approximately 8,018 GWh of electricity, or 2.9 percent of electricity generated in California in 20 20 (279,510 GWh). 19 Table 4-4 shows the estimated electricity and natural gas consumption for the Project based on output from CalEEMod. Development of the Project would consume 0.0066 percent of the total electricity use in Fresno County in 2020 and 0.4372 percent of the total natural gas use in Fresno County in 2020. These results do not rise a level of significance. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with the regulations and standards of Title 24 and CALGreen. Through compliance, it can be determined that the proposed Project would not consume energy in a manner that is wasteful, i nefficient, or unnecessary nor would the project conflict with any state or local plan for energy efficiency.
Table 4-4 Project Energy Consumption
Energy Consumption kWh per year GWh per year
Electricity 525,825 0.5258
Natural Gas 1,424,934 1.4249
19 California Energy Commission. “Electricity Consumption by County.” Accessed on June 19, 2022 , http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 56 Regarding energy consumed through vehicle trips, re development of the Project site would increase density and promote mixed -use development in an infill area and high -quality transit corridor. As a result, development would facilitate the usage of transportation modes such as walking, biking, and/or bus, decreasing vehicle fuel energy consumption in th e city. Therefore, it can be determined that the proposed Project would not consume energy in a manner that is wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary nor would the project conflict with any state or local plan for energy efficiency. Thus, the project would have a less than significant impact. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? No Impact. As discussed under criterion a), the construction and operations of the Project would be subject to compliance with a pplicable energy efficiency regulations including CALGreen, Title 24, General Plan, and CARB. Thus, applicable state and local regulations and programs would be implemented to reduce energy waste from construction and operations. Therefore, through compliance, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plan for energy efficiency and a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
4.6.3 Mitigation Measures
None Required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 57
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or Indirectly cause
potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most
recent Alquist -Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special
Publication 42.
X
ii. Strong seismic ground
shaking? X
iii. Seismic-related ground
failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv. Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in
on- or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18 -1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or
X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 58 property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
X
4.7.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is in the San Joaquin Valley which is one of the two large valleys comprising the Great Valley Geomorphic Province. The San Joaquin Valley is surrounded by Sierra Nevada (east), Coast Ranges (west), Tehachapi (south), and the Sacramento Valley (north). The Fresno area is set on gently southwest-sloping alluvial fans and plans formed by the San Joaquin and Kings Rivers. A brief discussion of the likelihood of seismic activities to occur in or affect Fresno is provided below.
Faulting
There are no active faults mapped within the city of Fresno. The Project site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone as established by the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act (Section 2622 of Chapter 7.5, Division 2 of the Californi a Public Resources Code). The nearest fault to the Project site is the Clovis Fault, which is approximately 9.5 miles northeast of the site. 20 Subsurface Soils
According to the Geologic Hazards Investigation for the Fresno General Plan, the uppermost soils in the Fresno area (i.e., 6-12 inches) comprise very loose silty sand, silty sand with trace clay, sandy silt, clayey sand, or clayey gravel. These soils are d isturbed, have low strength, and are highly compressible when saturated. Area soils between two (2) to four (4) feet below ground surface (bgs) range from loose/soft to very dense/hard clays, silts, sands, and gravels with the characteristics of moderately strong and moderately compressible. Three (3) to five (5) feet bgs soils are clays, silts, sands, and gravels that are moderately strong and slightly compressible.
20 California Department of Conservation. Fault Activity Map of California . Accessed on June 14, 2022, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 59 A search of the Web Soil Survey by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service indicat es that the following, stable, native soil comprises the Project site: 21 SdA: San Joquin sandy loam, shallow, 0 to 3 percent slopes, moderately well drained, very high runoff, with no potential of flooding or ponding. The depth to water table is more than 80 inches. The SdA soils account for 100% of the Project site.
Strong Ground Shaking
The Fresno area is subject to low to moderate ground shaking. The Owens Valley Ear thquake of 1872 and the Coalinga Earthquake of 1982 generated ground shaking of intensity VII of the 12 - point Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale. Intensity VII earthquakes result in negligible damage to buildings, slight to moderate in well -built structures, considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures, and some broken chimneys. 22 Development of the Project site would be required to conform to current seismic protection standards in the California Building Code (CBC), which are intended to minimize potential risks.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, fine‐grained granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high‐intensity ground shaking. The potential for liquefaction in the city of Fresno is low to moderate, per the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. There has been no observed liquefaction from any historic earthquake. Additionally, ground s haking, seismic settlement, and lateral spreading are not considered to be significant hazards due to the stable area soils as observed in the Geologic Hazards Investigation for the Fresno General Plan.
Erosion
Wind and flowing water are the primary agents of erosion in the San Joaquin Valley. Two (2) types of areas with moderate to high erosion potential are identified by the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan: soils in the Sierra Nevada and foothills on slopes over 30 percent and soils in the western San Joaquin Valley and Coast Ranges. According to the Fresno General Pl an, the city of Fresno is not susceptible to soil erosion except for land within 300 feet of the toe of the San
21 United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. “Web Soil Survey.” Accessed on June 14, 2022, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx 22 US Geological Survey (USGS), 2017. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, Accessed on June 14, 2022, https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/modified-mercalli-intensity-scale
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 60 Joaquin River bluffs. However, the Project site is not a bluff area and is therefore not subject to the potential for moderate to high erosion.
Ground Subsidence
Ground subsidence is the settling or sinking of surface soil deposits with little or no horizontal motion. Soils with high silt or clay content are subject to sub sidence. While the County of Fresno identifies a significant hazard significance for subsidence due to heavy groundwater withdrawal, the city of Fresno it not known to be subject to subsidence hazards. Areas with potential for subsidence hazards are in wes tern Fresno County over 25 miles southwest from the Project site, as mapped in the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Fresno General Plan
Geology and soils are discussed in the Noise and Safety Chapter of the Fresno General Plan. The following relevant policies of the Fresno General Plan:
Policy NS-2 Minimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic risks.
Policy NS-2-a Seismic Protection. Ensure seismic protection is incorporated into new and existing construction, consistent with the Fresno Municipal Code.
Policy NS-2-b Soil Analysis Requirement. Identify areas with potential geologic and/or soils hazards, and require development in these areas to conduct a soil analysis and mitigation plan by a registered civil engineer (or engineering geologist specializing in soil geology) prior to allowing on-site drainage or disposal for wastewater, stormwater runoff, or swimming pool/spa water.
4.7.2 Impact Assessment
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
No Impact. There are no known active earthquake faults in Fresno (inclusive of the Project site) , nor is Fresno within an Alquist -Priolo earthquake fault zone as e stablished by the Alquist -Priolo Fault Zoning Act. Thus, the Project would not cause rupture of a known earthquake fault and therefore, would have no impact.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 61 ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no known active earthquake faults in Fresno and Fresno has historically been subject to low to moderate ground shaking. The Fresno area, inclusive of the Project site, is classified by the State as being in a moderate seismic risk zone, Category “C” or “D,” depending on the soils underlying the specific location being categorized and that location’s proximity to the nearest known fault lines. The Project site is relatively flat and has stable, native soils and is not in close proximity to any fault lines. In addition, t he Project would be required to conform to current seismic protection standards in the CBC. Therefore, because of the Project’s stable soils and distance from active fault lines, conformance to CBC seismic safety standards, and compliance with General Plan polic ies, the Project does not have any aspect that could result in strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. As previously discussed, Fresno has a low to moderate potential for seismic activities. Further, Fresno does not have a significant liquefaction potential since it is in a stable geologic formation. There are also no geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions known to exist on the Project site. The site is relatively flat with stable soils and no apparent unique or significant landforms. For this reason, liquefaction or seismically induced settlement or bearing loss is considered unlikely, even if there should be a substantial increase in ground water level.
Further, development of the site would require c ompliance with the City’s grading and drainage standards. Therefore, because of the Project’s relatively flat topography, stability of soils, infrequency of seismic activity, and required compliance with City standards, the Project does not have any aspect that could result in seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction .
Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact. iv. Landslides?
Less than Significant Impact. The topography of the Project site is relatively flat with stable, native soils, in an area that is not susceptible to seismic activities, geologic instability, or landslides.
Furthermore, the site is not in the immediate vicinity of rivers or creeks that would be more susceptible to landslides. Therefore, there would be a less than significant impact as a result of the Project.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the Project site would require typical site preparation activities such as grading and trenching which may result in the potential for short - term soil disturbance or erosion impacts. Construction would also involve the use of water which may cause further soil disturbance . Such impacts would be addressed through compliance with regulations set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The SWRCB requires sites
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 62 larger than one (1) acre to comply with the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (i.e., General Permit Order No. 2012 -0006-DWQ). The General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). The SWPPP estimates the sediment risk assoc iated with construction activities and includes best management practices (BMP) to control erosion.
BMPs specific to erosion control cover erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management controls. Implementation of the SWPPP minimizes the potential for t he Project to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. With these provisions in place, impacts to soil and topsoil by the Project would be considered less than significant. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than Significant Impact. The site is relatively flat with stable soils and no apparent unique o r significant landforms. Furthermore, the Project site is in an area of infrequent and low historic seismic activity of nearby faults. Such factors minimize the potential for other geologic hazards such as landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefa ction, or collapse. Therefore, any development on the native, stable soils is unlikely to become unstable and result in geologic hazards. In addition, the Project does not have any aspect that could result in a landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liq uefaction, or collapse. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? No Impact. The Project site is relatively flat and stable, native soils of the SdA, San Joaquin sandy loam. Sandy loam soils are not classified as expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code and would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property.
Thus, no impact would occur because of the Project.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. Since the Project site is within city limits and fully developed, the site is connected to the city’s water and sewer systems. Thus, no septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be installed, and no impact would occur because of the Project. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 63 Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in the Cultural Resources section above, there are no known paleontological resources or unique geological features known to the City on this site. In addition, the Project site is previously disturbed with construction. Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non-visible, buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. To further assure future development does not result in significant impacts to any potential resources, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 as described in Section 4.5. Therefore, if any paleontological resources or geologic features were discovered, implementation of CUL-1 and CUL-2 would reduce the Project’s impact to less than significant.
4.7.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 64
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
4.8.1 Environmental Setting
Various gases in the Earth’s atmosphere, classified as atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a critical role in determining the Earth’s surface temperature. Solar radiation enters Earth’s atmosphere from space, and a portion of the radiation is absorbed by the Earth’s surface. The Earth emits this radiation back toward space, but the properties of the radiation change from high- frequency solar radiation to lower-frequency infrared radiation.
Naturally occurring greenhouse gases include water vapor (H 2O), carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone (O3). Several classes of halogenated substances that contain fluorine, chlorine, or bromine are also GHGs, but they are, for the most part, solely a product of industrial activities. Although the direct greenhouse gases CO2, CH4, and N2O occur naturally in the atmosphere, human activities have changed their atmospheric concentrations. From the pre - industrial era (i.e., ending about 1750) to 2011, concentrations of these three GHGs have increased globally by 40, 150, and 20 percent, respectively (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2013).
GHGs, which are transparent to solar radiation, are effective in absorbing infrared radiation. As a result, this radiation that otherwise would have escaped back into space is now retained, resulting in a warming of the atmosphere. This phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Among the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH4), ozone (O3), water vapor, nitrous oxide (N2O), and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 65 The emissions from a single project will not cause global climate change, however, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative impact with respect to global climate change. Therefore, the analysis of GHGs and climate change presented in this section is presented in terms of the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts and potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to GHGs and climate change.
Cumulative impacts are the collective impacts of one or more past, present, and future projects that, when combined, result in adverse changes to the environment. In determining the significance of a proposed project’s contribution to anticipated adverse future conditions, a lead agency should generally undertake a two step analysis. The first question is whether the combined effects from both the proposed project and other projects would be cumulatively significant. If the agency answers this inquiry in the affirmative, the second question is whether “the proposed project’s incremental effects are cumulatively considerable” and thus significant in and of themselves.
The cumulative project list for this issue (climate change) comprises anthropogenic (i.e., human made) GHG emissions sources across the globe and no project alone would reasonably be expected to contribute to a noticeable incremental change to the global climate. However, legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a statewide context and process for develo ping an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions.
Given the nature of environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs. Small contributions to this cumulat ive impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen over time) may be potentially considerable and, therefore, significant.
Executive Order S‐3‐05
California adopted EO B -3-05 on June 1, 2005, which established an emissions reduction to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
Executive Order B‐30‐15
California adopted EO B-30-15 on April 29, 2015, which established an emissions reduction to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
Threshold of Significance
In assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions, Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency may consider the following:
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 66 • The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the environmental setting;
• Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project;
• The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, guidance from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), SJVAPCD Climate Change Acti on Plan, City of Fresno Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan is discussed below as thresholds of significance. 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan
The CARB 2017 Scoping Plan 23 is the adopted statewide plan for reduction or mitigation of GHGs to implement State Bill (SB) 32. SB 32 was issued in 2016 to lay emission reduction goals beyond AB 32’s goal by 2020. It sets a statewide goal to reduce emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030.
Consequently, the Scoping Plan involves several measures to reduce pollution and GHG emissions, indicating a decrease of GHG emissions to 389 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e by 2030. 2009 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Guidance As part of the SJVAPCD Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP), SJVAPCD adopted its Guidance for Valley Land‐use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA and the policy District Policy - Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for Stationary Source Projects Under CEQA When Serving as the Lead Agency in 2009.
25F
24,
26F
25 Through this guidance document, SJVAPCD
recognized that project -specific emissions are cumulative and could be considered cumulatively considerable without mitigation. SJVAPCD suggested that the requirement to reduce GHG emissions for all projects is the best method to address this cumulative impact. In addition, this
23 California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2017). 2017 Scoping Plan Documents. Accessed April 5, 2022, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change-scoping-plan/2017-scoping-plan-documents 24 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (2009). Guidance for Valley Land -use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA. Accessed December 29, 2021, http://www.valleyair.org/Programs/CCAP/12-17-09/3%20CCAP%20-%20FINAL%20LU%20Guidance%20- %20Dec%2017%202009.pdf.
25 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (2000). Environmental Review Guidelines: Procedures for Implementing th e California Environmental Quality Act. Accessed December 29, 2021, http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/CEQA%20Rules/ERG%20Adopted%20_August%202000_. pdf
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 67 guidance provides screening criteria for climate change analyses, as well as draft guidance for the determination of significance. As shown in Figure 4-2, these criteria are used to evaluate whether a project would result in a significant climate change impact. Projects that meet one of these criteria would have less than significant impact on the global climate.
1. Exempt from CEQA;
2. Complies with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program;
3. Achieves 29 percent GHG reductions by using approved Best Performance Standards; or
4. Achieves AB 32 targeted 29 percent GHG reductions compared with “business as usual.”
Figure 4-2 SJVAPCD’s GHG Thresholds of Significance
Source: SJVAPCD Guidance for Valley Land-use Agencies in Addressing GHG Emission Impacts for New Projects under CEQA – Land Use Development Projects 2009 2020 Fresno Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Update (Adopted in 2021) As part of implementation of the General Plan, the city of Fresno adopted the Climate Action Plan, referred as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GHG Plan), in 2014. The GHG Plan supports AB 32 to reduce statewide emissions by 2020. The Fresno Green Sustainability Strategy also includes a commitment to meet the 2020 AB 32 goal and to meet a reduction of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 stated in Executive Order S‐03‐05. This GHG Plan is considered a “Qualified Pl an,” according to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15183.5.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 68 The City of Fresno updated the GHG Plan in 2020 (adopted in 2021) to incorporate two (2) significant regulations that have been established since 2014. This includes SB 32 that sets a statewide reduction goal of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and the Cali fornia Supreme Court’s decision invalidating an EIR for a variety of reasons, including the use of 29 percent below business-as-usual (BAU) as a threshold to determine significance of GHG emissions under CEQA without any supporting evidence. GHG Plan Update Section 6.0 sets a CEQA streamlining process for development projects that are subject to discretionary review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 . 26 In compliance with the City’s GHG Plan, the process for determining consistency with the Plan for a new discretionary action is as follows:
1. Review the GHG Reduction Plan Project Update CEQA Consistency Checklist that lists the local GHG reduction strategies identified in the GHG Plan Update to determine applicability to the project.
2. Incorporate design features or mitigation measures into the project as needed to demonstrate consistency.
3. Implement project design features suitable for the development type and location.
Projects that meet the requirements of the Consistency Checklist are considered to be consistent with the Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update and thereby are presumed to have a less than significant contribution to cumulative GHG pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(d), and 15183(b). This is consistent with SJVAPCD’s recommendation of a tiered approach to assess the significance of the GHG impacts on the environment (see Figure 4-2), which uses compliance with an adopted statewide, regional, or local plan for GHG emission reduction or mitigation as a threshold to determine individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions.
4.8.2 Impact Assessment
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in more detail under criterion b), the Project is deemed consistent with the with the Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update since it meets the requirements of the CEQA Consistency Checklist. Thus, it can be determined that the Project would not occur at a scale or scope with potential to contribute substantially or cumulatively to the generation of
26 City of Fresno. (2020). Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Update. Accessed on February 2, 2022, https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2020/03/Appendix_G- GHG_Reduction_Plan_Update.pdf
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 69 GHG emissions pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(3), 15130(d), and 15183(b) . As a result, GHG impacts of the Project would be less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact. The Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update is the applicable plan adopted for the purposes of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Project is consistent with the Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update CEQA Consistency Checklist as reviewed in Table 4-5. Overall, the Project contains features that would reduce GHG emissions in compliance with the Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update. As such, the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and therefore a less than significant impact would occur.
Table 4-5 Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Update - CEQA Consistency Checklist Checklist Item
(Check the appropriate box and provide an explanation
for your answer)
Yes No N/A Explanation
Strategy 1: Land Use and Transportation Demand Management Does the project provide complete streets for all roadway improvements? (Complete streets are roadways that
include curb, gutter, and sidewalks on both sides of the street. For local and collector streets, adequate roadway width is provided to accommodate two-way vehicle traffic and bicycles and arterial streets include striping for bike lanes.)
x
Roadway
improvements,
including curb, gutter,
and sidewalks are
existing.
Is the project a large employer (over 100 employees) and if so will the project comply with SJVAPCD Rule 9410 and provide an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan
that will include trip reduction methods such as increasing transit use, carpooling, va npooling, bicycling, or other measures? See the SJVAPCD website link for details:
https://www.valleyair.org/rules/currntrules/r9410.pdf
x The Project is not a
large employer.
Strategy 2: Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy
Does the project meet the mandatory energy efficiency
measures of the California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen)? If the Project exceeds mandatory CalGreen
measures then provide the tier number that the project
will meet in the explanation.
x
The Project will be
reviewed during
entitlement to ensure
that energy efficient
standards of CalGreen
are met.
For commercial projects, does it achieve net zero
electricity? Mark NA if project will be permitted before 2030. Mark Yes if voluntary. Add source and capacity in explanation.
x The Project will be
permitted before 2030.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 70 Does the project include onsite energy generation using renewable energy? If no, mark NA. If yes, provide source and capacity in the explanation.
x
Solar panels will be
installed in compliance
with Title 24 Solar
Mandate.
Strategy 3: Water Conservation
Does the project meet the mandatory indoor water use
measures of the CalGreen Code? If the project exceeds
CalGreen Code mandatory measures provide methods in
excess of requirements in the explanation. Examples may include water pipe insulation, pressure reducing valves, energy efficient appliances such as Energy Star Certified dishwashers, washing machines, dual flush toilets, point of use and/or tankless water heaters. Provide the measures , devices, or systems that the project will include in the explanation.
x
The Project will be
reviewed during
entitlement to ensure
that indoor water use
measures of CalGreen
are met.
Does the project meet the mandatory outdoor water use
measures of the CalGreen Code? If the project exceeds
CalGreen Code mandatory measures provide methods in
excess of requirements in the explanation? Examples may include any outdoor water conservation measures such as; drought tolerant landscaping plants, compliant irrigation systems, xeriscapes etc. Provide the conservation measure that the project will include in the explanation.
x
The Project will be
reviewed during
entitlement to ensure
that outdoor water use
measures of CalGreen
are met.
Strategy 4: Solid Waste Diversion and Recycling
When completed will the project implement techniques
for solid waste diversion and reduction (i.e., recycling, composting, waste to energy technology, waste
separation)?
X
Project waste will be
collected by Allied
Waste Services, which
will be included in the
citywide recycling and
compositing program.
Waste produced during
demolition is required
to be recycled since it is
a City-issued building.
During con struction will the project recycle construction and demolition waste? x
4.8.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 71
4.9 HAZARDOUS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one -quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the
project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 72 g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X
4.9.1 Environmental Setting
For the purposes of this section, the term “hazardous materials” refers to "injurious substances," which include flammable liquids and gases, poisons, corrosives, explosives, oxidizers, radioactive materials, and medical supplies and waste. These materials are either generated or used by various commercial and industrial activities. Hazardous wastes are injurious substances that have been or will be disp osed. Potential hazards arise from the transport of hazardous materials, including leakage and accidents involving transporting vehicles. There also are hazards associated with the use and storage of these materials and wastes. Hazardous materials are grouped into the following four categories based on their properties:
• Toxic: causes human health effect
• Ignitable: has the ability to burn
• Corrosive: causes severe burns or damage to materials • Reactive: causes explosions or generates toxic gases
“Hazardous wastes” are defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 25141(b) as wastes that: “…because of their quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, [may either] cause or significantly contribute to an incr ease in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed.” A hazardous waste is any hazardous m aterial that is discarded, abandoned, or slated to be recycled. If improperly handled, hazardous materials and hazardous waste can result in public health hazards if released into the soil or groundwater or through airborne releases in vapors, fumes, or du st. Soil and groundwater having concentrations of hazardous constituents higher than specific regulatory levels must be handled and disposed of as hazardous waste when excavated or pumped from an aquifer. The California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Secti ons 66261.20‐24 contains technical descriptions of toxic characteristics that could cause soil or groundwater to be classified as hazardous waste.
Hazardous waste generators may include industries, businesses, public and private institutions, and household s. Federal, state, and local agencies maintain comprehensive databases that identify the location of facilities using large quantities of hazardous materials, as well as facilities generating hazardous waste. Some of these facilities use certain classes of hazardous materials that require risk management plans to protect surrounding land uses. The release of hazardous
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 73 materials would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations and is similar to the transport, use, and disposal of hazard materials.
Record Search
The California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor database28F 27 and the State Water
Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database 29F
28 include hazardous release and contamination
sites. A search of each database was conducted on June 14, 2022. The searches revealed no active hazardous material release sites on or within a 0.5-mile radius of the Project site . There are nine (9) lust cleanup program site in the 0.5-mile radius of the Project site that are closed/cleaned up.
Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
The nearest public and public use airport is the Fresno Yosemite International Airport approximately ± 3.3-miles southeast of the Project site. The Fresno Yosemite International Airport is owned and operated by the City of Fresno and has one (1) runway that is 3,626 feet long and 75 feet wide. The Federal Aviation Administration designates the airport as a general aviation reliever airport for Fresno Yosemite International Airpo rt and it is used primarily for general aviation, including general aviation businesses offering services such as fueling, aircraft maintenance, restoration, flight instruction, charter services, and rentals. 29 According to the Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) 30 , the Project site is located within the Precision Approach Zone (PAZ) of the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the Fresno Yosemite International Airport. The ALUCP has set “safety zone land use compatibility standards” that restrict the development of land uses that could pose hazards to the public or to vulnerable populations in case of an aircraft accident, as shown in Table 4-6.
27California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Envirostor. Accessed June 14, 2022, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
28 California State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Accessed June 14, 2022, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
29 Federal Aviation Administration. (September 2014). Fresno Chandler Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Accessed on June 14, 2022, https://www.fresnocog.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/02/ALUC_Chandler_Executive_Airport_Compatibility_Land_Use_Plan_Update_10-06-14.pdf 30 Fresno Council of Governments. (December 2018). Fresno County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Accessed on June 14, 2022, https://www.fresnocog.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/fresno-draft-ALUCP-12-04-17c.pdf ; https://2ave3l244ex63mgdyc1u2mfp-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/fresno-final-alucp- 113018-r_part2.pdf
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 74 Table 4-6 Safety Zone Land Use Compatibility Standards
Zone PAZ
Dwelling Units per Acre No limit
Maximum Non-
Residential Intensity No limit
Required Open Land 0%
Prohibited Uses
Hazards to flight (i.e., physical (tall objects), visual, and electronic forms of interference with the safety of aircraft operations. Land use development, such as golf courses and certain types of crops that may cause the attraction of birds to increase is also prohibited).
Other Development
Conditions
No object shall have a height that would penetrate th e air‐ space protection surface of the airport. Any object that penetrates one of these surfaces is, by FAA definition, considered an obstruction. A proposed object having a height that exceeds the airport’s airspace protection surface shall be allowed onl y if, upon conclusion of the FAA’s 7460 review process, the FAA determines that the object would not be a hazard to air navigation.
Fresno General Plan
The General Plan include objectives and policies relevant to hazards and hazardous materials , airport-related safety hazards, and emergency response in its Noise and Safety Element:
Objective NS -4 Minimize the risk of loss of life, injury, serious illness, and damage to property resulting from the use, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardou s materials and hazardous wastes.
NS-4-a Processing and Storage. Require safe processing and storage of hazardous materials, consistent with the California Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City.
NS-4-b Coordination. Maintain a close liaison with the Fresno County Environmental Health Department, Cal-EPA Division of Toxics, and the State Office of Emergency Services to assist in developing and maintaining hazardous material business plans, inventory statements, risk management prevention plans, and contingency/emergency response action plans.
NS-4-c Soil and Groundwater Contamination Reports. Require an investigation of potential soil or groundwater contamination whenever justified by past site uses. Require appropriate mitigation as a condition of project approval in the event soil or groundwat er contamination is identified or could be encountered during site development.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 75 NS-4-e Compliance with County Program. Require that the production, use, storage, disposal, and transport of hazardous materials conform to the standards and procedures established by the County Division of Environmental Health. Require compliance with the County’s Hazardous Waste Generator Program, including the submittal and implementation of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, when applicable.
NS-4-f Hazardous Materials Facilities. Require facilities that handle hazardous materials or hazardous wastes to be designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with applicable hazardous materials and waste management laws and regulations.
NS-4-h Household Collection. Continue to s upport and assist with Fresno County’s special household hazardous waste collection activities, to reduce the amount of this material being improperly discarded.
Objective NS-5 Protect the safety, health, and welfare of persons and property on the ground a nd in aircraft by minimizing exposure to airport-related hazards.
NS-5-a Land Use and Height. Incorporate and enforce all applicable Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans (ALUCPs) through land use designations, zoning, and development standards to support the continued viability and flight operations of Fresno’s airports and to protect public safety, health, and general welfare.
• Limit land uses in airport safety zones to those uses listed in the applicable ALUCPs as compatible uses, and regulate compatibilit y in terms of location, height, and noise.
• Ensure that development, including public infrastructure projects, within the airport approach and departure zones complies with Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Administration Regulations (Objects Affecting Navig able Airspace), particularly in terms of height.
NS-5-b Airport Safety Hazards. Ensure that new development, including public infrastructure projects, does not create safety hazards such as glare from direct or reflective sources, smoke, electrical interference, hazardous chemicals, fuel storage, or from wildlife, in violation of adopted safety standards.
NS-5-c Avigation Easements. Employ avigation easements in order to secure and protect airspace required for unimpeded operation of publicly owned airports.
NS-5-d Disclosure. As a condition of approval for residential development projects, require sellers to prepare and provide State Department of Real Estate Disclosure statements to property buyers notifying of noise and safety issues related to airport operations.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 76 NS-5-e Planned Expansion. Allow for the orderly expansion and improvement of publicly owned airports, while minimizing adverse environmental impacts associated with these facilities.
• Periodically update airport facility master plans in accordance with FAA regulations.
• Require land use within the boundaries of the Fresno -Yosemite International Airport and Chandler Downtown Airport to conform to designations and policies specified in adopted City of Fresno compatible land use plans. • Provide local jurisdictions surround ing the City's publicly owned airports with specific guidelines for effectively dealing with the presence and operation of these airports.
OBJECTIVE NS-6 Foster an efficient and coordinated response to emergencies and natural disasters.
Policy NS-6-a County Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan. Adopt and implement the Fresno County Multi -Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan and City of Fresno Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex.
Policy NS -6-b Disaster Response Coordination. Maintain coordination with oth er local, State, and Federal agencies to provide coordinated disaster response.
Policy NS-6-c Emergency Operations Plan. Update the City’s Emergency Operations Plan periodically, using a whole community approach which integrates considerations for People with access and functional needs in all aspects of planning.
Policy NS-6-d Evacuation Planning. Maintain an emergency evacuation plan in consultation with the Police and Fire Departments and other emergency service providers, which shows potential evacuati on routes and a list of emergency shelters to be used in case of catastrophic emergencies.
Policy NS-6-e Critical Use Facilities. Ensure critical use facilities (e.g. City Hall, police and fire stations, schools, hospitals, public assembly facilities, tran sportation services) and other structures that are important to protecting health and safety in the community remain operational during an emergency.
• Site and design these facilities to minimize their exposure and susceptibility to flooding, seismic and geological effects, fire, and explosions.
• Work with the owners and operators of critical use facilities to ensure they can provide alternate sources of electricity, water, and sewerage in the event that regular utilities are interrupted in a disaster.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 77 Policy NS-6-f Emergency Vehicle Access. Require adequate access for emergency vehicles in all new development, including adequate widths, turning radii, hard standing areas, and vertical clearance.
Policy NS-6-g Emergency Preparedness Public Awareness Programs . Continue to conduct programs to inform the general public, including people with access and functional needs, of the City’s emergency preparedness and disaster response procedures.
4.9.2 Impact Assessment
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the enviro nment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed Project consists of a senior center and affordable housing development for seniors. The type of hazardous materials that would be associated with Project operations are those typical of residential uses such as cleaning supplies, HVAC equipment, etc. Because of the residential use, it is not expected that the Project would routinely transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials other than those typical of office uses and such materials would not be of the type or quantity that would pose a significant hazard to the public. Potential impacts during construction of the Project could result from the use of fuels and lubricants for construction equipment. However, these impacts would be short-term and temporary, and would be reduced to less than significant levels t hrough compliance with local, state, and federal regulations in addition to standard equipment operating practices. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment throu gh reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. As described under criterion a) above, it is not anticipated that the Project itself will involve any o perations that would require routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and therefore is not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through release of hazardous materials. While potential impacts would o ccur through construction-related transport and disposal of hazardous materials, such impacts would be short -term and temporary, and would be reduced to less than significant levels through compliance with local, state, and federal regulations in addition to standard equipment operating practices. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 78 Less than Significant Impact. Schools within one-quarter miles of the Project site include Del Mar Elementary School, approximately 0.20 miles southwest of the site. As described under criteria a) and b) above, the Project is not anticipat ed to emit hazard emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances, or water that would pose a risk or threat to the school or surrounding area.
Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. According to EnviroStor and GeoTracker, t he Project is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public of the environment. For these reasons, there would be no impact. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within the PAZ of the Fresno Yosemite International Airport AIA. Because it is within the AIA, City of Fresno Planning staff is required to review the Project for consistency with the ALUCP and General Plan. Review for consistency will take place during the entitlement process. Therefore, through compliance with the ALUCP and General Plan, the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the area and impacts would be less than significant.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not involve any new or altered infrastructure associated with evacuation, emergency response, and emergency access routes within the City or County of Fresno. Construction of frontage improvements may require lane closure; however, these activities would be short-term and access through East Holland Avenue or East Swift Avenue would be maintained through standard traffic control. Following construction, these streets would continue to provide access to the site. Furthermore, the Project would be subject to compliance with applicable standards for on -site emergency access inc luding turn radii and fire access. In addition, development projects would not impede the implementation of General Plan o bjective NS-6 policies NS-6-a to NS-6-g. Therefore, through the development review process and General Plan compliance, the P roject would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 79 g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
Less than Significant Impact. According to the Fresno General Plan, wildfire threats to Fresno are minimal because the city is largely urbanized or working agricultural land and lacks steep topographies. Although the city is proximate to high and very high fire hazard designated area, the urbanized area is categorized as little or no threat or moderate fire hazard which is attributed to its paved areas. Furthermore, the Project site is not identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) within the L ocal Responsibility Area.31 In addition, the Project proposes the construction of a senior center and residential development that would be occupied by humans; as such, the structure shall be constructed in adherence to the Wildland Urban Interface Codes and Standards of the California Building Code Chapter 7A. Compliance with such regulations would ensure that the Project meets standards to help prevent loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
4.9.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
31 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. FHSZ Viewer. Accessed on June 14, 202 2, https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 80
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may
impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream
or river, or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
X
i. Result in a substantial
erosion or siltation on - or
off-site;
X
ii. Substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on-
or off-site:
X
iii. Create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater
drainage systems or
provide substantial
additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv. Impede or redirect flood
flows? X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 81 d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants
due to project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
4.10.1 Environmental Setting
Through the entitlement review process, the City and responsible agencies will review the Project to determine adequate capacity in these systems and ensure compliance with applicable connection and discharge requirements. The resulting development will be required to incorporate any conditions set forth by the City.
Water
The City of Fresno Water Division manages and operates the City of Fresno’s water system. Fresno meets its demand for domestic water from a combination of groundwater, treated surface water, and reclaimed water sources. Groundwater is accessed from the Kings River Sub-basin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, while surface water from the Central Valley Project and Kings River are treated at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility. Surface water is also used to replace lost groundwater through Fresno’s recharge program at the City -owned Leaky Acres, Nielsen Recharge Facility, and smaller facilities in southeast Fresno.
Stormwater
The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) manages sto rmwater runoff in Fresno.
The major elements of the FMFCD’s flood control system include dams, reservoirs, and detention basins. The FMFCD is responsible for reviewing development proposals to assess drainage and flood control impacts and needs, in additio n to determining applicable requirements and modifications needed in order to implement the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan.
4.10.2 Impact Assessment
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. Because the Project site is greater than one (1) acre in size, the developer is required to prepare a SWPPP (Section 4.7) in compliance with the General Permit for
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 82 Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (i.e., General Permit Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ). The SWPPP estimates the sediment risk associated with construction activities and includes best management practices (BMP) to control erosion. BMPs specific to erosion control cover erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management controls. Implementation of the SWPPP minimizes the potential for the Project to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. These provisions minimize the potential for the Project to violate any waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Further, runoff resulting from the Project would be managed by the FMFCD in compliance with the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan in addition to approved grading and drainage plans. Thus, compliance with existing regulations including the General Construction Permit, BMPs, and Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan would reduce potential impacts related to water quality and waste discharge to less than significant levels.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less than Significant Impact. The City’s long-term water resource planning for existing and future demand is addressed in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWM P).32 According to the UWMP, water demand in the city has decreased over the past two (2) decades and is expected to grow at a slower rate than the anticipated population growth. This trend is captured by the daily per capita water use, measured as gallons per capita per day (GPCD). For 2020, water use averaged 198 GPCD based on 121,993 acre-feet (AF) of water production. Of note, this GPCD is below the 2020 daily per capita water use target of 247 GPCD, which the UWMP attributes to conservation efforts implemented by the City. According to the UWMP, the City’s per capita water usage is projected to continue to decline through 2045 due to more water efficiency in future construction and passive conservation pursuant to requirements of the California Plumbing Code (e.g., use of higher efficiency appliances, water efficient landscaping, etc.).
Regarding water supply reliability, the City manages its surface water and groundwater supply by maximizing water for potable use and intentional recharge during wet and normal years and relies on groundwater during dry years. To optimize water supply reliability and resiliency, the City is currently undergoing an update of its Metro Plan which will identify projects and programs.
32 City of Fresno (2021). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan . Accessed June 16, 2022 , https://www.fresno.gov/publicutilities/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2021/06/Fresno-2020-UWMP_Public- Draft_2021-06-29.pdf
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 83 Generally, the City’s approach is to maximize local supplies and improve the storage of the groundwater basin through recharge, recycled water usage, and conservation.
The UWMP projects normal water year, single dry water year, and five -year consecutive drought period supplies based on historic water allocations, sustainable yields, and utilization of recycled water. Based on these projections, the UWMP found that groundwater supplies remain reliable in all hydrologic conditions, attributing the stability to intentional recharge. The projections also show that the City will have greater than 100,000 AF available supply in normal years after meeting demands. In a s ingle dry year, surface water supplies will be reduced but the City would still be able to meet all potable demands. Lastly, for five -year consecutive drought periods, the City is projected to meet all demands with its existing supplies with reduced ground water recharge in year three (3) and four (4) to accommodate reduced surface water allocations. Based on these projections, it can be inferred that future development, such as the proposed Project, will not negatively impact the City’s ability to provide w ater assuming adherence to requirements and recommendations from the City’s water resources planning efforts.
According to the UWMP, the Project site is located in the Highway 41 Pressure Zone and there is an active City well located approximately 0.10 miles north of the Project site. There are also existing six (6)-inch public water mains and public fire hydrants on all surrounding roadways that the existing buildings are already connected to . Figure 4-3 shows the location of existing water wells, water mains, fire hydrants, and sewer mains in the vicinity of the Project site. 33 Future development of the Project site will be reviewed by the City through the entitlement process, to incorporate conditions such as installing water service and meter boxes to connect to the existing City facilities and pay ing the Water Capacity Fee for installation. Collectively, these facilities will convey water to and from the Project site.
Potable water demands for the Project were estimated using land -use-based unit water demand factors last updated for the City in 2018. The Project site has an existing land use of a shopping center (Neighborhood Commercial land use classification) and proposes to develop the site with multi-family residential (High Density Residential land use classification, based on density of residential land use designations ) and a senior center (Community Activity Center land use classification). According to the land -use-based unit water demand factors for the City, the proposed land use has an annual average (ac-ft/yr/acre) of 4.34, compared to 2.76 for the existing land use.
33 City of Fresno. Iveiw Fresno. Accessed June 16, 2022, https://iviewfresno.ci.fresno.ca.us/iview/index.html#
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 84 Table 4-7 summarizes the total water demands to be expected by land use, indicating that a proposed land use would generate approximately 57% greater demand for water than the existing land use. Despite the increase in water deman d for the proposed Project, the proposed land use and development density does not exceed the scale anticipated in the General Plan or PEIR. As a result, it can be pr esumed that the existing and planned water distribution system and supplies should be adequate to serve the Project, and the Project would thereby not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or impede sustainable groundwater management of the bas in. In addition, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the City’s water supply planning efforts (i.e., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact the City’s water provision. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project.
Table 4-7 Summary of Total Water Demands by Land Use
Land Use Area (ac) Annual Average (Ac-Ft/Yr/Acre) Annual Average (AFY) Existing
Neighborhood Commercial 4.25 2.76 11.73
Proposed
High Density Residential 4.25 6.51 4.35 18.42 Community Activity Center 2.16 Source: City of Fresno, 2018 Water Demand Factors by Land Use Classification
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 85
Figure 4-3 Existing Water and Sewer Infrastructure in the Project Vicinity
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 86 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
d) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less than Significant Impact. Erosion is a natural process in which soil is moved from place to place by wind or from flowing water. The effects of erosion can be accelerated by ground -disturbing activities associated with development. Siltation is the settling of sediment to the bed of a stream or lake which increases the turbidi ty of water. Turbid water can have harmful effects to aquatic life by clogging fish gills, reducing spawning habitat, and suppress aquatic vegetation growth.
Development of the Project site would occur on already developed and paved urban land, which is less susceptible to erosion than land with bare soils , thus it is expected that minimal erosion would occur on -site. During construction activities, and in compliance with the Project’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), construction -related erosion controls and BMPs would be implemented to reduce potential impacts related to erosion and siltation. These BMPs would include, but are not limited to, covering and/or binding soil surfaces to prevent soil from being detached and transported by water or wind, and the use of barriers such as straw bales and sandbags to control sediment. Together, the controls and BMPs are intended to limit soil transportation and erosion.
In addition, future development of the Project will be reviewed and conditioned by the FMFCD to ensure adequately discharged and captured stormwater runoff. The proposed drainage pattern is required to be constructed per regulations of the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan and will be reviewed by the FMFCD to ensure proper drainage. Consequently, review and approval by the FMFCD and compliance with standard requirements would result in a less than significant impact.
e) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Less than Significant Impact. Future development Project, including grading and drainage plans , will be reviewed, and conditioned by the FMFCD prior to the final development approval to ensure that surface runoff is controlled in a manner which would not result in flooding on- or off-site. For this reason, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project. f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 87 Less than Significant Impact. As previously mentioned, the FMFCD will review the Project to ensure that surface runoff is controlled in a manner which would not result in the creation or contribution of runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage services or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff . For this reason, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
g) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact. Although the construction of the proposed Project wou ld increase impervious surface s, the Project would not alter drainage patterns because Project -specific grading and drainage plans are required to be reviewed by the FMFCD before development approval. Further, the Project site is currently connected to existing facilities. As a result, the Project would not impede or redirect flood flows and a less than significant impact would occur as a result.
h) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone (i.e., standing waves on river, reservoirs, ponds, and lakes); there are no oceans, rivers, reservoirs, ponds, or lakes on or within the site and its vicinity. The Project site is designated as Zone X on the most recent Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 0601901570H dated February 18, 2009. Zone X is an area of minimal flood hazards with a 0.2 percent -annual-chance of flood (i.e., 500 -year flood). In addition, the Project area as well as the city of Fresno has historically been subject to low to moderate ground shaking and has a relatively low probability of shaking. As such, seiches are unlikely to form due to the low seismic energy produced in the area. Therefore, as a low-risk area, a less than significant i mpact as it relates to the risk release of pollutants due to project inundations would occur as a result of the Project.
i) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Signifi cant Impact. A groundwater sustainability plan was adopted for the Kings Groundwater Sub-basin on November 21, 2019, by the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency, of which the City of Fresno is a member. 34 The proposed Project is required to comply with the adopted plan (North Kings Groundwater) to meet the 2040 sustainability deadline for the
34 North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (2020). Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Accessed October 6, 2021, https://northkingsgsa.org/groundwater-sustainability-plan/
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 88 basin. As mentioned above, surface water will largely be the source of supply in wet hydrologic periods, groundwater will be used in a managed manner in norma l hydrologic periods and relied upon more in very dry periods. Through 30 years of diligent water resource planning and construction of surface water treatment facilities, inclusive of the Southeast Surface water Treatment Facility (which is a project with in the sustainability plan), the City has largely attained the balanced use of groundwater supplies well ahead of the legislative requirement of 2040, thus making the City compliant with the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Plan goals. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
4.10.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 89
4.11 LAND USE PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any
land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
4.11.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is within the city limits of Fresno and is surrounded by existing urban development.
4.11.2 Impact Assessment
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. Typically, physical division of an established community would occur if a project introduced new incompatible uses inconsistent with the planned or existing land uses or created a physical barrier that impeded access within the community. Typical examples of physical barriers include the introduction of new, intersecting roadways, roadway closures, and construction of new major utility infrastructure (e.g., transmission lines, storm channels, etc.).
Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site is along the Blackstone Avenue Corridor within an area generally characterized by a mix of existing land uses including residential (south and west), commercial (north, east, and south), and ponding basin (north). Future site improvements would be regulated by development standards and zoning regulations, including height, landscaping, setbacks, improvements, right - of-way dedications, open space, parking, and permitted uses etc. As such, the Project would be consistent and therefore compatible with the existing uses surrounding the Project site. Therefore, implementation of the Project would be generally consistent with the existing and planned land uses within the Project area.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 90 Circulation System
East Holland Avenue, a two (2) -lane, east-west collector forms the northerly site boundary and North Blackstone Avenue, a six (6)-lane, north-south arterial forms the easterly site boundary.
Existing street frontage improvements include curb, gutter, sidewalk, storm -drains, streetlights, etc. The Project would continue to be served by the existing circulation system and related infrastructure. The Project does not propose construction of new roadways.
Utility Infrastructure
The Project site is within city limits and thus will be required to connect to city water, stormwater, and wastewater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Utility systems are described and analyzed in Section 4.10 and Section 4.15. Based on the analysis, implementation of the Project would not result in the construction of new, major utility infrastructure.
Overall, the Project would not represent a significant change in the surrounding area.
Implementation of the Project would be generally consistent with the surrounding area and would not result in the physical separation of the established community. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than Significant Impact. Generally, p olicy conflicts are environmental impacts when they would result in direct physical impacts or where those conflicts relate to avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts. As such, associated physical environmental impacts are discussed in this document under specific topical sections, such as Biologi cal Resources, Cultural Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. However, a discussion of certain land use plans, policies, and regulations that are applicable to the proposed Project are included in Table 4-8. Table 4 -8 provides a comparison of the Project’s characteristics with all applicable policies included in the General Plan as they relate to infill residential development within BRT Corrido rs. As discussed below, the proposed Project is generally consistent with the General Plan.
Table 4-8 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Policies Objective UF-12. Locate roughly one-half of future residential development in infill areas—defined as being within the City on December 31, 2012— including the Downtown core area and surrounding neighborhoods, mixed-use centers and transit-oriented development along major BRT corridors, and other non-corridor infill areas, and vacant land.
Implementing Policies Project Consistency
UF-12-a. BRT Corridors. Design land uses and
integrate development site plans along BRT
Consistent. The Project site is along the Blackstone Avenue Corridor which is designated as a BRT Corridor by the
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 91 corridors, with transit-oriented development that
supports transit ridership and convenient
pedestrian access to bus stops and BRT station
stops.
Fresno General Plan. Further, the Project is within 0.25 - miles from four (4) bus stops and BRT station stops.
Therefore, the Project can be considered transit-oriented development that supports transit ridership and
convenience pedestrian access to bus/BRT stops and is
thereby consistent with UF-12-a.
UF-12-b. Activity Centers. Mixed-use designated
areas along BRT and/or transit corridors are
appropriate for more intensive concentrations of
urban uses. Typical uses could include commercial
areas; employment centers; schools; compact
residential development; religious institutions;
parks; and other gathering points where residents
may interact, work, and obtain goods and services
in the same place.
Consistent. Acquisition of the property by the City would facilitate the development of a senior center and
affordable housing units for seniors on a mixed -use
designated site within an urbanized area along the
Blackstone Avenue Corridor. This corridor is a BRT
Corridor and Activity Center as per the Fresno General
Plan. Thus, the Project is consistent with UF-12-b.
UF-12-c. Local -Serving Neighborhood Centers.
Design Neighborhood Centers for local services
and amenities that build upon the character and
identity of surrounding neighborhoods and
communities
Consistent. Acquisition of the property by the City would facilitate the development of a centrally located, transit - accessible senior center and affordable housing units for seniors that would provide services and amenities for the local senior population residing in the city of Fresno. As of 2019 the city’s population that is 65 years an d over
accounts for approximately 11% (58,538) of the overall
population (525,010). 35 Approximately 3,707 seniors, or 6% of the total senior population live within a one (1)-mile radius of the proposed Project. 36 Thus, the Project is consistent with UF-12-c.
UF-12-d. Appropriate Mixed -Use. Facilitate the
development of vertical and horizontal mixed-uses
to blend residential, commercial, and public land
uses on one or adjacent sites. Ensure land use
compatibility between mixed -use districts in
Activity Ce nters and the surrounding residential
neighborhoods.
Consistent. Acquisition of the property by the City would facilitate the development of a senior center and
affordable housing units for seniors, thereby blending
residential and public institutional use s on one (1) site.
Both proposed uses are permitted by the underlying
mixed-use land use designation and zone district, which is situated along the Blackstone Avenue Corridor. This
corridor is designated as a BRT Corridor and Activity
Center by the Fresno General Plan. Therefore, the Project is consistent with UF-12-d.
Objective LU-2. Plan for infill development that includes a range of housing types, building forms, and land uses to meet the needs of both current and future residents.
Implementing Policies Project Consistency
35U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey, 2019, 5-Year Estimates for S0103: Population 65 Years and Over.
Accessed March 29, 2022.
36 Surrounding neighborhoods within a one (1) mile radius include Census Tracts: 35, 46.02, 49.01, 50, and 51.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 92 LU-2-a. Infill Development and Redevelopment.
Promote development of vacant,
underdeveloped, and re-developable land within
the City Limits where urban services are available
by considering the establishment and
implementation of supportive regulations and
programs
Consistent. Acquisition of the property by the City would facilitate the development of a senior center and
affordable housing units for seniors on a previously
developed site. The sit e contains a former grocery store, existing strip mall, and paved parking lot and can therefore be considered an infill site that is re -developable land.
Further, because the Project site is an infill site surrounded by existing urban uses, urban services are available to serve the site. Therefore, the Project is consistent with LU- 2-a.
Objective LU-5. Plan for a diverse housing stock that will support balanced urban growth, and make efficient use of resources and public facilities.
Implementing Policies Project Consistency
LU-5-i. Housing for Seniors. Facilitate the
development of senior housing projects that are
accessible to public transportation and services.
Consistent. The Project site is along the Blackstone Avenue Corridor which is designated as a BRT Corridor by the
Fresno General Plan. Further, the Project is within 0.25 - miles from four (4) bus stops and BRT station stops.
Further, acquisition of the property by the City would
facilitate the development of affordable housing units for seniors that would be accessible to public transportation and services. Therefore, the Project is consistent with LU- 5-i.
Further, through the entitlement process, the Project will be reviewed for compliance with applicable regulations inclusive of th ose adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. Overall, the entitlement process would ensure that the Project complies with the General Plan, FMC, and any other applicable policies and regulations. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
4.11.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 93
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X
4.12.1 Environmental Setting
The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies and designates areas within California that contain or potentially contain significant mineral resources. Lands are classified into Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), which identify known or inferred significant mineral resources.
According to the California Department of Conservation, CGS’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Mineral Lands Classification (MLC) data portal, the nearest mineral resource areas to the city of Fresno are in the San Joaquin and Kings River areas which are classified as Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-2.
4.12.2 Impact Assessment
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The Project site is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery. Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. As described above, the Project site is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery and as a result, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 94 the state. Further, the site is not delineated on the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or other land use plan as a locally important mineral resource recovery site, thus it would not result in the loss of availability of a locally import ant mineral resource. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project.
4.12.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 95
4.13 NOISE
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase
in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
X
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
X
4.13.1 Environmental Setting
In general, there are two (2) types of noise sources: 1) mobile source and 2) stationary sounds.
Mobile source noises are typically associated with transportation including automobiles, trains, and aircraft. Stationary sounds are sources that do not move s uch as machinery or construction sites. Two (2) noise generating activities of the Project would include construction (short -term, temporary) and operational (long-term) noise.
The Fresno General Plan Noise Element and Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) outlines policies and regulations to mitigate health effects of noise in the community and prevent exposures to excessive noise levels. In particular, General Plan Policy NS-1-a establishes a maximum average noise level of 70 dBA L dn or CNEL at industrial uses and Policy NS-1-j establishes the significance
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 96 threshold for a significant increase generated by a project as an increase of 3 dB L dn or CNEL or more above the established, acceptable ambient noise levels.
Section 10-102 of the FMC also sets an ambient base n oise level of 70 dBA for industrial uses.
Section 10-106 prohibits any noise that exceeds the ambient noise level at receiving residential properties by more than 5 dB, while Section 10-107 prohibits any noise which “disturbs or unduly annoys” people withi n schools, hospitals, or churches. Regarding construction -related noise impacts, Section 10-109 of the FMC permits construction work to take place between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm on any day except Sunday, for work that is accomplished pursuant to a building permit.
Sensitive land uses include residential, schools, churches, nursing homes, hospitals, and open space/recreation areas. Commercial, farmland, and industrial areas are not considered noise sensitive and generally have higher tolerances for exterior an d interior noise levels. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are single-family residences located adjacent to the west of the Project site.
4.13.2 Impact Assessment
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards? Less than Significant Impact. Noise generating activities of the Project would include traffic noise and stationary source noise, such as operations and construction as described below. Overall, the Project would result in a less than significant impact regarding noise.
Mobile-Source Noise
The primary source of on-going noise from the future office project will be from vehicles traveling to and from the site. The Project will generate an increase in traffic on some roadways in the Project area. However, the relatively low number of new trips associated with the Project is not likely to increase the ambient noise levels by a significant amount as the area is active with vehicles and the proposed Project will not introduce a new significant source of noise that isn’t already occurring in the area.
Stationary-Source Noise
Based on anticipated operations as a senior center and residential development, stationary noise sources can be expected from mechanical equipment, such as HVAC systems. Such noise sources can be expected to be intermittent and generally localized within the enclosed b uilding. Much of this equipment would be in equipment rooms or in areas that are shielded from direct
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 97 public/personnel exposure (e.g., above ceilings, in walls, behind enclosures) and associated noises would therefore be indiscernible beyond the building walls.
Further, the Project would be subject to compliance with the General Plan Noise Element and FMC requirements to ensure that the ambient noise level does not increase at receiving residential properties by more than 5 dB. Given the amount of existing commercial and residential uses in the Project area and the Project’s required compliance with applicable policies and regulations, it can be expected that the Project would not introduce a new significant source of noise that is not already occurring in the Project area. Therefore, the Project would have a less -than-significant impact regarding operational noise impacts.
Construction activities would result in short-term noise impacts that vary depending on the nature of phase of construction (e.g., site preparation, grading and trenching, building construction, etc.).
Construction phases would include standard construction activities such as demolition, site preparation, grading/excavation, draining/utilities/trenching, foundations/concrete pour, building construction, and paving. The nearest sensitive land use is single-family residences adjacent to the west of the Project site. These activities would b e temporary and would generally take place Monday through Friday between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm, as permitted by FMC Section 10-109. Thus, construction-related noise would cease upon completion of the Project. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact regarding construction noise impacts. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated . Ground borne vibration may result from construction, depending on t he use of equipment (e.g., pile drivers, bulldozers, jackhammers, etc.), distance to affected structures, and soil type. Depending on the method, equipment - generated vibrations could spread through the ground and effect nearby buildings. It is not anticipated that the Project would generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels, given the type of improvements associated with the development. Further, construction or operation of the Project would not involve equipment that would gene rate substantial ground borne vibration of ground borne noise levels. As discussed under criterion a), project-generated stationary noise sources are not significant and would be regulated by the FMC.
In addition, the Project incorporates Mitigation Measure NOI-1 to mitigate for possible vibration caused during construction. Thus, the Project would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Construction Vibration. The use of heavy construction equipment within 25 feet of existing structures shall be prohibited. (PEIR Mitigation Measure NOI-2)
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 98 c) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. The nearest public and public use airport is the Fresno Yosemite International Airport approximately ± 3.3-mile southeast of the Project site. The Project Site is within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) but is not within the airport’s noise contour. Because the Project is within the AIA, City of Fresno Planning staff is req uired to review the Project for consistency with the ALUCP and General Plan. Review for consistency will take place during the entitlement process. Therefore, through compliance with the ALUCP and General Plan, the Project would not result in a safety haza rd for people residing or working in the area and impacts would be less than significant.
4.13.3 Mitigation Measures
The proposed Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the noise related mitigation measures as identified in the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program dated June 2022.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 99
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X
4.14.1 Environmental Setting
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that a CEQA document discuss the ways in which the proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in t he surrounding environment. The CEQA Guidelines provide the example of a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant that may allow for more construction within the service area. The CEQA Guidelines also note that the evaluation of growth inducement sh ould consider the characteristics of a project that may encourage or facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. Direct and Indirect Growth Inducement consists of activities that directly facilitate population growth, such as construction of new dwelling units.
4.14.2 Impact Assessment
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less than Significant Impact. A key consideration in evaluating growth inducement is whether the activity in question constitutes “planned growth.” A residential project that is consistent with the underlying General Plan would generally be considered planned growth because it was previously contemplated by these long-range planning documents, and, thus, would not be deemed to have
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 100 a significant growth-inducing effect. The Project proposes the development of a senior center and residential development, which is consistent with the zoning and planned land use of the site. In addition, the Project does not propose new roadways or major infrastructure constructions since it is a fully developed site surrounded by existing uses and related infra structure. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Project site currently contains a 40,564-sf. grocery store and paved parking lot , with improvements. Since the site does not currently provide housing, development of the Project site would not result in the physical displacement of people or housing. No impact would occur because of the Project.
4.14.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 101
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain a cceptable
service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for
any of the public services:
i. Fire protection? X
ii. Police protection? X
iii. Schools? X
iv. Parks? X
v. Other public facilities? X
4.15.1 Environmental Setting
The Project is located within Fresno city limits and thus, would be subject to fees to for the construction, acquisition, and improvements for such services. These services and fees include:
Fire Protection Services
Fire Protection Services in the city are provided by the Fresno Fire Department (FFD). The FFD operates a total of 20 fire stations/companies that serve a 116-square-mile area. To facilitate adequate service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection services, all development in the city of Fresno is required to be located within three (3) miles of an existing fire station. To address impacts to fire protection services, the City of Fresno has implemented the Fire Facilities Fee pursuant to Section 12 -4.901 of the FMC, which requires developers to pay the “fair share” of construction and acquisition costs for improvements to fire department facilities. A Fire Facilities Impact Fee will be assessed for the Project based on the project size.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 102 Table 4-9 Fire Facilities Fee Program
Type Fee
Single-Family Residential per unit $1,893
Multi-Family Residential per unit $1,429
Retail per 1,000 sf. of building $662
Office per 1,000 sf. of building $757
Police Protection Services
Police Protection Services in the city are provided by the Fresno Police Department (FPD). The FPD is divided into five (5) policing districts. Currently, the City has 851 police officer positions authorized and 791 filled, allo wing up to a service level of 1.57 officer per 1,000 residents and providing 1.45 officer per 1,000 residents. To address impacts to police protection services, the City has implemented the Police Facilities Fee pursuant to Section 12 -4.801 of the FMC, whi ch requires developers to pay the “fair share” of construction and acquisition costs for improvements to police protection services and facilities. A Police Facilities Impact Fee will be assessed for the proposed Project based on the project size.
Table 4-10 Police Facilities Fee Program
Type Fee
Single-Family Residential per unit $618
Multi-Family Residential per unit $466
Retail per 1,000 sf. of building $658
Office per 1,000 sf. of building $626
Schools
Educational services within the Project Area are provided by Fresno Unified School District .
Funding for schools and school facilities impacts is outlined in Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 et. seq., which governs th e amount of fees that can be levied against new development. These fees are used to construct new or expanded school facilities.
Payment of fees authorized by the statute is deemed “full and complete mitigation.” A School Impact Fee will be assessed for the proposed Project based on the Developer Fee rates in place at the time payment is due.
Parks and Recreation
Park and Recreation Facilities are overseen by the Fresno Parks and Recreation Department, Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services (PARCS). The General Plan established a service standard for park acreage of five (5) acres per 1,000 residents, with three (3) acres for community, neighborhood, and pocket parks and two (2) acres as regional parks. Similar to other public services, the City had established the Park Facilities Fee which requires developers to pay the “fair
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 103 share” of construction and acquisition for improvements to park facilities. A Park and Recreation Impact Fee will be assessed for the proposed Project based on the Project size.
Table 4-11 Park Facilities Fee Program
Type Park Facility Impact Fee Quimby Parkland Dedication Fee Single-Family Residential per unit $4,027 $1,153
Multi-Family Residential per unit $3,037 $879
Courts
The city of Fresno contains two (2) State courts, Fresno County Superior Court and 5 th District Court of Appeals, and one (1) federal court.
Library
The Fresno County Public Library System provides libraries in the city of Fresno. There are 39 libraries throughout the County of Fresno, 11 of which are located in the city of Fresno planning area.
Hospital
There are nine (9) hospitals located within the city of Fresno planning area with a total capacity of 1,603 beds as of 2020.
4.15.2 Impact Assessment
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the city limits and therefore would be served by the FFD. There are four (4) fire stations within a three (3)-mile radius of the proposed Project, including Station 5, Station 6, Station 11, and Station 20. The Project’s proximity to existing stations would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for fire protection se rvices. In addition, future development would be reviewed by the FFD for requirements related to water supply, fire hydrants, and fire apparatus access . Lastly, future development would be subject to the Fire Facilities Fee for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to fire department facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 104 Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities and as a result, a less than significant impact would occur.
ii. Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the city limits and therefore would be served by the FPD. The Project site is within the Central Policing District and the nearest police station to the proposed Project is located approximately one ( 1) m ile south of the site. The Project’s proximity to an existing station would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for police protection services. In addition, future development would be reviewed by the FPD for r equirements related to crime protection. Lastly, future development would be subject to the Police Facilities Fee for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to police department facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities and as a result, a less than significant impact would occur.
iii. Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. The development and managing of school sites are the responsibility of school districts and elected governing school boards. Funding for schools and school facilities impacts is outlined in Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 et. seq., which governs the amount of fees that can be levied against new develop ment. These fees are used to construct new or expanded school facilities. Payment of fees authorized by the statute is deemed “full and complete mitigation.” A School Impact Fee would be assessed for the proposed Project based on the Developer Fee rates in place at the time payment is due. In addition, the proposed housing is for seniors and thus, there will be few (if any) children housed in the proposed development. Thus, along with the fact that the proposed density has been previously accounted for, demonstrates that the Project would not result in construction of new school facilities not already accounted for. For these reasons , it can be determined that the Project , a less than significant impact would occur.
iv. Parks?
Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from proposed residential development. The proposed development includes 70 residential units, which would increase the population and therefore increase the demand for and use of local parks. Future residential development would be subject to the applicable FMC regulations, including the provision of on-site open space. In addition, future development would be required to pay the Park Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to the City’s park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. For these reasons, the Project would have less than significant impact.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 105 v. Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. Development of the Project will increase the demand for other public services, such as libraries. However, the City does not have a requirement or standard for the number or size of a library based on the City's population. Therefore, a significant impact or the need for new or altered facilities to provide other public services is not anticipated and thus the project will result in a less than significant impact.
4.15.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 106
4.16 RECREATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
X
4.16.1 Environmental Setting
Park and Recreation Facilities are overseen by the Fresno Parks and Recreation Department, Parks, After School, Recreation, and Community Services (PARCS). The General Plan established a service standard for park acreage of five (5) acres per 1,000 residents, with three (3) acres for community, neighborhood, and pocket parks and two (2) acres as regional parks. Similar to other public services, the City had established the Park Facilities Fee which requires developers to pay the “fair share” of construction and acquisition for improvements to park facilities. Future projects in the Project Area would be subject to the assessment of a Park Facilities Impact Fee based on the project size.
Table 4-12 Park Facilities Fee Program
Type Park Facility Impact Fee Quimby Parkland Dedication Fee Single-Family Residential per unit $4,027 $1,153
Multi-Family Residential per unit $3,037 $879
Fresno General Plan includes applicable policies regarding park facilities in its Parks, Open Space, and Schools Element as shown below:
Policy POSS-2-c Review of Development Applications. Coordinate review of all development applications (i.e., site plans, conditional use permits, and subdivision maps) in order to implement the parks and open space standards of this Plan.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 107 Policy POSS -2-e Open Space Dedication for Residential Development. Ensure new residential developments provide adequate land for parks, open space, landscaping, and trails through the dedication of land or otherwise providing for Pocket Parks, planned trails, and other recreational space, maintained by an HOA, CFD, or other such entity.
4.16.2 Impact Assessment
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from proposed residential development. The proposed development includes 70 residential units, which would increase the population and therefore increase the demand for and use of local parks. Future residential development would be subject to the applicable FMC regulations, including the provision of on-site open space. In addition, future development would be required to pay the Park Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to the City’s park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. For these reasons, the Project would have less than significant impact.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The Project includes the development of a senior center and residential development. Project recreational facilities, including open space, sidewalks, and the senior center, would be developed in an infill area to provide recreational uses for the residents.
In addition, the Project is subject to review and will be conditioned by the City to ensure that the proposed open space an d facilities comply with the FMC . As such, the facilities will not be in an area or be built to a scale that would degrade or cause significant impacts to the environment. As a result, there would be a less than significant impact.
4.16.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 108
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due
to a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X
4.17.1 Environmental Setting
The following summarizes plans, policies, and regulations that apply to the City of Fresno to give an overview of the regulatory setting of the Project.
City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan
The City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan (ATP) adopted March 2017, updates and supersedes the City of Fresno 2010 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan (BMP). The ATP outlines the vision to provide human-powered travel including walking, bicycling, and wheelchair use. The plan aims to improve the accessibility and connectivity of bicycle and pedestrian network to increase the number of people to travel active transportation. The goals identified in the ATP are:
• Equitably improve the safety and perceived safety of walking and bicycling in Fresno • Increase walking and bicycling trips in Fresno by creating user-friendly facilities • Improve the geographic equity of access to walking and bicycling facilities in Fresno • Fill key gaps in Fresno’s walking and bicycling networks
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 109 SB 743 and VMT Analysis
Under Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), traffic impacts are related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The VMT metric became mandatory on July 1, 2020. SB 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as VMT instead of Level of Service (LOS). VMT measures how much actual automobile travel (additional miles driven) a proposed Project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive automobile travel onto roads, then the project may cause a significant transportation impact. Therefore, LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities are no longer a relevant CEQA criteria for transportation impacts.
4.17.2 Impact Assessment
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would be required to comply with all project level requirements implemented by a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities . The Project is also required to submit improvement plans, including roadway improvements, for review and approval by the City Engineer to ensure improvements will be consistent with City standards. Therefore, through compliance with the programs, plans, ordinances, and polici es addressing the circulation system (inclusive of transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities), a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less than Significant Impact. Senate Bill (SB) 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of Level of Service (LOS). VMT measures how much a ctual auto travel (additional miles driven) a proposed project would create on California roads. If the project adds excessive car travel onto our roads, the project may cause a significant transportation impact.
The State CEQA Guidelines were amended to implement SB 743, by adding Section 15064.3.
Among its provisions, Section 15064.3 confirms that, except with respect to transportation projects, a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. Therefore, LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities are no longer a relevant CEQA criteria for transportation impacts.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(4) states that “[a] lead agency has discretion to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including wheth er to express the change in absolute terms, per
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 110 capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revision to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.”
On June 25, 2020, the City of Fresno adopted CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds, dated June 25, 2020, pursuant to Senate Bill 743 to be effective of July 1, 2020. The thresholds described therein are referred to herein as the City of Fresno VMT Thresholds. The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds document was prepared and adopted consistent with the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7. The December 2018 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), was utilized as a reference and guidance document in the preparation of the Fresno VMT Thresholds.
The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds adopted a screening standard and criteria that can be used to screen out qualified projects that meet the adopted criteria from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.
The City of Fresno VMT Thresholds Section 3.0 regarding Project Screeni ng discusses a variety of projects that may be screened out of a VMT analysis including specific development and transportation projects. For development projects, conditions may exist that would presume that a development project has a less than significant impact. These may be size, location, proximity to transit, or trip‐making potential.
The proposed Project is eligible to screen out because the Project is within 0.50-miles of a Transit Priority Area and a High -Quality Transit Area. In particular, the Project is within 0.25 -miles from four (4) bus stops and BRT station stops located at the intersection of North Blackstone and Ashlan Avenue. This intersection is served by fixed Route 1/Q which is part of the BRT system. As a result, the Project can be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact pursuant to the
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 111 Project Screening identified in the City of Fresno Guidelines for VMT Thresholds . 37 In conclusion, the Project will result in a less than significant VMT impact. c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project design does not contain any geometric design features that would create hazards. Design of the Project would be reviewed by the city to ensures that any improvements are designed pursuant to applicable federal, state, and local design standards.
Compliance with such standards would ensure that any traffic hazards are minimized. Further, the Project proposes the development of a n infill site that is in an area generally characterized by a mix of existing land uses including commercial and residential uses. Therefore, the Project does not propose an incompatible use as it is consistent with the existing development in the area and is similar in nature to the surrounding uses. As a result, implementation of the Project would result in a less than significant impact related to hazards due to roadway design features or incompatible uses.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project does not involve a change to any emergency response plan. In addition, the Project will be reviewed by the City’s Engineering Department and Fire Department to impose standard conditions to ensure adequate site access including emergency access. In the case that Project construction requires lane closures, access through East Holland Avenue or East Swift Avenue would be maintained through standard traffic control and therefore, potential lane closures would not affect emergency evacuation plans. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
4.17.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
37 In accordance with SB 743, “Transit Priority Areas” are defined as “an area within one -half miles of a major transit stop that is existi ng or planned,” a “High -Quality Transit Area” is a corridor with fixed route bus service with service internals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours,” and a “Major Transit Stop” means “a site containing an existing rail transit station, a fe rry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.”
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 112
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in PRC section 21074
as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined
in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
PRC section 5020.1(k), or,
X
b) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c)
of PRC section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of PRC section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
X
4.18.1 Environmental Setting
Generally, the term ‘cultural resources’ describes property types such as prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, buildings, bridges, roadways, and tribal cultural resources. As defined by CEQA, cultural resources are considered “historical resources” that meet criteria in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. If a Lead Agency determines that a project may have a significant effect on a historical resource, then the project is determined to have a significant impact on the environment. No further environmental review is required if a cultural resource is not found to be a historical resource.
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) requires consultation with California Native American tribes during the CEQA process to determine potential effects of proposed projects on a tribal cultural resource.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 113 Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the proposed project. Such significant cultural resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial eviden ce, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a) (1-2)). According to the most recent census data, California is home to 109 currently recognized Indian tribes. Tribes in California currently have nearly 100 separate reservations or Rancherias.
Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See PRC Section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
Tribal Consultation
In compliance with AB 52, as part of the preparation of this Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, the City of Fresno sent tribal consultation letters by certified mail to the Table Mountain Rancheria Tribe and the Dumna Wo Wah Tribe on June 7, 2022. Tribes have up to 30 days to request consultation. No requests for consultation were requested during that time.
Record Search
The Southern San Joaquin Information Center (SSJIC) conducted a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Record Search fo r the Project site and surrounding area (0.5 -mile radius) on June 20, 2022 (Record Search File Number 22-238). The search results do not show any formally recorded prehistoric or historic archeological resources or historic buildings within the Project area. There are no cultural resources within the Project area or 0.5-mile radius listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historical Resources, the California Points of Historical Interest, California Inventory of Histori c Resources, or the California State Historic Landmarks. The SSJIC Correspondence is provided in Appendix B.
4.18.2 Impact Assessment
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 114 Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.5 , the Pro ject site does not contain any property or site features that are eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Sources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k). Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non-visible, buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures as described in Section 4.5 would reduce any impacts to less than significant. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site has not been determined by the City of Fresno to be a significant resource pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 and to -date, no substantial information has been provided to the City to indicate otherwise. Further, the Project site, inclusive of site features, is not listed in the California Register of Historical Sources. However, there is some possibility that a non -visible, buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures as described in Section 4.5 would reduce any impacts to less than significant.
4.18.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 115
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric
power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which
could cause significant
environmental effect?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry
and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
state or local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste
reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and
local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 116
4.19.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is within city limits and thus, will be required to connect to water, sewer, stormwater, and wastewater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Each utility system is described below.
Water
The City of Fresno Water Division manages and operates the City of Fresno’s water system. Fresno meets its demand for domestic water from a combination of groundwater, treated surface water, and reclaimed water sources. Groundwater is accessed from the Kings River Sub-basin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, while surface water from the Central Valley Project and Kings River are treated at the Northeast Surface Water Treatment Facility and Southeast Surface Water Treatment Facility. Surface water is used to replace lost groundwater through Fresno’s recharge program at the City -owned Leaky Acres, Nielsen Recharge Facility, and smaller facilities in southeast Fresno.
Wastewater
The City of Fresno Wastewater Management Division (WMD) is respons ible for the collection, conveyance, treatment, and reclamation of wastewater generated in the Fresno -Clovis metropolitan area. Wastewater treatment and disposal is handled through the City -operated Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (R WRF) and North Fresno Wastewater Reclamation Facility (North Facility) via a wastewater collection system that consists of gravity sewer pipes, manholes, lift stations, junction structures, and force mains.
Solid Waste
Residential solid waste in the city’s Department of Public Utilities (DPU) Solid Waste Management Division and commercial , multi -family, and industrial solid waste is collected by private contractors, Mid Valley Disposal and Allied Waste Services. The City of Fresno diverts most of its solid waste to recycling and composting programs, which conserves landfill space, increase reuse of materials, and lessen contamination from toxic materials . The City has a target of Zero Waste by 2025.
Stormwater
The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) manages stormwater runoff in Fresno.
The major elements of the FMFCD’s flood control system include dams, reservoirs, and detention basins. The FMFCD is responsible for reviewing development proposals t o assess drainage and
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 117 flood control impacts and needs, in addition to determining applicable requirements and modifications needed in order to implement the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan.
Natural Gas and Electricity
PG&E, the natural gas and electric service provider for the area, incrementally expands and updates its service system as needed to serve its users.
Telecommunications
Accordingly, telecommunications providers in the area incrementally expand and update their service systems in response to usage and demand.
4.19.2 Impact Assessment
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within city limits and thus, will be required to connect to water, stormwater, solid waste, and wastewater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. The Project site is previously developed and located within an urban neighborhood surrounded by existing uses, thus there is existing utility infrastructure including wa ter, sewer, stormwater, natural gas, electricity, and telecommunication services to which the Project would connect. Further, development of the Project site would be reviewed and approved by the City and responsible agencies through the entitlement review process. The entitlement review process would ensure that the future development is developed in accordance with applicable regulations including the permitted density, intensity, and massing development standards. Consequently, the Project would be consistent with the planned land use previously accounted for in the Fresno General Plan and subsequent utility master plans including the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and 2015 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan . For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities and thus, can be adequately served by all required utilities and service systems. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project. b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 118 Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in detail in Section 4.10 , the C ity’s long -term water resource planning is addressed in the City’s 2020 UWMP. According to the UWMP, the City’s per capita water usage is projected to continue to decline through 2045 due to more water efficiency in future construction and passive conserva tion pursuant to requirements of the California Plumbing Code (e.g., use of higher efficiency appliances, water efficient landscaping, etc.).
In addition, the City manages its surface water and groundwater supply by maximizing water for potable use and int entional recharge during wet and normal years and relies on groundwater during dry years. To optimize water supply reliability and resiliency, the City is currently undergoing an update of its Metro Plan which will identify projects and programs. Generally , the City’s approach is to maximize local supplies and improve the storage of the groundwater basin through recharge, recycled water usage, and conservation.
The UWMP projects normal water year, single dry water year, and five -year consecutive drought period supplies based on historic water allocations, sustainable yields, and utilization of recycled water. Based on these projections, the UWMP found that groundwater supplies remain reliable in all hydrologic conditions, attributing the stability to intent ional recharge. The projections also show that the City will have greater than 100,000 AF available supply in normal years after meeting demands. In a single dry year, surface water supplies will be reduced but the City would still be able to meet all pota ble demands. Lastly, for five -year consecutive drought periods, the City is projected to meet all demands with its existing supplies with reduced groundwater recharge in year three (3) and four (4) to accommodate reduced surface water allocations. Based on these projections, it can be inferred that future development, such as the proposed Project, will not negatively impact the City’s ability to provide water assuming adherence to requirements and recommendations from the City’s water resources planning efforts.
According to the UWMP, the Project site is in the Highway 41 Pressure Zone and there is an active City well located approximately 0.10 miles north of the Project site . The Project site is currently connected to existing public water mains and public fire hydrants, as shown in Figure 4-3 in Section
4.10. As previously discussed, the Project will be reviewed by the City for review required to install water service and meter boxes to connect to the existing City facilities and pay the Water Capacity Fee for installation. Collectively, these facilities will convey water to and from the Project site.
Overall, based on the information collected from the UWMP and the City of Fresno, the proposed Project would generate more water demand than the existing land use. However, the proposed land use and development density does not exceed the scale anticipated in the General Plan or PEIR. As a result, it can be presumed that the existing and planned water distribution system should be adequate to serve the Project during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. In addition, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the City’s water supply
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 119 planning efforts (i.e., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact the City’s water provision. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project. c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact. The City’s long-term wastewater planning is addressed in the City’s Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (Master Plan) (2015 update). According to the Master Plan, the City manages and maintains more than 1,500 miles of gravity sewer lines up to 84-inches in diameter, 15 active lift stations, and associated force mains. Wastewater generated in the sewer service area is conveyed to the Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWRF) or the North Fresno Wastewater Reclamation Facil ity (North Facility). As of 2020, the RWRF has a capacity of
91.5 mgd (millions of gallons per day) and the North Facility has a capacity of 0.17 mgd (daily average flow). Expansion of these facilities is planned for 2025 or later, based on capacity levels.
Land uses are important to determine adequate sizing and capacity for pipes and facilities, and to maintain effective sanitary sewer system facilities. According to the Master Plan, residential customers in Fresno account for approximately 63 percent o f the current flow (40.2 mgd) and industrial customers account for 17 percent (11.3 mgd). Land use assumptions for wastewater generation rates were based on the full build-out conditions under the General Plan.
The Project site is located adjacent to an e xisting sewer service area served by an existing 8-inch sewer main located on East Holland Avenue, as shown in Figure 4-3 in Section 4.10 . And, as previously discussed, the Project will be reviewed by the City to be conditioned to install a sewer house branch to connect to the existing sewer main and pay the Sewer Connection Charges for installation as needed. Collectively, these facilities w ill convey wastewater generated from the Project. As a result, it can be presumed that the existing and planned wastewater collection system should be of adequate capacity to serve the Project. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant Impact. As described abov e, the estimated solid waste to be generated by the Project includes food waste, recycle, and refuse. Based on CalEEMod estimates, the Project would produce 197.5 tons of waste per year which will be transported to the American Avenue Landfill. The Project will be required by the City to install one (1) trash and recycling enclosure per 30 units for collection by Allied Waste Services . The Fresno General Plan Public Utilities and Services Element contains policies addressing waste collection and service in compliance with the
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 120 Solid Waste Management Act. Policies in the Resources Conservation and Resilience Element address waste reduction. These policies are designed to reduce the potential environmental effects associated with solid waste disposal. Compliance with the applicable measures and policies would serve to reduce impacts of solid waste by promoting regular collection and encouraging the recycling of materials. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project.
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. As described under criteria d), Project activities that generate solid waste would be handled, transported, and disposed of in accordance with all applicable statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the Project.
4.19.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 121
4.20 WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility
or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, Would the
project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including
downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post -fire slope instability,
or drainage changes?
X
4.20.1 Environmental Setting
In general, Fresno is categorized as having little or no threat or moderate fire hazard, which can be attributed to its impervious surface areas. The area along the San Joaquin River bluff is an exception, as it is prone to wildfires due to steep terrain and native vegetation. The Project site comprises a relatively flat property within the city limits in an area planned for and developed with urban uses, including industrial, commercial, and residential uses, and is approximately eight (8) miles southeast of the San Joaquin River. In addition, the site nor the City of Fresno are identified by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) as being in a “Very High Fire
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 122 Hazard Severity Zone” (VHFHSZ). Rather, the city, inclusive of the Project site, is in an “area of local responsibility” that is an area of low fire risk. 38
4.20.2 Impact Assessment
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not impair access to the existing roadway network.
Safe and convenient vehicular and pedestrian circulation would be provi ded in addition to adequate access for emergency vehicles. To determine adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation and emergency vehicle access , development of the Project would be reviewed and conditioned by the City of Fresno Police Department and Fir e Department for compliance with applicable code and regulations. Review and approval by the City would ensure that future projects do not substantially impair the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, the Project would n ot substantially impair any emergency response plan and no impact would occur as a result of the Project. b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. The Project site is located on a relatively flat property with minimal slope and is not in an area that is subject to strong prevailing winds or other factors that would exacerbate wildfire risks. The site is fully developed and surrounded with a mix of urban uses and is not located within a wildland, which precludes the risk of wildfire. Further, the Project site is within an “area of local responsibility” and is not identified by Cal Fire to be in a VHFHSZ. For these reasons, no impact would occur as a result of this Project.
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact. The Project is located within city limits in an infill area with existing infrastructure. As a result of ongoing development, infrastructure such as roads and utilities will be maintained
38 Cal Fire, “FHSZ Viewer.” Accessed on June 15, 2022, https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 123 accordingly. The Project itself will not result in installation of new major infrastructure and potential improvements will be subject to review and/or condition s by the City of Fresno. Such improvements would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment and no impact would occur as a result of the Project. For these reasons, no impact would occur as a result of this Project.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No Impact. The Project site is located on a relatively flat property with minimal slope and is not subject to down slope, downstream flooding, or landslides. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks and no impact would occur as a result of the Project.
4.20.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 124
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the
potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered pla nt or animal or
eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future
projects)?
X
c) Does the project have
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 125
4.21.1 Impact Assessment
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or e liminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the Project would have potentially significant impacts resulting from the proposed Project. Mitigation measures are incorporated herein to reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is signif icant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. Due to the nature of the Project and consistency with environmental policies, incremental contributions to impacts are considered less than cumulatively considerable. All Project-related impacts were determined to be less than significant.
The Project would not contribute substantially to adverse cumulative conditions, or create any substantial indirect impacts (i.e., increase in population could lead to an increased need for housing, increase in traffic, air pollutants, etc.). As such, Project impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable given the insignificance of project induced impacts. The impact is therefore less than significant.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse ef fects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact. The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the project is not expected to have substantial impact on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Standard requirements and conditions have been incorporated in the project to reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 126 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 127 Mitigation Measure Monitoring Checklist for Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project
June 2022
INCORPORATING MEASURES FROM THE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (PEIR) CERTIFIED FOR THE CITY OF FRESNO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE (SCH No. 2012111015) This mitigation monitoring and reporting checklist was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15097 and Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (PRC). The timing of implementing each mitigation measure is identified in in the checklist, as well as identifies the entity responsible for verifying that the mitig ation measures applied to a project are performed. Project applicants are responsible for providing evidence that mitigation measures are implemented. As lead agency, the City of Fresno is responsib le for verifying that mitigation is performed/completed.
Mitigation Measures Timing of Verification Compliance
Verified By
Verification of
Completion
Date Initials
Aesthetics
AES-1: Lighting for Street and Parking Areas. Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.1)
Verification comments:
Lighting systems to be
confirmed during plan
check, prior to
issuance of building
permits
Public Works
Department
(PW) and
Planning and
Development
Department
AES-2 Lighting for Public Facilities. Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play area s shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.2)
Verification comments:
Lighting systems to be
confirmed during plan
check, prior to
issuance of building
permits
Public Works
Department
(PW) and
Planning and
Development
Department
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 128 AES-3: Lighting for Non -Residential Uses. Lighting systems for non‐ residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.3)
Verification comments:
Lighting systems to be
confirmed during plan
check, prior to
issuance of building
permits
PW and
Planning and
Development
Department
AES-4: Signage Lighting. Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100-foot Lamberts (FT -L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT-L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.4)
Verification comments:
Lighting systems to be
confirmed during plan
check, prior to
issuance of building
permits
PW and
Planning and
Development
Department
AES-5: Use of Non -Reflective Materials. Materials used on building facades shall be non‐reflective. (PEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4.5) Verification comments:
Lighting systems to be
confirmed during plan
check, prior to
issuance of building
permits
PW and
Planning and
Development
Department
Cultural Resources
CUL-1: If previously unknown resources are encountered before or during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified historical resources specialist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study.
The qualified historical resources specialist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the f inds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be iden tified by the monitor and Planning and
Development
Department to review
contract specifications
to ensure inclusion of
provisions included in
project-specific
mitigation measure.
Following discovery of
previously unknown
resource, a qualified
historical resources
Planning and
Development
Department
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 129 recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds.
No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capab le of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study. (PEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-1.1)
Verification comments:
specialist shall
prepare
recommendations
and submit to the
Planning and
Development
Department. Timing
for recommendations
shall be es tablished
by project -specific
mitigation measure.
CUL-2: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into accoun t the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. (PEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-3) Verification comments:
Planning and
Development
Department to review
construction
specifications to
ensure inclusion of
provisions included in
mitigation measure.
Planning and
Development
Department
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 130 Noise
NOI-1: Construction Vibration. The use of heavy construction equipment within 25 feet of existing structures shall be prohibited. (PEIR Mitigation Measure NOI-2)
Verification comments:
Prior to issuance of
any grading or
construction
permits, the
Planning and
Development
Department shall
ensure that project
construction
specifications
Planning and
Development
Department
prohibit
heavy
construction
within 25 feet
of existing
structures.
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 131 6 REPORT PREPARATION
Names of Persons Who Prepared or Participated in the Initial Study:
Lead Agency & Applicant
Lead Agency
Randall Morrison, P.E.
Assistant Director of Public Works
(559) 621-8703
Applicant
Aldi Ramirez
City of Fresno
Parks, After School,
Recreation, and Community
Services
1515 E. Divisadero Street
Fresno, CA 93721
Initial Study Consultant
Initial Study Precision Civil Engineering, Inc.
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 449-4500
Bonique Emerson, AICP, VP of
Planning
Jenna Chilingerian, Senior
Associate Planner
Shin Tu, Associate Planner
INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
JUNE 202 2
CITY OF FRESNO – Proposed Acquisition for Senior Center and Housing Project | 132 7 APPENDICIES
7.1 Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files (Annual)
Prepared by Precision Civil Engineering, Inc., dated February 10, 2022.
Citywide Senior Center Project
San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Lot Acreage - Assumes
50%
lot size (
4.25 acre) for each land use.
Floor Surface Area - see Site Plan.
Recreational/Heath Clud - refers to the Senior Center for activities.
Mobile Land Use Mitigation -
Area Mitigation -
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses
Size
Metric
Lot Acreage
Floor Surface Area
Population
Apartments Mid Rise
70.00 Dwelling Unit
2.13 33,000.00
200
Health Club
29.00 1000sqft
2.13 29,000.00
0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s)
Precipitation Freq (Days)
2.7 45
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
2024
Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98
0.033
CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.004
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name
Column Name
Default Value
New Value
tblLandUse
LandUseSquareFeet
70,000.00
33,000.00
tblLandUse
LotAcreage
1.84 2.13
tblLandUse
LotAcreage
0.67 2.13
tblWoodstoves
NumberCatalytic
2.13 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 2/10/2022 11:06 AM
Citywide Senior Center Project - San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.0 Emissions Summary
tblWoodstoves
NumberNoncatalytic
2.13 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 2/10/2022 11:06 AM
Citywide Senior Center Project - San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2022
0.1599
1.4095
1.4195
2.6600e-
003
0.1145
0.0694
0.1839
0.0489
0.0650
0.1139
0.0000
233.0924
233.0924
0.0499
3.0000e-
003
235.2336
2023
0.6204
0.9191
1.1220
2.0700e-
003
0.0345
0.0434
0.0778
9.2600e-
003
0.0408
0.0501
0.0000
181.6456
181.6456
0.0359
2.6200e-
003
183.3234
Maximum
0.6204
1.4095
1.4195
2.6600e-
003
0.1145
0.0694
0.1839
0.0489
0.0650
0.1139
0.0000
233.0924
233.0924
0.0499
3.0000e-
003
235.2336
Unmitigated Construction
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Year
tons/yr
MT/yr
2022
0.1599
1.4095
1.4195
2.6600e-
003
0.1145
0.0694
0.1839
0.0489
0.0650
0.1139
0.0000
233.0922
233.0922
0.0499
3.0000e-
003
235.2334
2023
0.6204
0.9191
1.1220
2.0700e-
003
0.0345
0.0434
0.0778
9.2600e-
003
0.0408
0.0501
0.0000
181.6454
181.6454
0.0359
2.6200e-
003
183.3232
Maximum
0.6204
1.4095
1.4195
2.6600e-
003
0.1145
0.0694
0.1839
0.0489
0.0650
0.1139
0.0000
233.0922
233.0922
0.0499
3.0000e-
003
235.2334
Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 2/10/2022 11:06 AM
Citywide Senior Center Project - San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Quarter
Start Date
End Date
Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter)
1 6-1-2022
8-31-2022
0.7655
0.7655
2 9-1-2022
11-30-2022
0.5979
0.5979
3 12-1-2022
2-28-2023
0.5592
0.5592
4 3-1-2023
5-31-2023
0.5534
0.5534
5 6-1-2023
8-31-2023
0.6454
0.6454
Highest
0.7655
0.7655
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area
0.3120
0.0322
0.5310
1.9000e-
004
5.0000e-
003
5.0000e-
003
5.0000e-
003
5.0000e-
003
0.0000
31.1741
31.1741
1.4000e-
003
5.6000e-
004
31.3747
Energy
7.6800e-
003
0.0674
0.0409
4.2000e-
004
5.3100e-
003
5.3100e-
003
5.3100e-
003
5.3100e-
003
0.0000
124.6913
124.6913
9.3300e-
003
2.3500e-
003
125.6242
Mobile
0.5473
0.8691
4.5949
0.0102
0.9638
9.2800e-
003
0.9731
0.2580
8.7200e-
003
0.2667
0.0000
956.8693
956.8693
0.0571
0.0567
975.2042
Waste
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
40.0907
0.0000
40.0907
2.3693
0.0000
99.3231
Water
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
1.9911
4.4136
6.4046
0.2052
4.9200e-
003
12.9998
Total
0.8670
0.9687
5.1667
0.0108
0.9638
0.0196
0.9834
0.2580
0.0190
0.2770
42.0818
1,117.148
1 1,159.229
9 2.6423
0.0646
1,244.525
9 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 2/10/2022 11:06 AM
Citywide Senior Center Project - San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio- CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N2O
CO2e
Category
tons/yr
MT/yr
Area
0.2908
5.9900e-
003
0.5198
3.0000e-
005
2.8800e-
003
2.8800e-
003
2.8800e-
003
2.8800e-
003
0.0000
0.8495
0.8495
8.2000e-
004
0.0000
0.8699
Energy
7.6800e-
003
0.0674
0.0409
4.2000e-
004
5.3100e-
003
5.3100e-
003
5.3100e-
003
5.3100e-
003
0.0000
124.6913
124.6913
9.3300e-
003
2.3500e-
003
125.6242
Mobile
0.5326
0.8225
4.3520
9.4600e-
003
0.8928
8.6700e-
003
0.9014
0.2390
8.1300e-
003
0.2471
0.0000
889.3787
889.3787
0.0548
0.0536
906.7181
Waste
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
40.0907
0.0000
40.0907
2.3693
0.0000
99.3231
Water
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
1.9911
4.4136
6.4046
0.2052
4.9200e-
003
12.9998
Total
0.8311
0.8959
4.9127
9.9100e-
003
0.8928
0.0169
0.9096
0.2390
0.0163
0.2553
42.0818
1,019.333
1 1,061.414
9 2.6395
0.0609
1,145.535
0 Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name
Phase Type
Start Date
End Date
Num Days
Week
Num Days
Phase Description
1 Demolition
Demolition
6/1/2022
6/28/2022
5 20
2 Site Preparation
Site Preparation
6/29/2022
7/5/2022
5 5
3 Grading
Grading
7/6/2022
7/15/2022
5 8
ROG
NOx
CO
SO2
Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2
NBio-CO2
Total CO2
CH4
N20
CO2e
Percent
Reduction
4.15 7.51
4.92 8.16
7.37 13.94
7.50 7.37
14.24 7.83
0.00 8.76
8.44 0.11
5.75 7.95
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0
Date: 2/10/2022 11:06 AM