The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains the Envirostor Data Management System, which provides information on hazardous waste facilities (both permitted and corrective action) as well as any available site cleanup information. There are four sites listed in the database within the Plan Area:
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-5 • West Shields Elementary School: This site is located at 4108 Shields Avenue, and is a part of the DTSC – Site Cleanup Program. The cleanup status is active as of 1/4/2017. A Phase 1 assessment was completed on this site on January 4, 2017. Past uses that caused contamination are not specified. The Potential materials (e.g. soil, water, etc.) affected were also not specified.
• Golden State Ranch Property: This site is located at Ashlan Avenue and Grantland Avenue, and the DTSC is the oversight agency for this site. The cleanup status is active as of 2/27/2002. Past uses that caused contamination include agricultural – row crops. No contaminants were found at this site.
• Parc West Development: This site is located at the intersection of Shields, Grantland, Garfield, and Gettysburg avenues. The cleanup status is currently inactive. Past uses that caused contamination included agricultural – orchard and agricultural – row crop uses.
Potential contaminants of concern are under investigation, and the potential materials affected are soils.
The Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) is a database of solid waste facilities that is maintained by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). The SWIS data identifies active, planned and closed sites. The Plan Area does not have any active or planned solid waste facilities listed in the database.
There is a broad list of federal and state databases that provide information for sites with varying potential for risk from the possible existence of hazardous materials. There are numerous redundancies among these various database listings. Below is a brief summary of each.
National Priorities List: The National Priorities List (NPL) of Superfund Sites and Proposed NPL Sites is USEPA’s database of more than 1,200 sites designated or proposed for priority cleanup under the Superfund program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. No site listed in this database is located within the Plan Area. The closest site listed in this database is the Fresno Municipal Sanitary Landfill, located south of SR 180.
RCRIS System: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) is a USEPA database that includes selective information on sites that generate, transport, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by RCRA. Identification on this list does not indicate that there has been an impact on the environment. No portion of the Plan Area is listed in this database.
CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report (CORRACTS) is a USEPA database that identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. No portion of the Plan Area is listed in this database.
PADS System: PCB Activity Database System (PADS) is a USEPA database that identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers, and/or brokers and disposers of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) who are required to notify USEPA of such activities. No portion of the Plan Area is listed in this database.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Cortese Database: The Cortese database identifies public drinking water wells with detectable levels of contamination, hazardous substance sites selected for remedial action, sites with known toxic material identified through the abandoned site assessment program, sites with underground storage tanks (USTs) having a reportable release, and all solid waste disposal facilities from which there is known hazardous substance migration. The source of this database is the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA). No portion of the Plan Area is listed in this database.
GeoTracker: GeoTracker provides online access to environmental data and is the interface to the Geographic Environmental Information Management System, a data warehouse which tracks regulatory data about underground fuel tanks, fuel pipelines, and public drinking water supplies.
GeoTracker has replaced past databases, such as the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Information System and the Underground Storage Tank (UST) database. Information on hazardous material sites provided by the GeoTracker database is provided in greater detail below.
Hazardous Material Sites
As noted above, the State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (also known as the “Cortese List”) is a planning document used by the state, local agencies, and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements for providing information about the location of hazardous materials sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires Cal EPA to annually update the Cortese List. DTSC is responsible for preparing a portion of the information that comprises the Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies are required to provide additional hazardous material release information that is part of the complete list.
Searches of the GeoTracker database identified one active and one inactive hazardous material sites located within the Plan Area known to handle and store hazardous materials that are associated with a hazardous material related release or occurrence. The terms "release" or “occurrence” include any means by which a substance could harm the environment: by spilling, leaking, discharging, dumping, injecting, or escaping.
Table 3.8-2 displays the known hazardous material sites located within the Plan Area with a description of the type, status, and address. As shown, one active and one inactive site are located within the Plan Area, with the remaining sites are designated as completed, no action required, no further action, or not specified.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-7 TABLE 3.8-2: GEOTRACKER KNOWN HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RELEASE SITES WITHIN THE PLAN AREA
SITE NAME TYPE STATUS ADDRESS
7-Eleven #24180 LUST Cleanup Site Completed 426 West Ashlan Avenue AT&T California – SBR29 Permitted UST -- 4309 North Polk Avenue Chevron #9-9093 LUST Cleanup Site Completed 3996 Parkway Drive North Di Redo Dry Yard LUST Cleanup Site Completed 6150 Shaw Avenue West EZ Trip LUST Cleanup Site Completed 6639 Parkway Drive North Former Sieberts’ Oil Company LUST Cleanup Site Completed 2837 North Parkway Drive Fresno Gas & Liquor Permitted UST -- 3110 West Shields Avenue Golden State Ranch Property School Investigation No Action Required Ashlan Avenue/Grantland Avenue Johnny Quik #175 Permitted UST -- 4395 West Ashlan Avenue Jura Farms, Inc. LUST Cleanup Site Completed 5545 Dakota West Moore Truck Lines LUST Cleanup Site Completed 3693 Parkway North Parkway Mini-Mart Permitted UST --
Proposed Constance-Sierra
Elementary School School Investigation No Further Action Northeast Corner of Constance and Sierra Avenues Quick ‘N’ E-Z #19 Permitted UST --
Siebert’s Oil Company LUST Cleanup Site Completed 2837 Parkway Drive North Shop N Go, #607 Permitted UST -- 4245 West Ashlan
Sugahara Farm LUST Cleanup Site Completed 4108 Shields Avenue West Vallee Food Store LUST Cleanup Site Completed 2414 Marks North Westlake Proposed 430 Acre
Development Voluntary Cleanup Inactive Bounded by Shields, Grantland, Garfield, and Gettysburg West Shields Elementary School School Investigation Active 4108 Shields Avenue SOURCE: STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD GEOTRACKER (2019).
NOTE: -- = NOT SPECIFIED WITHIN THE GEOTRACKER DATABASE.
The West Shields Elementary School site has an active permitted underground storage tank (UST).
The permitting agency for this site is the DTSC. On January 4, 2017, DTSC received the Phase I for review. This site is currently a vacant lot with native grasses. The site has been used for agricultural purposes from at least 1937 through at least 1998. Multiple structures were formerly located at the site. In 1993, remediation of petroleum hydrocarbon-impacted soil was performed after removing a 500-gallon single-walled gasoline UST from the site. In addition, a water well was observed within the southwest quadrant of the site. The Phase I concludes that the only recognized environmental condition (REC) at the site is the potential application of persistent herbicides and pesticides due to the historical agricultural use of the site. The Phase I identifies the UST removal activities as a historical REC and indicates that no additional investigation appears warranted at this time.
Moreover, the Phase I identifies the following Site Development Issues: the potential presence of septic systems likely associated with the water well and the former on-site structures. The Phase I recommends properly abandoning and/or destroying the septic system and water well in accordance with all applicable state and local guidelines. On January 18, 2017, based on the provided information, DTSC determined that a Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA) is needed for the site. On August 4, 2017, DTSC conducted a site walk-through with the District and their consultant followed by the PEA scoping meeting. DTSC received the draft PEA Workplan on May 7, 2018 and issued comments on May 25, 2018. DTSC received the draft final PEA Workplan on June 23, 2018 and issued and approval letter or July 23, 2018. On September 4, 2018, DTSC conducted oversight
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan of the PEA fieldwork. DTSC received the draft PEA Report on 11 December 2018 and issued comments in a letter dated January 11, 2019. No subsequent information is available for the site.
The Inactive Westlake Proposed 430 Acre Development site is a voluntary (inactive) cleanup site.
The DTSC is the lead agency for the site. A Preliminary Endangerment Assessment was planned for this former agricultural property. The site is proposed as a Planned Residential Community. The DTSC had a Voluntary Cleanup Agreement with the applicant for the Planned Residential Community. Potential media affected includes soils. Potential contaminants of concern are under investigation. Should the site be developed in the future, future cleanup activities would be required prior to development on this site, as applicable.
Emergency Response
The City of Fresno Fire Department provides fire prevention, suppression and investigation services, airport fire and rescue, urban search and rescue, response to medical emergencies (EMS), and response to hazardous materials incidents. The FFD service areas consists of the City of Fresno, and also includes extra-territorial services via contracts to provide services to the Fig Garden Fire Protection District, Fresno Yosemite International Airport, and surrounding areas through mutual aid and automatic aid requests.
Transportation of Hazardous Materials
The nearest roadway and transportation route approved for the transportation of explosives, poisonous inhalation hazards, and radioactive materials in the city is State Route 99.
WILDFIRE HAZARDS
Wildfires are a major hazard in the State of California. Wildfires burn natural vegetation on developed and undeveloped lands and include timber, brush, woodland, and grass fires. While low intensity wildfires have a role in the County’s ecosystem, wildfires put human health and safety, structures (e.g., homes, schools, businesses, etc.), air quality, recreation areas, water quality, wildlife habitat and ecosystem health, and forest resources at risk.
Wildland fire hazards exist in varying degrees within the Plan Area. None of the Plan Area is located within or near to a State Responsibility Area (SRA). The Plan Area is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Most of the Plan Area is located in the “LRA Unzoned” Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). However, small areas within the northern, central, and southern portions of the Plan Area are located in the “LRA Moderate” FHSZ. There are no very high fire hazard severity zones (VHFHSZ) located within or near the Plan Area.
3.8.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following is an overview of the federal, State, and local regulations that are applicable to the proposed Specific Plan.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-9
FEDERAL
The primary federal agencies that are responsible for overseeing regulations and policies regarding hazardous materials are the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Department of Transportation (DOT). Several laws governing the transport, storage, and use of hazardous materials are governed by these agencies as well as oversight for contaminated sites cleanup. Federal laws and regulations that are applicable to hazards and hazardous materials are presented below.
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, as amended, is the basic statute regulating hazardous materials transportation in the United States. The purpose of the law is to provide adequate protection against the risks to life and property inherent in transporting hazardous materials in interstate commerce. This law gives the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) and other agencies the authority to issue and enforce rules and regulations governing the safe transportation of hazardous materials.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The 1976 Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the 1984 RCRA Amendments regulate the treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. The legislation mandated that hazardous wastes be tracked from the point of generation to their ultimate fate in the environment. This includes detailed tracking of hazardous materials during transport and permitting of hazardous material handling facilities.
The 1984 RCRA amendments provided the framework for a regulatory program designed to prevent releases from USTs. The program establishes tank and leak detection standards, including spill and overflow protection devices for new tanks. The tanks must also meet performance standards to ensure that the stored material will not corrode the tanks.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (the Act) introduced active federal involvement to emergency response, site remediation, and spill prevention, most notably the Superfund program. The Act was intended to be comprehensive in encompassing both the prevention of, and response to, uncontrolled hazardous substances releases. The Act deals with environmental response, providing mechanisms for reacting to emergencies and to chronic hazardous material releases. In addition to establishing procedures to prevent and remedy problems, it establishes a system for compensating appropriate individuals and assigning appropriate liability. It is designed to plan for and respond to failure in other regulatory programs and to remedy problems resulting from action taken before the era of comprehensive regulatory protection.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
The Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act authorizes the U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Pipeline Safety to regulate pipeline transportation of natural (flammable, toxic, or corrosive) gas and other gases as well as the transportation and storage of liquefied natural gas. The Office of Pipeline Safety regulates the design, construction, inspection, testing, operation, and maintenance of pipeline facilities. While the federal government is primarily responsible for developing, issuing, and enforcing pipeline safety regulations, the pipeline safety statutes provide for State assumption of the intrastate regulatory, inspection, and enforcement responsibilities under an annual certification.
To qualify for certification, a state must adopt the minimum federal regulations and may adopt additional or more stringent regulations as long as they are not incompatible.
Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 provides the EPA with authority to require reporting, record-keeping and testing requirements, and restrictions relating to chemical substances and/or mixtures. Certain substances are generally excluded from Toxic Substances Control Act, including, among others, food, drugs, cosmetics and pesticides. The Toxic Substances Control Act addresses the production, importation, use, and disposal of specific chemicals including PCBs, asbestos, radon and lead-based paint.
Various sections of Toxic Substances Control Act provide authority to:
• Require, under Section 5, pre-manufacture notification for "new chemical substances" before manufacture
• Require, under Section 4, testing of chemicals by manufacturers, importers, and processors where risks or exposures of concern are found
• Issue Significant New Use Rules (SNURs), under Section 5, when it identifies a "significant new use" that could result in exposures to, or releases of, a substance of concern. • Maintain the Toxic Substances Control Act Inventory, under Section 8, which contains more than 83,000 chemicals. As new chemicals are commercially manufactured or imported, they are placed on the list.
• Require those importing or exporting chemicals, under Sections 12(b) and 13, to comply with certification reporting and/or other requirements. • Require, under Section 8, reporting and record-keeping by persons who manufacture, import, process, and/or distribute chemical substances in commerce. • Require, under Section 8(e), that any person who manufactures (including imports), processes, or distributes in commerce a chemical substance or mixture and who obtains information which reasonably supports the conclusion that such substance or mixture presents a substantial risk of injury to health or the environment to immediately inform EPA, except where EPA has been adequately informed of such information. EPA screens all Toxic Substances Control Act b§8(e) submissions as well as voluntary "For Your Information" (FYI) submissions. The latter are not required by law, but are submitted by industry and public interest groups for a variety of reasons.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-11 The Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (also known as Title III of the Federal Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, or “SARA III”) (42 United States Code 11001, et seq.), was established by the EPA to allow for emergency planning at the state and local level regarding chemical emergencies, to provide notification of emergency release of chemicals, and to address community right-to-know regarding hazardous and toxic chemicals. SARA III was designed to increase community access and knowledge about chemical hazards as well as facilitate the creation and implementation of state/Native American tribe emergency response commissions, responsible for coordinating certain emergency response activities and for appointing local emergency planning committees. Section 1910.1200(c) Title 29 of the CFR defines “chemicals or hazardous materials” for the purposes of SARA III.
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 United States Code 136, et seq.) was originally passed in 1947. It has been amended several times, most extensively in 1972, and most recently by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996. The purpose of FIFRA is to establish federal jurisdiction over the distribution, sale, and use of pesticides. It also gives EPA the authority to study the effects of pesticide use. Other key provisions of FIFRA require pesticide applicators to pass a licensing examination for status as “qualified applicators,” create a review and registration process for new pesticide products, and ensure thorough and understandable labeling that includes instructions for use.
STATE
The primary state agencies that are responsible for overseeing regulations and policies regarding hazardous materials are the California Office of Emergency Services (OES), California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA), Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), California Highway Patrol (CHP), California Water Quality Control Board, and the California Air Resources Board. Several laws governing the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials are administered by these agencies. State laws and regulations that are applicable to hazards and hazardous materials are presented below.
California Health and Safety Code
Cal-EPA has established rules governing the use of hazardous materials and the management of hazardous wastes. Many of these regulations are embodied in the California Health and Safety Code.
The code includes regulations that govern safe drinking water, substances control, land reuse and revitalization, remediation, restoration, and methamphetamine contaminated cleanups.
California Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Program Business Plan
When hazardous materials are improperly handled or stored, they can result in a threat to employees, public health, and/or the contamination of the environment. State and Federal Community Right-to-Know laws were passed in 1984. These laws allow public access to information
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan about the types and amounts of chemicals being used at local businesses. The laws also require businesses to plan and prepare for a chemical emergency through the preparation of a Hazardous Materials Inventory that is certified annually and a Hazardous Materials Business Plan that is certified tri-annually. Businesses are inspected at least once every three years by a Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA) inspector to verify compliance with the California Health and Safety Code and California Code of Regulations.
A Business Emergency Response Plan and Inventory is required of any facility which handles hazardous materials or waste in amounts greater than:
• 55 gallons for liquids;
• 500 pounds for solids; or
• 200 cubic feet for compressed gases.
On October 8, 2011, Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill (AB) 408. AB 408 amends the Health & Safety Code Chapter 6.95, Section 25503.5 hazardous materials inventory reporting thresholds. With passage of this legislation, inventory reporting quantities were changed as follows:
1. For a solid or liquid hazardous material that is classified as a hazard solely as an irritant or sensitizer, the new reporting quantity is 5,000 pounds.
2. For a hazardous material that is a gas, at standard temperature and pressure, and for which the only health and physical hazards are simple asphyxiation and the release of pressure, the new reporting quantity is 1,000 cubic feet. (Reporting of gases in a cryogenic state remains unchanged).
3. For oil-filled electrical equipment that is not contiguous to an electrical facility, the new reporting quantity for the oil is 1,320 gallons.
California Code of Regulations Title 22 and Title 26
The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22 provides state regulations for hazardous materials, and CCR Title 26 provides regulation of hazardous materials management. In 1996, Cal EPA established the “Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program” (Unified Program) which consolidated the six administrative components of hazardous waste and materials into one program.
California Government Code Section 65962.5
The provisions in Government Code Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the “Cortese List” (after the Legislator who authored the legislation that enacted it). The list, or a site’s presence on the list, has bearing on the local permitting process as well as on compliance with CEQA. Government Code § 65962.5 was originally enacted in 1985, and per subsection (g), the effective date of the changes called for under the amendments to this section was January 1, 1992.
While Government Code Section 65962.5 refers to the preparation of a “list,” many changes have occurred related to web-based information access since 1992 and this information is now largely available on the Internet sites of the responsible organizations. Those requesting a copy of the HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-13 Cortese “list” are now referred directly to the appropriate information resources contained on the Internet web sites of the boards or departments that are referenced in the statute.
Section 65962.5(a)(1) requires that DTSC “shall compile and update as appropriate, but at least annually, and shall submit to the Secretary for Environmental Protection, a list of all the following:
….(1) [a]ll hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code (“HSC”).”
The hazardous waste facilities identified in HSC § 25187.5 are those where DTSC has taken or contracted for corrective action because a facility owner/operator has failed to comply with a date for taking corrective action in an order issued under HSC § 25187, or because DTSC determined that immediate corrective action was necessary to abate an imminent or substantial endangerment.
Occupational Safety and Health Act
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) was passed to prevent workers from being killed or otherwise harmed at work. The law requires employers to provide their employees with working conditions that are free of known dangers. The OSH Act created the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which sets and enforces protective workplace safety and health standards. OSHA also provides information, training and assistance to employers and workers.
The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, better known as Cal/OSHA, protects and improves the health and safety of workers in California and the safety of passengers riding on elevators, amusement rides, and tramways – through the following activities:
• Setting and enforcing standards;
• Providing outreach, education, and assistance; and
• Issuing permits, licenses, certifications, registrations, and approvals.
LOCAL
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan establishes the following objectives and policies directly related to hazards and hazardous materials.
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 hazardous materials and hazardous wastes.
Policy NS-4-a: Processing and Storage. Require safe processing and storage of hazardous materials, consistent with the California Building Code and Uniform Fire Code, as adopted by the City.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy 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.
Policy 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 groundwater contamination is identified or could be encountered during site development.
Policy NS-4-d: Site Identification. Continue to aid federal, State, and County agencies in the identification and mapping of waste disposal sites (including abandoned waste sites), and to assist in the survey of the kinds, amounts, and locations of hazardous wastes.
Policy 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.
Policy 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 materials and waste management laws and regulations.
Policy NS-4-g: Hazmat Response. Include policies and procedures appropriate to hazardous materials in the City’s disaster and emergency response preparedness and planning, coordinating with implementation of Fresno County’s Hazardous Materials Incident Response Plan.
Policy NS-4-h: Household Collection. Continue to support and assist with Fresno County’s special household hazardous waste collection activities, to reduce the amount of this material being improperly discarded.
Policy NS-4-i: Public Information. Continue to assist in providing information to the public on hazardous materials.
Objective NS-5: Protect the safety, health, and welfare of persons and property on the ground and in aircraft by minimizing exposure to airport-related hazards.
Policy 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.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-15 • Limit land uses in airport safety zones to those uses listed in the applicable ALUCPs as compatible uses, and regulate compatibility 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 Navigable Airspace), particularly in terms of height.
Policy 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.
Policy NS-5-c: Avigation Easements. Employ avigation easements in order to secure and protect airspace required for unimpeded operation of publicly owned airports.
Policy 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.
Policy 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 surrounding 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 other local, State, and Federal agencies to provide coordinated disaster response.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 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 evacuation 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, transportation 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.
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.
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT
Objective PU-2: Ensure that the Fire Department’s staffing and equipment resources are sufficient to meet all fire and emergency service level objectives and are provided in an efficient and cost effective manner.
Policy PU-2-a: Unify Fire Protection. Pursue long-range transfer of fire protection service agreements with adjacent fire districts that, in concert with existing automatic aid agreements, will lead to the eventual unification of fire protection services in the greater Fresno area.
Policy PU-2-b: Maintain Ability. Strive to continually maintain the Fire Department’s ability to provide staffing and equipment resources to effectively prevent and mitigate emergencies in existing and new high-rise buildings and in other high-density residential and commercial development throughout the city.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-17 Policy PU-2-c: Rescue Standards. Develop appropriate standards, as necessary, for rescue operations, including, but not limited to, confined space, high angle, swift water rescues, and the unique challenges of a high speed train corridor.
Policy PU-2-d: Station Siting. Use the General Plan, community plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood plans, and Concept Plans, the City’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database, and a fire station location program to achieve optimum siting of future fire stations.
Policy PU-2-e: Service Standards. Strive to achieve a community wide risk management plan that include the following service level objectives 90 percent of the time:
• First Unit on Scene – First fire unit arriving with minimum of three firefighters within 5 minutes and 20 seconds from the time the unit was alerted to the emergency incident.
• Effective Response Force – Provide sufficient number of firefighters on the scene of an emergency within 9 minutes and 20 seconds from the time of unit alert to arrival.
The effective response force is measured as 15 firefighters for low risk fire incidents and 21 firefighters for high risk fire incidents and is the number of personnel necessary to complete specific tasks required to contain and control fire minimizing loss of life and property.
Objective PU-3: Enhance the level of fire protection to meet the increasing demand for services from an increasing population.
Policy PU-3-a: Fire Prevention Inspections. Develop strategies to enable the performance of annual fire and life safety inspection of all industrial, commercial, institutional, and multifamily residential buildings, in accordance with nationally recognized standards for the level of service necessary for a large Metropolitan Area, including a self-certification program.
Policy PU-3-b: Reduction Strategies. Develop community risk reduction strategies that target high service demand areas, vulnerable populations (e.g. young children, older adults, non-English speaking residents, persons with disabilities, etc.), and high life hazard occupancies
Policy PU-3-c: Public Education Strategies. Develop strategies to re-establish and enhance routine public education outreach to all sectors of the community.
Policy PU-3-d: Review Development Applications. Continue Fire Department review of development applications, provide comments and recommend conditions of approval that will ensure adequate on-site and off-site fire protection systems and features are provided.
Policy PU-3-e: Building Codes. Adopt and enforce amendments to construction and fire codes, as determined appropriate, to systematically reduce the level of risk to life and property from fire, commensurate with the City’s fire suppression capabilities.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy PU-3-f: Adequate Infrastructure. Continue to pursue the provision of adequate water supplies, hydrants, and appropriate property access to allow for adequate fire suppression throughout the City.
Policy PU-3-g: Cost Recovery. Continue to evaluate appropriate codes, policies, and methods to generate fees or other sources of revenue to offset the ongoing personnel and maintenance costs of providing fire prevention and response services.
Fresno Municipal Code
Various provisions of the City of Fresno Municipal Code are relevant to hazards and hazardous materials, including portions of Chapter 15, Chapter 10, and Chapter 11. Discussion of these relevant portions of the Fresno Municipal Code are provided below.
Chapter 15 of the Fresno Municipal Code replaced the former development code in its entirety. It establishes new zone districts, permitted uses, development standards, and procedures in a contemporary, well-organized, and comprehensive manner. The new code reflects contemporary planning and business practices and sets clear criteria for new development. Proposals that conform to the new vision will have a streamlined approval process designed to boost economic development. In addition, infill development will be more feasible in Fresno under the new Development Code, designed for balanced growth in the future.
Article 25 (Performance Standards) of the Citywide Development Code (CDC) has the following purposes: 1) Establish permissible limits and allow objective measurement of nuisances, hazards, and objectionable conditions; and 2) Ensure that all uses will provide necessary control measures to protect the community from nuisances, hazards, and objectionable conditions. The General Standard of Article 25 is stated as follows: “Land or buildings shall not be used or occupied in a manner creating any dangerous, injurious, or noxious conditions, chemical fires, explosive, blight, or other hazards that could adversely affect the surrounding area.” Article 27 (Standards for Specific Uses and Activities) of the CDC states: “The purpose of this article is to establish standards for specific uses and activities that are permitted or conditionally permitted in some or all districts. These provisions are supplemental standards and requirements to minimize the impacts of these uses and activities on surrounding properties and to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their occupants and of the general public.” This article specifies regulation governing the operation of various types of facilities and activities, including hazardous waste management facilities, recycling facilities, and hazardous materials storage activities.
Section 15-2727, Development of Former Landfill Sites and Hazardous Sites, states “A Conditional Use Permit shall be required for the development of all former Landfill Sites and other sites deemed hazardous, regardless of the proposed use. As part of the application, the applicant shall at a minimum, provide a geotechnical report that provides a complete analysis of on-site soil conditions, fault hazards, underground water conditions, and recommendations as well as a post-closure plan that outlines remediation measures. Applicants shall comply with all State and federal regulations related to operation, post-closure remediation, and monitoring.” HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-19 Separately, Chapter 10, Regulations Regarding Public Nuisances and Real Property Conduct and Use, includes:
Article 14, Hazardous Spills Expense Recovery. The intent of Article 14 is stated as follows: “Surface waters, groundwater, soils, vegetation, and atmosphere inside the City of Fresno are susceptible to damage from the handling, storage, use, processing and disposal of hazardous material and the expense incurred by the taxpayers as a result of the City of Fresno or its Designee having to respond in an emergency to protect life, property and the environment when there has been a release of hazardous materials should be recovered from the person responsible for the emergency.” In conjunction with Chapter 15, Article 27 of the City of Fresno Municipal Code, Article 14 pertains to the recovery of expenses associated with hazardous spills. Specifically, the code states that “Any person causing a release or threatened release which results in an emergency action shall be liable to the City of Fresno for the recoverable costs resulting from the emergency action.” Additionally, Chapter 11, Building Permits and Regulations, includes Article 2, Section 11-218, Debris and Excavations, which requires of demolition projects that the permit holder properly cap the sanitary sewer house connection, and to properly fill or otherwise protect all basements, cellars, septic tanks, wells, and other excavations, and said lot or parcel shall be left level and in a condition to be disked for control of weeds.
Fire Department Hazardous Materials Response Team
The City of Fresno Fire Department recognizes the potential for a large chemical release to occur which could expose thousands of people to hazardous or toxic vapors. The City of Fresno Fire Department Hazardous Materials Response Team (HMRT) has embraced an all-hazards approach to emergency response to ensure that the City receives effective protection from the risk of hazardous materials releases.
Emergency Operations Plan
In addition to emergency response to hazardous materials incidents, both the City of Fresno and the County of Fresno implement programs to facilitate emergency preparedness for other types of incidents within the Plan Area. Specifically, the City of Fresno has an Emergency Operations Plan that describes what the City’s actions will be during a response to an emergency. This plan also describes the role of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and the coordination that occurs between the EOC, City departments, and other response agencies. The plan establishes a requirement for the emergency management organization to mitigate any significant emergency disaster affecting the City of Fresno. The plan also identifies the policies, responsibilities, and procedures required to protect the health and safety of City communities, public and private property, and the environmental effects of natural or technological disasters. In addition, the plan establishes the operation concepts and procedures associated within initial response operations (field response) to emergencies, the extended response operations (City of Fresno Emergency Operations Center Activities), and the recovery process. Furthermore, the plan complies with the State of California Emergency Operations Plan “Cross Walk” checklist for determining whether an emergency plan has addressed critical elements of California’s Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System (NIMS).
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Fresno County Environmental Health Department
The Fresno County Environmental Health Department maintains a Hazardous Materials Management Plan/Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMMP/HMBP). The HMMP/HMBP describes agency roles, strategies and processes for responding to emergencies involving hazardous materials.
The Environmental Health Department maintains a Hazardous Materials Database and Risk and Flood Maps available to the public on its website.
Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The Fresno County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) (May 2018), aims to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards. Fresno County, along with 17 participating jurisdictions, including the City of Fresno, prepared the MJHMP to demonstrate the community’s commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision makers direct mitigation activities and resources.
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA)
The California Environmental Protection Agency designates specific local agencies as Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPA), typically at the county level. The Fresno County Department of Environmental Health is the CUPA designated for Fresno County. The Fresno County Department of Environmental Health is responsible for the implementation of statewide programs within its jurisdiction, including: Underground storage of hazardous substances (USTs), Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMP) requirements, California Accidental Release Prevention (Cal-ARP) program, etc.
Implementation of these programs involves permitting, inspecting, providing education/guidance, investigations, and enforcement. The Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD) is the local CUPA.
3.8.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the Specific Plan will have a significant impact from hazards and hazardous materials if it will:
• Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
• 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.
• Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. • 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.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-21 • 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 or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
• Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
Additionally, consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed project will have a significant impact from wildfire if it is located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, and if the proposed project will:
• Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. • 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.
• 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. • 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.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.8-1: Specific Plan implementation has the potential to create a significant hazard through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or through the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
The unauthorized releases of hazardous materials into the environment could create environmental impacts to properties, the natural environment, and human health. The significance of these impacts could vary according to the release location and the quantity and nature of the substance released.
Hazardous releases can occur in areas that treat, store, transport and use hazardous materials; however, certain areas are at higher risk for releases. In the event of an unauthorized release of hazardous materials/substances, emergency response measures must be implemented to mitigate potential risks and ensure the protection of human health and the natural environment.
CONSTRUCTION PHASE IMPACTS
Construction activities would occur in phases through the implementation of the Specific Plan.
Construction equipment and materials would likely require the use of petroleum-based products (oil, gasoline, diesel fuel), and a variety of chemicals including paints, cleaners, and solvents. The use
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan of these materials at a construction site will pose a reasonable risk of release into the environment if not properly handled, stored, and transported.
Additionally, properties within the Plan Area may have residual soil (and potentially groundwater) contamination that may require remediation. Also, potentially hazardous building materials (e.g., asbestos containing materials, lead-based paint, etc.) could be encountered during demolition of existing structures to accommodate new development. A release into the environment could pose significant impacts to the health and welfare of people and/or wildlife, and could result in contamination of water (groundwater or surface water), habitat, and countless important resources.
Like most agricultural and farming operations in the Central Valley, agricultural practices in the area have used agricultural chemicals including pesticides and herbicides as a standard practice. Residual concentrations of pesticides may be present in soil as a result of historic agricultural application and storage. Continuous spraying of crops over many years can potentially result in a residual buildup of pesticides in farm soils. Of highest concern relative to agrichemicals are chemicals such as chlorinated herbicides, organophosphate pesticides, and organochlorine pesticides, such as Mecoprop (MCPP), Dinoseb, chlordane, dichloro-diphenyltrichloroethane (DDT), and dichlorodiphenyl-dichloroethylene (DDE). Other chemicals may also be present due to other built-up uses.
As described in the Environmental Setting, there is a historical record of soil contamination at the Proposed Constance-Sierra Elementary School site, the Westlake Proposed 430 Acre Development, and the West Shields Elementary School site, each of which are at differing levels of cleanup status.
Therefore, there is the potential for other sites to have experienced contamination or have a history of hazardous materials being used as part of previous or current operations. Implementation of the Specific Plan could involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials associated with future construction and/or remediation activities. The transport of hazardous materials and any potential remediation activities would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations.
Additionally, the proposed project would also be required to implement Mitigation Measures 3.8-1 through 3.8-10, which provide requirements for any ground disturbance activities within 50 feet of a well; require Phase I and Phase II site assessments, and other remediation activities including surveys and assessments, cleanup plans, programs, and activities, as applicable; and requires actions to ensure that developing a property within the Plan Area does not present an unacceptable risk to human health, if applicable, through the use of an Environmental Site Management Plan (ESMP).
Therefore, the potential for existing or new hazards within the Plan Area or generated by the proposed project is limited. Additional requirements include those related to evaluation of potential asbestos and lead prior to planned renovation or demolition of residential and/or commercial structures in the Plan Area, and soil sampling for hazardous materials. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8-1 through 3.8-10 would reduce potential impacts that could occur due to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or through the reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment associated with construction activities within the Plan area to a less than significant level.
OPERATIONAL PHASE IMPACTS
The operational phase of implementation of the Specific Plan would occur after construction is completed and business operators/employees, and residents move in to occupy the structures and HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-23 facilities on a day-to-day basis. Hazardous waste generators in the Plan Area include industries, businesses, public and private institutions, and households. Facilities that store, use or handle hazardous materials above reportable amounts are required to prepare and file a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (Business Plan) for the safe storage and use of chemicals. In the event of an emergency, firefighters, health officials, planners, public safety officers, health care providers and others rely on the Business Plan. Implementation of the Business Plan should prevent or reduce damage to the health and safety of people and the environment if a hazardous material is released.
The FCEHD, as the local CUPA, is responsible for administering/overseeing compliance with the Hazardous Materials Business Plan requirements, as well as other related regulatory programs such as those involving USTs, hazardous waste generation, hazardous waste treatment and disposal facility permitting, and hazardous materials releases.
Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would result in the continued use and storage of hazardous materials, including common cleaning products, building maintenance products, paints and solvents, and other similar items. Routinely used hazardous materials, however, would not be of the type or occur in sufficient quantities to pose a significant hazard to public health and safety or to the environment. It is anticipated that some facilities within the Specific Plan area would use certain classes of hazardous materials that require risk management plans to protect surrounding land uses. Future development also would result in continued generation of hazardous waste by certain facilities. Therefore, the transport of hazardous materials could occur during future operational activities. However, transport of hazardous materials would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations, as well as cooperation with the local CUPA and the City of Fresno Fire Department (FFD).
Implementation of the Specific Plan will allow for the development of a wide variety of land uses, including Low Density Residential, Medium Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, Urban Neighborhood Residential, High Density Residential, Community Commercial, Recreation Commercial, General Commercial, Regional Commercial, Office, Business Park, Light Industrial, Corridor/Center Mixed Use, Regional Mixed Use, Pocket Park, Neighborhood Park, Community Park, Open Space, Ponding Basin, Public Facility, Church, Special School, Elementary School, Elementary, Middle & High School, High School, and Fire Station uses, as well as the required transportation and utility improvements.
Each of these uses will likely use a variety of hazardous materials commonly found in urban areas including: paints, cleaners, and cleaning solvents. There could be a risk of release of these materials into the environment if they are not stored and handled in accordance with best management practices approved by Fresno County Environmental Health Division and the FFD. In addition, Mitigation Measure 3.8-1 requires that, prior to bringing hazardous materials onsite, the applicant shall submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to Fresno County Environmental Health Division (CUPA) for review and approval. This would further reduce the potential for a significant impact to this topic. Compliance with the applicable regulations, as well as implementation of the following mitigation measures, as appropriate, would ensure that the implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact relative to this issue.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.8-1: Prior to bringing hazardous materials onsite, the applicant shall submit a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) to Fresno County Environmental Health Division (CUPA) for review and approval. If during the construction process the applicant or their subcontractors generates hazardous waste, the applicant must register with the CUPA as a generator of hazardous waste, obtain an EPA ID# and accumulate, ship and dispose of the hazardous waste per Health and Safety Code Ch. 6.5. (California Hazardous Waste Control Law).
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2: Prior to initiation of any ground disturbance activities within 50 feet of a well, the applicant shall hire a licensed well contractor to obtain a well abandonment permit from Fresno County Environmental Health Department, and properly abandon the on-site wells, pursuant to review and approval of the City Engineer and the Fresno County Environmental Health Department.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-3: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase I ESA (performed in accordance with the current ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process [E 1527]) shall be conducted for each individual property prior to development or redevelopment to ascertain the presence or absence of Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HRECs), and Potential Environmental Concerns (PECs) relevant to the property under consideration. The findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow-up investigation, if found to be warranted.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-4: In the event that the findings and conclusions of the Phase I ESA for a property result in evidence of RECs, HRECs and/or PECs warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that a Phase II ESA shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of a significant impact to the subject site from hazardous materials.
The Phase II ESA may include but may not be limited to the following: (1) Collection and laboratory analysis of soils and/or groundwater samples to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of constituents of concern; (2) Collection and laboratory analysis of soil vapors and/or indoor air to ascertain the presence or absence of significant concentrations of volatile constituents of concern; and/or (3) Geophysical surveys to ascertain the presence or absence of subsurface features of concern such as USTs, drywells, drains, plumbing, and septic systems. The findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA shall become the basis for potential recommendations for follow-up investigation, site characterization, and/or remedial activities, if found to be warranted.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-5: In the event the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA reveal the presence of significant concentrations of hazardous materials warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of additional Phase II ESAs in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern. The findings and conclusions of the site HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-25 characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-6: If the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA(s), site characterization and/or risk assessment demonstrate the presence of concentrations of hazardous materials exceeding regulatory threshold levels, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, property owners and/or developers of properties shall complete site remediation and potential risk assessment with oversight from the applicable regulatory agency including, but not limited to, the CalEPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD). Potential remediation could include the removal or treatment of water and/or soil. If removal occurs, hazardous materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-7: Prior to the issuance of a building permit for an individual property within the Plan Area with residual environmental contamination, the agency with primary regulatory oversight of environmental conditions at such property ("Oversight Agency") shall have determined that the proposed land use for that property, including proposed development features and design, does not present an unacceptable risk to human health, if applicable, through the use of an Environmental Site Management Plan (ESMP) that could include institutional controls, site-specific mitigation measures, a risk management plan, and deed restrictions based upon applicable riskbased cleanup standards. Remedial action plans, risk management plans and health and safety plans shall be required as determined by the Oversight Agency for a given property under applicable environmental laws, if not already completed, to prevent an unacceptable risk to human health, including workers during and after construction, from exposure to residual contamination in soil and groundwater in connection with remediation and site development activities and the proposed land use.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-8: For those sites with potential residual volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil, soil gas, or groundwater that are planned for redevelopment with an overlying occupied building, a vapor intrusion assessment shall be performed by a licensed environmental professional.
If the results of the vapor intrusion assessment indicate the potential for significant vapor intrusion into the proposed building, the project design shall include vapor controls or source removal, as appropriate, in accordance with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or the Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD) requirements. Soil vapor mitigations or controls could include passive venting and/or active venting.
The vapor intrusion assessment as associated vapor controls or source removal can be incorporated into the ESMP.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-9: In the event of planned renovation or demolition of residential and/or commercial structures on the subject site, prior to the issuance of demolition permits, asbestos and lead based paint (LBP) surveys shall be conducted in order to determine the presence or absence of asbestos-containing materials (ACM) and/or LBP. Removal of friable ACM, and non-friable ACMs that have the potential to become friable, during demolition and/or renovation shall conform to the standards set forth by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs).
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is the responsible agency on the local level to enforce the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) and shall be notified by the property owners and/or developers of properties (or their designee(s)) prior to any demolition and/or renovation activities. If asbestos-containing materials are left in place, an Operations and Maintenance Program (O&M Program) shall be developed for the management of asbestos containing materials.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-10: Prior to the import of a soil to a particular property within the Plan Area as part of that property’s site development, such soils shall be sampled for toxic or hazardous materials to determine if concentrations exceed applicable Environmental Screening Levels for the proposed land use at such a property, in accordance with Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or the Fresno County Environmental Health Division (FCEHD) requirements.
Impact 3.8-2: Specific Plan implementation has the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. (Less than Significant)
The Specific Plan has the potential for the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, as described under Impact 3.8-1. There are several schools located within the Plan Area. These schools include: Glacier Point Middle School, Harvest Elementary School, Herndon-Barstow Elementary School, Teague Elementary School, John Steinbeck Elementary School, Central High School (East Campus), and Justin Garza High School. Other schools located within 0.25 miles from the Plan Area include James K. Polk Elementary School and Hanh Phan Tilley Elementary School. In addition, new schools are anticipated to be developed near to the Plan Area over time. However, as provided under Impact 3.8-1, with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.8-1 through 3.8-10, potential risks associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials resulting from implementation of the Specific Plan would be reduced to a less than significant level.
For example, Mitigation Measure 3.8-1 requires businesses generating hazardous waste to comply with a HMBP and to register with the CUPA, as appropriate. Mitigation Measure 3.8-2 provides requirements for any ground disturbance activities within 50 feet of a well. Additional requirements are provided in Mitigation Measures 3.8-3 through 3.8-10, such as Phase I and Phase II site assessments, and other remediation activities including surveys and assessments, cleanup plans, programs, and activities, as applicable. Therefore, the potential for existing or new hazards within the Plan Area or generated by the proposed project to affect nearby schools is limited. Moreover, compliance with the applicable General Plan objectives and policies would ensure that the Specific Plan implementation would have a limited potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste with one-quarter of an existing school. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact with respect to emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25-mile of an existing or proposed school.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 3.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.8-27 Impact 3.8-3: Specific Plan implementation would not result in impacts from being included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. (Less than Significant) The Plan Area is not on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
Impact 3.8-4: Specific Plan implementation would not result in safety hazards for people residing or working in the Plan Area as a result of public airport or public use airport. (Less than Significant)
There are no documented public airports or public use airports within two miles of the Plan Area, and the Plan Area is not located within an airport land use plan. The closest public or public use airport is the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, located approximately 2.5 miles to the south of the Plan Area, at its closest point. Therefore, implementation of the Plan would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
Impact 3.8-5: Specific Plan implementation would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. (Less than Significant) Future construction activities within the Plan Area could affect access along nearby roadways during construction, as short-term, temporary lane closures may occur. However, emergency access would be required to remain open and accessible at all times. Future applicants would be required to provide alternate route (i.e. detour) plans with a tentative schedule of planned closures prior to the beginning of construction to ensure that activities would not impede emergency access. These plans would be subject to review and approval by the City of Fresno Public Works Department, the Fresno Fire Department, and the Fresno Police Department. Construction activities are not expected to result in any unknown significant road closures, traffic detours, or congestion that could hinder the emergency vehicle access or evacuation in the event of an emergency.
Separately, the proposed project would develop new roadways within the Plan Area. However, the new roadways would be required to comply with the City’s police and fire standards for emergency access. Specifically, new roadways within the Plan Area would also be subject to review and approval by the City of Fresno Public Works Department, the Fresno Fire Department, and the Fresno Police Department and would provide increased access to and within the Plan Area. Therefore, roadways within the Plan Area would not impair the implementation of or physically interfere with any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Moreover, the proposed project would not conflict with the goals and objectives of the Fresno County’s Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan.
For example, Objective 1.3 of the Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan requires the improvement of transportation corridors to allow for better evacuation routes for the public and better access for emergency responders. Implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact with regards to this environmental issue.
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
3.8-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Impact 3.8-6: Specific Plan implementation would not have the potential to expose people or structures to a risk of loss, injury or death from wildland fires, or result in any other wildfire impact. (Less than Significant)
HAZARDS RELATED TO WILDLAND FIRES
The Plan Area is not located in or near to any SRA or land classified as VHFHSZs. Small areas within the northern, central, and southern portions of the Plan Area are identified as having a moderate potential for wildland fires. According to the Fresno General Plan, the City is largely urbanized or working agricultural land without steep topographies; thus, wildland fire threats are minimal.
Although Fresno is proximate to high and very high fire hazard designated areas, the City is largely categorized as little or no threat or moderate fire hazard, which is largely attributed to paved areas.
Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in increased urbanization of the area; including increased paved area. Future development would be required to comply with the current fire code (i.e. included in the Fresno Fire Code Section as established by the City of Fresno Fire Department), as well as all applicable City Municipal Code requirements. For example, City Municipal Code Chapter 11, Article 1 provides building code requirements, and City Municipal Code Chapter 10, Article 5 describes the City’s fire prevention requirements including adoption of the 2019 California Fire Code. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact with regards to the potential to expose people or structures to a risk of loss, injury, or death from wildland fires.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-1 This section describes the regulatory setting, regional hydrology and water quality impacts that are likely to result from Specific Plan implementation, and measures to reduce potential impacts to water quality. This section is based in part on the following documents, reports and studies:
• Fresno General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014);
• Draft Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update, City of Fresno, Fresno County, California (City of Fresno, 2014); • California’s Groundwater Update 2020 (Department of Water Resources [DWR], 2020); • Web Soil Survey (NRCS, 2019);
• Specific Plan of the West Area Water Supply Assessment (West Yost Associates, 2022, see Appendix F of this EIR);
• City of Fresno Specific Plan for the West Area Utility Background Summary (West Yost Associates, 2022, see Appendix D of this EIR).
Comments were received during the public review period or scoping meeting for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic from the following: Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) (August 1, 2019), Cathy Caples (August 1, 2019), and California Department of Water Resources (July 19, 2019). Each of the comments related to this topic are addressed within this section. Full comments received are included in Appendix A.
3.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
REGIONAL HYDROLOGY
Fresno County is located in the San Joaquin River watershed. The San Joaquin River is about 300 miles long. It begins in the Sierra Nevada mountain range on California’s eastern border. The river runs down the western slope of the Sierra and flows roughly northwest through the Central Valley, to where it meets the Sacramento River at the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, a 1,000-square-mile maze of channels and islands that drains more than 40 percent of the state’s lands (SJRGA 2013).
Because the Central Valley receives relatively little rainfall (12 to 17 inches a year, falling mostly October through March), snowmelt runoff from the mountains is the main source of fresh water in the San Joaquin River. Over its 300-mile length, the San Joaquin River is fed by many other streams and rivers, most notably the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced rivers.
Most of the surface water in the upper San Joaquin River is stored and diverted at Millerton Lakes’ Friant Dam, near Fresno. From Friant Dam, water gravity flows north through the Madera Canal and south through the Friant-Kern canal to irrigation districts and other water retailers, which then deliver the water directly to the end users in the southern portion of the watershed.
In the central and northern portions of the watershed, many agricultural and municipal users receive water from irrigation districts, such as the Modesto, Merced, Oakdale, South San Joaquin and Turlock Irrigation Districts. That water is provided through diversions from rivers that are tributary to the San Joaquin, such as the Mokelumne, Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced rivers.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Climate
The summer climate is hot and sub-humid with warm, dry summers, and cool, moist winters. In the entire San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB), daily summer high temperatures average 95 degrees.
Over the last 30 years, temperatures in the SJVAB averaged 90 degrees or higher for 106 days a year, and 100 degrees or higher for 40 days a year.
The daily summer temperature variation can be as high as 30 degrees. In winter, the Pacific highpressure cell weakens and shifts southward, resulting in wind flow offshore, the absence of upwelling, and the occurrence of storms. Average high temperatures in the winter are in the 50s, but lows in the 30s and 40s can occur on days with persistent fog and low cloudiness. The average daily low winter temperature is 45 degrees.
Precipitation in Fresno occurs mostly as rain during the months of November through April.
According to the City’s General Plan EIR, annual rainfall between 1948 and 2012 averaged 10.89 inches, but is variable. Recorded annual rainfall has ranged from a low of 3.01 inches to a high of
21.61 inches.
Watersheds
A watershed is a region that is bound by a divide that drains to a common watercourse or body of water. Watersheds serve an important biological function, oftentimes supporting an abundance of aquatic and terrestrial wildlife including special-status species and anadromous and native local fisheries. Watersheds provide conditions necessary for riparian habitat.
The State of California uses a hierarchical naming and numbering convention to define watershed areas for management purposes. This means that boundaries are defined according to size and topography, with multiple sub-watersheds within larger watersheds. Table 3.9-1 shows the primary watershed classification levels used by the State of California. The second column indicates the approximate size that a watershed area may be within a particular classification level, although variation in size is common.
TABLE 3.9-1: STATE OF CALIFORNIA WATERSHED HIERARCHY NAMING CONVENTION
WATERSHED
LEVEL
APPROXIMATE
SQUARE MILES
(ACRES)
DESCRIPTION
Hydrologic
Region (HR) 12,735 (8,150,000) Defined by large-scale topographic and geologic considerations. The State of California is divided into ten HRs.
Hydrologic
Unit (HU)
672
(430,000)
Defined by surface drainage; may include a major river watershed, groundwater basin, or closed drainage, among others.
Hydrologic
Area (HA)
244
(156,000)
Major subdivisions of hydrologic units, such as by major tributaries, groundwater attributes, or stream components.
Hydrologic
Sub-Area (HSA)
195
(125,000)
A major segment of an HA with significant geographical
characteristics or hydrological homogeneity.
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, 2012.
Additionally, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) maintains a national database of watersheds in the United States. The USGS maintains a hierarchical system of hydrologic units, with HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-3 each unit assigned a Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC). There are currently six levels in the hierarchy, represented by HUC codes from 2 to 12 digits long, called regions, subregions, subbasins, watersheds, and subwatersheds. Each level in the hierarchy is nested within the previous level. Table
3.9-2 shows the system’s hydrologic unit levels and their characteristics.
TABLE 3.9-2: USGS WATERSHED HIERARCHY NAMING CONVENTION
HYDROLOGIC UNIT LEVEL DIGIT NUMBER OF HUCS NAME
Region 1 2 22 Two-Digit Hydrologic Unit
Subregion 2 4 219 Four-Digit Hydrologic Unit
Basin 3 6 378 Six-Digit Hydrologic Unit
Subbasin 4 8 2,283 Eight-Digit Hydrologic Unit
Watershed 5 10 17,828 Ten-Digit Hydrologic Unit
Subwatershed 6 12 97,442 Twelve-Digit Hydrologic Unit
SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, WATERSHED BOUNDARY DATASET, 2016.
The southern and eastern portion of the Plan Area is located in the Gates Lake subwatershed, a swath of the northern portion of the Plan Area is located in the Town of Rolinda-James Bypass subwatershed, and the northern point of the Plan Area is located in the Kennedy Owens Canal-James Bypass subwatershed. The “subwatershed” (i.e. twelve-digit hydrologic unit) represents the most fine-grained level of data available for watersheds from the USGS. Figure 3.9-1 provides a map of these subwatersheds within the Plan Area.
Hydrologic Region
Fresno County is located in the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region. The Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region covers approximately 10.9 million acres (17,000 square miles) and includes all of Kings and Tulare counties and most of Fresno and Kern counties. Significant geographic features include the southern half of the San Joaquin Valley, the Temblor Range to the west, the Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the southern Sierra Nevada to the east. The region has 12 distinct groundwater basins and seven subbasins of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. Groundwater has historically been important to both urban and agricultural uses, accounting for 41 percent of the region’s total annual supply and 35 percent of all groundwater use in the State. Groundwater use in the region represents about 10 percent of the State’s overall supply for agricultural and urban uses. In general, groundwater quality throughout the Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region is suitable for most urban and agricultural uses with only local impairments. The primary constituents of concern are high total dissolved solids, nitrate, arsenic, and organic compounds.
Groundwater
The City of Fresno is located in the northern part of the Kings Subbasin of the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Area. The San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin is un-adjudicated and currently in overdraft. A basin management plan has been developed and the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has listed the basin as a high priority.
The following section describes the Kings Subbasin, including its water-bearing formations, water levels, and water quality. Much of the following information has been incorporated from the City’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Except where noted, the description of the sub-basin
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan is based largely on information provided in the 2016 DWR Bulletin 118 Interim Update, in which the groundwater basin description was last updated in December 2016.
The Kings Subbasin is not adjudicated and there are no legal restrictions to groundwater pumping.
The Kings Subbasin is generally bounded on the north by the San Joaquin River; on the west by the Fresno Slough; on the south by the Kings River and Cottonwood Creek; and on the east by the Sierra foothills. The upper several hundred feet within the Kings Subbasin generally consists of highly permeable, coarse-grained deposits, which are termed older alluvium. Coarse-grained stream channel deposits, associated with deposits by the ancestral San Joaquin and Kings Rivers, underlie much of the northwest portions of the City. Below the older alluvium to depths ranging from about 600 to 1,200 feet below ground surface, the finer-grained sediments of the Tertiary-Quaternary continental deposits are typically encountered. Substantial groundwater has been produced and utilized from these depths by the City; however, deeper deposits located in the southeastern and northern portions of the City have produced less groundwater. There are also reduced deposits in the northern and eastern portions of the City, at depths generally below 700 or 800 feet, which are associated with high concentrations of iron, manganese, arsenic, hydrogen sulfide, and methane gas. Groundwater at these depths does not generally provide a significant source for municipal supply wells. The City’s average groundwater depth in 2015 is approximately 130 below the ground surface.
Groundwater quality is a concern because the groundwater basin has several major contaminant plumes involving organic compounds, inorganic compounds, solvents, pesticides, and other contaminants. A number of the City’s wells are currently being treated or blended to address various contaminants. The total well capacity, when the City’s Water Master Plan was written, was approximately 460 million gallons per day (mgd).
According to the Utility Background Summary completed for the Specific Plan, groundwater within the Kings Subbasin generally meets primary and secondary drinking water standards1for municipal water use. However, groundwater contamination has caused the City to close over 30 wells and to construct well-head treatment facilities to other wells. Wellhead treatment for 1,2- Dibromo-3- chloropropane; ethylene dibromide; 1-2-3 trichloropropane; volatile organic compounds (including trichlorethylene, tetrachloroethylene), nitrate, manganese, radon, chloride, and iron are required in some areas of the City. Nitrates are a significant cause of groundwater contamination in the City. 1 EPA has established National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) that set mandatory water quality standards for drinking water contaminants. These are enforceable standards called "maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) which are established to protect the public against consumption of drinking water contaminants that present a risk to human health. An MCL is the maximum allowable amount of a contaminant in drinking water which is delivered to the consumer.
In addition, EPA has established National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations (NSDWRs) that set nonmandatory water quality standards for 15 contaminants. EPA does not enforce these "secondary maximum contaminant levels" (SMCLs). They are established as guidelines to assist public water systems in managing their drinking water for aesthetic considerations, such as taste, color, and odor. These contaminants are not considered to present a risk to human health at the SMCL. (EPA website, https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/secondary-drinking-water-standards-guidance-nuisance-chemicals) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-5 Nitrates come primarily from on-site wastewater treatment systems (septic tanks and leach fields) and fertilizer. Water contaminated with nitrate is difficult to treat. A transmission grid main (TGM) system on a half-mile grid decreases water quality variation between wells. While most wells discharge directly to the TGM system, there are some that are treated or blended first to address specific water quality issues. Twelve well sites City-wide have de-aeration facilities where groundwater is pumped to a tank to allow for de-aeration before entering the TGM (West Yost, 2014). With wellhead treatment and/or blending, the water supplied by the City meets all the primary and secondary drinking water standards for municipal water use and is safe and healthy to consume.
As part of a partnership of local municipal water purveyors, irrigation districts, a flood control district, and the overlying county, the Fresno Area Regional Groundwater Management Plan (FARGMP) was prepared in conformance with AB 3030 and SB 1938. The objectives of the FARGMP have been developed to monitor, protect, and sustain groundwater within the region. The City of Fresno and the other participating agencies subsequently adopted the groundwater management plan in 2006. The City of Fresno falls within the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (NKGSA). As a high priority basin, the Kings Subbasin must be managed under a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) by January 31, 2020. The NKGSA completed the GSP on January 28, 2020.
LOCAL SETTING
The Plan Area is relatively flat with natural gentle slope near State Route 99. The Plan Area topography ranges in elevation from approximately 283 to 315 feet above mean sea level. A large amount of land in the Plan Area is farmland or rural residential lots with large, uneven, and underutilized parcels.
Groundwater
The Plan Area is underlain by the Kings subbasin, which, along with six other sub‐basins, comprises the San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin. According to the Utility Background Summary completed for the Specific Plan, until 2004, groundwater was the sole source of potable water supply for the City. As of 2018, there were approximately 260 operational groundwater wells with a total production of 25,000 million gallons per year.
GROUNDWATER WELLS IN THE PLAN AREA
The Plan Area is served by eight active wells, as summarized in Table 3.9-3. As shown, the total well pumping capacity of the wells in the Plan Area is 13,510 gallons per minute (gpm).
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan TABLE 3.9-3: PLAN AREA WELL CAPACITY
WELL NUMBER PUMP HORSEPOWER RATED CAPACITY (GPM)1
Well 104 125 1,500
Well 138 125 1,800
Well 169 200 2,400
Well 171-1 60 600
Well 171-2 150 1,750
Well 192 150 2,000
Well 358 (has backup power) 200 2,100
Well 364 100 1,000
Total Well Pumping Capacity (GPM) 13,150
NOTE:
1 PUMP CAPACITY AND BACKUP POWER INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CITY STAFF (GPM = GALLONS PER MINUTE).
SOURCE: UTILITY BACKGROUND REPORT, WEST YOST ASSOCIATES, 2022.
GROUNDWATER QUALITY
According to the Utility Background Summary completed for the Specific Plan, the Plan Area tends to have better ground water quality than the City as a whole, with only a small portion of the Plan Area (near State Route 99) having nitrates in excess of the allowable limit of 45 mg/L as NO3 or 10 mg/L as NO3N. Well 171-2 is the only well that requires treatment within the West Area, and uses granular activated carbon (GAC).
Drainage
The Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) has primary responsibility for managing the local stormwater flows for the City, as well as a large area beyond the City’s boundaries. The City’s stormwater drains to urban stormwater basins, where it is retained for groundwater recharge or pumped to local irrigation canals owned by Fresno Irrigation District (FID) and then conveyed away from the municipal area.
The City of Fresno is located in the alluvial fans of numerous foothill streams and creeks that drain the western slope of the Sierra Nevada foothills. These streams include Big Dry Creek, Alluvial Drain, Pup Creek, Dog Creek, Redbank Creek, Mud Creek, and Fancher Creek. The City has hot dry summers and cool mild winters, with temperatures of mid-90°F in the summer and 60°F in the winter. The precipitation averages 11 inches per year and occurs almost entirely in the fall, winter, and spring.
Regionally, the City is protected by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Redbank-Fancher Creeks Flood Control Project. This project includes dams, detention basins, and levees designed to control upstream flood flows to approximately the 200-year storm event. Major facilities of this project include levee systems, the Big Dry Creek, Fancher Creek, and Redbank Creek dams and reservoirs, and the Alluvial Drain, Redbank Creek, Pup Creek, Fancher Creek, Big Dry Creek, Pup Creek Enterprise, and Dry Creek Extension detention basins.
Locally, the FMFCD drainage system consists of approximately 680 miles of pipeline and more than 150 stormwater retention basins. The storm drainage pipeline system is designed to accept the peak flow rate of runoff from a two-year intensity storm event (a storm that has a 50 percent probability of occurring in any given year). When storm events occur that exceed the two-year intensity, HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-7 ponding begins to occur in the streets until the pipeline system can remove the water. In the event of larger storms, “major storm breakover”, the FMFCD has planned for streets or other conveyance to move the excess runoff to the basins. The FMFCD facilities in the Plan Area are shown in Figure
3.9-2.
The drainage system discharges to a system of irrigation canals, creeks, and the San Joaquin River, but is designed to retain and infiltrate as much runoff as possible into the underlying groundwater aquifer. The local drainage service area is subdivided into over 160 drainage areas, most of which drain to a retention basin. Drainage channels within the Plan Area include:
• East Branch Victoria Canal • Teague School Canal
• Epstein Canal • Tracy Ditch
• Herndon Canal • West Branch Victoria Canal
• Minor Thornton Ditch • Wheaton Ditch
• Silvia Ditch • Austin Ditch
The Plan Area is drained by 15 drainage watersheds, six of which are fully within the Plan Area, and nine of which drain to areas immediately south or west of the Plan Area. There are seven existing retention basins within the Plan Area and an additional five that serve the Plan Area. An additional basin is planned to serve the drainage shed in the far southwestern corner of the Plan Area. The Plan Area’s storm drain system is shown on Figure 3.15-2 in Section 3.15, Utilities.
Flooding
Flooding events can result in damage to structures, injury or loss of human and animal life, exposure of waterborne diseases, and damage to infrastructure. In addition, standing floodwater can destroy agricultural crops, undermine infrastructure and structural foundations, and contaminate groundwater.
Predicted flood conditions in the vicinity of the Plan Area are shown on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) but are largely based on hydraulic modeling performed in 1981 (FEMA, 2016). The entire Plan Area is designated unshaded Zone X - minimal flood hazard, and would not be expected to have a flood hazard up to the level of the 0.2- percent annual chance flood. Lands designated as unshaded Zone X are outside of the Special Flood Hazard Areas. Changes to land surfaces in these areas do not trigger map revisions and no flood insurance requirements are imposed on structures in these areas. Figure 3.9-3 shows the flood boundaries, as delineated by the FEMA FIRM and USACE.
Although the Plan Area’s northern boundary is very near the San Joaquin River, the area is not within a Special Flood Hazard Area. Local flooding can occur for events larger than a two-year event, but runoff is generally contained in the streets or other breakover easements. Such flooding is not reflected on FEMA’s maps. Improvements to storm drainage facilities are accomplished either as a part of privately funded on-site developments or as a part of the master plan, funded by drainage fees. FMFCD maintains an on-going update to the system hydraulic model for flood control and prepares a capital improvement plan update every five years.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Dam Failure
A small portion of the Plan Area located in the northernmost point is located within the dam failure inundation area for the Friant Dam. Potential inundation from the Friant Dam is shown in Figure 3.9-
4. Dam failure is generally a result of structural instability caused by improper design or construction, instability resulting from seismic shaking, or overtopping and erosion of the dam. Larger dams that are higher than 25 feet or with storage capacities over 50 acre-feet of water are regulated by the California Dam Safety Act, which is implemented by the California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (DSD). The DSD is responsible for inspecting and monitoring these dams.
The Act also requires that dam owners submit to the California Office of Emergency Services inundation maps for dams that would cause significant loss of life or personal injury as a result of dam failure. The Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan outlines the mitigation strategy for reducing potential losses identified in Chapter 4, Risk Assessment, of the Plan.
Stormwater Quality
Potential hazards to surface water quality include the following nonpoint pollution problems: high turbidity from sediment resulting from erosion of improperly graded construction projects, concentration of nitrates and dissolved solids from agriculture or surfacing septic tank failures, contaminated street and lawn run-off from urban areas, and warm water drainage discharges into cold water streams.
The most critical period for surface water quality is following a rainstorm which can produce significant amounts of drainage runoff into streams at low flow, resulting in poor dilution of contaminates in the low flowing stream. Such conditions are most frequent during the fall at the beginning of the rainy season when stream flows are near their lowest annual levels. Besides the greases, oils, pesticides, litter, and organic matter associated with such runoff, heavy metals such as copper, zinc, and cadmium can cause considerable harm to aquatic organisms when introduced to streams in low flow conditions.
Urban stormwater runoff was managed as a non-point discharge (a source not readily identifiable) under the Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500, Section 208) until the mid-1980's. However, since then, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency has continued to develop implementing rules which categorize urban runoff as a point source (an identifiable source) subject to National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. Rules now affect medium and large urban areas, and further rulemaking is expected as programs are developed to meet requirements of federal water pollution control laws.
Surface water pollution is also caused by erosion. Excessive and improperly managed grading, vegetation removal, quarrying, logging, and agricultural practices all lead to increased erosion of exposed earth and sedimentation of watercourses during rainy periods. In slower moving water bodies these same factors often cause a buildup of siltation, which ultimately reduces the capacity of the water system to percolate and recharge groundwater basins, as well as adversely affecting both aquatic resources and flood control efforts.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-9 The current drainage system in the Plan Area discharges to a system of irrigation canals, creeks, and the San Joaquin River, but is designed to retain and infiltrate as much runoff as possible into the underlying groundwater aquifer.
303(D)IMPAIRED WATER BODIES
Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.
The primary surface water features within the vicinity of the Plan Area are the San Joaquin River and Millerton Lake. Both water features are considered Section 303(d) impaired waterbodies. The portion of the San Joaquin River nearest the Plan Area appears on the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) Impaired Water Bodies/303(d) List for invasive species (non‐native fish species).
Millerton Lake is included on the Impaired Water Bodies/303(d) List for mercury.
3.9.2REGULATORY SETTING
There are a number of regulatory agencies whose responsibility includes the oversight of the water resources of the State and nation (including Fresno County), including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the State Water Resources Control Board, and the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards, including the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. The following is an overview of the federal, State and local regulations that are applicable to the proposed Specific Plan.
FEDERAL
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA), initially passed in 1972, regulates the discharge of pollutants into watersheds throughout the nation. Section 402(p) of the act establishes a framework for regulating municipal and industrial stormwater discharges under the NPDES Program. Section 402(p) requires that stormwater discharges associated with an industrial activity, a discharge from a municipal separate storm sewer system serving a population of 250,000 or more, or a discharge associated with a municipal separate storm sewer system serving a population of 100,000 or more but less than 250,000, that discharges either directly to surface waters or indirectly through municipal separate storm sewers must be regulated by an NPDES permit.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
The City of Fresno is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), a Federal program administered by FEMA. Participants in the NFIP must satisfy certain mandated floodplain management criteria. The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 has adopted as a desired level of
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan protection, an expectation that developments should be protected from floodwater damage of the Intermediate Regional Flood (IRF). The IRF is defined as a flood that has an average frequency of occurrence on the order of once in 100 years, although such a flood may occur in any given year.
Communities are occasionally audited by the DWR and FEMA to insure the proper implementation of FEMA floodplain management regulations.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are required for discharges of pollutants to navigable waters of the United States, which includes any discharge to surface waters, including lakes, rivers, streams, bays, the ocean, dry stream beds, wetlands, and storm sewers that are tributary to any surface water body. NPDES permits are issued under the Federal Clean Water Act, Title IV, Permits and Licenses, Section 402 (33 USC 466 et seq.).
The RWQCB issues these permits in lieu of direct issuance by the Environmental Protection Agency, subject to review and approval by the Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrator. The terms of these NPDES permits implement pertinent provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act and its implementing regulations, including pre-treatment, sludge management, effluent limitations for specific industries, and anti-degradation. In general, the discharge of pollutants is to be eliminated or reduced as much as practicable so as to achieve the Clean Water Act goal of “fishable and swimmable” navigable (surface) waters. Technically, all NPDES permits issued by the RWQCB are also Waste Discharge Requirements issued under the authority of the CWA.
NPDES permits regulate discharges from publicly owned treatment works, industrial discharges, stormwater runoff, dewatering operations, and groundwater cleanup discharges. NPDES permits are issued for five years, and are therefore to be updated regularly. The SWRCB has adopted several general NPDES permits, each of which regulates numerous discharges of similar types of wastes. The SWRCB has issued general permits for stormwater runoff from industrial and construction sites statewide. Stormwater discharges from industrial and construction activities in the Central Valley Region can be covered under these general permits, which are administered jointly by the SWRCB and RWQCB.
The City of Fresno is a co‐permittee with the FMFCD, the County of Fresno, the City of Clovis, and California State University Fresno in the Phase 1 NPDES Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s). This Phase 1 MS4 Permit requires that the City and its co‐permittees implement water quality and watershed protection measures for all development projects. The waste discharge requirements contained in the NPDES Permit have been designed to be consistent with the water quality standards and goals established in the Central Valley RWQCB’s Basin Plan. The Phase 1 MS4 Permit prohibits discharges from violating applicable water quality standards or creating a nuisance or water quality impairment in receiving waters.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-11 STATE
California Water Code
The Federal Clean Water Act places the primary responsibility for the control of surface water pollution and for planning the development and use of water resources with the States, although this does establish certain guidelines for the States to follow in developing their programs and allows the Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw control from States with inadequate implementation mechanisms.
California’s primary statute governing water quality and water pollution issues with respect to both surface waters and groundwater is the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1970 (Division 7 of the California Water Code) (Porter-Cologne Act). The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and each of the RWQCBs power to protect water quality, and is the primary vehicle for implementation of California’s responsibilities under the Federal Clean Water Act. The Porter-Cologne Act grants the SWRCB and the RWQCBs authority and responsibility to adopt plans and policies, to regulate discharges to surface and groundwater, to regulate waste disposal sites and to require cleanup of discharges of hazardous materials and other pollutants. The Porter-Cologne Act also establishes reporting requirements for unintended discharges of any hazardous substance, sewage, or oil or petroleum product.
Each RWQCB must formulate and adopt a water quality control plan (Basin Plan) for its region the regional plans are to conform to the policies set forth in the Porter-Cologne Act and established by the SWRCB in its State water policy. The Porter-Cologne Act also provides that a RWQCB may include within its regional plan water discharge prohibitions applicable to particular conditions, areas, or types of waste.
The Water Code Section 13260 requires all dischargers of waste that may affect water quality in waters of the state to prepare and provide a water quality discharge report to the RWQCB. Section 13260a-c is as follows:
(a) Each of the following persons shall file with the appropriate regional board a report of the discharge, containing the information that may be required by the regional board:
(1) A person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, within any region that could affect the quality of the waters of the state, other than into a community sewer system.
(2) A person who is a citizen, domiciliary, or political agency or entity of this state discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, outside the boundaries of the state in a manner that could affect the quality of the waters of the state within any region. (3) A person operating, or proposing to construct, an injection well. (b) No report of waste discharge need be filed pursuant to subdivision (a) if the requirement is waived pursuant to Section 13269.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan (c) Each person subject to subdivision (a) shall file with the appropriate regional board a report of waste discharge relative to any material change or proposed change in the character, location, or volume of the discharge.
State Water Resources Control Board
The SWRCB is responsible for implementing the Clean Water Act and does so through issuing NPDES permits to cities and counties through regional water quality control boards. Federal regulations allow two permitting options for stormwater discharges (individual permits and general permits).
The SWRCB elected to adopt a statewide general permit (Water Quality Order No. 2013-001-DWQDWQ) for small municipal separate storm sewer systems.
LOCAL
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan establishes the following policies relative to hydrology and water quality:
NOISE AND SAFETY ELEMENT
Objective NS-3: Minimize the risks to property, life, and the environment due to flooding and stormwater runoff hazards.
Policy NS-3-a: Stormwater Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan. Support the full implementation of the FMFCD Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan, the completion of planned flood control and drainage system facilities, and the continued maintenance of stormwater and flood water retention and conveyance facilities and capacities. Work with the FMFCD to make sure that its Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan is consistent with the General Plan.
Policy NS-3-b: Curb and Gutter Installation. Coordinate with Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) to install curbing, gutters, and other drainage facilities with priority to existing neighborhoods with the greatest deficiencies and consistent with the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan.
Policy NS-3-c: Dual Use Facilities. Support multiple uses of flood control and drainage facilities as follows:
• Use, wherever practical, FMFCD facilities for groundwater management and recharge; and
• Promote recreational development of ponding basin facilities located within or near residential areas, compatible with the stormwater and groundwater recharge functions.
Policy NS-3-d: Landscaped Buffer. City will support the development of FMFCD ponding basins including the landscaping and irrigation for the top one third of the side sloped areas consistent with the FMFCD Basin Design Criteria.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-13 Policy NS-3-e: Pollutants. Work with FMFCD to prevent and reduce the existence of urban stormwater pollutants pursuant to the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems Act.
Policy NS-3-f: Flooding Emergency Response Plans. Work with responsible agencies to update emergency dam failure inundation plans, evacuation plans and other emergency response plans for designated flood-prone areas, including the San Joaquin riverbottom.
Policy NS-3-g: Essential Facilities Siting Outside of Floodplains. Avoid siting emergency response and essential public facilities, such as fire and police stations, within a 100-year floodplain, unless it can be demonstrated that the facility can be safely operated and accessed during flood events.
Policy NS-3-h: Runoff Controls. Implement grading regulations and related development policies that protect area residents from flooding caused by urban runoff produced from events that exceed the capacity of the Storm Drainage and Flood Control Master Plan system of facilities. Place all structures and/or flood-proofing in a manner that does not cause floodwaters to be diverted onto adjacent property, increase flood hazards to other property, or otherwise adversely affect other property.
Policy NS-3-i: New Development Must Mitigate Impact. Require new development to not significantly impact the existing storm drainage and flood control system by imposing conditions of approval as project mitigation, as authorized by law. As part of this process, closely coordinate and consult with the FMFCD to identify appropriate conditions that will result in mitigation acceptable and preferred by FMFCD for each project.
Policy NS-3-j: National Flood Insurance Program. Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by ensuring compliance with applicable requirements.
Review NFIP maps periodically to determine if areas subject to flooding have been added or removed and make adjustments to the Land Use Diagram Figure LU-1.
Policy NS-3-k: 100-Year Floodplain Policy. Require developers of residential subdivisions to preserve those portions of development sites as open space that may be subject to 100- year flood events, unless the flood hazard can be substantially mitigated by development project design.
Policy NS-3-l: 200-Year Floodplain Protection. Promote flood control measures that maintain natural conditions within the 200-year floodplain of rivers and streams and, to the extent possible, combine flood control, recreation, water quality, and open space functions.
Discourage construction of permanent improvements that would be adversely affected by periodic floods within the 200-year floodplain, particularly in the San Joaquin river bottom.
Policy NS-3-m: Flood Risk Public Awareness. Continue public awareness programs to inform the general public and potentially affected property owners of flood hazards and potential dam failure inundation. Remind households and businesses located in flood-prone areas of opportunities to purchase flood insurance.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy NS-3-n: Precipitation Changes. Work with FMFCD to evaluate the planned and existing stormwater conveyance system in light of possible changes to precipitation patterns in the future.
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT
Objective PU-5: Preserve groundwater quality and ensure that the health and safety of the entire Fresno community is not impaired by use of private, on-site disposal systems.
Objective PU-8: Manage and develop the City’s water facilities on a strategic timeline basis that recognizes the long life cycle of the assets and the duration of the resources, to ensure a safe, economical, and reliable water supply for existing customers and planned urban development and economic diversification.
Policy PU-8-f: Water Quality. Continue to evaluate and implement measures determined to be appropriate and consistent with water system policies, including prioritizing the use of groundwater, installing wellhead treatment facilities, constructing above-ground storage and surface water treatment facilities, and enhancing transmission grid mains to promote adequate water quality and quantity.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RESILIENCE ELEMENT
Objective RC-6: Ensure that Fresno has a reliable, long-range source of drinkable water.
Policy RC-6-g: Protect Recharge Areas. Continue to protect areas of beneficial natural groundwater recharge by preventing uses that can contaminate soil or groundwater.
Policy RC-6-i: Natural Recharge. Support removal of concrete from existing canals and change the practice of lining new and existing canals with concrete to allow for natural recharge.
PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND SCHOOLS ELEMENT
Objective POSS-6: Maintain and restore, where feasible, the ecological values of the San Joaquin River corridor.
Policy POSS-6-b: Effects of Stormwater Discharge. Support efforts to identify and mitigate cumulative adverse effects on aquatic life from stormwater discharge to the San Joaquin River.
• Avoid discharge of runoff from urban uses to the San Joaquin River or other riparian corridors.
• Approve development on sites having drainage (directly or indirectly) to the San Joaquin River or other riparian areas only upon a finding that adequate measures for preventing pollution of natural bodies of water from their runoff will be implemented.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-15 • Periodically monitor water quality and sediments near drainage outfalls to riparian areas. Institute remedial measures promptly if unacceptable levels of contaminant(s) occur.
Fresno Municipal Code
Chapter 6, Municipal Services and Utilities, Article 7, Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control, of the Fresno Municipal Code establishes provisions regarding stormwater discharges. The purpose and intent of Article 7 is to ensure the health, safety, and general welfare of residents, and to protect the water quality of surface water and groundwater resources in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Federal CWA by reducing pollutants in urban stormwater, discharges to the maximum extent practicable, and by effectively prohibiting non‐ stormwater discharges to the storm drain system.
Chapter 12, Impact Fees, Historic Resources, and Other Miscellaneous Topics, Section 12-2304, Development Application, Infrastructure Improvement Plans, and Building Permit Review and Processing Timelines, outlines the City’s grading plan check process. The grading plan check process is a review process that requires anyone who develops property:
1. Properly grade their property in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC).
2. Submit a grading plan showing the proposed grading of the development.
3. Obtain approval of the FMFCD indicating conformance of the grading plan with the Storm Drainage Master Plan.
4. Obtain coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit and comply with the requirements of the permit, including developing an erosion control site plan.
FMFCD Storm Drainage Master Plan
The Storm Drainage Master Plan contains proposed elevations for tops of curbs in undeveloped areas, delineation of storm drain inlet watershed areas, collection system pipeline alignments and sizes, and retention basin or urban detention (water quality) basin locations and geometry. The development of land in conformance with the Storm Drainage Master Plan ensures that development is graded to drain to storm drainage facilities that are designed to collect and dispose of stormwater from the planned development.
North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency Groundwater Sustainability Plan
The NKGSA finalized the Groundwater Sustainability Plan and submitted it to the DWR on January 28, 2020. The sustainability goal of the Kings Subbasin and the NKGSA is to ensure that by 2040 the basin is being managed to maintain a reliable water supply for current and future beneficial uses without experiencing undesirable results.
Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin The Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan) includes a summary of beneficial water uses, water quality objectives needed to protect the identified
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan beneficial uses, and implementation measures. The Basin Plan establishes water quality standards for all the ground and surface waters of the region. The term “water quality standards,” as used in the Federal Clean Water Act, includes both the beneficial uses of specific water bodies and the levels of quality that must be met and maintained to protect those uses. The Basin Plan includes an implementation plan describing the actions by the RWQCB and others that are necessary to achieve and maintain the water quality standards.
The RWQCB regulates waste discharges to minimize and control their effects on the quality of the region’s ground and surface water. Permits are issued under a number of programs and authorities.
The terms and conditions of these discharge permits are enforced through a variety of technical, administrative, and legal means. Water quality problems in the region are listed in the Basin Plan, along with the causes, where they are known. For water bodies with quality below the levels necessary to allow all the beneficial uses of the water to be met, plans for improving water quality are included. The Basin Plan reflects, incorporates, and implements applicable portions of a number of national and statewide water quality plans and policies, including the California Water Code and the Clean Water Act.
3.9.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Specific Plan will have a significant impact on the environment associated with hydrology and water quality if it will:
• Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.
• Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.
• 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:
o Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; o Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
o 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;
• In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation;
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-17
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Impact 3.9-1: The Specific Plan would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction. (Less than Significant)
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, polluted stormwater runoff is a leading cause of impairment to the nearly 40 percent of surveyed U.S. water bodies which do not meet water quality standards. Over land or via storm sewer systems, polluted runoff is discharged, often untreated, directly into local water bodies. Soil erosion is one of the most common sources of polluted stormwater runoff during construction activities. When left uncontrolled, storm water runoff can erode soil and cause sedimentation in waterways, which collectively result in the destruction of fish, wildlife, and aquatic life habitats; a loss in aesthetic value; and threats to public health due to contaminated food, drinking water supplies, and recreational waterways.
Mandated by Congress under the Clean Water Act, the NPDES Stormwater Program is a comprehensive two-phased national program for addressing the non-agricultural sources of stormwater discharges which adversely affect the quality of our nation's waters. The program uses the NPDES permitting mechanism to require the implementation of controls designed to prevent harmful pollutants, including soil erosion, from being washed by stormwater runoff into local water bodies. Future construction activities for the proposed Specific Plan would be governed by the General Permit 2009-0009-DWQ (amended by 2010-0014-DWQ & 2012-0006-DWQ), which states:
“…Particular attention must be paid to large, mass graded sites where the potential for soil exposure to the erosive effects of rainfall and wind is great and where there is potential for significant sediment discharge from the site to surface waters. Until permanent vegetation is established, soil cover is the most cost-effective and expeditious method to protect soil particles from detachment and transport by rainfall. Temporary soil stabilization can be the single most important factor in reducing erosion at construction sites. The discharger is required to consider measures such as: covering disturbed areas with mulch, temporary seeding, soil stabilizers, binders, fiber rolls or blankets, temporary vegetation, and permanent seeding. These erosion control measures are only examples of what should be considered and should not preclude new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed. Erosion control BMPs should be the primary means of preventing storm water contamination, and sediment control techniques should be used to capture any soil that becomes eroded…”
General Permit 2009-0009-DWQ (amended by 2010-0014-DWQ & 2012-0006-DWQ) further states that:
“Sediment control BMPs should be the secondary means of preventing storm water contamination. When erosion control techniques are ineffective, sediment control techniques should be used to capture any soil that becomes eroded. The discharger is required to consider perimeter control measures such as: installing silt fences or placing straw wattles below slopes. These sediment control measures are only examples of what
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan should be considered and should not preclude new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed…Inappropriate management of run-on and runoff can result in excessive physical impacts to receiving waters from sediment and increased flows. The discharger is required to manage all run-on and runoff from a Specific Plan Area. Examples include: installing berms and other temporary run-on and runoff diversions…All measures must be periodically inspected, maintained and repaired to ensure that receiving water quality is protected. Frequent inspections coupled with thorough documentation and timely repair is necessary to ensure that all measures are functioning as intended…” Grading, excavation, removal of vegetation cover, and loading activities associated with construction activities could temporarily increase runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. Construction activities also could result in soil compaction and wind erosion effects that could adversely affect soils and reduce the revegetation potential at construction sites and staging areas. To ensure that construction activities are covered under General Permit 2009-0009-DWQ (amended by 2010-0014- DWQ & 2012-0006-DWQ), projects in California must prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) containing Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and sediments to meet water quality standards. Such BMPs may include: temporary erosion control measures such as silt fences, staked straw bales/wattles, silt/sediment basins and traps, check dams, geofabric, sandbag dikes, and temporary revegetation or other ground cover. The BMPs and overall SWPPP is reviewed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City of Fresno as part of the permitting process. The SWPPP, once approved, is kept on site and implemented during construction activities and must be made available upon request to representatives of the RWQCB and/or the City of Fresno.
In accordance with the NPDES Stormwater Program, future development projects disturbing one or more acre within the Plan Area would be required to comply with existing regulatory requirements to prepare a SWPPP designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using BMPs that the RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, runoff during construction activities. The RWQCB has stated that these erosion control measures are only examples of what should be considered and should not preclude new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed. The specific controls are subject to the review and approval by the RWQCB and are an existing regulatory requirement.
CONCLUSION
Future development in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction. Pursuant to the SWPPP that would be required for future projects that disturb one or more acres, the use of BMPs during construction activities would be required in order to reduce erosion, control sediment, and manage runoff from the Plan Area. The BMPs may include: covering disturbed areas with mulch, temporary seeding, soil stabilizers, binders, fiber rolls or blankets, temporary vegetation, and permanent seeding. The use of these measures would prevent polluted, non-treated runoff from entering the nearby storm drains and waterways. The various RWQCBs have evaluated the effectiveness of the types of BMPs required by a SWPPP and have determined that BMPs are known to be effective in protecting HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-19 receiving waters2. Through compliance with future site-specific SWPPPs, the proposed Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Impact 3.9-2: The Specific Plan would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during operation. (Less than Significant) Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) requires States to identify waters that do not meet water quality standards or objectives and thus, are considered "impaired." Once listed, Section 303(d) mandates prioritization and development of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The TMDL is a tool that establishes the allowable loadings or other quantifiable parameters for a waterbody and thereby the basis for the States to establish water quality-based controls. The purpose of TMDLs is to ensure that beneficial uses are restored and that water quality objectives are achieved.
Waters that are listed under Section 303(d) of the CWA are known as “impaired.” The primary surface water features within the vicinity of the Plan Area are the San Joaquin River and Millerton Lake. Both water features are considered Section 303(d) impaired waterbodies. The portion of the San Joaquin River nearest the Plan Area appears on the SWRCB’s Impaired Water Bodies/303(d) List for invasive species (non‐native fish species). Millerton Lake is included on the Impaired Water Bodies/303(d) List for mercury. Additionally, although outside of the Plan Area, surface water from the Kings River is delivered to the area for intentional groundwater recharge. Two portions of the lower reaches of the Kings River are considered impaired waterbodies: from Island Weir to Stinson and Empire Weirs and from Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir. The Island Weir to Stinson and Empire Weirs segment of the Kings River appears on the SWRCB’s Impaired Water Bodies/303(d) List for conductivity (salinity/total dissolved solids/chlorides/sulfates), molybdenum metals (other than mercury), and toxaphene (pesticide). The Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir segment of the Kings River appears on the SWRCB’s Impaired Water Bodies/303(d) List for alkalinity/carbonate as CaCO3 ( pH/Acidity/Caustic Conditions) and toxicity (total toxics).
The long-term operations of future development projects in the Plan Area could result in long-term impacts to surface water quality from urban stormwater runoff. The proposed Specific Plan would result in new impervious areas associated with roadways, driveways, parking lots, buildings, and landscape areas. Normal activities in developed areas include the use of various automotive petroleum products (i.e. oil, grease, and fuel), common household hazardous materials, heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, and sediment. Within urban areas, these pollutants are generally called nonpoint source pollutants. The pollutant levels vary based on factors such as time between storm events, volume of storm event, type of uses, and density of people.
The majority of development allowed under the Specific Plan would be within areas currently developed with urban uses, and the amount and type of runoff generated by various future development and infrastructure projects would be similar to existing conditions. However, new development and infrastructure projects on lands that are used for agricultural operations, or are 2 Refer to “Review of Stormwater Best Management Practices at Large Construction Sites” by the Los Angeles RWQCB; Available online:
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/rwqcb4/water_issues/programs/stormwater/bmp/largeconstreportaugust-06.pdf
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan vacant and undeveloped, have the potential to result in increases in the amount of impervious surfaces throughout the Plan Area. The undeveloped and underdeveloped lands which do not contain impervious surfaces are scattered throughout the Plan Area, but are mainly located along the western and southern fringes. Future increases in impervious surfaces would result in increased urban runoff, pollutants, and first flush roadway contaminants, as well as an increase in nutrients and other chemicals from landscaped areas. These constituents could result in water quality impacts to onsite and offsite drainage flows to area waterways.
Storm water runoff may play a role in the water quality impairments described above. Runoff that occurs as overland flow across yards, driveways, and public streets is intercepted by the storm water drainage system and conveyed to local drainages before eventually being routed to the Pacific. This storm water can carry pollutants that can enter the local waterways and result in the types of water quality impairments described above. Common sources of storm water pollution in the City include litter, trash, pet waste, paint residue, organic material (yard waste), fertilizers, pesticides, sediments, construction debris, metals from automobile brake pad dust, air pollutants that settle on the ground or attach to rainwater, cooking grease, illegally dumped motor oil, and other harmful fluids.
In accordance with the NPDES Stormwater Program, an approved SWPPP would be required for future development projects in the Plan Area and designed to control erosion and the loss of topsoil to the extent practicable using BMPs that the RWQCB has deemed effective in controlling erosion, sedimentation, runoff during construction activities. Such BMPs shall include: temporary erosion control measures such as silt fences, staked straw bales/wattles, silt/sediment basins and traps, check dams, geofabric, sandbag dikes, and temporary revegetation or other ground cover or other equally or more effective measures. The BMPs and overall SWPPP are submitted to the RWQCB and the City of Fresno as part of the permitting process. The SWPPP is kept on site and implemented during construction activities and must be made available upon request to representatives of the RWQCB and/or the City of Fresno. The RWQCB has stated that these erosion control measures are only examples of what should be considered and should not preclude equally or more effective new or innovative approaches currently available or being developed. The specific controls are subject to the review and approval by the RWQCB.
Due to future development and implementation of new infrastructure anticipated by the Specific Plan, the overall volume of runoff in Fresno could be increased compared to existing conditions. If the FMFCD drainage system is not adequately designed, Specific Plan buildout could result in localized higher peak flow rates. Localized increases in flow would be significant if increases exceeded system capacity or contribute to bank erosion. Each future development and infrastructure project is required to prepare a detailed project specific drainage plan and a SWPPP that will control storm water runoff and erosion, both during and after construction. If the project involves the discharge into surface waters, the project proponent will need to acquire a Dewatering permit, NPDES permit, and Waste Discharge permit from the CVRWQCB.
As described above, under the Regulatory Setting, the City is required to implement a range of measures and procedures when reviewing new development and infrastructure projects.
Implementation of the City’s General Plan policies and actions, as well as the City’s adopted Municipal Code requirements, would ensure that water quality is preserved.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-21 Chapter 6, Municipal Services and Utilities, Article 7, Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control, of the Fresno Municipal Code establishes provisions regarding stormwater discharges. The purpose and intent of Article 7 is to ensure the health, safety, and general welfare of residents, and to protect the water quality of surface water and groundwater resources in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Federal CWA by reducing pollutants in urban stormwater, discharges to the maximum extent practicable, and by effectively prohibiting non‐ stormwater discharges to the storm drain system. Chapter 12, Impact Fees, Historic Resources, and Other Miscellaneous Topics, Section 12-2304, Development Application, Infrastructure Improvement Plans, and Building Permit Review and Processing Timelines, outlines the City’s grading plan check process. The grading plan check process is a review process that requires anyone who develops property:
1. Properly grade their property in accordance with the CBC.
2. Submit a grading plan showing the proposed grading of the development.
3. Obtain approval of the FMFCD indicating conformance of the grading plan with the Storm Drainage Master Plan.
4. Obtain coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit and comply with the requirements of the permit, including developing an erosion control site plan.
While the primary regulatory mechanisms for ensuring that future development and infrastructure projects do not result in adverse water quality impacts are contained in the Fresno Municipal Code, the City of Fresno has developed the Specific Plan to include additional policies that, when implemented, will further reduce water pollution from construction, new development, and new infrastructure projects, and protect and enhance natural storm drainage and water quality features.
The policies identified below include numerous requirements that would reduce the potential for Specific Plan implementation to result in increased water quality impacts.
CONCLUSION
The entire Plan Area is in areas served by FMFCD retention basins. Operation of projects developed under the proposed Specific Plan could generate the same categories of pollutants that construction could. Water quality treatment for post-construction discharges to stormwater in the FMFCD urban flood control system area is provided by retention basins. Land development in the FMFCD Master Plan Area is exempt from further water quality requirements provided that the FMFCD’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan is implemented.
Storm drainage improvements are funded by local drainage fees paid by developments and are built by the FMFCD, by developers, or both. Basins are highly effective at reducing average concentrations of a broad range of contaminants, including several polyaromatic hydrocarbons, total suspended solids, and most metals. Pollutants are removed by filtration through soil, and thus don’t reach the groundwater aquifer. Basins are built to design criteria exceeding Statewide Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan standards. The urban flood control system provides treatment for all types of development.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Additionally, compliance with the Specific Plan policies shown below would further ensure that water quality standards or waste discharge requirements are not violated during operation of future projects in the Plan Area. For example, adequate stormwater and flooding infrastructure would be required for new development. Through compliance with the FMFCD’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan, City General Plan policies, City Municipal Code requirements, and proposed Specific Plan policies, the proposed Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
SPECIFIC PLAN POLICIES
IPR 3.2: Continue to evaluate Capital Improvement Programs and update them to add missing infrastructure and to meet the demand for new development.
IPR 3.3: Continue to set appropriate conditions of approval for each new development proposal to ensure that water resource facilities are in place prior to construction and building occupancy.
IPR 3.4: Continue to plan for, install, and operate recycled water systems to benefit the West Area and to support local resource conservation goals.
Impact 3.9-3: The Specific Plan would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. (Less than Significant)
The quantity of ground water in the San Joaquin Valley has been declining for decades, as evidenced by the substantial lowering of water levels in the aquifers. Impacts on groundwater in the Fresno area are an important consideration in any development plan. See Impact 3.15-6 in Section 3.15, Utilities, for further discussions regarding groundwater demand, groundwater supplies, groundwater recharge, and groundwater quality. Impacts related to groundwater supplies and interference with groundwater recharge are considered in two ways: (1) conversion of pervious surfaces (which allow for groundwater recharge), and (2) use of groundwater as a water supply (which reduces the amount of local groundwater supply).
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
Future development projects in the Plan Area would result in new impervious surfaces and could reduce rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge in those areas. Infiltration rates vary depending on the overlying soil types. In general, sandy soils have higher infiltration rates and can contribute to significant amounts of ground water recharge; clay soils tend to have lower percolation potential; and impervious surfaces such as pavement significantly reduce infiltration capacity and increase surface water runoff.
As noted previously, the FMFCD drainage system consists of approximately 680 miles of pipeline and more than 150 stormwater retention basins. The storm drainage pipeline system is designed to accept the peak flow rate of runoff from a two-year intensity storm event (a storm that has a 50 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-23 percent probability of occurring in any given year). The FMFCD storm drain and flood control system is designed to retain and infiltrate as much stormwater and urban runoff as possible.
The current drainage system in the Plan Area discharges to a system of irrigation canals, creeks, and the San Joaquin River, but is designed to retain and infiltrate as much runoff as possible into the underlying groundwater aquifer. Future development would include water quality BMPs, detention basins, and retention basins designed to minimize or eliminate increases in runoff from these new impervious surfaces entering existing surface water courses and existing storm drains. Peak runoff and total volume of runoff will be minimized by future development of storm drainage design which retains water to the maximum extent possible. Consequently, infiltration into the groundwater aquifers will be maximized to the extent possible through the storm drainage design.
Additionally, future development projects in the Plan Area may result in new rainwater infiltration and groundwater recharge with the development of new pervious surfaces and maintenance of existing pervious surfaces. The Specific Plan incorporates best practices to support sustainable development including bioswale/run-off collection and large permeable green surfaces (i.e., park and open space areas) that would reduce new impervious surfaces, rainwater infiltration, and support groundwater recharge. Future development would include storm water quality BMPs designed to minimize runoff from impervious surfaces entering existing storm drains and surface water courses. Peak runoff and total volume of runoff will be minimized by future development of storm drainage design which retains water to the maximum extent possible.
Further, the City’s Recharge Fresno Program is intended to improve the pipelines and water system facilities that will capture, treat, and deliver water to Fresno homes and businesses, including surface water from the Sierra Nevada Mountains. This program has the following objectives: ensure a reliable and sustainable water supply for Fresno’s present and future prosperity by increasing the available water supply; bring new, treated surface water from the Sierra Nevada Mountains to our community; improve natural and intentional groundwater recharge; maintain focus on conservation and its role in ensuring a sustainable water supply for Fresno; and ensure a safe and reliable water supply.
Future development of the Plan Area under the proposed land use plan will modify the movement of water across the land surface and the infiltration of rain water into the groundwater system. The aquifers underlying the Plan Area are impacted by several major contaminant plumes involving organic compounds, inorganic compounds, solvents, pesticides, and other contaminants. Future development projects in the Plan Area, if no means were provided to preserve infiltration of rainwater, would likely reduce net infiltration of rain water and runoff into the groundwater system and reduce the diluting effect of this fresh water supply. The net impact would be a further build-up of contaminants in the groundwater in the Kings Subbasin. However, the proposed Specific Plan would also likely decrease the amount of pesticides and other agricultural contaminants entering the groundwater from the Plan Area, due to elimination of agricultural activity in the Plan Area, including fertilizer application. Surface water quality detention basins and BMPs would also have the potential to add to groundwater contamination levels if they are not properly designed and sited. It is also noted that the City is in the process of planning and constructing a comprehensive Recycled Water System, which will include parts of the Plan Area. Many of the segments of the
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan overall System are either under construction or already completed, and a Water Reuse Master Plan is underway to evaluate all options and plan for the future use of recycled water throughout the city.
The FMFCDs Storm Water Quality Management Plan, City General Plan policies, City Municipal Code requirements, the Recharge Fresno program, and proposed Specific Plan policies include BMPs aimed at preserving water quality and groundwater recharge areas. The BMPs required as part of future development of the Plan Area are designed to infiltrate as much storm water runoff as practicable into the ground. A portion of the retained runoff will infiltrate into the ground, helping to replenish the aquifers. The required BMPs are designed to trap contaminants and to beneficially make use of nutrients in the vegetated swales and planted areas. In addition, application rates of fertilizers on urbanized areas is less than that typically used in intensive agriculture. The aggregate effect of the proposed Specific Plan will, therefore, be to decrease the loading of nutrients (in particular, nitrates) into the groundwater.
GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES
The proposed Specific Plan would be served from the City’s existing and future water supplies. As discussed in Section 3.15, Utilities, the City currently receives water from four water supply sources:
surface water from the FID Agreement for Kings River water, surface water from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) Central Valley Project (CVP) Friant Division Contract for San Joaquin River water, groundwater that is pumped from wells in the City, and recycled water (planned to be used for nonpotable uses).
The City of Fresno forecasts that it will have sufficient water supplies for demands in its service area over the 2020 to 2040 period in normal, single-dry-year, and multiple-dry-year conditions.
Additionally, the Specific Plan water demand is not expected to exceed the City’s supplies in any normal, single dry, or multiple dry year between 2020 and 2040.
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT ACT
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) directs DWR to identify groundwater basins and subbasins that are in conditions of critical overdraft. This designation is determined based upon the presence of "undesirable impacts" such as seawater intrusion, land subsidence, groundwater depletion, and chronic lowering of groundwater levels. Per DWR's current list of critically overdrafted basins, finalized in February 2019, the Kings Subbasin is designated as a critically overdrafted basin.
As part of the California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring (CASGEM) Program, DWR is required to prioritize California groundwater basins to help identify, evaluate, and determine the need for additional groundwater level monitoring. Per the current CASGEM draft prioritization, completed in April 2019, the Kings Subbasin is a high priority subbasin.
The City has long made efforts toward offsetting the decline of groundwater levels and minimizing overdraft conditions through an active intentional recharge program that started in 1971. Through cooperative agreements with FMFCD and FID, the City has access to not only City-owned basins, but HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-25 also those of these two agencies. The City has averaged over 60,000 AFY the previous five years and plans to gradually increase recharge by about 540 AFY each year. However, during wet years the City will recharge more water when it is available to allow to the City to draw on additional groundwater during dry years when surface water is not available.
In short, SGMA is landmark legislation that, for the first time in the history of California, requires comprehensive groundwater management, with the mandatory goal of bringing all currently overdrafted basins into sustainable conditions by no later than 2040 or 2042, with five-year increments of progress starting in 2025 and 2027.
As noted previously, the FARGMP was prepared in conformance with AB 3030 and SB 1938. The objectives of the FARGMP have been developed to monitor, protect, and sustain groundwater within the region. The City of Fresno and the other participating agencies subsequently adopted the groundwater management plan in 2006. The City of Fresno falls within the NKGSA. As a high priority basin, the Kings Subbasin must be managed under a GSP by January 31, 2020. The NKGSA finalized the GSP and submitted it to the California DWR on January 28, 2020, ahead of the January 31, 2020 mandate. The FARGMP is discussed below.
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
As noted previously, the FARGMP was prepared in conformance with AB 3030 and SB 1938. The objectives of the FARGMP have been developed to monitor, protect, and sustain groundwater within the region. The City of Fresno and the other participating agencies subsequently adopted the groundwater management plan in 2006. The City of Fresno falls within the NKGSA. As a high priority basin, the Kings Subbasin must be managed under a GSP by January 31, 2020. The NKGSA completed the GSP on January 28, 2020.
As discussed above, the Specific Plan would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Plan may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. The Specific Plan includes park, open space, and ponding basin areas which would allow for infiltration of groundwater on-site. Existing City and FMFCD regulations require development in the Plan Area to address water quality and changes to the drainage pattern through BMPs and low impact development (LID) measures. LID measures and strategies can be used to meet the FMFCD’s development standards and include use of bioretention/infiltration landscape areas, disconnected hydrologic flow paths, reduced impervious areas, functional landscaping, and grading to maintain natural hydrologic functions that existed prior to development, such as interception, shallow surface storage, infiltration, evapotranspiration, and groundwater recharge. Further, Recharge Fresno, a City program to improve the pipelines and water system facilities that will capture, treat and deliver water to Fresno homes and businesses, including surface water from the Sierra Nevada Mountains. Groundwater-related objectives of Recharge Fresno include: improve natural and intentional groundwater recharge, maintain focus on conservation and its role in ensuring a sustainable water supply for Fresno, and ensure a safe and reliable water supply.. These guiding documents and requirements would ensure that stormwater quality treatment measures are implemented and maintained throughout the life of the Specific Plan.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
CONCLUSION
The required stormwater BMPs and retention basins would be designed to reduce runoff below that which occurs currently during storm events and ensure groundwater recharge from the Plan Area to the extent possible. Additionally, the Specific Plan water demand is not expected to exceed the City’s supplies in any normal, single dry, or multiple dry year between 2020 and 2040, and the Plan would not conflict with the FARGMP. Further, the Specific Plan includes two policies, listed below, which would encourage nonporous surfaces for groundwater recharge and other design strategies to maximize recharge. Therefore, impacts related to groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
SPECIFIC PLAN POLICIES
IPR 2.9: Plant locally appropriate, drought-tolerant landscaping and, where possible, incorporate designs that can contribute to groundwater recharge, flood protection, and reduced urban heat island effects.
IPR 3.1: Encourage the incorporation of water conservation methods in new development, such as greywater systems, drought-resilient landscaping, and reduction of nonporous surfaces.
Impact 3.9-4: The Specific Plan would not alter the existing drainage pattern in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite, or 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. (Less than Significant)
Future development would include water quality BMPs, detention basins, and retention basins designed to minimize or eliminate increases in runoff entering existing surface water courses and storm drains. Peak runoff and total volume of runoff will be minimized by the storm drainage design which retains water to the maximum extent possible.
The proposed Specific Plan will not alter drainage patterns in a manner which will cause flooding, erosion, or siltation. Surface runoff from the area will be managed via parcel-based LID measures, detention/retention basins, and flow reducing BMPs to prevent local flooding within the site. These features will also reduce peak flows from the Plan Area to receiving creeks and storm drains to amounts equal to or less than flows under existing conditions. Sediment in the stormwater flows will be captured in detention ponds designed to prevent siltation. Flooding, erosion, or siltation is not anticipated by the proposed Specific Plan given the storm drain design requirements and best management practices that will be implemented.
The proposed Specific Plan would not alter the existing drainage pattern in a manner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation, flooding, or polluted runoff. With the implementation of the Specific Plan policies already presented above, compliance with existing regulatory requirements HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-27 which pertain to water quality and runoff, and with the design and construction of the improvements included in the proposed storm drainage system, the proposed Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Impact 3.9-5: The Specific Plan would not release pollutants due to Plan Area inundation by flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche. (Less than Significant) As shown in Figure 3.9-2, the entire Plan Area is designated unshaded Zone X - minimal flood hazard, and would not be expected to have a flood hazard up to the level of the 0.2-percent annual chance flood. Lands designated as unshaded Zone X are outside of the Special Flood Hazard Areas. Changes to land surfaces in these areas do not trigger map revisions and no flood insurance requirements are imposed on structures in these areas.
Although the Plan Area’s northern boundary is very near the San Joaquin River, the area is not within a Special Flood Hazard Area. Local flooding can occur for events larger than a two-year event, but runoff is generally contained in the streets or other breakover easements. Such flooding is not reflected on FEMA’s maps. Improvements to storm drainage facilities are accomplished either as a part of privately funded on-site developments or as a part of the master plan, funded by drainage fees. FMFCD maintains an on-going update to the system hydraulic model for flood control and prepares a capital improvement plan update every five years.
A tsunami is a sea wave caused by a submarine earthquake, landslide, or volcanic eruption. Tsunami can cause catastrophic damage to shallow or exposed shorelines. The Plan Area is approximately 105 miles from the coast, which is sufficiently distant to preclude effects from a tsunami.
Additionally, tsunami inundation maps show no risk of tsunami inundation for the Plan Area.
Seiches are changes or oscillations of water levels within a confined water body. Seiches are caused by fluctuation in the atmosphere, tidal currents or earthquakes. The effect of this phenomenon is a standing wave that would occur when influenced by the external causes. The Plan Area is not adjacent to any lakes that pose significant a risk from a seiche event.
A small portion of the Plan Area located in the northernmost point is located within the dam failure inundation area for the Friant Dam. Potential inundation from the Friant Dam is shown in Figure 3.9-
3. Dam failure is generally a result of structural instability caused by improper design or construction, instability resulting from seismic shaking, or overtopping and erosion of the dam. The DSD is responsible for inspecting and monitoring these dams. The Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan outlines the mitigation strategy for reducing potential losses identified in Chapter 4, Risk Assessment, of the Plan.
Provided that the storm drain system and detention/retention facilities to be installed as part of the proposed development are adequately sized and properly installed and maintained, additional flooding and/or impedance or redirection of flows will not be induced by the proposed Specific Plan.
As a result, the proposed Specific Plan would have a less-than-significant impact relative to this topic.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Impact 3.9-6: The Specific Plan would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. (Less than Significant)
The Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Valley Region and the GSP are the two guiding documents for water quality and sustainable groundwater management in the Plan Area.
Consistency with the two plans are discussed below.
WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL VALLEY REGION The Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Valley Region (Basin Plan) includes a summary of beneficial water uses, water quality objectives needed to protect the identified beneficial uses, and implementation measures. The Basin Plan establishes water quality standards for all the ground and surface waters of the region. The RWQCB regulates waste discharges to minimize and control their effects on the quality of the region’s ground and surface water. Permits are issued under a number of programs and authorities. The terms and conditions of these discharge permits are enforced through a variety of technical, administrative, and legal means. Water quality problems in the region are listed in the Basin Plan, along with the causes, where known.
As discussed in Impacts 3.9-1 and 3.9-2, impacts related to water quality during construction and operation of future projects in the Plan Area would be less than significant. Through compliance with future site-specific SWPPPs, the proposed project Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact relative to construction. Through compliance with the FMFCD’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan, City General Plan policies, City Municipal Code requirements, and proposed Specific Plan policies, the proposed Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact relative to operation.
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
As part of a partnership of local municipal water purveyors, irrigation districts, a flood control district, and the overlying county, the FARGMP was prepared in conformance with AB 3030 and SB 1938. The objectives of the FARGMP have been developed to monitor, protect, and sustain groundwater within the region. The City of Fresno and the other participating agencies subsequently adopted the groundwater management plan in 2006. The City of Fresno falls within the North Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency (NKGSA). As a high priority basin, the Kings Subbasin must be managed under a GSP by January 31, 2020. The NKGSA completed the GSP on January 28, 2020.
As discussed in Impact 3.9-3, Specific Plan implementation would not decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Specific Plan may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. The required stormwater BMPs and retention basins would be designed to reduce runoff below that which occurs currently during storm events and ensure groundwater recharge from the Plan Area to the extent possible. Additionally, the Specific Plan water demand is not expected to exceed the City’s supplies in any normal, single dry, or multiple dry year between 2020 and 2040, and the Plan would not conflict with the FARGMP.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.9-29 Further, the Specific Plan includes two policies, listed above, which would encourage nonporous surfaces for groundwater recharge and other design strategies to maximize recharge.
CONCLUSION
Overall, implementation of the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to conflicts with the Basin Plan and the GSP.
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
N Dante Ave
W Gettysburg Ave
N Blythe Ave
W Shields Ave
N Figarden Dr
W Sierra Ave
W Dakota Ave
W Spruce Ave
N Polk Ave
W Figarden Dr
N Golden State Blvd
N Emerson Ave
W Clinton Ave
N Marks Ave
N Weber Ave
W Barstow Ave
N Brawley Ave
N Gates Ave
W Shaw Ave
N Valentine Ave
N Cornelia Ave
N Bryan Ave
W Bullard Ave
N
Milburn Ave
N Hayes Ave
N Grantland Ave
W Ashlan Ave
N Santa Fe Ave
N
Ma rty Ave
W San Jose Ave
W Herndon Ave
CITY OF FRESNO
SPECIFIC PLAN OF THE WEST AREA
UV99
Sources: USGS Watershed Boundary Dataset; Fresno County; City of Fresno. Map date: August 2, 2019. Revised: May 29, 2020.
BOUNDARIES
Specific Plan of the West Area
Fresno City Limits
Fresno Sphere of Influence
HYDROLOGIC UNITS
Watershed Boundary (HUC-10)
Subwatershed Area (HUCBethany Cemetery-San Joaquin
River
Empire Ditch-James Bypass
Gates Lake
Kennedy Owens Canal-James
Bypass
Scout Island-San Joaquin River
Town of Rolinda-James Bypass
Figure 3.9-1. Watersheds
q 0 ¼ ½
Miles
James Bypass Watershed
Cottonwood Creek - San Joaquin River Watershed
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
N Dante Ave
W Gettysburg Ave
W Shields Ave
N Blythe Ave
N Figarden Dr
W Sierra Ave
W Dakota Ave
W Spruce Ave
N Polk Ave
W Figarden Dr
N Golden State Blvd
N Emerson Ave
N Marks Ave
W Clinton Ave
N Weber Ave
W Barstow Ave
N Brawley Ave
N Gates Ave
W Shaw Ave
N Cornelia Ave
W Bullard Ave
N Valentine Ave
N Bryan Ave
N
Milburn Ave
N Hayes Ave
N Grantland Ave
W Ashlan Ave
N Santa Fe Ave
N
Marty A ve
W San Jose Ave
W Herndon Ave
EL
CD
AE
AH2
AH1
EJ
AB
K
AG
EH
EM
MM
EG
AJ
EN
AI
EO
AK
AF
AD
EF
AC
CITY OF FRESNO
SPECIFIC PLAN OF THE WEST AREA
UV99
Sources: FMFCD Map App, 1-31-2020; Fresno County; City of Fresno. Map date: July 31, 2020. Revised: May 29, 2020.
UV99
Figure 3.9-2.
Fresno Metropolitan Flood
Control District
Facilities and Basins
q 0 ¼ ½
Miles
FMFCD FEATURES
FID Facilities
Basin
BOUNDARIES
Specific Plan of the West Area
Fresno City Limits
Fresno Sphere of Influence
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
N Dante Ave
W Gettysburg Ave
N Blythe Ave
W Shields Ave
N Figarden Dr
W Sierra Ave
W Dakota Ave
W Spruce Ave
N Polk Ave
W Figarden Dr
W Alluvial Ave
N Golden State Blvd
N Emerson Ave
W Clinton Ave
N Valentine Ave
N Marks Ave
N Bryan Ave
N
Brawley Ave
N Weber Ave
W Barstow Ave
N Gates Ave
W Shaw Ave
N Cornelia Ave
W Bullard Ave
N
Milburn Ave
N Hayes Ave
N Grantland Ave
W Ashlan Ave
N Santa Fe Ave
N
Ma rty Ave
W San Jose Ave
W Herndon Ave
UV99
Sources: FEMA National Flood Hazard Layer; Fresno County; City of Fresno. Map date: August 2, 2019. Revised: May 29, 2020.
BOUNDARIES
Specific Plan of the West Area
Fresno City Limits
Fresno Sphere of Influence
FEMA FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION
100-year Flood Zone
Area of Minimal Flood Hazard
CITY OF FRESNO
SPECIFIC PLAN OF THE WEST AREA
Figure 3.9-3.
FEMA Flood Zones
q 0 ¼ ½
Miles
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
N Dante Ave
W Gettysburg Ave
N Blythe Ave
W Shields Ave
N Figarden Dr
W Sierra Ave
W Dakota Ave
W Spruce Ave
N Polk Ave
W Figarden Dr
N Golden State Blvd
N Emerson Ave
W Clinton Ave
N Valentine Ave
N Marks Ave
N
Brawley Ave
N Weber Ave
N Bryan Ave
W Barstow Ave
N Gates Ave
W Shaw Ave
N Cornelia Ave
W Bullard Ave
N
Milburn Ave
N Hayes Ave
N Grantland Ave
W Ashlan Ave
N Santa Fe Ave
N
Ma rty Ave
W San Jose Ave
W Herndon Ave
UV99
Sources: Cal OES Dam Inundation Areas, ArcGIS Online, 8/2/2019; Fresno County; City of Fresno. Map date: August 2, 2019. Revised: May 29, 2020.
BOUNDARIES
Specific Plan of the West Area
Fresno City Limits
Fresno Sphere of Influence
DAM INUNDATION AREAS
Friant Dam
CITY OF FRESNO
SPECIFIC PLAN OF THE WEST AREA
Figure 3.9-4.
Dam Inundation Areas
q 0 ¼ ½
Miles
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.9-38 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-1 This section describes the existing land uses in the Plan Area and in the surrounding area, describes the applicable land use regulations, and evaluates the environmental effects of implementation of the proposed Specific Plan related to land use. Information in this section is based on information provided in the project materials, and the following reference documents:
• Fresno General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014);
• Draft Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update, City of Fresno, Fresno County, California (City of Fresno, 2014); • Fresno General Plan Public Review Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (City of Fresno, 2020);
• Fresno Municipal Code (City of Fresno, 2007); and
• Fresno County General Plan (County of Fresno, 2000).
Two comments were received during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) review period regarding environmental impacts associated with land use: Cathy Caples (August 1, 2019) and Jeff Roberts (July 24, 2019). Full comments are included in Appendix A.
3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
EXISTING PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The City of Fresno is located in north central portion of Fresno County in the Central Valley region.
The City is near the geographical center of California and lies approximately 220 miles (350 km) north of Los Angeles, 170 miles (270 km) south of the state capitol, Sacramento. State Route 99 travels through the western portion of the City of Fresno.
Plan Area
The Plan Area encompasses approximately 7,077 acres (or a little more than 11 square miles) in the City of Fresno city limits and unincorporated Fresno County. Of the eleven square miles within the Plan Area, 6.9 square miles are in the City limits and 4.1 square miles are in the growth area. The growth area is land outside the City limits but within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) boundary, which is the adopted limit for future growth.
The Plan Area is triangular in shape and located west of State Route 99. It is bounded on the south by West Clinton Avenue, and to the west by Grantland and Garfield Avenues. The Plan Area includes the southwest portion of Highway City adjacent to State Route 99. See Chapter 2.0 (Project Description) Figure 2.0-1 for the regional location map and Figure 2.0-2 for the Plan Area vicinity map.
Existing Land Uses
A portion of the Plan Area is located within the City of Fresno City limits, and a portion is within unincorporated Fresno County (but within the City’s SOI). The City of Fresno General Plan designates the Plan Area as: Low Density Residential, Medium Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Urban Neighborhood Residential, High Density Residential, Community Commercial,
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan General Commercial, Recreation Commercial, Office, Business Park, Light Industrial, Corridor/Center Mixed Use, Regional Mixed Use, Community Park, Open Space – Ponding Basin, Neighborhood Park, Open Space, Public/Quasi-Public Facility, Special School, Elementary School, Elementary, Middle & High School, and High School. See Chapter 2.0 (Project Description) Figure 2.0-4 for the existing City General Plan land use designations.
A large amount of land in the Plan Area is farmland or rural residential lots with large, uneven, and underutilized parcels. The Plan Area has approximately eight different existing land uses which include the following:
• Rural/Estate Residential: Approximately 27 percent, or 1,911 acres, of the existing land uses within the Plan Area are currently used as rural/estate residential. Of the 6,109 acres of developable lands within the Plan Area, 1,640.68 acres are low-density single-family homes that are occupied lots with a size of two to nine acres per dwelling units. • Multiple Family Residential: Approximately two percent, or 141 acres, of the Plan Area account for multi-family residential development. These uses are primarily located adjacent to arterial roads with easy access to State Route 99, and Fresno Area Express (FAX) service lines.
• Single-Family Residential: Approximately 21 percent of the existing uses within the Plan Area are currently developed with single-family residential sues. These uses are located primarily within the city limits.
• Vacant Land: Approximately 15 percent of the land in the Plan Area, or 911.34 acres, account for vacant lands. Vacant areas are located throughout the Plan Area, in both the city limits and SOI. Vacant areas represent infill opportunities within the Plan Area’s densest neighborhoods.
• Public/Government Facilities: Approximately six percent, or 337.83 acres, of land within the Plan Area contain public or government facilities. These land uses include Central Unified School District facilities, churches, the Dante Club, and the Hacienda facility. • Open Space/Agricultural Land: Approximately 25 percent or 1,554.06 acres, in the Plan Area contain open space or agricultural land. While there are some open space land uses within the City, most of these uses are primarily located in the SOI. These uses include parks and ponding basins.
• Industrial Uses: Approximately one percent, or 57.33 acres, of the Plan Area account for industrial uses. The largest industrial land use in the Plan Area contains an agricultural business located at the intersection of West Dakota Avenue and North Grantland Avenue. • Commercial Uses: Approximately three percent, or 219.76 acres, of the Plan Area account for commercial uses. Commercial uses are spread throughout the eastern and southeastern portions of the Plan Area, closer to State Route 99.
Existing Zoning
The City of Fresno Zoning Map provides zoning for those portions of the Plan Area located within the City limits, but not for areas within the unincorporated County. Zoning designations are generally LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-3 consistent with the existing General Plan land uses. The City zoning designations for the Plan Area include: Residential Estate (RE), Residential Single-Family, Extremely Low Density (RS-1), Residential Single-Family, Very Low Density (RS-2), Residential Single-Family, Low Density (RS-3), Residential Single-Family, Medium Low Density (RS-4), Residential Single-Family, Medium Density (RS-5), Residential Multi-Family, Medium High Density (RM-1), Residential Multi-Family, Urban Neighborhood (RM-2), Residential Multi-Family, High Density (RM-3), Mobile Home Park (RM-MH), Commercial Community (CC), Commercial General (CG), Commercial Regional (CR), Commercial Recreation (CRC), Light Industrial (IL), Corridor/Center Mixed Use (CMX), Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX), Regional Mixed Use (RMX), Business Park (BP), Office (O), Open Space (OS), and Park and Recreation (PR). See Chapter 2.0 (Project Description) Figure 2.0-5 for the existing zoning designations.
The Fresno County Zoning Map designates the portions of the Plan Area outside the City limits as:
Rural Commercial Center (RCC), Central Trading (C4), General Commercial (C6), Light Industrial (M1), Exclusive Agricultural (AE20), Limited Agricultural (AL20), Rural Residential (RR), Single Family Residential Agricultural (RA), Single Family Residential (12,500) (R1B), and Trailer Park Residential (TP). Upon a proposal to annex unincorporated land into the City limits, the City of Fresno would prezone the land to a zone that is consistent with the General Plan land use. Once annexation occurs, the County zoning would no longer apply to the parcel.
Surrounding Land Uses
Surrounding land uses include State Route 99; the historic communities of Herndon and Highway City; incorporated areas of the City of Fresno to the northeast; incorporated areas of the City of Fresno to the east (including mostly industrial uses); unincorporated Fresno County and incorporated areas of the City of Fresno to the south (including farmland uses, rural residential uses, low density residential uses, and underutilized parcels); and unincorporated Fresno County to the west (including farmland and rural residential uses).
3.10.2 REGULATORY SETTING
This section provides an overview of the regulatory setting including applicable plans and policies, and land use laws. A variety of sources, including applicable General Plans, the Fresno Citywide Development Code, and Government Code sections relevant to land use are discussed.
STATE
Government Code
California Government Code Section 65300 et seq. establishes the obligation of cities and counties to adopt and implement general plans. The general plan is a comprehensive, long-term, and general document that describes plans for the physical development of a jurisdiction and of any land outside its boundaries that, in the jurisdiction’s judgment, bears relation to its planning. The general plan addresses a broad range of topics, including, at a minimum, land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. In addressing these topics, the general plan identifies
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan the goals, objectives, policies, principles, standards, and plan proposals that support the jurisdiction’s vision for the area. The general plan is a long-range document that typically addresses the physical character of an area over a 20-year period. Although the general plan serves as a blueprint for future development and identifies the overall vision for the planning area, it remains general enough to allow for flexibility in the approach taken to achieve the plan's goals.
The State Zoning Law (California Government Code Section 65800 et seq.) establishes that zoning ordinances, which are laws that define allowable land uses within a specific district, are required to be consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plans. When amendments to the general plan are made, corresponding changes in the zoning ordinance may be required within a reasonable time to ensure the land uses designated in the general plan would also be allowable by the zoning ordinance (Government Code, Section 65860, subd. [c]).
State of California Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000
The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act establishes procedures for local government changes of organization, including city incorporations, annexations to a city or special district, and city and special district consolidations. In approving an annexation, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) will consider the following factors:
• Population and population density; land area and land use; per capita assessed valuation; topography, natural boundaries, and drainage basins; proximity to other populated areas; and the likelihood of significant growth in the area and in adjacent incorporated and unincorporated areas during the next ten years.
• The need for organized community services; the present cost and adequacy of governmental services and controls in the area; probable future needs for those services and controls; and the probable effect of the proposed incorporation, formation, annexation, exclusion and of alternative courses of action on the cost and adequacy of services and controls in the area and adjacent areas.
• The effect of the proposed action and of alternative actions on adjacent areas, on mutual social and economic interests, and on the local government structure of the county. • The conformity of both the proposal and its anticipated effects with both the adopted commission policies on providing planned, orderly, and efficient patterns of urban development, and the policies and priorities set forth in Government Code section 56377. • The effect of the proposal on maintaining the physical and economic integrity of agricultural lands, as defined by Government Code section 56016.
• The definiteness and certainty of the boundaries of the territory, nonconformance of proposed boundaries with lines of assessment or ownership, creation of islands or corridors of unincorporated territory, and other similar matters affecting the proposed boundaries. • Consistency with city or county general and specific plans. • The sphere of influence of any local agency that may be applicable to the proposal being reviewed.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-5 • The comments of any affected local agency.
• The ability of the newly formed or receiving entity to provide the services that are the subject of the application to the area, including the sufficiency of revenues for those services following the proposed boundary change.
• Timely availability of water supplies adequate for projected needs as specified in Government Code section 65352.5.
• The extent to which the proposal will affect a city or cities and the county in achieving their respective fair shares of the regional housing needs, as determined by the appropriate council of governments consistent with Housing Element laws. • Any information or comments from lawmakers.
• Any information relating to existing land use designations.
In addition to the above factors, LAFCo may also consider any resolution raising objections to the action that may be filed by an affected agency; and any other matters which the commission deems material.
LOCAL
Fresno General Plan
As noted above, General Plans are prepared under a mandate from the State of California, which requires each city and county to prepare and adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its jurisdiction and any adjacent related lands.
Key themes of the Fresno General Plan include the strengthening of existing centers of activity and commercial corridors in the City, as well as expansion of the City’s industrial capacity, retail base, and new residential neighborhoods. The Fresno General Plan has been prepared to do the following:
• Establish a long-range vision that reflects the aspirations of the community and outlines steps to achieve this vision;
• Establish long-range land use development policies that will guide development decisionmaking by City departments by providing a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with the outcomes envisioned in the Fresno General Plan policies;
• Reflect the City’s current planning, resource conservation, and economic development efforts;
• Guide development in a manner that improves the quality of life for the whole community and meets future land needs based on the projected population and job growth; • Allow the City, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will preserve and enhance community character and environmental resources, promote resiliency, and minimize hazards; and
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan • Provide the basis for establishing detailed plans and implementation programs, such as the zoning and subdivision regulations, community plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood plans, Concept Plans, and the Capital Improvement Program.
GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
The General Plan is organized into the following elements:
• Introduction: This introductory element includes General Plan goals, State requirements, and requirements for administration of the Plan. In addition, the projected development under General Plan Horizon and General Plan Buildout are summarized, and overarching themes of the Plan are presented.
• Economic Development and Fiscal Sustainability: This element addresses strategies for the City to boost the strength and range of existing businesses, expand economic opportunities for current and future residents, and ensure the long-term ability of the City to deliver a high level of public services.
• Urban Form, Land Use and Design: This element provides the physical framework for development in the city. It establishes policies related to the location and intensity of new development, citywide land use and growth management policies. The Urban Form, Land Use and Design Element, including the Land Use Map, is discussed in further detail below. • Mobility and Transportation: This element includes policies, programs, and standards to maintain efficient circulation for vehicles and alternative modes of transportation. It creates a framework for provision of Complete Streets; identifies future street and bikeway improvements; and addresses trails, parking, public transit, goods movement, and longterm plans for the municipal airport. • Parks, Open Space, and Schools: This element provides an inventory of existing and planned parks, recreation facilities, other open space, and public schools, and defines policies and standards relating to these services and amenities. This element also outlines policies relating to the preservation of open space and natural resources. • Public Utilities and Services: The element addresses the provision of police, fire, wastewater treatment, drinking water, drainage, and solid waste disposal services. • Resource Conservation and Resilience: This element provides strategies for improving critical environmental conditions regarding air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, ensuring long-term water and energy supplies, and strengthening the city for potential future changes in resource supply and climate change. The element complies with the requirements of AB 170 for jurisdictions in the San Joaquin Valley to amend their general plans to include goals, data and analysis, policies and feasible implementation strategies designed to improve air quality.
• Historic and Cultural Resources: This element provides policy guidance to protect, preserve, and celebrate the city’s history and its architectural and cultural heritage. • Noise and Safety: This element addresses the risks posed by geologic hazards, wildland fire, hazardous materials, and flooding. It also discusses emergency response, safety service LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-7 response standards, and evacuation routes. The element also includes policies and standards to limit the impacts of noise sources throughout the city. Future noise contours are illustrated in order to facilitate administration of noise policies and standards. • Healthy Communities: This element focuses specifically on subjects not fully discussed in other elements, in particular the relationships between the built, natural, and social environments, community health and wellness outcomes, youth leadership and community engagement, healthy food access, community gardens and urban agriculture. • Housing Element Consistency: This chapter provides information regarding the consistency between the General Plan and the adopted Housing Element, including a matrix showing how the General Plan consistently implements the requirements of the Housing Element. • Implementation: The Implementation element provides an implementation and monitoring program for this General Plan.
General Plan Land Use Map: The Fresno General Plan Land Use Map portrays the ultimate uses of land in the city of through land use designations. The City of Fresno General Plan designates the Plan Area as: Low Density Residential, Medium Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Urban Neighborhood Residential, High Density Residential, Community Commercial, General Commercial, Recreation Commercial, Office, Business Park, Light Industrial, Corridor/Center Mixed Use, Regional Mixed Use, Community Park, Open Space – Ponding Basin, Neighborhood Park, Open Space, Public/Quasi-Public Facility, Special School, Elementary School, Elementary, Middle & High School, and High School. See Figure 2.0-4 for the existing City General Plan land use designations.
GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND IMPLEMENTING POLICIES
General Plan policies associated with specific environmental topics (aesthetics, air quality, agriculture, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils/mineral resources, hazards, hydrology/water quality, noise, public services/recreation, transportation, utilities, etc.) are discussed in the relevant chapters of this EIR. The policies included within the City’s Land Use Element are intended to support the overarching goals including:
1. Increase opportunity, economic development, business, and job creation. Use urban form, land use, and Development Code policies to streamline permit approval, promote local educational excellence and workforce relevance, significantly increase business development and expansion, retain and attract talented people, create jobs and sustained economic growth, strategically locate employment lands and facilities, and avoid over - saturation of a single type of housing, retail, or employment.
2. Support a successful and competitive Downtown. Emphasize infill development and a revitalized central core area as the primary activity center for Fresno and the region by locating substantial growth near the Downtown core and along the corridors leading to the Downtown. Use vision - based policies in a development code specific to the Downtown, when adopted, to ensure the creation of a unique sense of place in the central core.
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
3. Emphasize conservation, successful adaptation to climate and changing resource conditions, and performance effectiveness in the use of energy, water, land, buildings, natural resources, and fiscal resources required for the long-term sustainability of Fresno.
7. Provide for a diversity of districts, neighborhoods, housing types (including affordable housing), residential densities, job opportunities, recreation, open space, and educational venues that appeal to a broad range of people throughout the City.
8. Develop Complete Neighborhoods and districts with an efficient and diverse mix of residential densities, building types, and affordability which are designed to be healthy, attractive, and centered by schools, parks, and public and commercial services to provide a sense of place and that provide as many services as possible within walking distance.
Intentionally plan for Complete Neighborhoods as an outcome, rather than collections of subdivisions which do not result in Complete Neighborhoods.
9. Promote a city of healthy communities and improve quality of life in established neighborhoods. Emphasize supporting established neighborhoods in Fresno with safe, well maintained, and accessible streets, public utilities, education and job training, proximity to jobs, retail services, and health care, affordable housing, youth development opportunities, open space and parks, transportation options, and opportunities for home grown businesses.
10. Emphasize increased land use intensity and mixed-use development at densities supportive of greater use of transit in Fresno. Greater densities can be achieved through encouragement, infrastructure, and incentives for infill and revitalization along major corridors and in Activity Centers.
12. Resolve existing public infrastructure and service deficiencies, make full use of existing infrastructure, and invest in improvements to increase competitiveness and promote economic growth. Emphasize the fair and necessary costs of maintaining sustainable water, sewer, streets, and other public infrastructure and service systems in rates, fees, financing, and public investments to implement the General Plan. Adequately address accumulated deferred maintenance, aging infrastructure, risks to service continuity, desired standards of service to meet quality - of - life goals, and required infrastructure to support growth, economic competitiveness and business development.
13. Emphasize the City as a role model for good growth management planning, efficient processing and permit streamlining, effective urban development policies, environmental quality, and a strong economy. Work collaboratively with other jurisdictions and institutions to further these values throughout the region. Positively influence the same attributes in other jurisdictions of the San Joaquin Valley – and thus the potential for regional sustainability – and improve the standing and credibility of the City to pursue appropriate State, LAFCO, and other regional policies that would curb sprawl and prevent new unincorporated community development which compete with and threaten the success of sustainable policies and development practices in Fresno.
15. Improve Fresno's visual image and enhance its form and function through urban design strategies and effective maintenance.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-9
17. Recognize, respect, and plan for Fresno's cultural, social, and ethnic diversity, and foster an informed and engaged citizenry. Emphasize shared community values and genuine engagement with and across different neighborhoods, communities, institutions, businesses and sectors to solve difficult problems and achieve shared goals for the success of Fresno and all its residents.
In addition to the City of Fresno General Plan overarching land use goals, Objective UF-13 call for the City to locate roughly one-half of future residential development in the Growth Areas (including the West Development Area), which are to be developed with Complete Neighborhoods that include housing, services, and recreation; mixed-use centers; or along future bus rapid transit (BRT) corridors. Objectives, and Implementing Policies related to the development within Growth Areas identified by the City of Fresno General Plan are included below:
Objective
UF-13 Locate roughly one-half of future residential development in the Growth Areas— defined as unincorporated land as of December 31, 2012 SOI—which are to be developed with Complete Neighborhoods that include housing, services, and recreation; mixed-use centers; or along future BRT corridors.
Implementing Policy
UF-13-a Future Planning to Require Design Principles. Require future planning, such as Specific Plans, neighborhood plans or Concept Plans, for Development Areas and BRT Corridors designated by the General Plan to include urban design principles and standards consistent with the Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element.
Objective
UF-14 Create an urban form that facilitates multi-modal connectivity.
Implementing Policy
UF-14-a Design Guidelines for Walkability. Develop and use design guidelines and standards for a walkable and pedestrian-scaled environment with a network of streets and connections for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as transit and autos.
Fresno Municipal Code Chapter 15: Citywide Development Code The purpose of this Development Code is to implement the General Plan and, if applicable, operative plans, to protect and promote the public health, safety, peace, comfort, convenience, prosperity, and general welfare of the City of Fresno. More specifically, the Development Code is adopted to achieve the following, consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan and any other operative plan:
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan A. To provide a precise guide for the physical development of the city in a manner as to progressively achieve the arrangement of land uses depicted in the General Plan.
B. To foster a harmonious and workable relationship among land uses and ensure compatible infill development.
C. To support economic development and job creation.
D. To provide for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community.
E. To promote high quality architecture and sustainable design. Sustainable Design is a philosophy that seeks to maximize the quality of the built environment, while minimizing or eliminating negative impact to the natural environment.
F. To promote the stability of existing land uses that conform to the General Plan, protecting them from inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions.
G. To promote a safe and efficient traffic circulation system, including bicycle facilities and pedestrian amenities, and to support a multi-modal transportation system.
H. To facilitate the appropriate location of community facilities, institutions, parks, and recreational areas.
I. To protect and enhance real property values.
J. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the city.
K. K. To define duties and powers of governing bodies and officials responsible for the implementation of this Code.
ZONING MAP
The Zoning Map identifies zoning districts within the City at the parcel level. The City of Fresno Zoning Map provides zoning for those portions of the Plan Area located within the City limits, but not for areas within the unincorporated County. Zoning designations are generally consistent with the existing General Plan land uses. The City zoning designations for the Plan Area include:
Residential Estate (RE), Residential Single-Family, Extremely Low Density (RS-1), Residential SingleFamily, Very Low Density (RS-2), Residential Single-Family, Low Density (RS-3), Residential SingleFamily, Medium Low Density (RS-4), Residential Single-Family, Medium Density (RS-5), Residential Multi-Family, Medium High Density (RM-1), Residential Multi-Family, Urban Neighborhood (RM-2), Residential Multi-Family, High Density (RM-3), Mobile Home Park (RM-MH), Commercial Community (CC), Commercial General (CG), Commercial Regional (CR), Commercial Recreation (CRC), Light Industrial (IL), Corridor/Center Mixed Use (CMX), Neighborhood Mixed Use (NMX), Regional Mixed Use (RMX), Business Park (BP), Office (O), Open Space (OS), and Park and Recreation (PR). See Chapter 2.0 (Project Description) Figure 2.0-5 for the existing zoning designations.
County of Fresno General Plan
The Fresno County General Plan is a policy guide for physical and economic growth of the County.
Unincorporated land located within the Project site is currently under the jurisdiction of the County.
The County General Plan Land Use Map designates the Plan Area with the following county land use LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-11 designations: Rural Residential, Medium Density Residential, Reserve Medium Residential, and Proposed Ponding Basin.
Fresno Local Agency Formation Commission
The Fresno LAFCo is responsible for coordinating orderly reorganization to local jurisdictional boundaries, including annexations. Any annexation of the Plan Area to the City is subject to LAFCo approval, and LAFCo will review proposed annexations for consistency with LAFCo’s Annexation Policies and Procedures.
No annexations are proposed as part of the Specific Plan Adoption; however, future projects within the Specific Plan area may include annexation requests and would be required to adhere to LAFCo policies. Any future proposals for annexations into the City would be required to be consistent with LAFCo policies and procedures.
Fresno LAFCo has adopted Policies and Procedures for Annexation and Detachment to and from all agencies within their jurisdiction. It is Fresno LAFCo policy (102-01) that “within the sphere of influence each agency should implement an orderly, phased annexation program. A proposal should not be approved solely because the area falls within the sphere of influence of an agency.” The City of Fresno follows the Policies and Procedures for Annexation and Detachment when annexing land into the City. LAFCo recommends that each local agency fulfill this policy through the exercise of one or more of the following basic principles and actions.
1. The annexation program is consistent with LAFCo’s Sphere of influence (SOI) for the city.
Suggested actions:
• City and county shall reach agreement on development standards and planning and zoning requirements within the sphere to ensure that development within the sphere occurs in a manner that reflects the concerns of the affected city and is accomplished in a manner that promotes the logical and orderly development of areas within the sphere. GC §56425 • City responds to a request to extend service outside of its city limits and SOIs in consultation with GC §56133 and Fresno LAFCo policy.
2. The annexation program clearly implements the city’s general plan.
Suggested actions:
• City annexation applications shall describe how the proposal implements the city’s general plan, and support these statements with information from other official sources such as the annual budget, capital improvement plan, and so forth.
• A prezoning ordinance shall not be encumbered with extraneous conditions that preclude the ordinance’s effective date by the time of LAFCo hearing on the annexation.
3. The annexation program emphasizes the use of cities’ resolution of application versus property owner/registered voter petitions.
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Suggested action:
• For the city to consider opposing property owner petition-initiated reorganizations as these would not have proceeded through the process of city development review and approval, which is an important step in the management of a city’s general plan.
4. The annexation program supports orderly growth by identifying areas to be annexed, general time frames for growth, and a plan for extension of services to these areas.
Suggested actions:
• Capital improvement plan and/or facilities plans include all lands within the SOI; • Development impact fees that fund the extension of services are established and maintained;
• Impacts to service delivery are assessed in the city’s EIR or project-specific CEQA documents and appropriately-scaled mitigation is approved and implemented. • The city coordinates its public policy documents in support of the annexation program.
5. The annexation program anticipates changes of organization of existing service districts and service areas in the SOI or adjacent to the SOI.
Suggested action:
• The Program should describe the transition of services that will occur when the city annexes/detaches (CID, NCFPD, FCFPD, KRCD, etc.); inversely, the document describes the status of or continuation of services when annexations do not result in detachment (FID, FMFCD, etc.).
6. The annexation program anticipates the location of Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities within a city’s sphere of influence.
Suggested action:
• Cities should become proficient in implementing their responsibilities under Senate Bill 244, should review Fresno LAFCo DUC policy and review Senate Bill 244 Technical Advisory.
7. The annexation program informs citizens in annexation areas of their rights, benefits, and changes that will occur on annexation.
Suggested actions:
• City to establish and maintain on its website a description of the information above, how citizens can engage the process, how the city engages citizens and stakeholders and other information related to annexation. This information should include a description of the SOI, protest processes, and how LAFCo is involved.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-13 • For those portions of a city’s SOI that contain a large number of rural residential parcels that are planned for urban uses, the city is strongly encouraged to develop a long-term plan to annex and serve these areas.
8. The annexation program will be coordinated with LAFCo’s Municipal Services Review (MSR) for the city.
Suggested action:
• City applications should include an assessment of current MSR determinations and recommendations.
9. The annexation program is managed by an assigned and responsible city staff member.
Suggested action:
• City identifies a staff member to serve as a genuine point of contact with LAFCo, that is, a staff member responsible and accountable for managing applications, knowledgeable of the project and of LAFCo’s process, and empowered to facilitate the city’s annexation program.
10. City entitlement analysis is integrated with LAFCo policies Suggested action:
• Local agencies, including Fresno County, are strongly advised to include Fresno LAFCo in their initial request for comments.
• When initial planning applications that will eventually require annexation are submitted to cities, they are encouraged to submit a pre-application to LAFCo so that LAFCo can track the project at its beginning, and provide comments that would facilitate annexation in time for these to be considered in a timely and efficient manner.
3.10.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Specific Plan will have a significant impact on land use and planning if it will:
• Physically divide an established community; or
• 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.
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.10-1: The proposed Specific Plan would not physically divide an established community. (Less than Significant)
The proposed Specific Plan establishes the City’s vision for future growth and development within the Plan Area. The Plan Area is located at the western edge of the City of Fresno west of State Route 99 and primarily consists of and is adjacent to undeveloped lands, sporadic residential and suburban developments and agricultural lands as shown on Figure 2.0-3 located in Chapter 2.0, Project Description.
The existing land use pattern within the Specific Plan Area consists of a patchwork of land uses, including subdivisions, industrial and commercial areas, recreation areas, schools, farmland, and vacant areas. Many pockets of residential land uses are adjacent to vacant land, or agriculture uses.
The implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would enhance the connectivity from the existing uses within the Specific Plan Area to adjacent land uses through improved roadways and pedestrian and bicycle paths and lanes, and develop a cohesive network of planned land uses that would result in greater connectivity within the Specific Plan Area.
Development of the Specific Plan Area would result in a westerly extension of developed uses within Fresno City limits and SOI which would include the development of commercial lands, office, mixed use, residential, and public services and open spaces within the Specific Plan Area. Development allowed under the Specific Plan would require new roadway improvements and pedestrian pathways to connect the Plan Area to the existing circulation system and create connections and to allow access to and from the site and to other areas of the City. As such, development of the Specific Plan Area would not result in any substantial physical barriers, such as a highway, or other division, that would divide an existing community, but would serve as a westerly extension of existing and planned development and create a land use plan for the orderly expansion of the Planning Area.
Because the overall purpose of the proposed Specific Plan is to refine the vision for the Plan Area established in the General Plan, as well as other infrastructure improvements required to accommodate new development, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would not adversely impact community connectivity nor divide the physical arrangement of the community.
There are no development applications being processed as part of the Specific Plan, however individual future projects may require additional site-specific environmental review under CEQA, and would be required to undergo design review as part of development review process. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-15 Impact 3.10-2: The proposed Specific Plan would not 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)
The proposed Specific Plan will establish the land use planning and regulatory guidance, including the land use and zoning designations and policies, for the approximately 7,077-acre Plan Area.
Existing land use plans, policies, and regulations that govern land uses within the Plan Area include the City of Fresno General Plan and Development Code, and Fresno County General Plan and Development Code.
CONSISTENCY WITH STATE PLANS
The proposed Specific Plan was prepared in conformance with State laws and regulations associated with the preparation of specific plans. Discussion of the proposed Specific Plan’s consistency with State regulations, plans, and policies associated with specific environmental issues (e.g., air quality, traffic, water quality, etc.) is provided in the relevant chapters of this Draft EIR. The State would continue to have authority over any State-owned lands and resources in the vicinity of the Specific Plan Area and the proposed Specific Plan would not conflict with continued application of State land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted to avoid or mitigate environmental effects.
CONSISTENCY WITH FRESNO GENERAL PLAN
General Plan Land Use Map: The General Plan aims to achieve efficient, attractive, and resilient development in the Development Areas. The General Plan identifies that in growth areas, subsequent Specific Plans are anticipated to refine land use and transportation design integration and intensity with necessary public facilities, maintenance, and services financing and design standards.
The Specific Plan contains development standards, distribution of land uses, infrastructure requirements, and implementation measures for the development of a specific geographic area. The Specific Plan’s land use plan defines various land use designations by their allowable uses and maximum development densities, and each use is consistent with the adopted General Plan’s land uses. These designations implement both the Specific Plan and the City’s General Plan vision, policies, for each land use classifications and for the specific desire for a comprehensive planned growth area. The proposed Specific Plan would continue to carry forward and implement, policies and objectives from the City’s existing General Plan that were intended for environmental protection and would not remove or conflict with City plans, policies, or regulations adopted for environmental protection.
The proposed Specific Plan would require modifications to the City’s General Plan Land Use Map to provide consistency between the General Plan and Specific Plan; however, these modifications will not remove or adversely modify portions of the General Plan or policies that were adopted to mitigate an environmental effect. The proposed Specific Plan would refine the land use vision and
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan amend the land uses for the Plan Area. The draft land use map proposes the relocation of higher density land uses away from the most western and southwestern portions of the Plan Area where they are distant from public transit and community amenities and transfers those higher density land use designations to major corridors. The Plan would amend the land uses for approximately half of the land within the Plan Area. The remaining parcels would maintain their existing land use and zoning designations. The parcels that are proposed for change by the proposed land use map are shown in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, Figure 2.0-7.
The West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan land use plan utilizes the City’s existing General Plan land use designations to maintain or re-designate some parcels in the West Area. Chapter 2.0, Project Description, shows the parcel acreages by land use classification for the existing General Plan and proposed Specific Plan, and Figure 2.0-6 shows the proposed General Plan land use designations. As indicated in Table 2.0-1, the Specific Plan would result in an increase in land designated for employment, mixed use, open space and public facilities uses and a decrease in land designated for residential and commercial uses.
General Plan Policies: Table 3.10-1 provides an analysis of the Project’s consistency with the relevant General Plan policies adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Since general plans often contain numerous policies emphasizing differing legislative goals, a development project may be “consistent” with a general plan, taken as a whole, even though the project appears to be inconsistent or arguably inconsistent with some individual policies. (Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Association v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 719.) TABLE 3.10-1: GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
URBAN FORM, LAND USE, AND DESIGN ELEMENT
UF-13-a Future Planning to Require Design
Principles. Require future planning, such
as Specific Plans, neighborhood plans or
Concept Plans, for Development Areas
and BRT Corridors designated by the
General Plan to include urban design
principles and standards consistent with
the Urban Form, Land Use, and Design
Element.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes design
principles and standards in Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of
the Specific Plan. This Specific Plan Chapter is
consistent with the Urban Form, Land Use, and
Design Element.
LU-1-c Provision of Public Facilities and
Services. Promote orderly land use
development in pace with public facilities
and services needed to serve
development.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes plans for the
provision of public facilities, services, and utilities in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Specific Plan. Future
development of the Specific Plan Area in
accordance with the proposed land use map would
not occur unless public facilities and services were
adequately provided.
LU-5-g Scale and Character of New
development. Allow new development
in or adjacent to established
neighborhoods that is compatible in
scale and character with the surrounding
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes design
principles and standards in Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of
the Specific Plan which address compatibility with
existing neighborhoods, including scale and
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-17
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
area by promoting a transition in scale
and architectural character between new
buildings and established
neighborhoods, as well as integrating
pedestrian circulation and vehicular
routes.
character. Compliance with the principles and
standards in this Specific Plan Chapter would ensure
that future development in the Plan Area is
compatible with the scale and character of future
buildings. Further, the proposed Specific Plan
includes pedestrian, vehicular, and other circulation
routes in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Specific Plan.
MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
MT-1-b Circulation Plan Diagram
Implementation. Design and construct
planned streets and highways that
complement and enhance the existing
network, as well as future improvements
to the network consistent with the goals,
objectives and policies of the General
Plan, as shown on the Circulation
Diagram (Figure MT-1), to ensure that
each new and existing roadway
continues to function as intended.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes pedestrian,
vehicular, and other circulation routes in Chapters 3
and 4 of the Specific Plan. This Specific Plan Chapter
is consistent with the Circulation Diagram (Figure
MT-1).
MT-1-d Integrate Land Use and Transportation
Planning. Plan for and maintain a
coordinated and well integrated land use
pattern, local circulation network and
transportation system that
accommodates planned growth, reduces
impacts on adjacent land uses, and
preserves the integrity of established
neighborhoods.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes pedestrian,
vehicular, and other circulation routes in Chapters 3
and 4 of the Specific Plan. This Specific Plan Chapter
is consistent with the Circulation Diagram (Figure
MT-1).
MT-4-k Bicycle Safety, Awareness, and
Education. Promote bicycle ridership by
providing secure bicycle facilities,
promoting traffic safety awareness for
both bicyclists and motorists, promoting
the air quality benefits, promoting nonrenewable energy savings, and promoting the public health benefits of
physical activity.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes bicycle
facilities and routes in Chapters 3 and 4 of the
Specific Plan. This Specific Plan Chapter encourages
the use of secure bicycle facilities and promotes the
use of active transportation throughout the Plan
Area.
MT-5-b Sidewalk Requirements. Assure
adequate access for pedestrians and
people with disabilities in new residential
developments per adopted City policies,
consistent with the California Building
Code and the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes pedestrian
facilities in Chapters 3 and 4 of the Specific Plan. This Specific Plan Chapter promotes the use of active
transportation throughout the Plan Area. All future
improvements in the Plan Area would be consistent
with the California Building Code and the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
MT-6-i Path and Trail Design Standards.
Designate and design paths and trails in
accordance with design standards
established by the City that give
consideration to all path and trail users
(consistent with design, terrain and
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan discusses the system
of park and open space facilities, including paths
and trails, in Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan. This
Specific Plan Chapter includes design standards
(including widths, storm water and drainage
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
habitat limitations) and provide for
appropriate widths, surfacing, drainage,
design speed, barriers, fences, signage,
visibility, intersections, bridges, and
street cleaning.
practices, and other standards) and policies to
encourage development of a cohesive trail system
throughout the Plan Area.
MT-6-k Path and Trail Buffers. Use landscaping
with appropriate and adequate physical
and visual barriers (e.g., masonry walls,
wrought iron, or square-tube fencing) to
screen path and trail rights-of ways and
separate paths and trails from mining
operations, drainage facilities, and
similar locations as warranted.
Consistent. As noted above, the proposed West
Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan discusses the
system of park and open space facilities, including
paths and trails, in Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan.
This Specific Plan Chapter includes design standards
(including the use of buffers and visual barriers, as
appropriate) and policies to encourage
development of a cohesive trail system throughout
the Plan Area.
MT-6-m Environmentally Sensitive Path and Trail
Design. Develop paths and trails with
minimum environmental impact by
taking the following actions:
• Surface paths and trails with materials
that are conducive to maintenance and
safe travel, choosing materials that blend
in with the surrounding area;
• Design paths and trails to follow
contour lines where the least amount of
grading (fewest cuts and fills) and least
disturbance of the surrounding habitat
will occur;
• Beautify path and trail rights-of-way in
a manner consistent with intended use,
safety, and maintenance;
• Use landscaping to stabilize slopes,
create physical or visual barriers, and
provide shaded areas; and
• Preserve and incorporate native plant
species into the landscaping.
Consistent. As noted above, the proposed West
Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan discusses the
system of park and open space facilities, including
paths and trails, in Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan.
This Specific Plan Chapter includes design standards
(including trail materials, buffers and visual barriers, landscaping, and native plant usage) and policies
aimed at reducing environmental impacts to the
extent feasible.
MT-6-n Emergency Vehicle Access along Paths
and Trails. Provide points of emergency
vehicle access within the path and trail
corridors, via parking areas, service
roads, emergency access gates in
fencing, and firebreaks.
Consistent. As noted above, the proposed West
Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan discusses the
system of park and open space facilities, including
paths and trails, in Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan.
Emergency vehicle access would be provided as
individual parks, trails, and open space areas are
developed in the future.
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT
PU-3-f Adequate Infrastructure. Continue to
pursue the provision of adequate water
supplies, hydrants, and appropriate
property access to allow for adequate
fire suppression throughout the City.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes plans for the
provision of utilities, including water supplies, in
Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan. Future development
of the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the
proposed land use map would not occur unless
facilities and supplies, including emergency access,
were adequately provided.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-19
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
PU-4-c System Extension and Cost Recovery.
Pursue enlargement or extension of the
sewage collection system where
necessary to serve planned urban
development, with the capital costs and
benefits allocated equitably and fairly
between the existing users and new
users.
Consistent. The proposed West Area
Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes plans for the
provision of utilities, including wastewater
distribution and treatment, in Chapter 3 of the
Specific Plan. Future development of the Specific
Plan Area in accordance with the proposed land use
map would not occur unless facilities and supplies,
including emergency access, were adequately
provided. Development Impact Fees would be paid
by future project applicants throughout the City,
including the Plan Area.
PU-8-g Review Project Impact on Supply.
Mitigate the effects of development and
capital improvement projects on the
long-range water budget to ensure an
adequate water supply for current and
future uses.
Consistent. As noted above, the proposed West
Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes plans for
the provision of utilities, including water supplies, in Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan. Future development
of the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the
proposed land use map would not occur unless
water facilities and supplies were adequately
provided.
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RESILIENCE ELEMENT
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. Discourage investment in
infrastructure that would not meet these
criteria.
Consistent. The proposed Specific Plan would
encourage infill development in multi-modal
corridors. As outlined in Chapter 2.0, Project
Description, of this EIR, the proposed Specific Plan
includes four objectives pertaining to
transportation. Together, these objectives promote
transit services and other alternative transportation
facilities (bicycle and pedestrian) in the West Area
by locating routes near or adjacent to higherintensity development, such as community centers, schools, parks, and retail centers.
RC-4-c Evaluate Impacts with Models. Continue
to require the use of computer models
used by SJVAPCD to evaluate the air
quality impacts of plans and projects that
require such environmental review by
the City.
Consistent. Air quality impacts are discussed in
Section 3.3 of this EIR. The California Emissions
Estimator Model (CalEEMod), which is the SJVAPCDpreferred computer model, was used to estimate the air quality emissions resulting from future
buildout of the Plan Area.
RC-4-d Forward Information. Forward
information regarding proposed General
Plan amendments, community plans,
Specific Plans, neighborhood plans,
Concept Plans, and development
proposals that require air quality
evaluation, and amendments to
development regulations to the SJVAPCD
for their review of potential air quality
and health impacts.
Consistent. Information regarding the proposed
Specific Plan, including all requested entitlements,
will be forwarded to the SJVAPCD for their review of
potential air quality and health impacts. The
SJVAPCD reviewed the NOP for the Specific Plan and
provided a NOP comment letter on July 15, 2019.
Once the EIR is available for public review, the EIR
will be provided to the SJVAPCD.
RC-5-d SCS and CAP Conformity Analysis.
Ensure that the City includes analysis of a
project’s conformity to an adopted
regional Sustainable Community Strategy
Consistent. Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gases, Climate
Change, and Energy, of this EIR discusses conformity
with the City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, the
Fresno Council of Governments Regional
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
or Alternative Planning Strategy (APS), an
adopted Climate Action Plan (CAP), and
any other applicable City and regional
greenhouse gas reduction strategies in
effect at the time of project review.
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy, and other applicable City regulations
which aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As
discussed in Impact 3.7-1 and shown in Table 3.7-6,
the proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the
City’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. The Specific
Plan is also consistent with the Fresno Council of
Governments’ Regional Transportation Plan.
RC-5-e Ensure Compliance. Ensure ongoing
compliance with GHG emissions
reduction plans and programs by
requiring that air quality measures are
incorporated into projects’ design,
conditions of approval, and mitigation
measures.
Consistent. Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gases, Climate
Change, and Energy, of this EIR discusses
compliance with GHG emissions reductions plans
and programs which aim to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. As discussed, the proposed Specific Plan
is consistent with the City’s Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Plan. Because all impacts were
determined to be less than significant, mitigation
measures are not warranted or required.
RC-5-g Evaluate Impacts with Models. Continue
to use computer models such as those
used by SJVAPCD to evaluate greenhouse
gas impacts of plans and projects that
require such review.
Consistent. Greenhouse gas emission impacts are
discussed in Section 3.3 of this EIR. CalEEMod, which
is the SJVAPCD-preferred computer model, was
used to estimate the greenhouse gas emissions
resulting from future buildout of the Plan Area.
RC-6-c Land Use and Development Compliance.
Ensure that land use and development
projects adhere to the objective of the
Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources
Management Plan to provide sustainable
and reliable water supplies to meet the
demand of existing and future customers
through 2025.
Consistent. Section 3.15, Utilities, of this EIR,
analyzes potential impacts associated with water
supplies and demands in the near and long term
(until 2040). As discussed, future development of
the Plan Area would not result in insufficient water
supplies. As such, the proposed Specific Plan meets
the objective of the Fresno Metropolitan Water
Resources Management Plan to provide sustainable
and reliable water supplies to meet the demand of
existing and future customers through 2025.
RC-6-g Protect Recharge Areas. Continue to
protect areas of beneficial natural
groundwater recharge by preventing
uses that can contaminate soil or
groundwater.
Consistent. Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality, of this EIR, analyzes potential impacts
associated with groundwater recharge, depletion of
groundwater resources, and conflicts with the
groundwater management plan. As discussed in
Impact 3.9-3, the required stormwater best
management practices (BMPs) and retention basins
would be designed to reduce runoff below that
which occurs currently during storm events and
ensure groundwater recharge from the Plan Area to
the extent possible. Additionally, the Specific Plan
water demand is not expected to exceed the City’s
supplies in any normal, single dry, or multiple dry
year between 2020 and 2040, and the Plan would
not conflict with the Fresno Area Regional
Groundwater Management Plan (FARGMP).
Further, the Specific Plan includes two policies that
would encourage nonporous surfaces for
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-21
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
groundwater recharge and other design strategies
to maximize recharge.
HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ELEMENT
HCR-2-c Project Development. Prior to project
approval, continue to require a project
site and its Area of Potential Effects
(APE), without benefit of a prior historic
survey, to be evaluated and reviewed for
the potential for historic and/or cultural
resources by a professional who meets
the Secretary of Interior’s Qualifications.
Survey costs shall be the responsibility of
the project developer. Council may, but
is not required, to adopt an ordinance to
implement this policy.
Consistent. Section 3.5, Cultural and Tribal
Resources, of this EIR, analyzes potential impacts
associated with historical resources, archaeological
resources, human remains, and tribal cultural
resources. A Cultural and Paleontological Resource
Assessment for the Fresno West Area Specific Plan
Project was conducted (Cogstone, 2019). Due to the
programmatic nature of this EIR, future projects in
the Plan Area would be required to be evaluated for
project-specific impacts under CEQA at the time of
application. CEQA guidelines require tribal
consultation and the protections of any identified
archeological and tribal resources. This is
considered a potentially significant impact, which
would be mitigated to a less than significant level
through the implementation of the mitigation
measures included in Section 3.5. Specifically,
Mitigation Measure 3.5-1 requiresthat all work stop
within 50 meters of a cultural resources discovery,
and a qualified archaeologist that meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards in prehistoric or historical
archaeology be retained to determine the
significance of the discovery.
HCR-2-f Archaeological Resources. Consider
State Office of Historic Preservation
guidelines when establishing CEQA
mitigation measures for archaeological
resources.
Consistent. Section 3.5, Cultural and Tribal
Resources, of this EIR, analyzes potential impacts
associated with archaeological resources. The
mitigation measures in this section were
established within the Cultural and Paleontological
Resource Assessment for the Fresno West Area
Specific Plan Project (Cogstone, 2019). The
measures generally follow the State Office of
Historic Preservation guidelines.
NOISE AND SAFETY ELEMENT
NS-1-i Mitigation by New Development.
Require an acoustical analysis where new
development of industrial, commercial
or other noise generating land uses
(including transportation facilities such
as roadways, railroads, and airports) may
result in noise levels that exceed the
noise level exposure criteria established
by Tables 9-2 and 9-3 to determine
impacts, and require developers to
mitigate these impacts in conformance
with Tables 9-2 and 9-3 as a condition of
permit approval through appropriate
means.
Consistent. Section 3.11, Noise, of this EIR, analyzes
potential noise and vibration impacts associated
with future development of the Plan Area. This
section is based on the acoustical analysis that was
prepared for the Specific Plan. The acoustical
analysis includes mitigation measures consistent
with this policy. As discussed in Impact 3.11-1,
buildout of the Plan Area would result in substantial
increases in ambient traffic noise levels resulting in
potentially significant impacts to existing and
proposed receptors. Mitigation Measure 3.11-1
would require the implementation of performance
standards based on project-specific acoustical
analysis for new residential and noise sensitive uses
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
Noise mitigation measures may include:
• The screening of noise sources such
as parking and loading facilities,
outdoor activities, and mechanical
equipment;
• Providing increased setbacks for
noise sources from adjacent
dwellings;
• Installation of walls and landscaping
that serve as noise buffers;
• Installation of soundproofing
materials and double-glazed
windows; and
• Regulating operations, such as hours
of operation, including deliveries and
trash pickup.
Alternative acoustical designs that
achieve the prescribed noise level
reduction may be approved by the City,
provided a qualified Acoustical
Consultant submits information
demonstrating that the alternative
designs will achieve and maintain the
specific targets for outdoor activity areas
and interior spaces. As a last resort,
developers may propose to construct
noise walls along roadways when
compatible with aesthetic concerns and
neighborhood character. This would be a
developer responsibility, with no City
funding.
exposed to significant exterior community noise
levels from transportation, which may include noise
walls and/or berms. Mitigation Measure 3.11-1
would assist in reducing traffic noise level impacts.
Therefore, with implementation of the mitigation,
buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result
in a lessthan significant impact relative to this topic.
As discussed in Impact 3.11-4, due to the
suburban/rural nature of the Plan Area,
development of the West Area Specific Plan will
result in a substantial increase in existing ambient
noise conditions. Increases in ambient noise levels
associated with existing and future stationary noise
impacts may result in potentially significant
impacts. However, enforcement of the Sections 10-
105 through 10-109 of the City’s Noise Ordinance
and analysis of noise producing projects, along with
implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-5,
would ensure that the nearby sensitive receptors to
the Plan Area would not be subject to stationary
noise levels in excess of the City’s standards.
Further, Mitigation Measure 3.11-6 would ensure
that the future land uses within the Specific Plan
would not be subject to interior noise levels in
excess of the City’s standards.
NS-1-j Significance Threshold. Establish, as a
threshold of significance for the City's
environmental review process, that a
significant increase in ambient noise
levels is assumed if the project would
increase noise levels in the immediate
vicinity by 3 dB LDN or CNEL or more
above the ambient noise limits
established in this General Plan Update.
Consistent. As noted previously, Section 3.11,
Noise, of this EIR, analyzes potential noise and
vibration impacts associated with future
development of the Plan Area. This section is based
on the acoustical analysis that was prepared for the
Specific Plan. The acoustical analysis assumes that
an increase in noise levels by 3 dB LDN or CNEL or
more above the ambient noise limits would be
considered a significant increase.
NS-1-k Proposal Review. Review all new public
and private development proposals that
may potentially be affected by or cause a
significant increase in noise levels, per
Policy NS-1-i, to determine conformance
with the policies of this Noise Element.
Require developers to reduce the noise
Consistent. As noted previously, Section 3.11,
Noise, of this EIR, analyzes potential noise and
vibration impacts associated with future
development of the Plan Area. The acoustical
analysis was performed at the program-level.
Future development projects within the Plan Area
would be required to reduce the noise impacts on
adjacent properties, as appropriate and feasible.
LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-23
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
impacts of new development on adjacent
properties through appropriate means.
NS-1-m Transportation Related Noise Impacts.
For projects subject to City approval,
require that the project sponsor mitigate
noise created by new transportation and
transportation-related stationary noise
sources, including roadway
improvement projects, so that resulting
noise levels do not exceed the City’s
adopted standards for noise sensitive
land uses.
Consistent. As noted previously, Section 3.11,
Noise, of this EIR, analyzes potential transportation
and transportation-related noise impacts
associated with future development of the Plan
Area. The acoustical analysis was performed at the
program-level. Future development projects within
the Plan Area would be required to reduce the
transportation noise impacts on adjacent
properties, as appropriate and feasible.
NS-2-b 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.
Consistent. Section 3.6, Geology, Soils, and
Seismicity, of this EIR, analyzes potential geologic
impacts associated with future development of the
Plan Area. This EIR section identifies areas with
potential geologic and soils hazards. Future
development within the Plan Area, as required by
the California Building Code, would be required to
complete a design-level geotechnical analysis
conducted by a registered civil engineer (or
engineering geologist specializing in soil geology).
Should wastewater disposal, stormwater facilities,
or swimming pools be included as part of these
future development projects, the design-level
geotechnical analysis would include soil analysis and
mitigation to address any potential soils hazards.
NS-3-i New Development Must Mitigate
Impact. Require new development to not
significantly impact the existing storm
drainage and flood control system by
imposing conditions of approval as
project mitigation, as authorized by law.
As part of this process, closely coordinate
and consult with the FMFCD to identify
appropriate conditions that will result in
mitigation acceptable and preferred by
FMFCD for each project.
Consistent. Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality, of this EIR, analyzes potential storm
drainage and flooding impacts associated with
future development of the Plan Area. Impacts
associated with storm drainage and flooding,
including flood control, were determined to be less
than significant or less than significant with
implementation of mitigation. As such, future
development of the Plan Area would mitigate,
where necessary and applicable, potential storm
drainage and flooding related impacts.
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 groundwater
contamination is identified or could be
encountered during site development.
Consistent. Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water
Quality, of this EIR, analyzes potential storm
drainage and flooding impacts associated with
future development of the Plan Area. Impacts
associated with storm drainage and flooding,
including flood control, were determined to be less
than significant or less than significant with
implementation of mitigation. As such, future
development of the Plan Area would mitigate,
where necessary and applicable, potential storm
drainage and flooding related impacts.
NS-4-e Compliance with County Program.
Require that the production, use,
Consistent. Section 3.8, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, of this EIR, analyzes potential storm
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
GENERAL PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
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.
impacts associated with production, use, storage,
disposal, and transport of hazardous materials. As
discussed, prior to bringing hazardous materials
onsite, future development projects would be
required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business
Plan to the County Environmental Health
Department.
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.
Consistent. Section 3.14, Transportation and
Circulation, of this EIR, analyzes potential storm
impacts associated emergency vehicle access.
Future development within the Plan Area would not
result in inadequate emergency vehicle access.
The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the adopted General Plan and has been designed to encourage implementation of the General Plan’s primary objectives. The General Plan’s overarching land use objective for the Growth Areas includes Objective UF-13 that calls for the City to locate roughly one-half of future residential development in the Growth Areas (including the West Development Area), which are to be developed with Complete Neighborhoods that include housing, services, and recreation; mixed-use centers; or along future BRT corridors. As discussed throughout the proposed Specific Plan, the West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan holds firm to the goal of achieving Complete Neighborhoods.
The West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan will serve as an implementation tool to support the General Plan’s goals and objectives as well as a vital instrument for much needed comprehensive planning, to improve area-wide connectivity, housing opportunities, recreation, services and infrastructure improvements.
CITY OF FRESNO ZONING CODE
The Specific Plan includes certain development regulations and standards that are intended to be specific to the Specific Plan Area. Where there is a matter or issue not specifically covered by the Specific Plan development regulations and design standards, the Fresno Zoning Code would apply.
Where there is a conflict between the Specific Plan and the Zoning Code, the Zoning Code would prevail.
The Specific Plan is intended to be adopted by the City Council and to serve as a tool for the City of Fresno to implement. The Specific Plan is to be used by designers, developers, builders, and planners, to guide development of the Plan Area. The land use, development standards, and design guidelines are provided to ensure that all proposed developments remain consistent with the vision established by the Specific Plan as the Project is built over time. The Specific Plan development concepts, design guidelines, and standards are in accordance with the City’s General Plan, Municipal Ordinances, and City Specifications. The Specific Plan shall be used to review, process, and approve LAND USE 3.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.10-25 development proposals for the Project site including but not limited to site specific development applications and site improvement plans.
As previously indicated, the City of Fresno Zoning Map designates the Plan Area as: RE, RS-1, RS-2, RS-3, RS-4, RS-5, RM-1, RM-2, RM-3, RM-MH, CC, CG, CR, CRC, IL, CMX, NMX, RMX, BP, O, OS, and PR. The Fresno County Zoning Map designates the portions of the Plan Area outside the city limits as: RCC, C4, C6, M1, AE20, AL20, RR, RA, R1B, and TP. In conjunction with the approval of the Specific Plan, the parcels in the City which would have a changed land use designation as a result of the Specific Plan would be rezoned to the corresponding City zoning designation. Zoning designations are generally consistent with the existing General Plan land uses. The proposed Specific Plan would require modifications to the City’s Zoning Map to provide consistency between the General Plan and zoning; however, these modifications will not remove or adversely modify portions of the Fresno Municipal Code that were adopted to mitigate an environmental effect.
The parcels that are currently within the County will not be rezoned. Instead, upon a proposal to annex unincorporated land into the city limits, the City of Fresno would prezone the land to a zone that is consistent with the General Plan land use. Once annexation occurs, the County zoning would not apply to the parcel.
CONSISTENCY WITH FRESNO COUNTY’S LAND USE PLANS
The proposed Specific Plan land use designations are not entirely consistent with the County land use designations and Zoning Designations for areas outside the Fresno City limits, but within the Plan Area. The Fresno County Zoning Map designates the portions of the Plan Area outside the Fresno City limits as: Rural Commercial Center (RCC), Central Trading (C4), General Commercial (C6), Light Industrial (M1), Exclusive Agricultural (AE20), Limited Agricultural (AL20), Rural Residential (RR), Single Family Residential Agricultural (RA), Single Family Residential (12,500) (R1B), and Trailer Park Residential (TP). The parcels that are currently within the County will not be rezoned. Instead, upon a proposal to annex unincorporated land into the City limits, the City of Fresno would prezone the land to a zone that is consistent with the General Plan land use. Once annexation occurs, the County zoning would no longer apply to the parcel. As described in the requested entitlements in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, no annexations are being requested as part of the proposed Specific Plan. The properties currently located outside of the current City of Fresno City limits, within the County, would continue to be governed under the Fresno County land use policies and designations until such time that 1) the property owners desire to annex the subject properties into the City, 2) all applicable project entitlements have been approved by the City Council, and 3) the LAFCo of Fresno County approves the annexation request. As such, all figures and text in the Specific Plan and this Draft EIR (as they pertain to these unincorporated properties) have been provided for conceptual planning purposes.
The County’s General Plan includes the major theme of directing urban growth to existing communities, including the City of Fresno. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with this land use theme in that the Specific Plan would result in extension of an existing community, the City of
3.10 LAND USE
3.10-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Fresno, in any area located adjacent to the City limits. Any future development on County land that is eventually annexed into the City of Fresno would be phased and would include the provision of adequate City services.
CONCLUSION
Subsequent development projects within the Specific Plan Area would be required to be consistent with all applicable policies, standards, and regulations, including those land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted to mitigate environmental effects by the City as well as those adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over components of future development projects. Any potential environmental impact associated with conflicts with land use requirements including conflicts with policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be less than significant.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-1 This section provides a general description of the existing noise sources in the Plan Area vicinity, a discussion of the regulatory setting, and identifies potential noise impacts associated with the proposed project. Specific Plan impacts are evaluated relative to applicable noise level criteria and to the existing ambient noise environment. Mitigation measures have been identified for significant noise-related impacts. This section is based on the West Area Specific Plan Noise Impact Study completed for the project (MD Acoustics, September 2020), which can be found in Appendix F.
Comments were received during the public review period or scoping meeting for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic from the following: Cathy Caples (dated August 1, 2019). Cathy Caples noted that, in addition to traffic noise, residents in the area hear gunfire from the Sheriff’s Gun Range; however, no specific-concerns were expressed. The comments related to this topic are addressed within this section; see Impact 3.11-1 regarding traffic noise and Impact 3.11-4 regarding stationary noise. Full comments received are included in Appendix A.
3.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
KEY TERMS
Acoustics The science of sound.
Ambient Noise The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given area consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre-project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.
Attenuation The reduction of noise.
A-Weighting A frequency-response adjustment of a sound level meter that conditions the output signal to approximate human response.
Decibel or dB Fundamental unit of sound, defined as ten times the logarithm of the ratio of the sound pressure squared over the reference pressure squared.
CNEL Community noise equivalent level. Defined as the 24-hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 - 10 p.m.) weighted by a factor of three and nighttime hours weighted by a factor of 10 prior to averaging.
Frequency The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic acoustic signal, expressed in cycles per second or Hertz.
Impulsive Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.
Ldn Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.
Leq Equivalent or energy-averaged sound level.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Lmax The highest root-mean-square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.
L(n) The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period.
For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the one hour period.
Loudness A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.
Noise Unwanted sound.
SEL Sound exposure levels. A rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train passby, that compresses the total sound energy into a one-second event.
FUNDAMENTALS OF ACOUSTICS
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to human (or animal) ears. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound, and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz).
Noise is a subjective reaction to different types of sounds. Noise is typically defined as (airborne) sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected or undesired, and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.
Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.
The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by A-weighted sound levels. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment. All noise levels reported in this section are in terms of A-weighted levels, but are expressed as dB, unless otherwise noted.
The decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear. In other words, two sound levels 10 dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A-weighted, an increase NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-3 of 10 dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70 dBA sound is half as loud as an 80 dBA sound, and twice as loud as a 60 dBA sound.
Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the all-encompassing noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool to measure the ambient noise level is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady-state A weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.
The day/night average level (Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10 decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours.
The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because Ldn represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment. CNEL is similar to Ldn, but includes a +5 dB penalty for evening noise. Table 3.11-1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations.
TABLE 3.11-1: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
COMMON OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES NOISE LEVEL (DBA) COMMON INDOOR ACTIVITIES -- --110-- Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300 m (1,000 ft) --100-- --
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft) --90-- --
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft),
at 80 km/hr (50 mph) --80--
Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft)
Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft)
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft) --70-- Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft) --60-- Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft) Quiet Urban Daytime --50--
Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime --40--
Theater, Large Conference Room
(Background)
Quiet Suburban Nighttime --30-- Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime --20--
Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall
(Background)
--10-- Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing --0-- Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing SOURCE: CALTRANS, TECHNICAL NOISE SUPPLEMENT, TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS PROTOCOL. NOVEMBER 2009.
EFFECTS OF NOISE ON PEOPLE
The effects of noise on people can be placed in three categories:
• Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction; • Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning; and • Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the last category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual’s past experiences with noise.
Thus, an important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so-called ambient noise level.
In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it. With regard to increases in A-weighted noise level, the following relationships occur:
• Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a 1 dBA change cannot be perceived; • Outside of the laboratory, a 3 dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference; • A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected; and
• A 10 dBA change is subjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness, and can cause an adverse response.
Stationary point sources of noise – including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles – attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6 dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on environmental conditions (i.e. atmospheric conditions and either vegetative or manufactured noise barriers, etc.). Widely distributed noises, such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres, or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate.
EXISTING NOISE LEVELS
Four long-term 24-hour noise measurements and 12 short-term noise measurements were conducted throughout the Plan Area to document the existing noise environment. Noise measurement locations are shown in Figure 3.11-1.
Short-Term Noise Measurements
The results of the 12 short-term noise measurement are presented below in Table 3.11-2. The measured noise levels within the Plan Area range between 54.4 and 74.8 dBA Leq. The primary source of ambient noise included vehicle noise associated with surface streets and SR 99, as well as the existing rail. Secondary noise sources included typical residential activities and landscaping equipment. Field notes and meter output are provided in the Noise Impact Study found in Appendix F.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-5 TABLE 3.11-2: SHORT-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT SUMMARY
LOCATION APPROX. ADDRESS TIME
A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL (DBA)
LEQ LMAX LMIN L2 L8 L25 L50
1 Herndon Ave./
N. Parkway Dr. 9:28 AM 67.6 78.3 54.5 74.7 71.3 68.0 65.6 2 N. Bryan Ave./
W. Shaw Ave. 9:48 AM 69.5 84.1 40.9 78.3 75.8 69.4 60.4 3 N. Polk Ave./
W. Gettysburg Ave. 10:15 AM 61.5 82.5 41.3 68.1 62.2 58.8 54.2 4 N. Bryan Ave./
W. Ashlan Ave. 10:32 AM 54.4 69.5 37.8 63.1 58.4 53.7 50.0 5 N. Polk Ave./
W. Ashlan Ave. 12:13 PM 64.6 86.5 45.4 71.6 67.7 64.3 60.8 6 N. Dakota Ave./
W. Brawley Ave. 2:19 PM 74.8 99.8 50.2 79.2 72.6 67.5 64.3 7 N. Grantland Ave./
W. Shields Ave. 12:38 PM 72.8 93.4 37.5 81.4 74.7 65.0 56.2 8 N. Polk Ave./
W. Shields Ave. 12:54 PM 66.1 86.3 51.5 75.5 70.1 62.6 58.9 9 N. Blythe Ave./
W. Shields Ave. 1:09 PM 64.4 79.9 48.1 73.5 68.9 63.4 59.5 10 N. Bryan Ave./
W. Clinton Ave. 1:26 PM 59.6 79.5 31.9 70.4 61.6 52.7 43.8 11 N. Cornelia Ave./
W. Clinton Ave. 1:42 PM 65.8 85.0 44.7 73.4 68.7 64.7 60.4 12 N. Marks Ave./
W. Clinton Ave. 2:00 PM 68.8 85.2 55.2 75.9 72.7 69.6 65.6 SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, 2020.
Long-Term Noise Measurements
Four long-term noise measurements (24 consecutive hours) were taken in order to document the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) at different locations throughout the Plan Area. The results of the long-term noise measurement are presented below in Table 3.11-3, which outlines the daytime (7AM to 7PM), evening (7PM to 10PM), and nighttime (10PM to 7AM) Leq levels at each location. These represent the average level over each time period (day/evening/night).
As shown in Table 3.11-3, the measured CNEL ranged between 60.5 and 70.2 dBA, and the primary noise source was vehicle traffic. Field notes and meter output are provided in the West Area Specific Plan Noise Impact Study found in Appendix F.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan TABLE 3.11-3: LONG-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT SUMMARY
LOCATIO
N
APPROX.
ADDRESS
DATE DESCRIPTION
A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL (DBA)
DAY-TIME
LEQ
EVENING
LEQ
NIGHTTIME LEQ
CNEL
LT1
N. Grantland
Ave./W.
Barstow Ave.
6/3-
6/4
Vehicle traffic on N.
Valentine Ave. and SR 99 58.8 56.1 52.7 60.7
LT2
N. Valentine
Ave./W.
Shields Ave.
6/3-
6/4
Vehicle traffic on N.
Grantland Ave. and W.
Barstow Ave.
65.4 62.1 63.4 70.8
LT3
N. Blythe
Ave./W.
Ashlan Ave.
6/4-
6/5
Vehicle traffic on N. Blythe
Ave. and W. Ashlan Ave. 67.3 65.5 61.5 69.1
LT4
N. Hayes
Ave./W.
Ashlan Ave.
6/3-
6/4
Vehicle traffic on N. Hayes
Ave. and W. Ashlan Ave. 65.8 61.3 58.6 67.1
SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, 2020.
EXISTING NOISE ENVIRONMENT
Existing land uses within the Plan Area include single and multiple family residential development, commercial, recreational, and industrial land uses. Noise sources associated with existing land uses include residential maintenance, parking lot noise, heating and cooling system (HVAC) noise, property maintenance noise, trash truck noise, loading and unloading noise, and recreational noise.
Roadway Noise
The primary noise source in the community is vehicle traffic traveling on surface streets and on State Route (SR) 99. Long-term (24-hour) and short-term (10-minute) noise measurements were taken at 16 locations throughout the Plan Area, as shown in Figure 3.11-1. Existing modeled and measured noise levels associated with acoustically significant roadways within the Plan Area are shown on Figure 3.11-2, as well as in Table 3.11-4 below. The modeled noise levels do not take into account factors such as existing buildings, walls, etc. that may reduce or in some cases, amplify noise sources.
The measured noise levels do take into account existing structures as well as other noise sources. It should be noted that the road segment modeling assumptions for the existing exterior noise levels found in Table 3.11-4 can be found within the West Area Specific Plan Noise Impact Study found in Appendix F.
TABLE 3.11-4: EXISTING EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS ALONG ROADWAYS (DBA, CNEL)
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
SR 99 W. Herndon Ave to
W. Shaw Ave 83 695 1,497 3,225 6,948
SR 99 W. Shaw Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 82 672 1,447 3,118 6,718
SR 99 W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 84 826 1,780 3,834 8,261
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-7
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
SR 99 W. Dakota Ave to
W. Shields Ave 84 821 1,768 3,810 8,208
SR 99 W. Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 82 615 1,324 2,852 6,145
W. Herndon Ave N. Garfield Ave to
N. Parkway Drive No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data W. Bullard Ave N Garfield Ave to
N. Grantland Ave 48 3 7 16 33
W. Bullard Ave N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 55 10 21 44 96
W. Bullard Ave N. Bryan Ave to
SR 99 23 0 0 0 1
W. Barstow Ave N Garfield to
N. Grantland Ave 53 8 17 37 79
W. Barstow Ave N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 49 4 9 19 41
W. Barstow Ave N. Bryan Ave to
N. Contessa Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data W. Barstow Ave N. Contessa Ave to
N. Island Waterpark
Drive
No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
W. Shaw Ave N Garfield Ave to
N. Grantland Ave 59 19 41 89 193
W. Shaw Ave N. Grantland Ave to N.
Bryan Ave 60 22 46 100 215
W. Shaw Ave N. Bryan Ave to 1,300 ft
east of N. Hayes Ave 61 24 51 110 238
W. Shaw Ave 1,300 ft east of
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave
63 36 77 166 358
W. Shaw Ave N. Polk Ave to
SR 99 66 57 124 266 574
W. Gettysburg
Ave
1,300 ft west of
N. Bryan Ave to
Bryan Ave
51 5 11 25 53
W. Gettysburg
Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 52 7 14 31 67
W. Gettysburg
Ave
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 53 7 16 34 73
W. Gettysburg
Ave
N. Polk Ave to
N. Barcus 54 8 17 37 80
W. Ashlan Ave N. Garfield to
N. Grantland No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
W. Ashlan Ave N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 59 18 38 82 177
3.11 NOISE
3.11-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
W. Ashlan Ave N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 56 12 27 58 124
W. Ashlan Ave N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 55 9 20 44 94
W. Ashlan Ave N. Polk Ave to
N. Cornelia Ave 60 20 44 94 203
W. Ashlan Ave N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 64 38 81 174 376
W. Ashlan Ave N. Blythe Ave to
SR 99 65 48 103 223 480
W. Dakota Ave N. Hayes Ave to
N. Barcus Ave 53 7 16 34 73
W. Dakota Ave N. Barcus Ave to
N. Polk Ave 56 11 24 51 109
W. Dakota Ave N. Polk Ave to
N. Cornelia Ave 57 14 30 65 139
W. Dakota Ave N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 56 12 27 57 123
W. Dakota Ave N. Blythe Ave to
N Brawley Ave 55 10 22 47 101
W. Dakota Ave N Brawley Ave to
N. Parkway Drive 54 8 18 39 84
W. Shields Ave N. Garfield Ave to
Grantland Ave 54 9 20 42 91
W. Shields Ave N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 54 9 20 43 92
W. Shields Ave N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 56 11 24 51 109
W. Shields Ave N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 55 10 22 48 103
W. Shields Ave N. Polk Ave to
N. Dante Ave 58 17 36 78 169
W. Shields Ave N. Dante Ave to
N. Cornelia Ave 58 17 36 78 169
W. Shields Ave N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 57 13 28 60 130
W. Shields Ave N. Blythe Ave to
N. Brawley Ave 57 13 27 59 126
W. Shields Ave N Brawley Ave to
N. Valentine Ave 58 15 33 70 152
W. Shields Ave N. Valentine Ave to
N. Marks Ave 58 17 37 79 170
W. Clinton Ave N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 48 3 7 15 32
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-9
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
W. Clinton Ave N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 50 5 10 21 46
W. Clinton Ave N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 52 6 13 28 60
W. Clinton Ave N. Polk Ave to 1,900 ft
east of N. Polk Ave 52 6 13 28 60
W. Clinton Ave 1,900 ft east of N. Polk
Ave to N. Cornelia Ave 59 18 40 86 184
W. Clinton Ave N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Milburn Ave 63 34 74 159 343
W. Clinton Ave N. Milburn Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 62 29 62 133 286
W. Clinton Ave N. Blythe Ave to
N Sonora Ave 65 44 95 204 440
W. Clinton Ave N. Sonora Ave to
N Brawley Ave 63 37 79 170 367
W. Clinton Ave N Brawley Ave to
N. Knoll Ave 64 38 82 177 381
W. Clinton Ave N. Knoll Ave to 850 ft
east of N. Knoll Ave 64 37 81 174 374
W. Clinton Ave 850 ft east of N. Knoll
Ave to N. Valentine
Ave
61 27 58 124 268
W. Clinton Ave N. Valentine Ave to
N. Marks Ave 64 41 88 190 410
W. Clinton Ave N. Marks Ave to
W. Vassar Ave 68 73 158 340 733
N Garfield Ave W. Herndon Ave to
W. Bullard Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N Garfield Ave W. Bullard Ave to
W. Barstow Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N Garfield Ave W. Barstow Ave to
1,000 ft south of W.
Barstow Ave
No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N Garfield Ave 1,000 ft south of W.
Barstow Ave to
W. Shaw Ave
No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N Garfield Ave W. Shaw Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data N Garfield Ave W. Gettysburg to
W. Ashlan Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N Garfield Ave W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N Garfield Ave W. Dakota Ave to
W. Shields Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
3.11 NOISE
3.11-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
N. Parkway
Drive
N Herndon Ave to
W. Herndon Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N. Grantland
Ave
N. Parkway Drive to
W. Bullard Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Bullard Ave to
W. Barstow Ave 62 31 68 146 315
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Barstow Ave to
W. Shaw Ave 62 29 62 134 290
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 57 14 31 67 144
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 60 21 44 95 205
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Ashlan Ave to
W Dakota Ave 59 17 37 80 171
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W. Shields Ave No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data
N. Grantland
Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57 14 31 66 142
N. Bryan Ave W. Shaw Ave to
W. Santa Ana Ave 54 8 18 39 84
N. Bryan Ave W. Santa Ana Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 54 8 18 39 84
N. Bryan Ave W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 58 15 32 69 149
N. Bryan Ave W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 55 10 22 47 102
N. Bryan Ave W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 53 7 15 32 68
N. Bryan Ave W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 48 4 8 16 35
N. Hayes Ave W. Shaw Ave to
W. Santa Ana Ave 57 14 30 64 138
N. Hayes Ave W. Santa Ana Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 57 14 29 63 136
N. Hayes Ave W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Swift Ave 55 10 21 46 100
N. Hayes Ave W. Swift Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 52 7 14 31 67
N. Hayes Ave W. Ashland Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 54 8 18 39 84
N. Hayes Ave W. Dakota Ave to
1,300 ft South of
W. Dakota Ave
53 8 17 36 78
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-11
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
N. Hayes Ave 1,300 ft South of
W. Dakota Ave
to W Shields Ave
56 12 25 54 116
N. Hayes Ave W Shields Ave to W.
Clinton Ave 52 7 14 30 66
N. Polk Ave North of W. Shaw Ave 60 22 47 102 219
N. Polk Ave W. Shaw Ave to
W. Acacia Ave 62 31 66 142 307
N. Polk Ave W. Acacia Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 62 31 67 145 312
N. Polk Ave W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 58 17 36 78 167
N. Polk Ave W. Ashland Ave to W.
Griffith Way 59 18 40 85 184
N. Polk Ave W. Griffith Way to
W. Dakota Ave 61 26 55 119 257
N. Polk Ave W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 58 17 36 78 168
N. Polk Ave W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57 14 30 65 141
N. Cornelia Ave N. Parkway Drive to W.
Gettysburg Ave 60 22 48 104 223
N. Cornelia Ave W. Gettysburg to
W. Ashlan Ave 60 22 48 104 223
N. Cornelia Ave W. Ashland Ave to
W. Bellaire Way 62 27 59 128 275
N. Cornelia Ave W. Bellaire Way to
W. Dakota Ave 62 27 59 128 275
N. Cornelia Ave W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 58 15 33 70 152
N. Cornelia Ave W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 60 22 47 102 220
N. Blythe Ave W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 60 21 45 96 207
N. Blythe Ave W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 57 13 29 62 133
N. Blythe Ave W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57 14 29 63 136
N Brawley Ave N. Parkway Drive to W.
Dakota Ave 58 17 36 77 165
N Brawley Ave W. Dakota Ave to
W. Dayton Ave 58 16 35 75 161
N Brawley Ave W. Dayton Ave to
W. Cortland Ave 61 24 52 111 240
3.11 NOISE
3.11-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
ROADWAY SEGMENT
DISTANCES TO CONTOUR
@100 ft 70 65 60 55
N Brawley Ave W. Cortland Ave to
W. Shields Ave 58 16 35 75 161
N Brawley Ave W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 58 16 33 72 155
N. Valentine
Ave
N. Parkway Drive to
W Shields Ave 54 9 19 41 89
N. Valentine
Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 53 8 17 36 77
N. Marks Ave W Princeton Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 59 20 44 95 205
NOTES:
1. EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS CALCULATED AT 5-FEET ABOVE GROUND.
2. NOISE LEVELS CALCULATED FROM CENTERLINE OF SUBJECT ROADWAY.
3. REFER TO APPENDIX C OF APPENDIX F FOR PROJECTED NOISE LEVEL CALCULATIONS.
4. THE PROJECTED NOISE LEVELS AT 100 FT ARE THEORETICAL AND DO NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE EFFECT OF
TOPOGRAPHY, NOISE BARRIERS, STRUCTURES OR OTHER FACTORS WHICH WILL REDUCE THE ACTUAL NOISE LEVEL IN THE OUTDOOR LIVING AREAS. THESE FACTORS CAN REDUCE THE ACTUAL NOISE LEVELS BY 5-10 DBA FROM WHAT IS SHOWN IN THE TABLE.
THEREFORE, THE LEVELS THAT ARE SHOWN ARE FOR COMPARATIVE PURPOSES ONLY TO SHOW THE DIFFERENCE IN PROJECTED NOISE LEVELS WITHOUT AND WITH THE PROJECT.
SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, 2020.
As shown in Table 3.11-4 and Figure 3.11-2, areas in the City that currently experience sound levels greater than 60 dBA Ldn are typically near major vehicular traffic corridors. Highway traffic noise levels typically depend on three factors: (1) the volume of traffic, (2) the average speed of traffic, and (3) the vehicle mix (i.e., the percentage of trucks versus automobiles in the traffic flow). Vehicle noise includes noises produced by the engine, exhaust, tires, and wind generated by taller vehicles.
Other factors that affect the perception of traffic noise include the distance from the highway, terrain, vegetation, and natural and structural obstacles. While tire noise from automobiles is generally located at ground level, some truck noise sources may emanate from 12 feet or more above the ground.
Vehicle traffic generated noise associated with SR 99 is the dominant noise source in the eastern portion of the Plan Area with average daily vehicle trips (ADTs) ranging between 77,000-107,000 adjacent to the Plan Area. Existing modeled noise contours shown in Figure 3.11-2 show that traffic noise associated with SR 99 dominates the noise environment of the easternmost portion of the Plan Area. Most noise sensitive land uses adjacent to SR 99 are shielded by existing sound walls, topography, or buildings, however, the attenuation provided by them is not represented in the noise contour map.
Rail Noise
Noise associated with the existing Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) line that generally runs parallel to SR 99 also contributes to noise in the Plan Area. The Union Pacific Railroad extends in a southeast/northwest direction ranging between 320 and 2,100 feet east of the project area. Based on count data available provided by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA 2020) fourteen train NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-13 trips per day (split evenly between daytime and nighttime hours) utilize the rail lines located east of the project area and SR 99 and north of West Ashlan Avenue. There are existing residential land uses located within the project area as close as 380 feet to the rail lines north of West Ashlan Avenue and 380 feet from the rail lines south of West Ashlan Avenue. There is a rail yard east of SR 99 that extends from approximately 450 feet north of Clinton Avenue to West Ashlan Avenue. Noise level contours associated with the UPRR are shown in Figure 3.11-3.
Airport/Aircraft Noise
There are no airports located within the Plan Area and the Plan Area is not located within any airport noise contours (City of Fresno, 2014). The Plan Area is, however, affected by fly-over noise associated with the Fresno Yosemite International airport, the Fresno‐Chandler Downtown Airport, and the Sierra Sky Park Airport. Commercial jet aircraft operations are limited to the Fresno Yosemite International Airport. The Air National Guard is also stationed there and operates military jets and other aircraft. Private and commercial operations with smaller aircraft use the Fresno Chandler Downtown Airport, while only small private aircraft use the Sierra Sky Park Airport.
VIBRATION SOURCES IN THE PLAN AREA
The main sources of vibration in the project area are related to vehicles, rail, and construction.
Typical roadway traffic, including heavy trucks, rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage. However, there have been cases in which heavy trucks traveling over potholes or other discontinuities in the pavement have caused vibration high enough to result in complaints from nearby residents.
3.11.2 REGULATORY SETTING
FEDERAL
Noise Control Act of 1972
The Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) originally was tasked with implementing the Noise Control Act. However, it was eventually eliminated leaving other federal agencies and committees to develop noise policies and programs. Some examples of these agencies are as follows:
• The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumed a significant role in noise control through its various agencies.
• The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) is responsible to regulate noise from aircraft and airports. • The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible to regulate noise from the interstate highway system.
• The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the prohibition of excessive noise exposure to workers.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan The federal government advocates that local jurisdiction use their land use regulatory authority to arrange new development in such a way that “noise sensitive” uses are either prohibited from being constructed adjacent to a highway, or alternatively that the developments are planned and constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized.
Since the federal government has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted by the transportation source, the City is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the transportation system through nuisance abatement Codes and land use planning.
STATE
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, indicate that a significant noise impact may occur if a project exposes persons to noise or vibration levels in excess of local general plans or noise ordinance standards, or cause a substantial permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels. CEQA standards are discussed more below under the Thresholds of Significance criteria section.
Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code
Section 1206.4 of the California Building Code (2019), Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 12 (Interior Environment), establishes an interior noise criteria of 45 dBA CNEL for “dwelling units”. Per California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 2 (Definitions), a residential dwelling unit is intended to be used as a residence that is primarily long-term in nature. Residential dwelling units do not include transient lodging, inpatient medical care, licensed long-term care, and detention or correctional facilities.
California Building Code (2019), Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 5 (Nonresidential Mandatory Measures), applies to all proposed buildings that people may occupy but are not residential dwelling units, with the exception of factories, stadiums, storage, enclosed parking structures, and utility buildings.
Section 5.507.4.1 requires wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source making up the building, or addition envelope or altered envelope, shall meet a composite Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of at least 50 or a composite Outdoor to Indoor Transmission Class (OITC) rating of no less than 40, with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 or OITC of 30.
LOCAL
Fresno General Plan
For the purposes of evaluating noise impacts due to new projects, the objectives and policies of the City of Fresno General Plan Noise Element are used. The Fresno General Plan Noise Element sets forth noise standards for transportation noise sources. Ideally, proposed land uses would be developed in areas where future noise levels due to transportation noise sources (except aircraft) would not exceed those presented in Table 3.11-5. Additionally, the Fresno General Plan Element NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-15 also includes standards for stationary noise sources to regulate noise emanating from one property to another, which are presented in Table 3.11-6.
TABLE 3.11-5: TRANSPORTATION (NON-AIRCRAFT) NOISE SOURCES
NOISE SENSITIVE LAND USES
OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREAS1,3 INTERIOR SPACES
LDN/CNEL, DB LDN/CNEL, DB LEQ DB2, 4
Residential 65 45 --
Transient Lodging 65 45 --
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65 45 --
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls -- -- 35
Churches, Meeting Halls 65 -- 45
Office Buildings -- -- 45
Schools, Libraries Museums -- -- 45
NOTES: 1. WHERE THE LOCATION OF OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREAS IS UNKNOWN OR IS NOT APPLICABLE, THE EXTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARD SHALL BE APPLIED TO THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE RECEIVING LAND USE.
2. EXCLUDES FRONT OR SIDE YARD AREAS, AND FRONT OR SIDE PORCHES. BALCONIES OR ROOF DECKS FACING FRONT AND SIDE
YARDS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN DESIGNATED AREAS TO BE PROTECTED FROM NOISE WHERE THESE SPACES ARE USED TO CALCULATE COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIRED OUTDOOR LIVING AREA AS REQUIRED BY ADOPTED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
3. RESIDENTIAL AND NOISE SENSITIVE USES LOCATED ALONG BUS RAPID TRANSIT CORRIDORS OR WITHIN ACTIVITY CENTERS AS
IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY OF FRESNO GENERAL PLAN, ARE EXEMPT FROM EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS WHERE IT IS DETERMINED
APPLICATION OF NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE REALIZATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN'S MIXED USE POLICIES. INTERIOR NOISE LEVEL STANDARDS SHALL STILL APPLY.
4. AS DETERMINED FOR A TYPICAL WORST-CASE HOUR DURING PERIODS OF USE.
SOURCE: CITY OF FRESNO GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT (TABLE 9-2), 2014.
TABLE 3.11-6: STATIONARY NOISE SOURCE STANDARDS
DAYTIME
(7:00 AM – 10:00 PM)
NIGHTTIME
(10:00 PM – 7:00 AM)
Hourly Equivalent Sound Level (Leq),
dBA 50 45
Maximum Sound Level (Lmax), dBA 70 60
NOTES: 1. THE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, MAY
DESIGNATE LAND USES OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN IN THIS TABLE TO BE NOISE-SENSITIVE, AND MAY REQUIRE APPROPRIATE NOISE MITIGATION MEASURES.
2. AS DETERMINED AT OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREAS. WHERE THE LOCATION OF OUTDOOR ACTIVITY AREAS IS UNKNOWN OR NOT APPLICABLE, THE NOISE EXPOSURE STANDARD SHALL BE APPLIED AT THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE RECEIVING LAND USE. WHEN
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS EXCEED OR EQUAL THE LEVELS IN THE TABLE, MITIGATION SHALL ONLY BE REQUIRED TO LIMIT NOISE TO THE AMBIENT PLUS FIVE DBA.
SOURCE: CITY OF FRESNO GENERAL PLAN NOISE ELEMENT, 2014.
The Noise Element outlines the following objectives and policies which are pertinent to the project.
This list does not include all noise-related policies, but provides policies which are relevant to the project.
NOISE ELEMENT
Objective NS-1: Protect the citizens of the City from the harmful effects of exposure to excessive noise.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy NS-1-a: Desirable and Generally Acceptable Exterior Noise Environment. Establish 65 dB Ldn or CNEL as the standard for the desirable maximum average exterior noise levels for defined usable exterior areas of residential and noise-sensitive uses for noise, but designate 60 dB Ldn or CNEL (measured at the property line) for noise generated by stationary sources impinging upon residential and noise-sensitive uses. Maintain 65 dB Ldn or CNEL as the maximum average exterior noise levels for non-sensitive commercial land uses, and maintain 70 dB Ldn or CNEL as maximum average exterior noise level for industrial land uses, both to be measured at the property line of parcels where noise is generated which may impinge on neighboring properties.
Commentary: The noise ordinance will define usable exterior areas for single family and multiple family residential and noise sensitive uses to include rear yards and other outdoor areas intended to accommodate leisure or active use, excluding front or side yard areas, and front or side porches. Balconies or roof decks facing from side yards shall be included in designated areas to be protected from noise where these spaces are used to calculate compliance with required outdoor living area as required by adopted development standards.
Policy NS-1b: Conditionally Acceptable Exterior Noise Exposure Range. Establish conditionally acceptable noise exposure level range for residential and other noise sensitive uses to be 65 dB Ldn or require appropriate noise reducing mitigation measures as determined by a site specific acoustical analysis to comply with the desirable and conditionally acceptable exterior noise level and the required interior noise level standards set in Table 9-2.
Policy NS-1c: Generally Unacceptable Exterior Noise Exposure Range. Establish the exterior noise exposure of greater than 65 dB Ldn or CNEL to be generally unacceptable for residential or other noise sensitive uses for noise generated by sources in Policy NS-1-a, and study alternative less noise sensitive uses for these areas if otherwise appropriate. Require appropriate noise reducing mitigation measures as determined by a site specific acoustical analysis to comply with the generally acceptable exterior noise and the required 45 dB interior noise level standards et in Table 9-2 as conditions of permit approval.
Policy NS-1i: Mitigation of New Developments. Require an acoustical analysis where new development of industrial, commercial or other noise generating land uses (including transportation facilities such as roadways, railroads, and airports) may result in noise level that exceed the noise level exposure criteria established in Tables 9-2 and 9-3 to determine impacts, and require developers to mitigate these impacts in conformance with tables 9-2 and 9-3 as a condition of permit approval through appropriate means.
Noise mitigation measures may include:
• The screening of noise sources such as parking and loading facilities, outdoor activities, and mechanical equipment;
• providing increased setbacks for noise sources from adjacent dwellings; NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-17 • Installation of walls and landscaping that serve as noise buffers; • Installation of soundproofing materials and double-glazed windows; and • Regulating operations, such as hours of operation, including deliveries and trash pickup.
Alternative acoustical designs that achieve the prescribed noise level reduction may be approved by the City, provided a qualified Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative designs will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces. As a last resort, developers may propose to construct noise walls along roadways when compatible with aesthetic concerns and neighborhood character.
Policy NS-1j: Significance Threshold. Establish, as a threshold of significance for the City's environmental review process, that a significant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity by 3 dB Ldn or CNEL, or more above the ambient noise limits established in this General Plan Update.
Commentary: When an increase in noise would result in a "Significant" impact (increase of three dBA or more) to residents or businesses, then noise mitigation would be required to reduce noise exposure. If the increase in noise is less than three dBA, then the noise impact is considered insignificant and no noise mitigation is needed.
Policy NS-1k: Proposal Review. Review all new public and private development proposals that may potentially be affected by or cause a significant increase in noise levels, per Policy NS-1-i, to determine conformance with the policies of this Noise Element. Require developers to reduce the noise impacts of new development on adjacent properties through appropriate means.
Policy NS-1l: Enforcement. Continue to enforce applicable State Noise Insulation Standards and Uniform Building Code noise requirements, as adopted by the City.
Policy NS-1m: Transportation Related Noise Impacts. For projects subject to the City approval, require that the project sponsor mitigate noise created by new transportation and transportation-related stationary noise sources, including roadway improvement projects, so that resulting noise levels do not exceed the City's adopted standards for noise sensitive land uses.
Policy NS-1n: Best Available Technology. Require new noise sources to use best available control technology to minimize noise emissions.
Commentary: Noise from mechanical equipment can be reduced by soundproofing materials and sound-deadening installation; controlling hours of operation will also reduce noise impacts during the morning or evening.
Policy NS-1o: Sound Wall Guidelines. Acoustical studies and noise mitigation measures for projects shall specify the heights, materials, and design for sound walls and other noise
3.11 NOISE
3.11-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan barriers. Aesthetic considerations shall also be addressed in these studies and mitigation measures such as variable noise barrier heights, a combination of a landscaped berm with wall, and reduced barrier height in combination with increased distance or elevation differences between noise source and noise receptor, with a maximum allowable height of 15 feet. The City will develop guidelines for aesthetic design measures of sound walls, and may commission area wide noise mitigation studies that can serve as templates for acoustical treatment that can be applied to similar situations in the urban area.
Commentary: While acoustical studies need to be site-specific in order to appropriately assess particular settings, having prototypical design measures and noise control templates that can be applied for similar situations and contexts can facilitate infill and other development. These can be provided in this noise report and carried forward into the Specific Plan.
Policy NS-1p: Airport Noise Compatibility. Implement the land use and noise exposure compatibility provisions of the adopted Fresno Yosemite International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport Master and Environs Specific Plan, and the Sierra Sky Park Land Use Policy Plan to assess noise compatibility of proposed uses and improvements within airport influence and environs areas.
City of Fresno Noise Ordinance
Article 1 of Chapter 10 of the City's Municipal Code contains the City's Noise Ordinance, which establishes excessive noise guidelines and exemptions. The standards for ambient noise for varying land uses are somewhat generic and are assumed to be overridden by actual noise measurements and modeling of noise sources. Those applicable to this analysis are presented below.
SEC. 10-102. Definitions.
(b) Ambient Noise. “Ambient noise” is the all‐encompassing noise associated with a given environment, being usually a composite of sounds from many sources near and far. For the purpose of this ordinance, ambient noise level is the level obtained when the noise level is averaged over a period of fifteen minutes, without inclusion of the offending noise, at the location and time of day at which a comparison with the offending noise is to be made.
Where the ambient noise level is less than what is presented in Table 3.11-7 for the applicable type of land use, the sound level presented in Table 3.11-7, shall be deemed to be the ambient noise level for that location.
TABLE 3.11-7: AMBIENT NOISE
DISTRICT TIME SOUND LEVEL DECIBELS
Residential
10:00 PM to 7:00 AM 50
7:00 PM to 10:00 PM 55
7:00 AM to 7:00 PM 60
Commercial 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM 60
7:00 AM to 10:00 PM 65
Industrial Anytime 70
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-19 SOURCE: CITY OF FRESNO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10-102(B) SEC. 10-105. Excessive Noise Prohibited.
No person shall make, cause, or suffer or permit to be made or caused upon any premises or upon any public street, alley, or place within the city, any sound or noise which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing or working in the area, unless such noise or sound is specifically authorized by or in accordance with this article. The provisions of this section shall apply to, but shall be limited to, the control, use, and operation of the following noise sources:
(a) Radios, musical instruments, phonographs, television sets, or other machines or devices used for the amplification, production, or reproduction of sound or the human voice. (b) Animals or fowl creating, generating, or emitting any cry or behavioral sound. (c) Machinery or equipment, such as fans, pumps, air conditioning units, engines, turbines, compressors, generators, motors or similar devices, equipment, or apparatus. (d) Construction equipment or work, including the operation, use or employment of pile drivers, hammers, saws, drills, derricks, hoists, or similar construction equipment or tools.
SEC. 10-107. Schools, Hospitals, and Churches.
No person shall create any noise on any street, sidewalk, or public place adjacent to any school, institution of learning, or church while the same is in use, or adjacent to any hospital, which noise unreasonably interferes with the workings of such institution or which disturbs or unduly annoys patients in the hospital, provided conspicuous signs are displayed in such street, sidewalk, or public place indicating the presence of a school, church, or hospital.
SEC. 10-109. Exceptions.
(a) Construction, repair or remodeling work accomplished pursuant to a building, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or other construction permit issued by the city or other governmental agency, or to site preparation and grading, provided such work takes place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday. (b) Emergency work.
(c) Any acts or acts which are prohibited by any law of the State of California or the United States.
City of Fresno Community Plans
The City of Fresno is divided in to nine Community Plan Areas. The project site is within the West Area Community Plan Area. The West Area Community Plan includes a few land use related policies that encourage good design and avoidance of potential noise issues. These policies are presented below.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy W-7-e: All loading spaces shall be located not less than 150 feet from the boundary of any residential property; however, the proximity of loading areas may be reduced when adequate design and operational measures (such as restricted hours for loading activities) are approved to mitigate noise, lights, and other nuisances associated with loading areas, in order to protect adjacent residential uses. In all cases, loading areas shall be screened from view of adjoining property zoned, planned, or approved for residential uses. This screening shall be accomplished by either placing loading docks and areas on the sides of buildings that face away from residential property, or by a combination of landscape planting and a solid masonry wall. Where possible, loading areas should not be visible from, nor take access from, local streets with residential frontage.
Policy W-7-f: Roof-mounted and detached mechanical equipment for commercial and office uses should be screened from view of adjacent residential areas, and acoustically baffled to prevent the noise level rating for the equipment from exceeding the applicable city standard for ambient noise at residential property lines.
3.11.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the project will have a significant impact related to noise if it will result in:
• Generation of a 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; and/or
• Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. • 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, the project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Noise Standards
The noise standards applicable to the project include the relevant portions of the City of Fresno General Plan, as described in the Regulatory Setting section above, and the following standards.
Based upon the General Plan Noise and Safety Element, the project will have a significant increase in noise if it exceeds a 3 dB Ldn. This is consistent with Table 3.11-8 which is based upon recommendations made by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) to provide guidance in the assessment of changes in ambient noise levels resulting from aircraft operations.
The recommendations are based upon studies that relate aircraft noise levels to the percentage of persons highly annoyed by the noise. Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, it has been accepted that they are applicable to all sources of noise described in terms of cumulative noise exposure metrics such as the Ldn.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-21 TABLE 3.11-8: SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGES IN NOISE EXPOSURE
AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL WITHOUT PROJECT, LDN INCREASE REQUIRED FOR SIGNIFICANT IMPACT <60 dB +5.0 dB or more
60-65 dB +3.0 dB or more
>65 dB +1.5 dB or more
SOURCE: FEDERAL INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE ON NOISE (FICON).
Vibration Standards
Vibration is like noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, whereas vibration usually consists of the excitation of a structure or surface.
As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s perception to the vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity to vibration, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source and the response of the system which is vibrating.
Vibration can be measured in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration measures in terms of peak particle velocities in inches per second. Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration levels defined in terms of peak particle velocities.
The City of Fresno does not establish criteria for vibration impacts. However, the Federal Transit Administration establishes vibration impact thresholds for construction/demolition projects. These thresholds are shown in Table 3.11-9 on the following page.
TABLE 3.11-9: GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION CRITERIA
ARCHITECTURAL DAMAGE BUILDING CATEGORY PPV (IN/SEC) LV (VDB)A I. Reinforced concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102 II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98 III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94 IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90 NOTE:
A RMS VELOCITY CALCULATED FROM VIBRATION LEVEL (VDB) USING THE REFERENCE OF ONE MICRO-INCH/SECOND.
SOURCE: FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, TRANSIT NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT, 2006.
Table 3.11-9 indicates that the threshold for damage to structures ranges from 0.2 to 0.5 peak particle velocity in inches per second (in/sec p.p.v). One-half this minimum threshold or 0.1 in/sec p.p.v. is considered a safe criterion that would protect against architectural or structural damage.
The general threshold at which human annoyance could also occur is typically noted as 0.1 in/sec p.p.v.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.11-1: Specific Plan implementation could potentially substantially increase mobile noise levels at existing and proposed receptors. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS – PROPOSED RECEPTORS
Upon future buildout of the Plan Area, the primary noise source in the community will continue to be vehicle traffic traveling on surface streets and on SR 99. Future noise levels associated with acoustically significant roadways within the Plan Area are shown on Figure 3.11-4. Vehicle traffic generated noise associated with SR 99 will continue to be the dominant noise source in the eastern portion of the Plan Area with ADTs ranging between 77,000 and 107,000 adjacent to the Plan Area.
Although most noise sensitive land uses adjacent to SR 99 are shielded by existing sound walls, topography or buildings, there are still some noise sensitive land uses where existing plus project plus cumulative noise levels will exceed the City’s 60 dBA Ldn noise standard. Thus, traffic noise impacts to proposed receptors would be potentially significant.
EXTERIOR TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS – EXISTING RECEPTORS
Buildout of the Plan Area will result in substantial increases in ambient noise levels. According to the West Area Specific Plan Noise Impact Study, the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to predict noise levels due to the Specific Plan traffic. Traffic volumes for existing conditions were obtained from the traffic data prepared for the Specific Plan. The potential off-site noise impacts caused by the increase in vehicular traffic from the operation of the proposed project on the nearby roadways was calculated by comparing the existing and existing plus project plus cumulative noise levels. Table 3.11-10 compares the existing and existing plus project cumulative noise levels along the Plan Area roadways.
TABLE 3.11-10: CHANGE IN NOISE ALONG ROADWAYS DUE TO THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN (DBA, CNEL)
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
SR 99
W. Herndon Ave to
W. Shaw Ave 82.6 82.6 0.0 Yes No
SR 99
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 82.4 82.4 0.0 Yes No
SR 99
W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 83.8 83.8 0.0 Yes No
SR 99
W. Dakota Ave to
W. Shields Ave 83.7 83.7 0.0 Yes No
SR 99 W. Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 81.8 83.8 2.0 Yes No
W. Herndon Ave N. Garfield Ave to
N. Parkway Drive No Data No Data n/a n/a n/a
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-23
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
W. Bullard Ave
N Garfield Ave to
N. Grantland Ave 47.9 58.3 10.5 No No
W. Bullard Ave N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 54.7 60.0 5.2 No No
W. Bullard Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
SR 99 No Data No Data n/a n/a n/a
W. Barstow Ave
N Garfield to
N. Grantland Ave 53.5 53.8 0.4 No No
W. Barstow Ave
N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 49.1 61.8 12.7 No No
W. Barstow Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
N. Contessa Ave No Data No Data n/a n/a n/a
W. Barstow Ave
N. Contessa Ave to
N. Island Waterpark
Drive
No Data No Data n/a n/a n/a
W. Shaw Ave
N Garfield Ave to
N. Grantland Ave 59.3 63.7 4.5 No No
W. Shaw Ave
N. Grantland Ave to N.
Bryan Ave 60.0 68.3 8.3 Yes Yes
W. Shaw Ave
N. Bryan Ave to 1,300
ft east of N. Hayes Ave 60.6 68.1 7.5 Yes Yes
W. Shaw Ave
1,300 ft east of
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave
63.3 71.0 7.7 Yes Yes
W. Shaw Ave
N. Polk Ave to
SR 99 66.4 73.3 6.9 Yes Yes
W. Gettysburg
Ave
1,300 ft west of
N. Bryan Ave to
Bryan Ave
50.9 58.5 7.6 No No
W. Gettysburg
Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 52.4 60.5 8.1 No No
W. Gettysburg
Ave
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 53.0 62.8 9.8 No No
W. Gettysburg
Ave
N. Polk Ave to
N. Barcus 53.6 62.3 8.8 No No
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Garfield to
N. Grantland No Data 64.3 n/a n/a n/a
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 58.7 70.4 11.7 Yes Yes
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 56.4 67.5 11.2 Yes Yes
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 54.6 68.0 13.4 Yes Yes
3.11 NOISE
3.11-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Polk Ave to
N. Cornelia Ave 59.6 67.8 8.2 Yes Yes
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 63.6 69.2 5.6 Yes Yes
W. Ashlan Ave
N. Blythe Ave to
SR 99 65.2 69.7 4.5 Yes No
W. Dakota Ave
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Barcus Ave 53.0 62.2 9.2 No No
W. Dakota Ave
N. Barcus Ave to
N. Polk Ave 55.6 64.7 9.2 No No
W. Dakota Ave
N. Polk Ave to
N. Cornelia Ave 57.2 61.8 4.6 No No
W. Dakota Ave
N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 56.4 61.6 5.3 No No
W. Dakota Ave
N. Blythe Ave to
N Brawley Ave 55.1 61.3 6.2 No No
W. Dakota Ave
N Brawley Ave to
N. Parkway Drive 53.9 58.8 4.9 No No
W. Shields Ave
N. Garfield Ave to
Grantland Ave 54.4 No Data n/a n/a n/a
W. Shields Ave
N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 54.5 61.3 6.9 No No
W. Shields Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 55.6 62.0 6.4 No No
W. Shields Ave
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 55.2 61.0 5.8 No No
W. Shields Ave
N. Polk Ave to
N. Dante Ave 58.4 66.0 7.6 Yes Yes
W. Shields Ave
N. Dante Ave to
N. Cornelia Ave 58.4 66.0 7.6 Yes Yes
W. Shields Ave
N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 56.7 63.0 6.3 No No
W. Shields Ave
N. Blythe Ave to
N. Brawley Ave 56.5 63.3 6.8 No No
W. Shields Ave
N Brawley Ave to
N. Valentine Ave 57.7 63.0 5.3 No No
W. Shields Ave
N. Valentine Ave to
N. Marks Ave 58.5 62.9 4.5 No No
W. Clinton Ave
N. Grantland Ave to
N. Bryan Ave 47.5 55.4 7.9 No No
W. Clinton Ave
N. Bryan Ave to
N. Hayes Ave 49.9 61.6 11.7 No No
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-25
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
W. Clinton Ave
N. Hayes Ave to
N. Polk Ave 51.7 62.0 10.3 No No
W. Clinton Ave
N. Polk Ave to 1,900 ft
east of N. Polk Ave 51.7 62.9 11.2 No No
W. Clinton Ave
1,900 ft east of N. Polk
Ave to N. Cornelia Ave 59.0 66.9 8.0 Yes Yes
W. Clinton Ave
N. Cornelia Ave to
N. Milburn Ave 63.0 68.9 5.9 Yes Yes
W. Clinton Ave
N. Milburn Ave to
N. Blythe Ave 61.8 68.5 6.6 Yes Yes
W. Clinton Ave
N. Blythe Ave to
N Sonora Ave 64.6 68.9 4.2 Yes No
W. Clinton Ave
N. Sonora Ave to
N Brawley Ave 63.5 67.7 4.2 Yes No
W. Clinton Ave
N Brawley Ave to
N. Knoll Ave 63.7 68.5 4.7 Yes No
W. Clinton Ave
N. Knoll Ave to 850 ft
east of N. Knoll Ave 63.6 68.3 4.7 Yes No
W. Clinton Ave
850 ft east of N. Knoll
Ave to N. Valentine
Ave
61.4 66.2 4.7 Yes No
W. Clinton Ave
N. Valentine Ave to
N. Marks Ave 64.2 69.7 5.5 Yes Yes
W. Clinton Ave
N. Marks Ave to
W. Vassar Ave 68.0 72.6 4.6 Yes No
N Garfield Ave
W. Herndon Ave to
W. Bullard Ave No Data 57.8 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
W. Bullard Ave to
W. Barstow Ave No Data 58.4 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
W. Barstow Ave to
1,000 ft south of W.
Barstow Ave
No Data 60.9 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
1,000 ft south of W.
Barstow Ave to
W. Shaw Ave
No Data 60.9 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave No Data 59.0 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
W. Gettysburg to
W. Ashlan Ave No Data 58.8 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave No Data 21.5 n/a n/a n/a
N Garfield Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W. Shields Ave No Data 58.5 n/a n/a n/a
3.11 NOISE
3.11-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
N. Parkway
Drive
N Herndon Ave to
W. Herndon Ave No Data 57.7 n/a n/a n/a
N. Grantland
Ave
N. Parkway Drive to
W. Bullard Ave No Data No Data n/a n/a n/a
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Bullard Ave to
W. Barstow Ave 62.5 64.4 2.0 Yes No
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Barstow Ave to
W. Shaw Ave 61.9 65.5 3.6 Yes No
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 57.4 68.0 10.6 Yes Yes
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 59.7 71.1 11.5 Yes Yes
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Ashlan Ave to
W Dakota Ave 58.5 No Data n/a n/a n/a
N. Grantland
Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W. Shields Ave No Data 69.7 n/a n/a n/a
N. Grantland
Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57.3 67.7 10.5 Yes Yes
N. Bryan Ave
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Santa Ana Ave 53.9 63.4 9.5 No No
N. Bryan Ave
W. Santa Ana Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 53.9 63.4 9.5 No No
N. Bryan Ave
W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 57.6 65.3 7.7 Yes Yes
N. Bryan Ave
W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 55.1 No Data n/a n/a n/a
N. Bryan Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 52.5 62.9 10.3 No No
N. Bryan Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 48.2 61.4 13.2 No No
N. Hayes Ave
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Santa Ana Ave 57.1 66.4 9.3 Yes Yes
N. Hayes Ave
W. Santa Ana Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 57.0 66.2 9.3 Yes Yes
N. Hayes Ave
W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Swift Ave 55.0 66.8 11.8 Yes Yes
N. Hayes Ave
W. Swift Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 52.4 64.2 11.8 Yes No
N. Hayes Ave
W. Ashland Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 53.9 64.9 11.0 Yes No
N. Hayes Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
1,300 ft South of
W. Dakota Ave
53.4 63.3 9.9 Yes No
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-27
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
N. Hayes Ave
1,300 ft South of
W. Dakota Ave
to W Shields Ave
56.0 65.9 9.9 Yes Yes
N. Hayes Ave
W Shields Ave to W.
Clinton Ave 52.3 62.5 10.3 Yes No
N. Polk Ave
North of W. Shaw Ave
60.1 61.8 1.7 Yes No
N. Polk Ave
W. Shaw Ave to
W. Acacia Ave 62.3 67.8 5.5 Yes Yes
N. Polk Ave
W. Acacia Ave to
W. Gettysburg Ave 62.4 67.9 5.5 Yes Yes
N. Polk Ave
W. Gettysburg Ave to
W. Ashlan Ave 58.3 66.5 8.1 Yes Yes
N. Polk Ave
W. Ashland Ave to W.
Griffith Way 59.0 66.5 7.5 Yes Yes
N. Polk Ave
W. Griffith Way to
W. Dakota Ave 61.1 68.7 7.5 Yes Yes
N. Polk Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 58.4 65.3 6.9 Yes Yes
N. Polk Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57.2 64.9 7.7 No No
N. Cornelia Ave
N. Parkway Drive to W.
Gettysburg Ave 60.2 62.3 2.1 No No
N. Cornelia Ave
W. Gettysburg to
W. Ashlan Ave 60.2 66.1 5.9 Yes Yes
N. Cornelia Ave
W. Ashland Ave to
W. Bellaire Way 61.6 64.6 3.0 No No
N. Cornelia Ave
W. Bellaire Way to
W. Dakota Ave 61.6 64.6 3.0 No No
N. Cornelia Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 57.7 62.6 4.9 No No
N. Cornelia Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 60.1 64.4 4.3 No No
N. Blythe Ave
W. Ashlan Ave to
W. Dakota Ave 59.7 63.8 4.1 No No
N. Blythe Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W Shields Ave 56.8 62.5 5.6 No No
N. Blythe Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57.0 62.2 5.2 No No
N Brawley Ave
N. Parkway Drive to W.
Dakota Ave 58.3 63.3 5.0 No No
N Brawley Ave
W. Dakota Ave to
W. Dayton Ave 58.0 62.2 4.1 No No
3.11 NOISE
3.11-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
ROADWAY SEGMENT
CNEL AT 100 FEET DBA2
EXISTING
EXISTING +
PROJECT +
CUMULATIVE
CHANGE
EXCEEDS
COMPATIBILITY
CRITERIA
POTENTIALLY
SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT4
N Brawley Ave
W. Dayton Ave to
W. Cortland Ave 60.6 64.7 4.1 No No
N Brawley Ave
W. Cortland Ave to
W. Shields Ave 57.9 62.0 4.1 No No
N Brawley Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 57.6 62.1 4.5 No No
N. Valentine
Ave
N. Parkway Drive to
W Shields Ave 53.9 60.7 6.8 No No
N. Valentine
Ave
W Shields Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 52.9 60.4 7.5 No No
N. Marks Ave
W Princeton Ave to
W. Clinton Ave 59.2 61.5 2.3 No No
NOTE:
1 EXTERIOR NOISE LEVELS CALCULATED AT 5 FEET ABOVE GROUND LEVEL. 2 NOISE LEVELS CALCULATED FROM CENTERLINE OF SUBJECT ROADWAY. 3 SEE TABLE 3.11-4.
4 SIGNIFICANT IF RESULTS IN A 3 DB INCREASE IN AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS AND EXCEEDS STANDARD IN TABLE 3.11-4.
SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, SEPTEMBER 2020.
As shown in Table 3.11-10, existing plus project plus cumulative traffic conditions will result in significant increases in ambient noise levels along the following road segments:
• Traffic noise levels along W. Shaw Avenue are expected to range between 68.1 and 73.3 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in increases ranging between 6.9 and 8.3 dBA CNEL.
• Traffic noise levels along W. Ashlan Avenue between N. Grantland Avenue and N. Blythe Avenue are expected to range between 67.5 and 70.4 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in increases ranging between 5.6 and 13.4 dBA CNEL.
• Traffic noise levels along W. Shields Avenue between N. Polk Avenue and N. Cornelia Avenue are expected to reach up to 66 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in an increase in ambient noise level of 7.6 dBA CNEL. • Traffic noise levels along W. Clinton Avenue between N. Polk Avenue and N. Blythe Avenue and between N. Valentine Avenue and N. Marks Avenue are expected to range between
66.9 and 69.7 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in increases in ambient noise levels ranging between 5.5 and 8.0 dBA CNEL • Traffic noise levels along N. Grantland Avenue between W. Gettysburg Avenue and W.
Dakota Avenue and between W. Shields Avenue and W. Clinton Avenue are expected to range between 67.7 and 71.0 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in increases in ambient noise levels between 10.5 and 11.5 dBA CNEL.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-29 • Traffic noise levels along N. Bryan Avenue between W. Gettysburg Avenue and W. Ashlan Avenue are expected to reach up to 65.3 dBA CNEL, resulting in an increase of 7.7 dBA CNEL in ambient noise levels.
• Traffic noise levels along N. Hayes Avenue between W. Shaw Avenue and W. Swift Avenue and between W. Dakota Avenue and W. Shields Avenue are expected to range between
65.9 and 66.8 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in increases in ambient noise levels ranging between 9.3 and 11.8 dBA CNEL. • Traffic noise levels along N. Polk Avenue between W. Shaw Avenue and W. Shields Avenue are expected to range between 65.3 and 68.7 dBA CNEL at a distance of 100 feet from the centerline of the road, resulting in increases in ambient noise levels between 5.5 and 8.1 dBA CNEL.
• Traffic noise levels along N. Cornelia Avenue between W. Gettysburg Avenue and W.
Ashlan Avenue are expected to reach up to 66.1 dBA CNEL, resulting in an increase of 5.9 dBA CNEL in ambient noise levels.
Based upon Policy NS-1j of the City’s General Plan, which is used as a threshold of significance for the City's environmental review process, a significant increase in ambient noise levels is assumed if the project would increase noise levels in the immediate vicinity by 3 dB Ldn or CNEL above the ambient noise limits established in the General Plan Update (or in this case, the modeled increase in traffic noise levels due to the project). Future traffic noise is anticipated to result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels on existing sensitive receptors, ranging in increases between 5.5 dBA to 13.4 dBA at the roadway segments listed above. Therefore, this is a potentially significant impact.
RAIL NOISE IMPACTS
Noise associated with the existing UPRR line is expected to remain the same or end altogether. The California High-Speed Train Project, which is currently under construction east of SR 99 will introduce more noise into the eastern portion of the Plan Area. According to the Noise and Vibration Technical Report prepared for the Merced to Fresno Section of the High Speed Train (CAHST, FRA 2012), trains in the Fresno area are expected to result in noise levels between 65 to 76 dB Ldn at nearby receptors. All of the receptors which would be moderately or severely impacted by the HighSpeed Train are located outside of the Plan Area to the east. High-Speed Train noise is not expected to result in significant noise impacts within the Plan Area. As such, this impact would be less than significant.
AGRICULTURAL NOISE IMPACTS
The Plan Area is currently exposed to agricultural noise including field and crop maintenance, hauling, and crop dusting from small aircraft. The noise from these sources mostly occurs within the confines of the agricultural fields, and is seasonal. A characteristic of agricultural noise is short periods of noisy activities separated by long periods of little or no noise-producing activities. The FAA regulates noise associated with aircraft once they leave the ground. FAA regulations require
3.11 NOISE
3.11-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan that all aircraft maintain a height of at least 500 feet above ground or objects on the ground, like a house. A crop duster can go below this height only to operate to apply chemicals and for no other reason.
Future development of the Plan Area may result in the exposure of sensitive receptors to agricultural noise. However, noise associated with crop cultivation is specifically exempt from compliance with the noise regulations presented in Section 15-2506 of the City of Fresno Municipal Code. As such, this impact would be less than significant.
CONCLUSION
As described above, buildout of the Plan Area would result in substantial increases in ambient traffic noise levels resulting in potentially significant impacts to existing and proposed receptors. With respect to future sensitive receptors, noise levels in the Plan Area are expected to exceed 65 dBA CNEL in most areas where shielding from traffic noise is not provided. Additionally, future traffic noise is anticipated to result in a substantial increase in ambient noise levels on existing sensitive receptors. Of the 115 roadway segments analyzed in Table 3.11-10, 30 segments would experience substantial noise increases greater than 3 dBA attributable to buildout of the proposed Specific Plan, with noise levels that exceed 65 dB CNEL.
For these reasons, future development projects within the Plan Area would be required to implement mitigation measures that are specifically intended to ensure compliance with the City of Fresno noise standards and minimize the impact associated with the substantial increase in ambient noise levels. Mitigation Measure 3.11-1 would require the implementation of performance standards based on project-specific acoustical analysis for new residential and noise sensitive uses exposed to significant exterior community noise levels from transportation, which may include noise walls and/or berms, or setbacks.
Walls/Berms: As shown in the diagram below, when a noise barrier is inserted between a noise source and receiver, the direct noise path along the line of sight between the two is interrupted.
Some of the acoustical energy will be transmitted through the barrier material and continue to the source, although at a reduced level. The amount of this reduction depends on the material’s mass and rigidity, and is called the transmission loss (TL), which is expressed in decibels. To be effective, noise barriers need to be solid, without holes and cracks. Concrete walls and earthen berms tend to provide the most noise attenuation, but other materials can be used. The exact amount of reduction provided by a barrier will range depending on the material, location and height of the barrier but barriers can be used to mitigate significant noise impacts to sensitive receptors in outdoor activity areas. Because the Plan Area is flat, noise walls and/or berms would be highly effective.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-31 SOURCE: CALTRANS 2013A
Setbacks: Traffic noise is not a single, stationary point source. The movement of vehicles makes the noise source of the sound appear to be emanate from a line rather than from a point when viewed over a time interval. Noise levels associated with vehicle traffic are reduced by 3 dB for every doubling of distance from the receiver. For this reason, increasing the distance between the noise source and the receiver can be used to avoid significant impacts related to traffic noise at sensitive receptors within the Plan Area.
Mitigation Measure 3.11-1 would reduce traffic noise levels to a less-than-significant level.
Therefore, with implementation of mitigation, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts relative to this topic.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.11-1: Future project proponent(s) for development projects in the Plan Area which involve residential or other noise sensitive uses shall implement performance standards for noise reduction for new residential and noise sensitive uses exposed to exterior community noise levels from transportation sources above 65 dB Ldn or CNEL, as shown on Exhibit G: Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative Noise Contours of the West Area Specific Plan Noise Impact Study prepared by MD Acoustics (dated September 30, 2020), or as identified by a project-specific acoustical analysis based on the target acceptable noise levels set in Table 9-2 of the Fresno General Plan Noise Element (Table 3.11-5 of this EIR).
If future exterior noise levels are expected to exceed the applicable standards presented in Table 9-2 of the Fresno General Plan Noise Element (Table 3.11-5 of this EIR), the mitigation measure presented below shall be implemented, as applicable. A qualified Acoustical Consultant shall provide information demonstrating that site specific mitigation will be effective at reaching the applicable noise standard.
• Install noise walls, berms and/or a combination of a landscaped berm with wall, and reduced barrier height in combination with increased distance or elevation differences
3.11 NOISE
3.11-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan between noise source and noise receptor. The City of Fresno has established a maximum allowable height for noise walls of 15 feet. As such, the noise walls, berms and/or a combination of a landscaped berm with wall shall not exceed 15 feet.
The aforementioned measure is not exhaustive and alternative designs may be approved by the City, provided that a qualified Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative design(s) will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces.
Impact 3.11-2: Specific Plan implementation would not substantially increase noise levels associated with construction and demolition activities. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has compiled data regarding the noise generated characteristics of typical construction activities. The data is presented in Table 3.11-11. These noise levels would diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. For example, a noise level of 86 dBA measured 50 feet from the noise source would reduce to 80 dBA at 100 feet. At 200 feet from the noise source, the noise level would reduce to 74 dBA. At 400 feet from the noise source, the noise level would reduce by another 6 dBA to 68 dBA.
Contractors are required to comply with the City of Fresno’s Noise Ordinance during construction, as described in Section 10‐109.
TABLE 3.11-11: TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS
TYPE1 NOISE LEVELS (DBA) AT 50 FEET
EQUIPMENT POWERED BY INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES
EARTH MOVING
Compactors (rollers) 73 – 76
Front Loaders 73 – 84
Backhoes 73 – 92
Tractors 75 – 95
Scrapers, Graders 78 – 92
Pavers 85 – 87
Trucks 81 – 94
MATERIALS HANDLING
Concrete Mixers 72 – 87
Concrete Pumps 81 – 83
Cranes (Moveable) 72 – 86
Cranes (Derrick) 85 – 87
STATIONARY
Pumps 68 – 71
Generators 71 – 83
Compressors 75 – 86
IMPACT EQUIPMENT
Saws 71 – 82
Vibrators 68 – 82
SOURCE: REFERENCE NOISE LEVELS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-33
CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC
Future development projects in the Plan Area would result in short-term noise impacts associated with construction activities. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project. First, construction crew commute and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site for the proposed project would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Truck traffic associated with project construction should be limited to within the permitted construction hours, as listed in the City’s Municipal Code.
Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential at a maximum of 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from passing trucks, causing possible short-term intermittent annoyances, the effect on ambient noise levels would be less than 1 dBA when averaged over one hour or 24 hours.
In other words, the changes in noise levels over 1 hour or 24 hours attributable to passing trucks would not be perceptible to the normal human ear. Therefore, short-term construction-related impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport on local streets leading to the project site would result in a less than significant impact on noise-sensitive receptors along the access routes.
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
The site preparation phase, which includes grading and paving, tends to generate the highest noise levels, since the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front loaders.
Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings.
Future development projects in the Plan Area are expected to require the use of scrapers, bulldozers, motor grader, and water and pickup trucks. Noise associated with the use of construction equipment is estimated to reach between 79 and 89 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area for the grading phase. The maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be approximately 87 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from the scraper in operation. Each bulldozer would also generate approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. The worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area. Noise reduction potential will be project and site specific.
Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Noise levels will be loudest during grading phase. A likely worst-case construction noise scenario during grading assumes the use of a grader, a dozer, and two (2) excavators, two (2) backhoes and a scrapper operating at 50 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor.
Assuming a usage factor of 40 percent for each piece of equipment, unmitigated noise levels at 50 feet have the potential to reach 90 dBA Leq and 92 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptors during
3.11 NOISE
3.11-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan grading. Noise levels for the other construction phases would be lower and range between 85 to 90 dBA. For this reason, the West Area Specific Plan Noise Impact Study identifies a number of measures to minimize construction noise impacts associated with the buildout of the Specific Plan, which have been incorporated as mitigation measures. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would ensure that the nearby sensitive receptors to the Plan Area would not be subject to construction noise levels in excess of the City’s standards, resulting in a less than significant impact.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.11-2: Construction within the Plan Area must follow the City’s Municipal Noise Code Section 10‐109 which exempts construction, repair or remodeling work accomplished pursuant to a building, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, or other construction permit issued by the City or other governmental agency, or to site preparation and grading, provided such work takes place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any day except Sunday.
Mitigation Measure 3.11-3: The project proponent(s) and/or construction contractor(s) shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department, that buildout of the Specific Plan complies with the following:
• Truck traffic associated with project construction shall be limited to within the permitted construction hours, as listed in the City’s Municipal Code above. • Stationary construction noise sources such as generators or pumps shall be located at least 300 feet from sensitive land uses, as feasible.
• Construction staging areas shall be located as far from noise sensitive land uses as feasible. • During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. The use of manufacturer certified mufflers would generally reduce the construction equipment noise by 8 to 10 dBA. • Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. • Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging.
Impact 3.11-3: Specific Plan implementation would not substantially increase noise vibration association with construction activities. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
The effects of vibration on structures have been the subject of extensive research. The Federal Transit Administration has compiled data regarding the vibration levels for various construction equipment and activities and is detailed in Table 3.11-12.
The Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual for the California Department of Transportation has various recommended vibration thresholds for various types of projects and land uses. According to the Konan Vibration Criteria for Historic and Sensitive Buildings, the criteria for transient vibration sources should not exceed 0.3 peak particle velocity (PPV) (Section 6 – Structures, Table 11). In addition, 0.035 inches per second PPV is barely perceptive.
NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-35 TABLE 3.11-12: VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
TYPE OF EQUIPMENT
PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY @ 25 FEET
(INCHES/SECOND)
APPROXIMATE VIBRATION LEVEL
LV (VDB) @ 25 FEET
Pile Drive (impact)
1.518 (upper range) 112
0.644 (typical) 104
Pile driver (sonic)
0.734 (upper range) 105
0.170 (typical) 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large Bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson Drill 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small Bulldozer 0.003 58
SOURCE: FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, TRANSIT NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES, MAY 2006 Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. Typical development projects in the Plan Area would not likely require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. For example, the primary vibration source during most future construction may be from a bulldozer. A large bulldozer has a vibration impact of 0.089 inches per second PPV at 25 feet, which is perceptible but below any risk to architectural damage. As shown in Table 3.11-9, a PPV of 0.20 is the threshold at which there is a risk to “architectural” damage to normal dwellings. It also the level at which ground-borne vibration are annoying to people in buildings. Impacts would be significant if construction activities result in ground-borne vibration of 0.20 inches per second PPV or higher at sensitive receptors.
For buildout of the proposed Specific Plan, the distance of the construction equipment would likely be at least 10 feet or more from any existing structure. At a distance of 10 feet, a large bulldozer would yield a worst-case 0.244 inches per second PPV which may be perceptible for short periods of time during site preparation of the southeastern corner of the project site, but no damage is expected. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-4 would further reduce construction related groundborne vibration. Therefore, this impact is less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.11-4: For future projects which would require the use of highly vibratory equipment in the Plan Area, an additional site- and project-specific analysis shall be conducted by a noise and vibration specialist prior to project approval. The analysis shall evaluate potential groundborne vibration impacts to existing structures and sensitive receptors, and shall also recommend additional mitigation measures, as necessary. The recommendations of the site- and project-specific analysis shall be implemented by the project proponent(s), to the satisfaction of the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department.
3.11 NOISE
3.11-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Impact 3.11-4: Specific Plan implementation would not substantially increase stationary noise at sensitive receptors. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
The Specific Plan proposes the relocation of higher density land uses away from the most western and southwestern portions of the Plan Area where they are distant from public transit and community amenities and transfers those higher density land use designations to major corridors.
The Specific Plan would result in an increase in land designated for employment, mixed use, open space and public facilities uses and a decrease in land designated for residential and commercial uses. Typical stationary noise sources and associated noise levels as measured ten-feet from the source are presented in Table 3.11-13.
TABLE 3.11-13: TYPICAL STATIONARY NOISE LEVELS
TYPE NOISE LEVELS (DBA) AT 10 FEET1
Parking Lot Noise 50 – 75
HVAC 55 – 100
Property Maintenance 75 – 95
Trash Truck 85 – 90
Loading/Unloading 65 – 82
Recreational Noise 50 – 90
Amplified Music 85 – 105
Car Wash 85 – 105
Event Venue 65 – 75
Idling Heavy Traffic 72
NOTE:
1. THE NOISE RANGES PRESENTED ARE INTENDED TO GIVE A GENERAL IDEA OF TYPICAL URBAN/SUBURBAN STATIONARY NOISE SOURCES. DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF PATRONS AND THE SPECIFIC ACTIVITY, I.E. OUTDOOR WINERY CONCERT VS. A ROCK BAND, NOISE LEVELS WILL VARY.
SOURCE: MD ACOUSTICS, 2020.
Due to the suburban/rural nature of the Plan Area, future development of the Plan Area will result in a substantial increase in existing ambient noise conditions. Increases in ambient noise levels associated with existing and future stationary noise impacts may result in potentially significant impacts. However, enforcement of the Sections 10-105 through 10-109 of the City’s Noise Ordinance and analysis of noise producing projects, along with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-5, would ensure that the nearby sensitive receptors to the Plan Area would not be subject to stationary noise levels in excess of the City’s standards. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.11-5: In order to reduce the potential for stationary noise impacts, development projects in the Plan Area shall implement the following measures:
• Avoid the placement of new noise producing uses in proximity to noise-sensitive land uses; NOISE 3.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.11-37 • Apply noise level performance standards provided in Table 9-2 of the City of Fresno General Plan Noise Element (Table 3.11-5 of this EIR) to proposed new noise producing uses; and • Require new noise-sensitive uses in near proximity to noise-producing facilities include mitigation measures that would ensure compliance with noise performance standards in Table 9-2 of the City of Fresno General Plan Noise Element (Table 3.11-5 of this EIR).
Impact 3.11-5: Specific Plan implementation would not substantially increase ambient interior noise at future sensitive receptors. (Less than Significant with Mitigation)
Based on the data provided in the EPA’s Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9-79-100, Nov 1979), standard homes in California provide at least 12 dBA of noise exterior to interior noise attenuation with windows open and 20 dBA with windows closed. Therefore, residences would need to be exposed to exterior noise levels exceeding 65 dBA CNEL (45 dBA + 20 dBA = 65 dBA) to potentially exceed the interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL with windows closed. A windows closed condition is defined as: the interior noise level with the windows closed. Upgrades are required for residential structures that would experience interior noise levels exceeding the 45 dBA CNEL noise standard when windows are closed (e.g. higher grade of insulation in outdoor walls, and/or double-paned windows and air condition units).
As discussed in Impact 3.11-1, the existing and future traffic noise levels anticipated from implementation of proposed Specific Plan would result in exterior noise levels exceeding 65 dBA, which could result in the interior noise levels at future land uses exceeding the City’s interior noise level standards of 45dBA, as presented in 3.11-5. To reduce the interior noise impacts, site-specific noise analyses will be required for future development projects under the proposed Specific Plan, as required by Mitigation Measure 3.11-6. The site-specific noise analyses will be required to finetune and finalize noise reduction features and must demonstrate the interior noise level will not exceed the City’s 45 dBA CNEL noise limit. Potential noise reduction features may include a “windows closed” condition and possibly upgraded windows with increased STC ratings for doors and windows.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-6 would ensure that the future land uses within the Specific Plan would not be subject to interior noise levels in excess of the City’s standards. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.11-6: Prior to approval, site- and project-specific noise analyses development projects under the proposed Specific Plan shall be completed and submitted to the City in order to fine-tune and finalize noise reduction features. The site-specific noise analyses must demonstrate the interior noise level will not exceed the City’s 45 dBA CNEL noise limit.
A qualified Acoustical Consultant shall provide information demonstrating that site specific mitigation will be effective at reaching the applicable noise standard, which includes:
3.11 NOISE
3.11-38 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan • Install noise walls, berms and/or a combination of a landscaped berm with wall, and reduced barrier height in combination with increased distance or elevation differences between noise source and noise receptor. The City of Fresno has established a maximum allowable height for noise walls of 15 feet. As such, the noise walls, berms and/or a combination of a landscaped berm with wall shall not exceed 15 feet.
• Utilize façades with substantial weight and insulation. • Install sound-rated windows for primary sleeping and activity areas. • Install sound-rated doors for all exterior entries at primary sleeping and activity areas. • Install acoustic baffling of vents for chimneys, attic and gable ends. • Install mechanical ventilation systems that provide fresh air under closed window conditions.
The aforementioned measures are not exhaustive and alternative designs may be approved by the City, provided that a qualified Acoustical Consultant submits information demonstrating that the alternative design(s) will achieve and maintain the specific targets for outdoor activity areas and interior spaces.
Impact 3.11-6: Specific Plan implementation would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive airport or aircraft noise. (Less than Significant)
There are no airports located within the Plan Area and noise contours associated with airports in the vicinity of the Plan Area are not expected to encroach into the Plan Area (City of Fresno 2014).
The closest public or public use airport is the Fresno Chandler Executive Airport, located approximately 2.5 miles to the south of the Plan Area, at its closest point. The Plan Area will however, continue to be affected by fly-over noise associated with the Fresno Yosemite International Airport, the Fresno‐Chandler Downtown airport, and the Sierra Sky Park Airport.
However, airport noise and aircraft noise are not expected to result in significant impacts in the Plan Area. Therefore, this is a less than significant impact relative to this topic.
Figure 3.11-1
Noise Measurement Location Map
Existing Noise Environment
37 1 = Short Term measurement (10-Minute)
1 = Long Term measurement (24-Hour)
4 6
7 8 9
10 11
2 3
= West Area Specific Plan Boundary
West Area Specific Plan
Noise Impact Study
City of Fresno, CA
12 1
2 3
5 1
4 3.11 NOISE
3.11-40 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
41 Existing Noise Environment
West Area Specific Plan
Noise Impact Study
City of Fresno, CA
Figure 3.11-2
Existing Roadway Noise Level Contours (CNEL)
3.11 NOISE
3.11-42 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
42 Figure 3.11-3
Union Pacific Railroad Noise Level Contours (CNEL)
West Area Specific Plan
Noise Impact Study
City of Fresno, CA Existing Noise Environment
3.11 NOISE
3.11-44 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
46 West Area Specific Plan
Noise Impact Study
City of Fresno, CA Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation Figure 3.11-4
Existing Plus Project Plus Cumulative Roadway Noise Level Contours (CNEL)
3.11 NOISE
3.11-46 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
POPULATION AND HOUSING 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.12-1 The purpose of this EIR section is to analyze and disclose the anticipated growth in population that would result from plan implementation, analyze the plan’s consistency with relevant planning documents and policies related to population and housing, and recommend mitigation measures to avoid or minimize the significance of potential impacts. Information in this section is based on information provided by the City of Fresno, site survey, ground and aerial photographs, and the following reference materials:
• Fresno General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014);
• Draft Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update, City of Fresno, Fresno County, California (City of Fresno, 2014); • Fresno General Plan Public Review Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (City of Fresno, 2020);
• City of Fresno Housing Element (City of Fresno, 2017); • City of Fresno, Chapter 15, Citywide Development Code (City of Fresno, Adopted December 2015);
• US Census data (U.S. Census data, 2019);
• California Department of Finance Population and Housing Estimates (E-5 Reports) (California Department of Finance, 2019).
Comments were received during the public review period or scoping meeting for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic from the following: Cathy Caples (August 1, 2019). The portion of this comment letter which relates to this topic is addressed within this section. Full comments received are included in Appendix A.
3.12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
DEMOGRAPHICS
POPULATION TRENDS
U.S. Census data indicates that the City of Fresno experienced moderate population growth from 1990 to 2000, increasing from 354,091 to 427,719 persons at an annual average increase of 2.1 percent as shown in Table 3.12-1. During the decade from 2000 to 2010, the rate of growth continued at an annual average increase of 1.6 percent, reaching a total population of 494,665 in 2010. The city’s population has increased during this decade to a population of 542,012in 2019.
TABLE 3.12-1: POPULATION GROWTH – FRESNO
YEAR POPULATION ANNUAL AVERAGE CHANGE
1990 354,091 --
2000 427,719 2.1%
2010 494,665 1.6%
2015 522,369 1.1%
2017 531,440 0.9%
2018 536,593 1.0%
2019 542,012 1.0%
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.12-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan SOURCE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, E-4 POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR CITIES, COUNTIES, AND THE STATE, 2001-2010, WITH 2000 & 2010 CENSUS COUNTS AND E-5 POPULATION ESTIMATES FOR CITIES, COUNTIES, AND THE STATE, 2011-2020, WITH 2010 CENSUS BENCHMARK.
HOUSING STOCK
Table 3.12-2 summarizes the growth of the City of Fresno’s housing stock from the years 2000 to 2019, based on information from the US Census and California Department of Finance. The number of housing units has increased from 171,288 in 2010 to 180,632 in 2019, an average annual increase of 0.6 percent.
TABLE 3.12 -2: HOUSING UNIT GROWTH – FRESNO
YEAR HOUSING UNITS ANNUAL AVERAGE CHANGE
2000 149,053 --
2010 171,288 1.5%
2015 176,915 0.7%
2017 178,819 0.5%
2019 180,632 0.5%
SOURCE: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, E-8 HOUSING ESTIMATES FOR CITIES, COUNTIES, AND THE STATE, 2000-2010 AND E-5 HOUSING ESTIMATES FOR CITIES, COUNTIES, AND THE STATE, 2011-2020, WITH 2010 CENSUS BENCHMARK.
PERSONS PER DWELLING UNIT
The average number of persons residing in a dwelling unit in Fresno is 2.97 (California Department of Finance, 2019).
JOBS:HOUSING BALANCE
As described in Section 4.11, Population and Housing, implementation of the City of Fresno General Plan Update is realistically expected to result in the construction of 76,000 new residential dwellings by the 2035 planning horizon to arrive at a total of 267,000 housing units and a population of 771,000. The City’s General Plan population projection assumes total buildout of all available residential lands in the city will not be reached by the year 2035, in which case substantial population and housing growth will continue. According the City’s General Plan, at the Horizon Year 2035, the General Plan can accommodate 0.48 jobs per new resident, approximately equivalent to the current percentage of the city’s population in the labor force (46 percent according the 2010 U.S. Census).
At General Plan horizon, the SOI could accommodate approximately a total of 108,000 new jobs above current levels, based on 0.48 jobs per 226,000 new residents anticipated by 2035. At General Plan Buildout, well after 2035, it is estimated that there would be 0.45 jobs per new resident, roughly equivalent to the current percentage of the city’s population in the labor force (46 percent according to the 2010 US Census). At General Plan buildout, the SOI could accommodate approximately a total of 189,500 new jobs above current levels based on 0.45 jobs per 425,000 new residents anticipated.
GROWTH PROJECTIONS
As described in the Fresno General Plan, the city’s growth is realistically expected to result in the construction of 76,000 new residential dwellings by the 2035 planning horizon to arrive at a total of POPULATION AND HOUSING 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.12-3 267,000 housing units and a population of 771,000. The City’s General Plan residential development projection anticipates that the city will continue to develop beyond the General Plan Horizon. The city will grow into the remaining portions of the SOI that were not developed during the horizon of the General Plan. Full Buildout of this SOI is anticipated to occur well after 2035.
3.12.2 REGULATORY SETTING
STATE REGULATIONS
Senate Bill 330 “The Housing Crisis Act of 2019” is a statewide bill intended to reduce the time it takes to approve housing developments in California. SB 330 would declare a statewide housing emergency to be in effect until January 1, 2030. During that period, cities and counties found to have high rents and low rental vacancy rates would:
• Be prohibited from reducing housing densities, increasing development fees, or taking a range of other actions affecting housing development (both for-sale and rental); • Have any such actions taken since January 1, 2018 declared null and void; • Be prohibited from imposing fees on new units that are deed restricted for families earning less than 80% of the area median income;
• Be prohibited from enforcing requirements that new developments include parking; • Be required to process housing development applications under the general plan and zoning ordinance in effect at the time the application is deemed complete.
Other provisions of SB 330 would apply to all jurisdictions not only those with high rents and low vacancy rates. These include requiring cities and counties to process housing development applications under the general plan and zoning ordinance in effect at the time the application is deemed complete, a ban on holding more than three de novo public hearings on a project, and a requirement that cities and counties post all development standards online. The bill would also call for the State Department of Housing and Community Development to update building standards for “occupied substandard buildings.”
FRESNO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
The Fresno Council of Governments (FCOG) is an association of local governments from cities within Fresno County. The member agencies include City of Clovis, City of Coalinga, City of Firebaugh, City of Fowler, City of Fresno, City of Huron, City of Kerman, City of Kingsburg, City of Mendota, City of Orange Cove, City of Parlier, City of Reedley and City of San Joaquin, City of Sanger, City of Selma, and County of Fresno. FCOG is responsible for the preparation of, and updates to, the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) for the region. The RTP/SCS provides a 25-year transportation vision and strategies for air emissions reduction. The 2018 MTP/SCS was adopted by the FCOG board in July 2017.
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.12-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The 2018 RTP is a long-range plan for transportation improvements in the region. The RTP identifies existing and future transportation related needs, while considering all modes of travel, analyzing alternative solutions, and identifying anticipated available funding for the over 3,000 projects and multiple programs. The plan is based on projections for growth in population, housing, and jobs.
FCOG determines the regional growth projections by evaluating baseline data (existing housing units and employees, jobs/housing ratio, and percent of regional growth share for housing units and employees), historic reference data (based upon five- and ten-year residential building permit averages and historic county-level employment statistics), capacity data (General Plan data for each jurisdiction), and current RTP data about assumptions used in the most recent RTP/SCS. FCOG staff then meets with each jurisdiction to discuss and incorporate more subjective considerations about planned growth for each area. Finally, FCOG makes a regional growth forecast for new homes and new jobs, based upon an economic analysis provided by a recognized expert in order to estimate regional growth potential based on market analysis and related economic data. This growth forecast is then incorporated into the RTP/SCS.
Regional Housing Needs Plan
California General Plan law requires each city and county to have land zoned to accommodate a fair share of the regional housing need. The share is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). FCOG is the lead agency for developing the RHNA that includes Fresno County and the City of Fresno. The latest housing allocation for the City of Fresno covers the nearly eight-year period from 2013 through 2023 and consists of 23,565 units (2,833 extremely low, 2,833 very low, 3,289 low, 3,571 moderate, and 11,039 above moderate income). The City is not required to make development occur; however, the City must facilitate housing production by ensuring that land is available and that unnecessary development constraints have been removed. The City prepared and adopted an updated Housing Element to cover the 2013-2023 regional housing needs cycle (adoption date: April, 2017).
If a jurisdiction failed to make adequate sites available to accommodate the RHNA in the previous planning period, AB 1233 (Government Code Section 65584.09) requires the jurisdiction to identify and, if necessary, rezone sites in the first year of the current planning period to address the unaccommodated lower-income RHNA from the previous planning period. This requirement is in addition to the requirement to identify other specific sites to accommodate the RHNA for the current planning period. The City may not count capacity on the same sites for both planning periods. The City of Fresno must carry over 3,172 extremely- and very low-income units and 3,304 low-income units, for a total of 6,476 lower-income units from the 2008-2014 RHNA, as indicated by HCD in a letter to the City dated August 11, 2016 (corrected November 1, 2016).
FRESNO GENERAL PLAN
The Fresno General Plan articulates the community's vision of its long-term physical form and development. The Fresno General Plan is comprehensive in scope and represents the city's POPULATION AND HOUSING 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.12-5 expression of quality of life and community values. General plans are prepared under a mandate from the State of California, which requires that each city and county prepare and adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its jurisdiction and any adjacent related lands. State law requires general plans to address seven mandated components: circulation, conservation, housing, land use, noise, open space, and safety. Fresno General Plan population, housing, and growth policies relevant to this EIR are identified below.
Urban Form, Land Use, and DesignElement
Objective UF-1. Emphasize the opportunity for a diversity of districts, neighborhoods, and housing types.
Policy Uf-1-a: Diverse Neighborhoods. Support development projects that provide Fresno with a diversity of urban and suburban neighborhood opportunities.
Policy Uf-1-c: Identifiable City Structure. Focus integrated and ongoing planning efforts to achieve an identifiable city structure, comprised of a concentration of buildings, people, and pedestrian-oriented activity in Downtown; along a small number of transit-oriented, mixeduse corridors and strategically located Activity Centers; and in existing and new neighborhoods augmented with parks and connected by multi-purpose trails and tree lined bike lanes and streets.
Policy UF-1-d: Range of Housing Types. Provide for diversity and variation of building types, densities, and scales of development in order to reinforce the identity of individual neighborhoods, foster a variety of market-based options for living and working to suit a large range of income levels, and further affordable housing opportunities throughout the city.
Policy UF-1-e: Unique Neighborhoods. Promote and protect unique neighborhoods and mixed use areas throughout Fresno that respect and support various ethnic, cultural and historic enclaves; provide a range of housing options, including furthering affordable housing opportunities; and convey a unique character and lifestyle attractive to Fresnans.
Support unique areas through more specific planning processes that directly engage community members in creative and innovative design efforts.
Policy UF-1-f: Complete Neighborhoods, Densities, and Development Standards. Use Complete Neighborhood design concepts and development standards to achieve the development of Complete Neighborhoods and the residential density targets of the General Plan.
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.
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.12-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy UF-12-a: BRT Corridors. Design land uses and integrate development site plans along BRT corridors, with transit-oriented development that supports transit ridership and convenient pedestrian access to bus stops and BRT station stops.
Policy 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.
Policy 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.
Policy 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 Centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
Policy UF-12-e: Access to Activity Centers. Access to Activity Centers. Promote adoption and implementation of standards supporting pedestrian activities and bicycle linkages from surrounding land uses and neighborhoods into Activity Centers and to transit stops. Provide for priority transit routes and facilities to serve the Activity Centers.
Policy UF-12-f: Mixed-Use in Activity Centers. Mixed-Use in Activity Centers. Adopt a new Development Code which includes use regulations and standards to allow for mixed-uses and shared parking facilities.
Policy UF-12-g: Impacts on Surrounding Uses. Impacts on Surrounding Uses. Establish design standards and buffering requirements for high-intensity Activity Centers to protect surrounding residential uses from increased impacts from traffic noise and vehicle emissions, visual intrusion, interruption of view and air movement, and encroachment upon solar access.
Policy UF-12-h: Parking Standards for Shared Parking. Parking Standards for Shared Parking.
Explore opportunities to provide shared parking within mixed-use designations to reduce the need to construct large parking lots or structures needed for peak use times only.
Objective UF-13. Locate roughly one-half of future residential development in the Growth Areas— defined as unincorporated land as of December 31, 2012 SOI—which are to be developed with Complete Neighborhoods that include housing, services, and recreation; mixed-use centers; or along future BRT corridors.
Policy UF-13-a: Future Planning to Require Design Principles. Require future planning, such as Specific Plans, neighborhood plans or Concept Plans, for Development Areas and BRT POPULATION AND HOUSING 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.12-7 Corridors designated by the General Plan to include urban design principles and standards consistent with the Urban Form, Land Use and Design Element.
Land Use Element
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.
Policy 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.
Policy LU-2-b: Infill Development for Affordable Housing. Establish a priority infill incentive program for residential infill development of existing vacant lots and underutilized sites within the City as a strategy to help to meet the affordable housing needs of the community.
Policy LU-2-c: Infill Design Toolkit. Incorporate standards in the Development Code to preserve the existing residential quality of established neighborhoods.
Objective LU-4. Enhance existing residential neighborhoods through regulations, code enforcement, and compatible infill development.
Policy LU-4-a: Neighborhood Nuisance Abatement. Continue proactive and responsive code enforcement and nuisance abatement programs to improve the attractiveness of residential neighborhoods.
Policy LU-2-b: Neighborhood Reinvestment. Promote and consider partnerships with lending institutions that provide a variety of financing alternatives and adhere to the provisions of the federal Community Reinvestment Act.
Policy LU-2-c: Housing Task Force. Establish an interagency housing task force to coordinate the housing programs of the City with similar programs of other local jurisdictions and the Fresno Housing Authority to develop a coordinated affordable housing implementation plan.
Objective LU-5. Plan for a diverse housing stock that will support balanced urban growth, and make efficient use of resources and public facilities.
Policy LU-5-a: Low Density Residential Uses. Promote low density residential uses only where there are established neighborhoods with semi-rural or estate characteristics.
Policy LU-5-b: Medium-Low Density Residential Uses. Promote medium-low density residential uses to preserve existing uses of that nature or provide a transition between low and medium density residential areas.
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.12-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy LU-5-c: Medium Density Residential Uses. Promote medium density residential uses to maximize efficient use of residential property through a wide range of densities.
Policy LU-5-d: Medium-High Density Residential Uses. Promote medium-high density residential uses to optimize use of available or planned public facilities and services and to provide housing opportunities with convenient access to employment, shopping, services, and transportation.
Policy LU-5-e: Urban Neighborhood Residential Uses. Promote urban neighborhood residential uses to support compact communities and Complete Neighborhoods that include community facilities, walkable access to parkland and commercial services, and transit stops.
Policy LU-5-f: High Density Residential Uses. Promote high-density residential uses to support Activity Centers and BRT Corridors, and walkable access to transit stops.
Policy LU-5-g: Scale and Character of New Development. Allow new development in or adjacent to established neighborhoods that is compatible in scale and character with the surrounding area by promoting a transition in scale and architectural character between new buildings and established neighborhoods, as well as integrating pedestrian circulation and vehicular routes.
Policy LU-5-h: Housing Offering Amenities. Support housing that offers residents a range of amenities, including public and private open space, landscaping, and recreation facilities with direct access to commercial services, public transit, and community gathering spaces.
Policy LU-5-i: Housing for Seniors. Facilitate the development of senior housing projects that are accessible to public transportation and services.
Policy LU-5-j: Campus-Centered Communities. Encourage development of campus-centered communities by focusing growth around existing and planned academic facilities and by directing infrastructure to those areas.
Housing Element
Goal 2. New construction of Affordable Housing.
Policy 2-1: New Construction. The General Plan is not inconsistent with this program. As discussed above in the narrative, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) identified a need for approximately 20,967 units for the 2008-2013 planning period. The number of potential dwelling units allowable in the land use designations proposed by the General Plan, and by zoning in the updated Development Code meet and exceed this amount. Details can be found throughout the General Plan, including increased density and development intensity (such as Table 3-1 and Table 3-2) and infill/growth area construction (Objectives UF-1, UF-12, UF-13, LU-2, LU-4, and LU-5 and supporting Policies).
POPULATION AND HOUSING 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.12-9 Goal 3. Housing Rehabilitation, Acquisition and Neighborhood Improvements.
Policy 3-1: Neighborhood Revitalization. Although the RDA has been dissolved, this General Plan recognizes and supports the function of the RDA as is now administered by the City of Fresno in its capacity of the Housing Successor to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Fresno, and the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Fresno. See Goal 7, 8, and 9; also Objective LU-5.
Goal 4. Housing Rehabilitation, Acquisition and Neighborhood Improvements.
3.12.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the standards established by Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Specific Plan will have a significant impact on population and housing if it will:
• 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);
• Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.12-1: Implementation of the Specific Plan would not induce unplanned substantial population growth. (Less than Significant) The proposed Specific Plan would be expected to increase the population of the city of Fresno through the future development of a mixed-use, commercial and residential development.
However, the West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan seeks to provide for the orderly and consistent development that promotes enhanced transportation infrastructure, development of core commercial centers, creation of additional parkland, and development of a diverse housing stock.
The Plan Area does not currently have commercial amenities, forcing residents to travel east of State Route 99 for retail services. The Plan Area also lacks a complete roadway network and parkland.
The Specific Plan would allow for the future development of up to 54,953 dwelling units (DU) (including 67 DU in the commercial category, 47,072 DU in the residential category and 7,814 DU in the mixed use category), and 60,621,006.31 square feet (SF) of non-residential uses. The proposed land use plan also designates public facility uses that are currently existing within the Plan Area.
There are also planned public facilities, including schools, ponding basins, and churches, which will be developed within the proposed Plan. In the northern portion of the Plan Area, Fire Station No. 18 is temporarily located off of West Bullard Avenue at 5938 North La Ventana Avenue. Fire Station 18 will be permanently relocated to a location on the south side of the 6000 block of West Shaw Avenue to maximize the department’s response time goal. Additionally, the proposed land use plan would
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.12-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan allow for approximately 248 acres of park, open space, and ponding basin uses. The Specific Plan also includes circulation and utility improvements, some of which are planned in the City’s current program for capital improvements.
Based on the City’s General Plan Housing Element estimate of approximately 2.97 persons per dwelling unit, the proposed Specific Plan is estimated to accommodate 163,211 total residents in the City of Fresno at buildout. Population growth by itself is not considered a significant environmental impact. However, development of housing, infrastructure, and facilities and services to serve this growth can have significant environmental impacts through land conversion, commitment of resources, and other mechanisms.
The proposed Specific Plan would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (i.e., by proposed new unplanned homes) or indirectly (i.e., by the extension of roads or other infrastructure). As part of the proposed Specific Plan, the draft land use map proposes the relocation of higher density land uses away from the most western and southwestern portions of the Plan Area where they are distant from public transit and community amenities and transfers those higher density land use designations to major corridors. The proposed land use plan utilizes the City’s existing General Plan land use designations to maintain or re-designate some parcels in the Plan Area. Some of the designation changes include: Low Density Residential (1 to 3.5 dwelling units per acre [DU/AC]), Medium Low Density Residential (3.5 to 6 DU/AC), Medium Density Residential (5 to 12 DU/AC), Medium High Density Residential (12 to 16 DU/AC), Urban Neighborhood Residential (16 to 30 DU/AC), High Density Residential (30 to 45 DU/AC), Community Commercial (1.0 maximum floor-area-ratio [FAR]), Recreation Commercial (0.5 maximum FAR), General Commercial (2.0 maximum FAR), Regional Commercial (16 DU/AC and 1.0 maximum FAR), Office (2.0 maximum FAR), Business Park (1.0 maximum FAR), Light Industrial (1.0 maximum FAR), Corridor/Center Mixed Use (16 to 30 DU/AC and 1.5 maximum FAR), Neighborhood Mixed Use (12 to 16 DU/AC and 1.5 maximum FAR), Regional Mixed Use (30 to 45 DU/AC and 2.0 maximum FAR), Pocket Park, Neighborhood Park, Community Park, Open Space, Ponding Basin, Public Facility, Church, Special School, Elementary School, Elementary, Middle & High School, High School, and Fire Station. The City of Fresno Zoning Map designates the Plan Area as: RE, RS-1, RS2, RS-3, RS-4, RS-5, RM-1, RM-2, RM-3, RM-MH, CC, CG, CR, CRC, IL, CMX, NMX, RMX, BP, O, OS, and PR. The Fresno County Zoning Map designates the portions of the Plan Area outside the city limits as: RCC, C4, C6, M1, AE20, AL20, RR, RA, R1B, and TP. In conjunction with the approval of the Specific Plan, the parcels in the city which would have a changed land use designation as a result of the Specific Plan would be rezoned to the corresponding city zoning designation. The parcels that are currently within the county will not be rezoned. Instead, upon a proposal to annex unincorporated land into the city limits, the City of Fresno would prezone the land to a zone that is consistent with the General Plan land use. Once annexation occurs, the county zoning would not apply to the parcel.
If the Plan Area were developed based on the land use designations in the General Plan, there would be an increase of 288.66 acres of residential uses and a decrease of 153.53 acres of mixed uses (see Table 2.0-1 of Chapter 2.0 for the existing General Plan land use acreages for the Plan Area). Given POPULATION AND HOUSING 3.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.12-11 the wide density ranges specified in the General Plan for residential and mixed use development, the proposed land use designations for this Specific Plan do not vary substantially from the existing General Plan Land use designations. Therefore, the Specific Plan does not directly induce substantial unplanned population growth. This is considered a less than significant impact in this regard.
The Specific Plan also does not induce substantial unplanned growth indirectly (through the extension of roads or other infrastructure). Roads and infrastructure would be developed throughout the Plan Area to provide internal circulation and utilities to the proposed development and would not extend outside the Plan boundaries. Furthermore, proposed growth and annexation of the city’s SOI has been accounted for within the City’s General Plan 10-year planning horizon and would therefore, not induce unplanned growth through the extension of city roads and other infrastructure. This is considered a less than significant impact in this regard.
It is also noted that an important outcome of the proposed Specific Plan is to increase housing opportunity and stability for existing and future Plan Area residents, which is an important tool related to environmental justice. The increase of housing variety in a neighborhood offers a greater range of pricing points for entry, with accessory dwelling units and missing middle housing types typically being more affordable. Section 5.7.B of the Specific Plan discusses housing opportunities and stability.
Overall, the Specific Plan is consistent with the regional growth projections prepared by FCOG.
Additionally, the City’s General Plan and housing densities requirements would ensure that the population growth associated with the Plan is consistent with the City’s growth management requirements. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.
Impact 3.12-2: Implementation of the Specific Plan would not displace substantial numbers of people or existing housing. (Less than significant) The proposed Specific Plan sites where new development is focused are mostly vacant and would not result in significant displacements of residents or the loss of existing dwelling units. Even though several sites may be razed, redeveloped or converted as a result of new development, the addition of homes at all market levels will offset the loss of the few homes that exist. The proposed Specific Plan would also focus new development onto infill and vacant sites located throughout the Plan Area. New development in the Plan Area could result in the loss of a limited number of dwelling units as future sites are redeveloped to a more efficient mixed use or residential project. However, any loss of existing units that may occur as a result of future infill development is not expected to be significant. Overall, implementation of the proposed Specific Plan could result in the development of 54,953 additional residential units in the proposed specific Plan Area, primarily complementary in nature to existing single family residential currently existing in the Plan Area.
Overall, construction and operation of the proposed Specific Plan would not remove a substantial number of existing housing units within the City of Fresno, and would not displace substantial numbers of residents. Therefore, this impact is considered a less than significant.
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.12-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-1 This section describes and evaluates potential impacts associated with the provision of police protection, fire protection and emergency services, schools, parks, and other services for the proposed project. The information in this section is derived primarily from:
• City of Fresno Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update (City of Fresno, 2016);
• Fresno Parks Master Plan (City of Fresno, 2017);
• Fresno General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014);
• Response to Comments on the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update - City of Fresno, Fresno County, California (City of Fresno, 2014); • FBI Uniform Crime Reporting, Table 8, Offenses Known to Law Enforcement (2016-2018).
Comments were received during the public review period or scoping meeting for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic from the following: Forgotten Fresno (July 17, 2019), Central Grizzlies Youth Football & Cheer (August 2, 2019), and Cathy Caples (August 1, 2019). The portions of these comment letters which relate to this topic are addressed within this section. Full comments received are included in Appendix A.
3.13.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
POLICE PROTECTION
The Fresno Police Department is responsible for enforcement of state and city laws, investigation of crimes, apprehension of criminals, reducing traffic collisions, maintenance of ongoing crime prevention programs, and building ties with the community and other local law enforcement agencies. The Police Department is divided into four divisions—the patrol division, the investigation division, the administrative division, and the support division. The Chief of Police supervises all divisions. As of April 3, 2020, the Fresno Police Department employs 1,061 FTE authorized personnel, including 809 FTE sworn safety members and 252 FTE civilians.1There are no police department facilities within the Plan Area.
The Patrol Division covers an area of 104.8 square miles provided by officers traveling by vehicle, bicycle, horse (mounted patrol), helicopter (Skywatch), and on foot. The Patrol Division includes five districts with individual needs and responses to crime. There are 505 staff in the patrol division as of April 24, 2020 with 94 personnel dedicated to the southwest district, 78 in the northwest district, 91 in the southeast district, 86 in the northeast district, and 90 in the central district. In addition, the Police Department has gang focused tactical teams to provide focused and proactive crime 1 Personal communication with Mindy Casto, Police Captain for the Fresno Police Department, September 21, 2021.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan suppression as a citywide resource for the patrol division. For example, 25 sworn personnel are assigned to the multi-agency gang enforcement consortium (MAGEC).
During 2020, Fresno Police Department received 385,177 emergency “911” calls and 520,029 nonemergency calls to the dispatch center. After being entered into the computer-aided dispatch system, each call is assigned a priority and then sent out to the field to be handled by officers.
Typically, the demand for police services and the need for police staff grows as population and businesses within the City of Fresno grow. Table 3.13-1 provides statistics on police calls/service from 2016 through 2018. The most frequent crimes requiring police services from 2016 through 2018 are related to larceny and burglary/theft. Violent crimes accounted for roughly 7.1% of crimes within the City of Fresno in 2018.
TABLE 3.13-1: CITY OF FRESNO CRIME STATISTICS (2016-2018) CATEGORY/CRIME 2016 2017 2018
Total Violent Crimes 3,206 2,974 2,953
Homicide 39 56 32
Rape 158 174 170
Robbery 1,122 958 909
Assault 1,887 1,786 1,842
Total Property Crimes 20,523 20,220 17,787
Burglary 3,697 3,649 2,949
Motor Vehicle Theft 3,284 2,789 2,365
Larceny 13,542 13,782 12,473
Arson 260 217 264
SOURCE: FBI CRIME STATISTICS; HTTPS://UCR.FBI.GOV/.
FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
The Fresno Fire Department (FFD) was established in 1877 and is one of the oldest fire departments in the United Stated. FFD provides fire prevention, suppression and investigation services, airport fire and rescue, urban search and rescue, response to medical emergencies (EMS), and response to hazardous materials incidents. The FFD service areas are comprised of the City of Fresno, and also includes extra-territorial services via contracts to provide services to the Fig Garden Fire Protection District and Fresno Yosemite International Airport.
The Fire Chief has an executive assistant and supervises the operations division, administration division, and prevention, investigation and support services division. The FFD operates out of 21 stations (including a specialized airport station), a fire apparatus shop, and headquarters. FFD’s21 stations are divided into four battalions that cover the City. As of April 2020, the Department is staffed by 346 authorized personnel, including 302 sworn safety members and 44 sworn non-safety and civilian personnel. The current daily staffing throughout the service area is as follows: City of PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-3 Fresno - 75; Airports - 2; Fig Garden Fire Protection District - 3; for a total of 80 firefighters.2 Specialized teams within FFD include Urban Search and Rescue (USAR), Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF), Hazardous Materials Response Team (HMRT), and a Communication Team. Figure
3.13-1 shows the FFD facilitates in the Plan Area.
FFD is a full-service fire department and provides services including, but not limited to, fire protection, emergency medical services, hazardous material response, and public assistance. There has been a general increasing trend in the number of calls for service since 2007, with some spikes and declines in the intervening years. Call volumes within the City tend to vary less by volume than type during each season. Typical of most fire providers, the City responds to a large proportion of emergency medical calls. The FFD response times for the first arriving unit are shown in Table 3.13-
2. TABLE 3.13-2: FFD RESPONSE TIMES WITHIN CITY BOUNDARIES (2019)
PERCENTILE (MINS) TURNOUT TRAVEL RESPONSE
Median 0:00:59 0:03:30 0:04:30
Mean 0:00:59 0:03:44 0:04:43
Standard Deviation 0:00:32 0:01:50 0:01:56
10% 0:00:11 0:01:56 0:02:46
20% 0:00:32 0:02:26 0:03:21
30% 0:00:43 0:02:49 0:03:46
40% 0:00:51 0:03:09 0:04:08
50% 0:00:59 0:03:30 0:04:30
60% 0:01:05 0:03:51 0:04:53
70% 0:01:14 0:04:15 0:05:19
80% 0:01:24 0:04:49 0:05:53
90% 0:01:38 0:05:45 0:06:51
SOURCE: CITY OF FRESNO MUNICIPAL SERVICE REVIEW AND SPHERE OF INFLUENCE UPDATE, FIGURE 10-7.
The three performance areas tracked by FFD are the 911-dispatch alarm process time, turnout time and travel time. These performance areas have been identified in both the Commission on Fire Accreditation International process and National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 1710. The benchmark for the 911 dispatch alarm process time is 60 seconds, as defined by the time between answering the call at the Fire/EMS dispatch center and activation of the station and/or company alerting devices by the computer-aided operator. The benchmarks for the turnout time are 60 seconds between 7:00 am and 9:59 pm and 90 seconds between 10:00 pm and 6:59 am. The interval between the activation of station and/or company alerting devices and the time when the responding crew begins rolling toward the call defines the turnout time. Travel time is defined as 2 Personal communication with Cody Charette, Data Analyst for the Fresno Fire Department, April 23, 2020.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan the time between the responding crew/apparatus signaling the dispatch center they are responding to the alarm and when the team arrives on scene.
While the 911 dispatch processing time benchmark is 60 seconds, 90 percent of the time, the Department’s processing time is somewhat longer at 57 seconds 50 percent of the time and greater than 90 seconds at 90 percent of the time. The greater processing times are in large part due to the use of cell phones for 911 calls. When a 911 call is received from a cell phone, the address information is not captured by the emergency call system, thereby requiring the dispatch staff to ask a series of questions to determine location. In response to the increase in cell phone use for 911 calls, a discussion of the relativity and appropriateness of the 60-second benchmark is underway at the national level.
SCHOOLS
Central Unified School District
The Specific Plan Area is within the Central Unified School District (CUSD). CUSD has 28 schools, including six preschools, 14 elementary schools, three middle schools, two high schools, and three alternative schools. Collectively, CUSD’s school facilities have a capacity of 20,287 seats. Of these 20,287 seats, 11,502 are at the elementary school level, 3,557 are at the middle school level, and 4,778 are at the high school level. Based on student enrollment data for school year 2017/2018, the enrollment of the CUSD is 15,883 students.
Additionally, a second high school in the CUSD area has recently opened. Justin Garza High School, located adjacent to Glacier Point Middle School at the intersection of West Ashlan and North Grantland Avenues, recently opened to freshman and sophomores in August 2021. The CUSD’s original high school, Central High, is split into two campuses — Central East, which opened in 1996 and sits on Cornelia and Dakota avenues, and Central West, which opened in 1922 and sits on McKinley and Dickenson avenues. About 4,200 students are split between those two campuses.
Since Justin Garza High School opened, the attendance boundaries have been split between Central East and Garza.3
Table 3.13-3 provides the enrollment and capacity for each school within the CUSD for the 2017/2018 school year. As shown in the table, all CUSD schools are currently operating under capacity, except for the Central Learning Adult/Alternative School Site (C.L.A.S.S.). Figure 3.13-1 shows the schools in the Plan Area.
3 The Fresno Bee. Does Fresno’s new high school favor rich families on the north side? Here’s the map.
Published November 11, 2020.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-5 TABLE 3.13-3: CENTRAL UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: SCHOOL INVENTORY AND 2017/2018 ENROLLMENT AND
CAPACITY
SCHOOL ENROLLMENT CAPACITY DIFFERENCE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS
Biola-Pershing Elementary School 235 240 -5
Harvest Elementary School 724 918 -194
Herndon-Barstow Elementary School 660 860 -200
Houghton-Kearney K-8 School 233 351 -118
Liddell Elementary School 717 876 -159
Madison Elementary School 695 1,010 -315
McKinley Elementary School 830 976 -146
Polk Elementary School 811 927 -116
River Bluff Elementary School 799 1,010 -211
Roosevelt Elementary School 490 786 -296
Saroyan Elementary School 745 927 -182
Steinbeck Elementary School 769 985 -216
Teague Elementary School 713 894 -181
Tilley Elementary School 442 742 -300
MIDDLE SCHOOLS
El Capitan Middle School 712 1,129 -417
Glacier Point Middle School 918 1,060 -142
Rio Vista Middle School 863 1,368 -505
HIGH SCHOOL
Central High School 4,168 4,778 -610
ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS
C.L.A.S.S. 218 175 +43
Pathway Community Day School 24 75 -51
Pershing Continuation High School 117 200 -83
TOTAL 15,883 20,287 --
SOURCES: SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT CARDS (PUBLISHED BY THE CUSD DURING THE 2018-2019 SCHOOL YEAR); AND CUSD FACILITIES MASTER PLAN (2016).
LIBRARY SERVICES
Library services in the City of Fresno are provided by the Fresno County Public Library. The Fresno County Public Library provides collections and services through its Central Resource Library and 34 branches. The County Public Library is part of the San Joaquin Valley Library System (SJVLS), a cooperative network of 10 public library jurisdictions in the counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced and Tulare.
The Plan Area contains one library, the Teague Branch, located in a newly constructed community resource center across from Teague Elementary School on Polk Avenue. The other nearest libraries to the Plan Area include the Biola Branch Library, the Fig Garden Regional Library, Gillis Branch Library, and the Central Library:
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan The Teague Branch Library is located at 4718 North Polk Avenue. The library was originally hosted in Teague Elementary from 1932 to 1950, reopening in 2014. The library was relocated to the community resource center in 2019.
The Biola Branch Library is located at 4885 North Biola Avenue. Opened in 1924, this branch operated in several different town locations. This branch was replaced by Fresno County Bookmobile service from 1963 to 2012. In 2012, the Biola Branch Library reopened at the Biola-Pershing Elementary School.
The Fig Garden Regional Library is located at 3071 West Bullard Avenue in a 9,929 square foot building. This library opened in 1962 to meet the needs of northern Fresno's growing population.
This library was first located in the Fig Garden Village shopping center, but relocated in 1995 to a larger facility at Bullard and Marks Avenues.
The Gillis Branch Library is located at 629 West Dakota Avenue in a 6,263 square foot building. This branch opened in 1940 on Olive Avenue, in rented space; the branch moved to the corner of Dakota and Fruit Avenues in 1975. This library was named in honor of James Gillis (1857-1917), founder of the California county library system.
The Central Library is located at 2420 Mariposa Street in an 82,716 square foot building. The Central Library is the successor to several different downtown Fresno libraries; the first of which opened in 1876. The first true Fresno public library opened in 1891 and occupied its first real home on Broadway in 1904. The current Central Library branch opened its doors in 1959 and is known for its Heritage Center and Government Documents collection.
PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM
City of Fresno Parks, After School, Recreation and Community Services (PARCS) Department owns and operate numerous parks including regional parks, neighborhood parks, trails, dog parks, community centers, action sports facilities, play structures, pools, splash parks, and golf courses.
PARCS offers recreation opportunities through sports activities for youth and adults at a minimum or no cost.
The City maintains approximately 1,617 acres of open space and nearly 230,000 square feet of building space dedicated to recreational/educational purposes. Other facilities include nine community pools, four splash parks, 518 picnic tables, 153 barbeque grills, three amphitheaters, 54 baseball/softball fields, 53 football/soccer fields, 40 basketball courts, 11 volleyball courts, 40 tennis courts, seven skate parks, and five dog parks. The park system also provides and maintains 115 acres of paths and trails for pedestrians and bicyclists. Figure 3.13-1 shows the parks in the Plan Area.
The City of Fresno presently operates three regional parks. The Regional Sports Complex is located at Jensen and West Avenues and is a 114.3-acre sports center. This park contains six softball and nine soccer fields. In addition, it also has an 8.68-acre paintball shooting complex. The PARCS PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-7 Department offers softball leagues and tournaments for approximately 1,380 teams each year. The sports complex also hosts a number of major music concerts throughout the year. The Regional Sports Complex is located approximately 5.1 miles south of the southern boundary of the Plan Area.
Roeding Park has evolved into a regional park since its inception in 1903. Although originally intended as a large community park that would provide picnicking and recreation space for Fresno residents, the addition of Storyland, Playland and the Fresno Chaffee Zoo have turned this into a major regional park site. This park now services a significant number of guests who live outside of Fresno and visit the park for the major attractions located at the facility. Roeding Park is located approximately 1.3 miles south of the southern boundary of the Plan Area.
Woodward Park is a 300-acre site that contains the Rotary Amphitheater, the Shinzen Japanese Garden, numerous walking trails, picnic shelters and serves as a gateway to the San Joaquin River.
Because of its size and mature trees, this facility draws thousands of visitors for exercise and major cultural arts functions. Woodward Park is located approximately 6.5 miles northeast of the eastern boundary of the Plan Area.
Table 3.13-4 summarizes the City’s park and recreation facilities, including the facility name, location, size, hours, and amenities.
TABLE 3.13-4: CITY OF FRESNO PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
Alfonso
Hernandez
Youth Center
1515 E.
Divisadero St.
N/A Dawn - 10PM Recreation room, computer lab
Almy Park 228 W Almy Ave. 0.5 acres Dawn - Dusk Playground, grass areas, picnic tables Al Radka Park 5897 E. Belmont
Ave.
14.35 acres
Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
field lights, picnic tables & BBQ, shade
structures, restrooms, community
garden.
Belcher
Neighborhood
Park
2158 E. Alluvial
Ave
5.50 acres Mon - Sun
7AM – 10PM
Turf areas, playground, picnic
tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Bigby Villa 1329 E. Florence,
Ave.
2.43 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket park with turf areas,
playground.
California/Mayo
r/A
607 Mayor Ave. 0.13 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket park with a picnic table & BBQ.
California/
Tupman
2094 S. Tupman
St.
0.95 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket park with 3 picnic tables & a BBQ.
Maxie L. Parks
Community
Center
1802 E.
California Ave.
2.12 acres Mon - Fri 9AM –
8PM
Gymnasium, meeting rooms, kitchen.
Camp Fresno 53849 Dinkey
Creek Rd.,
Shaver Lake
40.0 acres Late May - Late
Oct
51 rental cabins with wood burning
stove, table and stools. BBQ pit,
picnic table and campfire ring. Cold
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
lockers in a walk-in refrigerator,
washing machines and showers
located throughout camp. Recreation
hall.
Camp Fresno
Junior
53849 Dinkey
Creek Rd.,
Shaver Lake
N/A Late May - Late
Oct
Two dorms, three counselor cabins,
dining pavilion, fully equipped
kitchen and shower house with
washing machines.
Carozza
Neighborhood
Park
4921 E. Olive
Ave.
6.0 acres Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playground, baseball & softball fields, restrooms
Cary
Neighborhood
Park
4750 N. Fresno
St.
8.8 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground, baseball & softball fields, football & soccer fields,
in-line hockey court, tennis courts,
picnic tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Centex Park 5626 E. Burns
Ave.
0.98 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket Park. Turf area, picnic
tables.
Chandler 1225 S Crystal
Ave.
1.93 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground, basketball courts, picnic tables & BBQs.
Cultural Arts
District Park
1615 Fulton St. 0.15 acres 9AM – 6PM Playground, shade areas, grass areas, picnic tables & BBQs.
Dickey
Playground
50 N. Calaveras
St.
2.02 acres Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, tennis courts, splash
park, picnic shelter, picnic tables &
BBQs, restrooms.
El Capitan Dog
Park (Basin AH1)
4257 W. Alamos
Ave.
1.5 acres May -
November:
7AM – 10PM
daily
Turf areas, picnic tables.
East Fresno Boys
& Girls Club
1621 S. Cedar
Ave.
4.63 acres M-F Turf areas, baseball & softball
fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, gymnasium,
social hall, kitchen, restrooms.
Eaton Plaza 2330 Fresno St. 2.93 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, amphitheater. Movies in the Park program
Einstein
Neighborhood
Center
3566 E. Dakota
Ave.
12 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, tennis courts,
volleyball courts, learner pool, picnic
shelter, picnic tables & BBQs, social
hall, computer lab, kitchen, restrooms.
El Dorado Mini
Park
1343 E. Barstow
Ave.
1.64 acres Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, basketball courts,
picnic tables, computer lab,
restrooms. Recreational activities.
Emerald Park 3599 W. Wathen
Ave.
1.28 acres
Dawn - Dusk Pocket Park. Turf area.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-9
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
Figarden Loop
Park
4265 W.
Figarden Dr.
8.54 acres Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playground, baseball fields, splash park, picnic shelter, picnic
tables & BBQs, shade structures,
restrooms, and concession building.
Fink-White
Neighborhood
Center
535 S. Trinity St. 8.71 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Summer Pool:
1-5PM
Turf areas, playground,baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, learner pool, wading
pool, picnic shelter, picnic tables &
BBQs, picnic shelter, social hall,
computer lab, kitchen, restrooms.
First & Nevada 253 N First St. 0.08 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket Park. Turf area Frank H. Ball
Neighborhood
Center
760 Mayor Ave. 2.94 acres Pool: Seasonal
Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
8PM
Sat. 12-5PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, gymnasium,
swimming pool, wading pool, picnic
tables & BBQs, social hall, computer
lab, kitchen, restrooms.
Granny's Park 2024 E. Pontiac
Way
1.15 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Turf areas, basketball courts,
picnic tables & BBQs.
Recreational facility.
Habitat Park 300 W. Garrett
Ave.
1.05 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket Park. Turf area
Highway City
Neighborhood
Center
5140 N. State St. 2.0 acres Science
Workshop: 3-7
PM Mon-Fri
Playground, picnic tables, BBQ.
Hinton
Neighborhood
Park
2385 S. Fairview
Ave.
6.23 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf area, baseball/softball
fields, soccer/football field,
tennis courts, picnic table, BBQ.
Holmes
Neighborhood
Center
212 S. First St. 9.10 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, tennis courts, lawn
bowling court, outdoor stage,
gymnasium, wading pool, picnic tables
& BBQs, social hall, computer lab,
kitchen, restrooms. Full-service center
offering many recreational programs.
Holman
Neighborhood
Park
6522 N. West
Ave.
4.55 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground, baseball & softball fields, football & soccer fields,
volleyball courts, picnic tables & BBQs,
picnic shelter, restrooms
Hyde
Neighborhood
Park
319 W. Florence
Ave.
19 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas
Inspiration
Park*
5770 Gettysburg
Ave.
7.9 acres Dawn - Dusk Grass areas, playground, baseball field, basketball courts, picnic shelter,
restrooms.
Kaiser
Neighborhood
Park
425 E. Alluvial
Ave.
4.66 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground, baseball/ softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, court lights, skate
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
park, picnic tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Kearney/Fresno
Park
Kearney Blvd. &
Fresno St.
1.0 acres Dawn - Dusk Pocket Park. Turf area, playground.
Keith Tice
Memorial
Neighborhood
Park
8695 N.
Millbrook Ave.
4.06 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground, par/fitness course, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms. Turf areas, playground,
football & soccer fields, basketball
court, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Koligian
Neighborhood
Park
5165 W. Alluvial
Ave.
7.20 acres Dawn - Dusk Grass area, playground, picnic tables.
Lafayette
Neighborhood
Center
1516 E.
Princeton Ave.
4.13 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Summer Wader
Pool: 1-5PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, handball courts
tennis courts, volleyball courts, wading
pool, picnic tables, social hall,
computer lab, kitchen, restrooms.
Recreational programs.
Large
Neighborhood
Park
4424 N
Millbrook Ave.
6.24 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, football & soccer field.
Lewis S. Eaton
Trail
Northeast edge
of Woodward
Park and
continuing north
parallel to Friant
Ave.
4 miles Dawn - Dusk Benches, bridges, trees.
Lions
Neighborhood
Park
4650 N. Marks
Ave.
9.02 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Skate: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
tennis courts, volleyball courts, court
lights, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms, skate park.
Logan
Neighborhood
Park
5450 N. Santa Fe
Ave.
9.0 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, tennis courts, court
lights, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Manchester
Neighborhood
Park
3414 N. Fresno
St.
9.4 acres Park: Dawn -
Dusk
Summer Wader
Pool: 1-5PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball court, wading pool, picnic
tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Maple/Huntingt
on Park
Maple Ave. &
Huntington Blvd.
0.03 acre Dawn - Dusk Pocket park. Turf area.
Maple/McKinley
Park
Maple Ave. &
University Ave.
0.11 acre Dawn - Dusk Pocket park. Turf area with picnic table.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-11
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
Martin Ray
Reilly Park
770 N. Chestnut
Ave.
3.38 acres Dawn - Dusk Turf areas, playground, football & soccer fields, basketball court, picnic
tables & BBQs, splash pad, restrooms.
Mary Ella Brown
Community
Center
1350 E.
Annadale Ave.
4.48 acres Pool: Seasonal
Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, swimming
pool, social hall, community center,
computer lab, kitchen, restrooms.
Open recreation activities and Fresno
Connect Computer Lab.
Mayor &
Ventura Park
Mayor Ave. &
Ventura Ave.
0.11 acre Dawn – Dusk Pocket park. Turf area
Melody
Neighborhood
Center
5935 E. Shields
Ave.
5 acres Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, tennis courts, court
lights, skate, park, picnic tables & BBQs,
social hall, computer lab, kitchen,
restrooms. Crafts programs.
Mosqueda
Community
Center
4670 E. Butler
Ave.
10.02 acres
Pool: Seasonal
Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, bike park, swimming
pool, picnic tables & BBQ, community
center, social hall, computer lab,
library, auditorium with stage, meeting
& conference rooms, kitchen,
restrooms. Senior hot meals &
recreation, dance classes, martial arts,
Fresno Connect Computer Lab.
Nielsen
Neighborhood
Park
1730 S. Fruit St. 4.44 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground, baseball & softball fields, basketball courts, picnic
tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Ninth & Tulare
Park
3925 E Tulare
Ave.
0.15 acre Dawn – Dusk Pocket park, turf area
Orchid
Neighborhood
Park
3420 W. Fir Ave. 5.18 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground, baseball & softball fields, football & soccer fields,
tennis courts, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Oso de Oro Lake
Neighborhood
Park
5550 N. Forkner
Ave.
5.6 acres N/A Turf areas, playground, basketball
courts, lake, picnic tables & BBQs,
covered pavilion, restrooms.
Pilibos
Neighborhood
Park
4945 E. Lane
Ave.
13.29 acres
Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playground, football &
soccer fields, picnic tables & BBQs,
picnic shelter, restrooms.
Pinedale
Community
Center
7170 N. San
Pablo Ave.
0.50 acre Mon-Fri: 8AM -
8:30PM
Pool: Seasonal
Turf areas, playground, basketball
courts, learner pool, social hall with a
stage, computer lab, kitchen,
restrooms, parking lot. Senior
nutrition program, open recreation
activities, youth club, special summer
activities.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
Pride Park Fresno Ave. &
California Ave.
0.75 acre Dawn – Dusk Pocket park. Turf area, picnic table, BBQ.
Quigley
Neighborhood
Center
808 W. Dakota
Ave.
8.26 acres Pool: Seasonal
Park: Dawn -
10PM
Center: 3PM -
7PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, tennis courts,
volleyball courts, court lights, learner
pool, picnic tables & BBQs, computer
lab,
kitchen, restrooms.
Radio
Neighborhood
Park
2233 N First St. 7.51 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball field, football & soccer field,
picnic tables, restrooms, parking lot.
Home to the Fresno Arts Center which
displays art exhibits, provides classes,
workshops, concerts, festivals.
Reedy Discovery
Center
1944 N. Winery
Ave.
5.64 acres Tues-Sun:
10AM-4PM
Garden of the
Sun: Mon, Wed
Fri, Sat 9AM1PM
Home to the Garden of the Sun
Demonstration Garden, Discovery
Center science education center and
Deutsch Cactus Garden.
Regional Sports
Complex
1707 W. Jensen
Ave.
116.09
acres
Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playgrounds, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer fields,
field lights, vert ramp, paintball zone,
concession booth, picnic tables &
BBQs, picnic shelter, restrooms.
Riverbottom
Park
6038 W. Bluff
Ave.
41.22 acres
Dawn – Dusk Located along the river (no amenities)
Riverside
Municipal Golf
Course
7492 N.
Riverside Dr.,
Fresno
10 acres Dawn – Dusk 18-hole driving range, practice putting green, coffee shop, pro shop,
restrooms, parking. New cart paths,
greens and water hazard. Fees
charged per round of golf.
Robinson
Neighborhood
Park
401 E. Browning
Ave.
4.97acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground, football & soccer field, picnic tables.
Roeding
Regional Park
890 W. Belmont
Ave.
145.47
acres
Apr-Oct: 6AM –
10PM
Nov - Mar: 6AM
–7PM
Turf areas, playgrounds, football &
soccer fields, handball courts, tennis
courts, volleyball court, court lights,
par/fitness course, dog park, lake,
picnic shelter, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms. Home to the Fresno
Chaffee Zoo and Rotary Storyland and
Playland.
Romain
Neighborhood
Center
745 N. First St. 8.02 acres N/A Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball field, football & soccer field,
basketball courts, skate park,
gymnasium, learner pool, picnic tables
& BBQs, social hall, computer lab,
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-13
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
kitchen, restrooms. Full-service center
providing swim lessons, youth
leagues, day camps.
Rotary East
Neighborhood
Park
6464 N. Cedar
Ave.
4.27 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball field, football & soccer field,
tennis courts, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Rotary West
Neighborhood
Park
3202 E.
Gettysburg Ave.
13.64 acres
Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, football & soccer field,
basketball court, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Safety Park 6350 N. Rafael
Ave.
0.89 acre Dawn – Dusk Pocket park. Turf area
San Pablo Family
Park
511 N. San Pablo
Ave.
1.45 acres Dawn – Dusk Playground
Selma Layne
Neighborhood
Park
2065 E.
Shepherd Ave.
8.52 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball field, football & soccer field,
basketball court, picnic shelter, picnic
tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Spano Park 8090 N. Palm
Ave.
1.22 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, picnic tables
Stallion
Neighborhood
Park
6245 N. Polk
Ave.
5.65 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball field, football & soccer field,
basketball court, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Sugar Pine Trail Copper Avenue
to Nees Avenue
N/A Dawn – Dusk Paved trail, benches, large variety of
trees
Sunnyside
Neighborhood
Park
5279 E. Butler
Ave.
4.27 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground,baseball & softball field, football & soccer field,
picnic tables & BBQs, restrooms.
Sunset
Neighborhood
Center
1345 W. Eden
Ave.
0.97 acres Mon-Fri 3PM -
7PM Wader Pool:
Seasonal
Turf areas, playground, wading pool,
picnic tables & BBQ, social hall,
community center, computer lab,
kitchen, restrooms.
Ted C. Wills
Community
Center
770 N. San
Pablo Ave.
4.28 acres Mon-Fri 7AM – 8
PM
Turf areas, playground, baseball &
softball fields, basketball courts,
volleyball courts, field lights, picnic
tables & BBQ, gymnasium, social hall,
community center, meeting &
conference rooms, computer lab,
library, kitchen, restrooms, parking lot.
Senior nutrition program, EOC
Headstart program, and the Valley Art
and Science Academy (VASA) Charter
School.
Todd Beamer
Neighborhood
Park
9797 N Maple
Ave.
6.94 acres 6AM – 10PM
daily
Turf areas, playgrounds, football &
soccer field, basketball courts, par &
fitness course, skate park, splash park,
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
FACILITY LOCATION SIZE HOURS OPEN PURPOSE/AMENITIES
dog park, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Trolley Creek
Park
5100 E.
Huntington Ave.
3.0 acres N/A Turf areas, playgrounds, amphitheater,
picnic shelters & BBQs, restrooms
University
Neighborhood
Park
4085 S. Angus St.2.38 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, picnic tables & BBQs Jaswant Singh
Khalra Park
3861 West
Clinton Ave.
19.71 acres
6AM – 10PM
daily
Turf areas, playgrounds, baseball &
softball field, football & soccer fields,
basketball courts, court lights, dog
park, shade structures & picnic
shelter, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Victoria
Neighborhood
Park
3165 W. Shields
Ave.
19.71 acres
Dawn – Dusk Grass areas, shade areas, picnic tables
& BBQs
Vinland
Neighborhood
Park
4695 E.
Gettysburg Ave.
7.88 acres Dawn - 10PM Turf areas, playgrounds, baseball & softball field, football & soccer fields,
tennis courts,
court lights, picnic tables & BBQs,
restrooms.
Willow/Balch
Pocket Park
4963 E. Balch
Ave.
1.15 acres Dawn – Dusk Turf areas, playground, picnic tables & BBQs.
Woodward
Regional Park
7775 N. Friant
Rd.
300 acres Spring and
Summer: 6AM -
10PM
Fall and Winter:
6AM – 7PM
Turf areas, playgrounds, lake, Shinzen
Japanese Garden with tea house, par
& fitness course, dog park, shade
structures & picnic shelters, picnic
tables & BBQs, amphitheater,
restrooms. BMX track, Disc Golf
Course, Art of Life Garden.
NOTE: * = WITHIN PLAN AREA.
SOURCE: FRESNO MSR, FIGURE 12-1.
3.13.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following is an overview of the federal, State and local regulations that are applicable to the proposed Specific Plan.
STATE
Police Protection
There are no State regulations related to police protection services applicable to the proposed project.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-15 Fire Protection and Emergency Response
CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 8 Sections 1270 "Fire Prevention" and 6773 "Fire Protection and Fire Equipment" the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include, but are not limited to, guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.
The State of California passed legislation authorizing the Office of Emergency Services (OES) to prepare a Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS) program, which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters. Non-compliance with SEMS could result in the State withholding disaster relief from the non-complying jurisdiction in the event of an emergency disaster.
CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE AND UNIFORM FIRE CODE
The California Fire Code contains regulations relating to construction and maintenance of buildings and the use of premises. Topics addressed in the Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions to protect and assist first responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire safety requirements for new and existing buildings and premises.
Additionally, the Uniform Fire Code with the State of California Amendments contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the California Fire Code include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized firesafety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises. The Fire Code contains specialized technical regulations related to fire and life safety.
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
State fire regulations are set forth in Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code.
This includes regulations for building standards (as also set forth in the California Building Code), fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building and childcare facility standards, and fire suppression training.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION 1710
The NFPA 1710 Standards are applicable to urban areas and where staffing is comprised of career Firefighters. According to these guidelines, a career fire department needs to respond within six minutes, 90 percent of the time with a response time measured from the 911 call to the time of arrival of the first responder.
The standards are divided as follows:
• Dispatch time of one (1) minute or less for at least 90 percent of the alarms • Turnout time of one (1) minute or less for EMS calls (80 seconds for fire and special operations response)
• Fire response travel time of four (4) minutes or less for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire incident and eight (8) minutes or less travel time for the deployment of an initial full alarm assignment at a fire incident • Eight (8) minutes or less travel time for the arrival of an advanced life support (ALS) (4 minutes or less if provided by the fire department
Parks/Recreation
QUIMBY ACT
The Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477) states that “the legislative body of a city or county may, by ordinance, require the dedication of land or impose a requirement of the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a tentative or parcel map.” Requirements of the Quimby Act apply only to the acquisition of new parkland and do not apply to the physical development of new park facilities or associated operations and maintenance costs. The Quimby Act seeks to preserve open space needed to develop parkland and recreational facilities; however, the actual development of parks and other recreational facilities is subject to discretionary approval and is evaluated on a caseby-case basis with new residential development. The City collects impact fees for both parks and recreation, but anticipates that a West Area Parks Impact Fee will be established. For residential projects, the fees are collected at the time of occupancy and include both capital impacts and land acquisition. Commercial projects are required to pay impact fees at building permit issuance.
Schools
CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS
The California Code of Regulations, Title 5 Education Code, governs all aspects of education within the State.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
The California Department of Education (CDE) School Facilities Planning Division (SFPD) prepared a School Site Selection and Approval Guide that provides criteria for locating appropriate school sites PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-17 in the State of California. School site and size recommendations were changed by the CDE in 2000 to reflect various changes in educational conditions, such as lowering of class sizes and use of advanced technology. The expanded use of school buildings and grounds for community and agency joint use and concern for the safety of the students and staff members also influenced the modification of the CDE recommendations.
Specific recommendations for school size are provided in the School Site Analysis and Development Guide. This document suggests a ratio of 1:2 between buildings and land. CDE is aware that in a number of cases, primarily in urban settings, smaller sites cannot accommodate this ratio. In such cases, the SFPD may approve an amount of acreage less than the recommended gross site size and building-to-ground ratio.
Certain health and safety requirements for school site selection are governed by State regulations and the policies of the SFPD relating to:
• Proximity to airports, high-voltage power transmission lines, railroads, and major roadways; • Presence of toxic and hazardous substances;
• Hazardous facilities and hazardous air emissions within one-quarter mile; • Proximity to high-pressure natural gas lines, propane storage facilities, gasoline lines, pressurized sewer lines, or high-pressure water pipelines; • Noise;
• Results of geological studies or soil analyses;
• Traffic and school bus safety issues.
THE KINDERGARTEN-UNIVERSITY PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES BOND ACT OF 2002 (PROP 47) This Act was approved by California voters in November 2002 and provides for a bond issue of $13.05 billion to fund necessary education facilities to relieve overcrowding and to repair older schools.
Funds will be targeted at areas of greatest need and must be spent according to strict accountability measures. Funds have also been used to upgrade and build new classrooms in the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California in order to provide adequate higher education facilities to accommodate growing student enrollment.
LEROY F. GREENE SCHOOL FACILITIES ACT OF 1998 (SB 50)
The “Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998,” also known as Senate Bill No. 50 or SB 50 (Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998), governs a school district’s authority to levy school impact fees. This comprehensive legislation, together with the $9.2 billion education bond act approved by the voters in November 1998 known as “Proposition 1A”, reformed methods of school construction financing in California. SB 50 instituted a new school facility program by which school districts can apply for State construction and modernization funds. It imposed limitations on the power of cities and counties to require mitigation of school facilities impacts as a condition of approving new development and provided the authority for school districts to levy fees at three different levels:
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan • Level I fees are the current statutory fees allowed under Education Code 17620. This code section provides the basic authority for school districts to levy a fee against residential and commercial construction for the purpose of funding school construction or reconstruction of facilities. These fees vary by district for residential construction and commercial construction and are increased biannually.
• Level II fees are outlined in Government Code Section 65995.5, allowing school districts to impose a higher fee on residential construction if certain conditions are met. These conditions include having a substantial percentage of students on multi-track year-round scheduling, having an assumed debt equal to 15–30 percent of the district’s bonding capacity (percentage is based on revenue sources for repayment), having at least 20 percent of the district’s teaching stations housed in relocatable classrooms, and having placed a local bond on the ballot in the past four years which received at least 50 percent plus one of the votes cast. A Facility Needs Assessment must demonstrate the need for new school facilities for unhoused pupils is attributable to projected enrollment growth from the construction of new residential units over the next five years.
• Level III fees are outlined in Government Code Section 655995.7. If State funding becomes unavailable, this code section authorizes a school district that has been approved to collect Level II fees to collect a higher fee on residential construction. This fee is equal to twice the amount of Level II fees. However, if a district eventually receives State funding, this excess fee may be reimbursed to the developers or subtracted from the amount of State funding.
LOCAL
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan contains the following objectives and policies that are relevant to public services and recreation:
PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT
Objective PU-1: Provide the level of law enforcement and crime prevention services necessary to maintain a safe, secure, and stable urban living environment through a Police Department that is dedicated to providing professional, ethical, efficient and innovative service with integrity, consistency and pride.
Policy PU-1-a: Integration of Crime Data. Develop a mechanism to share pertinent crime data from multiple sources with other law enforcement agencies as a means of improving service delivery, officer safety, and providing a safer community for the citizens of Fresno. • Strive to develop and implement data sharing agreements externally throughout County of Fresno Law Enforcement Agencies with the intent of participating in region-wide data sharing agreements throughout the State of California. • Utilize developing technologies internally to ensure that crime specific data is PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-19 made available for first responders and criminal investigators. • Develop advanced predictive policing capabilities to ensure that limited law enforcement resources are properly placed to reduce criminal activity in locations of the city that are identified as having a high probability of criminal activity. • Fully implement a Real Time Crime Center which provides responding officers integrated computer data, video data from the Video Policing Unit, and up-to-date emergency dispatch information as a means of improving officer safety to critical incidents and service delivery to the community.
Policy PU-1-b: Involvement in General Plan. Facilitate Police Department participation in the implementation of General Plan policies, including citizen participation efforts and the application of crime prevention design measures to reduce the exposure of neighborhoods to crime and to promote community security.
• Facilitate Police Department communication with citizen advisory committees. • Refer appropriate development entitlements to the Police Department for review and comment.
Policy PU-1-c: Safety Considerations in Development Approval. Continue to identify and apply appropriate safety, design and operational measures as conditions of development approval, including, but not limited to,street access control measures, lighting and visibility of access points and common areas, functional and secure on-site recreational and open space improvements within residential developments, and use of State licensed, uniformed security.
Policy PU-1-d: New Police Station Locations. Consideration will be given to collocating new police station facilities with other public property including, but not limited to, schools, parks, playgrounds, and community centers to create a synergy of participation in the neighborhood with the potential result of less vandalism and promotion of a better sense of security for the citizens using these facilities.
Policy PU-1-e: Communication with Public. Maximize communication and cooperative efforts with residents and businesses in order to identify crime problems and optimize the effectiveness of crime prevention measures and law enforcement programs.
Policy PU-1-f: Law Enforcement Collaboration. Collaborate with community-based public, non-profit and private agencies to:
• Develop comprehensive narcotics and violence prevention programs designed to discourage delinquent behavior and narcotics abuse and to encourage viable alternative behaviors.
• Develop a more concentrated understanding of how to assist and support citizens with a variety of disabilities, especially those with cognitive and developmental auditory disabilities.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan • Maintain active involvement in youth development and delinquency prevention activities.
Policy PU-1-g: Plan for Optimum Service. Create and adopt a program to provide targeted police services and establish long-term steps for attaining and maintaining the optimum levels of service - 1.5 unrestricted officers per 1,000 residents.
Policy PU-1-h: Retail Conversion. Assist community groups seeking information on conversion of establishments with off-site or on-site liquor sales licenses to other retail products that better meet community needs.
Policy PU-1-i: Crime and Nuisances. Assist community and neighborhood groups seeking to reduce crime and nuisances they associate with high concentrations of establishments with off-sale or on-sale liquor licenses through Police Department consultations, other available services, and programs such as Neighborhood Watch.
Policy PU-1-j: Lighting and Safety. Ensure adequate lighting at off-sale liquor stores to help deter crime and to promote a more inviting and safe atmosphere around them.
Objective PU-2: Ensure that the Fire Department’s staffing and equipment resources are sufficient to meet all fire and emergency service level objectives and are provided in an efficient and cost effective manner.
Policy PU-2-a: Unify Fire Protection. Pursue long-range transfer of fire protection service agreements with adjacent fire districts that, in concert with existing automatic aid agreements, will lead to the eventual unification of fire protection services in the greater Fresno area.
Policy PU-2-b: Maintain Ability. Strive to continually maintain the Fire Department’s ability to provide staffing and equipment resources to effectively prevent and mitigate emergencies in existing and new high-rise buildings and in other high-density residential and commercial development throughout the city.
Policy PU-2-c: Rescue Standards. Develop appropriate standards, as necessary, for rescue operations, including, but not limited to, confined space, high angle, swift water rescues, and the unique challenges of a high speed train corridor.
Policy PU-2-d: Station Siting. Use the General Plan, community plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood plans, and Concept Plans, the City’s Geographic Information Systems (GIS) database, and a fire station location program to achieve optimum siting of future fire stations.
Policy PU-2-e: Service Standards. Strive to achieve a community wide risk management plan that include the following service level objectives 90 percent of the time:
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-21 • First Unit on Scene – First fire unit arriving with minimum of three firefighters within 5 minutes and 20 seconds from the time the unit was alerted to the emergency incident.
• Effective Response Force – Provide sufficient number of firefighters on the scene of an emergency within 9 minutes and 20 seconds from the time of unit alert to arrival. The effective response force is measured as 15 firefighters for low risk fire incidents and 21 firefighters for high risk fire incidents and is the number of personnel necessary to complete specific tasks required to contain and control fire minimizing loss of life and property.
Policy PU-2-f: Plan for Optimum Service. Create and adopt a program to provide appropriate number of employees to effectively respond to call volume and type; and establish a long-term plan to attain a level of service of 0.81 firefighters per 1,000 residents.
Policy PU-2-g: Community Facilities District for Emergency Services. Develop strategies on the formation of Community Facilities Districts in new Development Areas to fund emergency services.
Objective PU-3: Enhance the level of fire protection to meet the increasing demand for services from an increasing population.
Policy PU-3-a: Fire Prevention Inspections. Develop strategies to enable the performance of annual fire and life safety inspection of all industrial, commercial, institutional, and multi-family residential buildings, in accordance with nationally recognized standards for the level of service necessary for a large Metropolitan Area, including a self-certification program.
Policy PU-3-b: Reduction Strategies. Develop community risk reduction strategies that target high service demand areas, vulnerable populations (e.g. young children, older adults, non-English speaking residents, persons with disabilities, etc.), and high life hazard occupancies.
Policy PU-3-c: Public Education Strategies. Develop strategies to re-establish and enhance routine public education outreach to all sectors of the community.
Policy PU-3-d: Review Development Applications. Continue Fire Department review of development applications, provide comments and recommend conditions of approval that will ensure adequate on-site and off-site fire protection systems and features are provided.
Policy PU-3-e: Building Codes. Adopt and enforce amendments to construction and fire codes, as determined appropriate, to systematically reduce the level of risk to life and property from fire, commensurate with the City’s fire suppression capabilities.
Policy PU-3-f: Adequate Infrastructure. Continue to pursue the provision of adequate water supplies, hydrants, and appropriate property access to allow for adequate fire suppression throughout the City.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Policy PU-3-g: Cost Recovery. Continue to evaluate appropriate codes, policies, and methods to generate fees or other sources of revenue to offset the ongoing personnel and maintenance costs of providing fire prevention and response services.
Policy PU-3-h: Annexations. Develop annexation strategies to include the appropriate rights-of-way and easements necessary to provide cost effective emergency services.
Policy PU-3-i: New Fire Station Locations. Consideration will be given to co-locating new Fire Station facilities with other public property including, but not limited to, police substations, schools, parks, playgrounds, and community centers to create a synergy of participation in the neighborhood with the potential result of less vandalism and promotion of a better sense of security for the citizens using these facilities.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
Objective ED-5: Achieve fiscal sustainability.
Policy ED-5-b: Fair and Proportional Payments. Require new residential and commercial development that requires annexation to the City to pay its fair and proportional share of needed community improvements through impact fees, assessment districts, and other mechanisms. Approve new residential and commercial development projects that require annexation to the City only after making findings that all of the following conditions are met:
• No City revenue will be used to replace or provide developer funding that has or would have been committed to any mitigation project;
• The development project will fully fund public facilities and infrastructure as necessary to mitigate any impacts arising from the new development; • The development project will pay for public facilities and infrastructure improvements in proportion to the development’s neighborhood and citywide impacts; and
• The development will fully fund ongoing public facility and infrastructure maintenance and public service costs.
LAND USE ELEMENT
Objective LU-1: Establish a comprehensive citywide land use planning strategy to meet economic development objectives, achieve efficient and equitable use of resources and infrastructure, and create an attractive living environment.
Policy LU-1-e: Annexation Requirements. Adopt implementing policies and requirements that achieve annexations to the City that conform to the General Plan Land Use Designations and open space and park system, and are revenue neutral and cover all costs for public infrastructure, public facilities, and public services on an ongoing basis consistent with the requirements of ED-50b.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-23 Objective LU-11: Encourage coordination with adjacent jurisdictions in providing public services, infrastructure and cooperative economic development.
Policy LU-11-a: Regional Programs. Coordinate with the County of Fresno, County of Madera, the City of Clovis and other cities or special districts to:
• Promote resource management programs to avoid overlap and duplication of effort;
• Promote the development of a regional justice system program to meet future needs of the justice system, both adult and juvenile, including the judicial system and law enforcement;
• Promote the development of a regional public health program to meet future needs including community, environmental and mental health services; and • Promote the development of a regional program to meet future library, recreational and social service needs of the region.
PARKS, OPEN SPACE, AND SCHOOLS ELEMENT
Objective POSS-1: Provide an expanded, high quality and diversified park system, allowing for varied recreational opportunities for the entire Fresno community.
Policy POSS-1-a: Parkland standard. Implement a standard of at least three acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents for Pocket, Neighborhood, and Community parks throughout the city, while striving for five acres per 1,000 residents for all parks throughout the city, subject to identifying additional funding for regional parks and trails.
Policy POSS-1-b: Parks Implementation Planning. Conduct ongoing planning to implement park policies established in this General Plan and continue to strive for well-maintained and fully accessible playgrounds, with accessible amenities, throughout the city. • Keep an up-to-date inventory of existing and planned parks, including locations mapped on the Parks and Open Space Diagram;
• Plan for acquiring new parkland designated in the General Plan, as shown in Figure POSS-1;
• Establish a standard protocol for working with new development to arrange for parkland acquisition and dedication;
• Establish a protocol for working with established neighborhoods to provide needed parks, including the fostering of neighborhood and district associations to help plan, acquire, improve and care for public parks, and coordinating new City service facilities to provide new open space;
• Establish detailed design, construction, and maintenance standards; • Prepare an assessment of the recreation needs of existing and future residents; • Create an action plan defining priorities, timeframes, and responsibilities; • Adopt and implement a comprehensive financing strategy for land acquisition,
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan park development, operations, and maintenance;
• Identify opportunities for using existing or planned park space as passive stormwater storage, treatment, and conservation areas that also provide scenic and/or recreational opportunities;
• Identify opportunities for siting and using existing or planned park space as passive “purple pipe” waste water storage, treatment, and conservation areas that also provide scenic and/or recreational opportunities; and
• Update the Parks Master Plan.
Policy POSS-1-c: Public Input in Park Planning. Continue to provide opportunities for public participation in the planning and development of park facilities and in creation of social, cultural, and recreational activities in the community.
Policy POSS-1-d: Additional Parkland in Certain Areas. Strive to obtain additional parkland of sufficient size to adequately serve underserved neighborhood areas and along BRT corridors in support of new and intense residential and mixed use infill development. • Identify, where appropriate, joint use opportunities in siting parks with other City service facility needs.
Policy POSS-1-e: Criteria for Parks in Development Areas. Continue to use park size and service area criteria for siting new parks and planning for parks in Development Areas:
PARK TYPE SIZE RANGE (ACREAGE) POPULATION SERVED SERVICE AREA RADIUS Neighborhood 2.01 to 10 10,000 - 15,000 Up to 1 mile
Community 10.01 to 40 50,000 - 80,000 Up to 4 miles
Regional More than 401 100,000 100,000 residents
1 Or when amenities provide regional service.
Policy POSS-1-f: Parks and Open Space Diagram. Require parks to be sited and sized as shown on the Parks and Open Space Diagram (Figure POSS-1) of the General Plan, subject to the following:
• All new park designations carry dual land use designations, so that if a park is not needed, private development consistent with zoning and development standards may be approved. (See Figure LU-2: Dual Designation Diagram in the Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element);
• Revised and/or additional park sites will be identified through subsequent implementation and planning in established neighborhoods and Development Areas;
• Locations for future park sites as shown on Figure POSS-1 are schematic to the extent that park sites may be relocated as necessity and opportunity dictate, and a General Plan amendment is not required if the park continues to serve the target areas as determined by the Planning Director; and
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-25 • A park may be located on any suitable land in the general vicinity of the sites depicted. However, the zoning of potential park site must be made consistent with the General Plan.
Policy POSS-1-g: Regional Urban Forest. Maintain and implement incrementally through new development projects, additions to Fresno’s urban forest to delineate corridors and the boundaries of urban areas, and to provide tree canopy for bike lanes, sidewalks, parking lots, and trails.
Objective POSS-2: Ensure that adequate land, in appropriate locations, is designated and acquired for park and recreation uses in infill and growth areas.
Policy POSS-2-a: Identify opportunities to site, develop and co-locate Fire and Police stations with needed parks and open space as joint-use facilities. • Capital Improvement Plans should be updated to reflect this policy.
Policy POSS-2-b: Park and Recreation Priorities. Use the following priorities and guidelines in acquiring and developing parks and recreation facilities:
• Acquire and develop neighborhood park space in existing developed neighborhoods that are deficient of such space and in areas along BRT corridors that are designated as priorities for encouraging new mixed-use transit-oriented development;
• Provide accessible recreation facilities in established neighborhoods with emphasis on those neighborhoods currently underserved by recreation facilities; • Improve established neighborhood parks with emphasis on those neighborhoods with the greatest need;
• Acquire and develop neighborhood and community parks in new Development Areas;
• Recognize community parks as a special need in areas that lack these facilities or are planned for transit supportive urban densities, and explore all potential sources of revenue to secure and develop appropriate sites including joint use facilities;
• Develop new special purpose parks, such as outdoor gym equipment, natural resource based trail parks, equestrian centers, dog parks, and amphitheaters, as well as alternative recreation facilities, such as community recreation centers, passive wildlife observation park, cultural heritage and diversity park, military veterans memorial park, and universal access open space park; and • Acquire and develop park and open space in established neighborhoods and Development Areas, prioritizing existing neighborhoods with the greatest deficiencies, so that all residents have access to park or open space within one-half mile of their residence. Develop these facilities to be fully accessible to individuals with disabilities as required by law.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 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. • Assure the provision of adequate active and passive open spaces and facilities as appropriate within residential subdivisions through Development Code requirements for mandatory dedication and improvement of land and/or development fees.
• Require the provision of appropriate outdoor living areas or private open space in multi-family residential developments not subject to the Subdivision Map Act. • Request open space easements where feasible and warranted to secure appropriate public use of sensitive areas with scenic or recreation values, and for buffering space for sensitive areas.
• Require provision of appropriate open space areas in private projects, in the form of trails, enhanced landscaped setbacks, parks, and water features. • Evaluate the merits of establishing a development bonus entitlement program in which development incentives (i.e., bonus densities, bonus floor area square footage) are provided for contributions to public recreational facilities on-site or in the vicinity of the development project.
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.
Objective POSS-3: Ensure that park and recreational facilities make the most efficient use of land; that they are designed and managed to provide for the entire Fresno community; and that they represent positive examples of design and energy conservation.
Policy POSS-3-a: Centralized Park Locations. Site parks central and accessible to the population served, while preserving the integrity of the surrounding neighborhood.
Policy POSS-3-b: Park Location and Walking Distance. Site Pocket and Neighborhood Parks within a half-mile walking distance of new residential development.
Policy POSS-3-c: Link Parks with Walkways. Link public open space to adjacent, schools, and residential uses and Activity Centers through a series of landscaped linear walkways and bikeways that enhance and encourage pedestrian use.
Policy POSS-3-d: Sidewalks to Connect Neighborhoods. Sidewalks should be designed for internal neighborhood circulation, and to connect neighborhoods to other residential areas, parks, community trails, shopping, and major streets.
Policy POSS-3-e: Minimum Park Size for Active Recreation. Minimize City acquisition or acceptance of dedication of park sites less than two acres in size for active recreational PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-27 uses, except where maintenance costs are secured through a CFD, HOA, or other such mechanism.
URBAN FORM, LAND USE, AND DESIGN ELEMENT
Objective D-4: Preserve and strengthen Fresno’s overall image through design review and create a safe, walkable and attractive urban environment for the current and future generations of residents.
Policy D-4-d: Design for Safety. Continue to involve the City’s Police Department in the development review process to ensure new buildings are designed with security and safety in mind.
Fresno Parks Master Plan
The Fresno Parks Master Plan was adopted in December 2017. The Plan articulates a vision for improving Fresno’s park and open space system based on robust community engagement and thorough analysis. The Parks Master Plan is an update to the 1989 Master Plan for Parks and Recreation, which was a component of the 1984 General Plan Open Space and Recreation Element.
The 2017 Plan accounts for changes that have occurred since the 1984 General Plan was drafted, and reflects a vision for improving the city’s park and recreation system so that it better serves current and future needs of the people of Fresno.
City of Fresno Impact Fees
The City includes a development impact fee schedule to fund public services and facilities, including but not limited to fees to fund police and fire, library, and recreation services. The fees are established in Chapter 12, Impact Fees, Historic Resources, and Other Miscellaneous Topics.
Article 4.6 – Payment of Development Fees and Charges, notes that the development of real property within the city creates demands on existing municipal facilities, improvements, and services. Various development fees and charges are imposed upon new development in order to mitigate such demands. Payment of those fees and charges is required at various stages of the development process, including the amendment of applicable land use plans, rezoning, tentative tract map, tentative parcel map, Urban Growth Management permit, the issuance of special permits, building permits, certificates of occupancy, and similar entitlements. To facilitate the orderly collection and administration of such development fees and charges, this article sets forth the terms and conditions upon which the payment thereof may be deferred and paid simultaneously upon the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the buildings or structures within such development.
Article 4.7 – Park Facilities Fee, notes that, in order to implement the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan, and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, certain park facilities must be constructed. The City Council has determined that a park facilities fee is
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan needed in order to finance these public facilities and to pay for each development's fair share of the construction and acquisition costs of these improvements.
Article 4.8 – Police Facilities Fee, notes that, in order to implement the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan, and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, certain police facilities must be constructed. The City Council has determined that a Police Facilities Fee is needed in order to finance these public facilities and to pay for each development's fair share of the construction and acquisition costs of these improvements.
Article 4.9 – Fire Facilities Fee, notes that, in order to implement the goals and objectives of the City's general plan, and to mitigate the impacts caused by future development in the city, certain fire department facilities must be constructed. The City Council has determined that a Fire Facilities Fee is needed in order to finance these public facilities and to pay for each development's fair share of the construction and acquisition costs of these improvements.
3.13.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Specific Plan will have a significant impact on public services if it would result in:
Substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provisions of new or physically altered government facilities, and/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 following public services:
• Fire Protection
• Police Protection
• Schools
• Parks
• Other public facilities
It is important to note that, in addressing public service demand issues under CEQA, the appropriate focus is on the environmental effects of whatever steps might be necessary to achieve or maintain adequate service. For example, if proposed new development would create an increased demand for law enforcement or fire protection services, an EIR should inquire as to whether new or expanded physical facilities may be required in order to provide such service. The “impacts” addressed under CEQA are the physical effects of providing service, not any possible failure to provide adequate service under applicable standards. (See City of Hayward v. Board of Trustees of the Cal. State University (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 833, 843 [“[t]he need for additional fire protection services is not an environmental impact that CEQA requires a project proponent to mitigate”]; Goleta Union School Dist. v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1025, 1031–1034 [school PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-29 overcrowding attributable to new development is not an environmental effect subject to CEQA, though the physical effects of new facility construction to serve new students would be]; and CEQA Guidelines, § 15131, subd. (a) [“[e]conomic or social effects of a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the environment”].)
This does not mean, however, that a city or county is powerless to require new development to take the steps needed to ensure adequate public services, such as law enforcement service. Such steps are simply beyond the scope of CEQA. They should instead be imposed under some other body of State statutory law (e.g., the Planning and Zoning Law [Gov. Code, § 65300 et seq.] or the Subdivision Map Act [Gov. Code, § 66410 et seq.]) or under a local government’s broad police power under the California Constitution. (See Cal. Const., Art. XI, § 7; Candid Enterprises, Inc. v. Grossmont Union High School Dist. (1985) 39 Cal.3d 878, 885.)
It is also important to understand that special legal principles apply to impacts to school facilities.
According to Government Code Section 65996, the development fees authorized by Senate Bill 50 (1998) (described earlier) are deemed to be “full and complete school facilities mitigation” for impact caused by new development. The legislation also recognized the need for the fee to be adjusted periodically to keep pace with inflation. The legislation indicated that in January 2000, and every two years thereafter, the State Allocation Board would increase the maximum fees according to the adjustment for inflation in the statewide index for school construction.
Section 65996 also prohibits public agencies from using CEQA or “any other provision of state or local law” to deny approval of “a legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property or any change in governmental organization or reorganization” on the basis of the project’s impacts on school facilities.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.13-1: The proposed Specific Plan may require the construction of fire department facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The FFD provides fire prevention, suppression and investigation services, airport fire and rescue, urban search and rescue, response to medical emergencies (EMS), and response to hazardous materials incidents. These services are provided 24-hours per day from 21 fire stations strategically located throughout the City of Fresno. Additionally, FFD has an extensive inventory of fire and emergency response equipment. The FFD service areas are comprised of the City of Fresno, and also includes extra-territorial services via contracts to provide services to the Fig Garden Fire Protection District and Fresno Yosemite International Airport.
Fresno General Plan Policy PU-1-g sets forth the following plan for optimum services: “Create and adopt a program to provide appropriate number of employees to effectively respond to call volume
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-30 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan and type; and establish a long-term plan to attain a level of service of 0.81 firefighters per 1,000 residents.”
Additionally, Fresno General Plan Policy PU-2-e outlines the following fire response service standards:
Strive to achieve a community wide risk management plan that include the following service level objectives 90 percent of the time:
• First Unit on Scene – First fire unit arriving with minimum of three firefighters within 5 minutes and 20 seconds from the time the unit was alerted to the emergency incident.
• Effective Response Force – Provide sufficient number of firefighters on the scene of an emergency within 9 minutes and 20 seconds from the time of unit alert to arrival. The effective response force is measured as 15 firefighters for low risk fire incidents and 21 firefighters for high risk fire incidents and is the number of personnel necessary to complete specific tasks required to contain and control fire minimizing loss of life and property.
As such, fire protection service level is generally defined in terms of the timely arrival of a sufficient number of personnel necessary to stabilize and mitigate various types of emergencies (including low and high-risk fire incidents). This is accomplished through a community wide risk management plan that strives to meet the service objectives for first unit on scene (5 minutes and 20 seconds or less, 90 percent of the time) and effective response force (9 minutes and 20 seconds, 90 percent of the time).
The Plan Area is currently served by Stations 18 (5938 N. La Ventana, Fresno), 16 (2510 N. Polk, Fresno), and 14 (6239 N. Polk, Fresno). Station 18 was constructed in 2005 and is in good condition; this station is staffed with three FFD employees daily (one captain, one engineer and one firefighter) and has one fire engine. Station 18 will be relocated to a permanent location on the south side of the 6000 block of West Shaw Avenue to maximize the department’s “4 Minutes to Excellence” response time goal. Relocation of Station 18 is not proposed as part of the Specific Plan; as such, relocation of this station would occur regardless of the proposed Specific Plan. Future relocation of Station 18 would undergo a separate environmental review pursuant to CEQA. Station 16 was constructed in 2009 and is in good condition; this station is staffed with three FFD employees daily (one captain, and two engineers) and has one fire engine and one HAZMAT vehicle. Station 14 was constructed in 1992 and is in good condition; this station is staffed with three FFD employees daily (one captain, one engineer and one firefighter) and has one fire engine, one water tender, and one relief engine.
As shown in Table 2.0-3 in Section 2.0, Project Description, of this EIR, the proposed land use map for the Plan Area would result in the addition of up to 54,953 new residential units and up to PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-31 60,621,006.31 square feet of non-residential uses at project build‐out. The proposed land use plan also designates public facility uses that are currently existing within the Plan Area, including schools and churches. Consistent with the City’s General Plan Master EIR, Mitigation Measure PS-1, as future fire facilities are planned (including the relocation of Station 18), the fire department shall evaluate if specific environmental effects would occur. Typical impacts from fire facilities include noise, traffic, and lighting. Typical mitigation to reduce potential impacts, as noted in Mitigation Measure PS-1 of the General Plan Master EIR, includes:
• Noise: Barriers and setbacks on the fire department sites. • Traffic: Traffic devices for circulation and a “keep clear zone” during emergency responses. • Lighting: Provision of hoods and deflectors on lighting fixtures on the fire department sites.
The proposed Specific Plan would not create a need for new or expanded fire protection facilities that could result in offsite physical impacts on the environment. Relocation of Station 18, which was planned independent of the proposed Specific Plan, would improve response times in the Plan Area.
Any future development under the approved General Plan, which includes development within the Plan Area, is required to comply with regulations, policies, and standards included in the General Plan and Draft Master EIR (City of Fresno, 2014). Additionally, Development Impact Fees will recover future development’s proportionate share of FFD capital asset costs. As outlined in Article 4.9 of the City’s Municipal Code, the City collects Development Impact Fees from new development based upon projected impacts from the development, for purposes of mitigating for project impacts on public facilities, including fire protection facilities. The City also reviews the adequacy of impact fees on an annual basis to ensure that the fee is commensurate with anticipated future facilities demands, assessed on a fair share basis for new development.
CONCLUSION
The proposed project may require the construction of fire department facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. Payment of the applicable impact fees by the future project applicants, and ongoing revenues that would come from property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by future projects and/or as specified in a Development Agreement, would ensure that project impacts to fire services are less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.13-1: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for each future dwelling unit to be developed within the Plan Area (and prior to issuance of building permits for nonresidential uses), the applicant shall pay all applicable project impact fees per the impact fee schedule.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-32 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Impact 3.13-2: The proposed Specific Plan may result in, or have the potential to require the construction of police department facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. (Less than Significant)
The Fresno Police Department is responsible for enforcement of state and city laws, investigation of crimes, apprehension of criminals, reducing traffic collisions, maintenance of ongoing crime prevention programs, and building ties with the community and other local law enforcement agencies. The Police Department is divided into four divisions — the patrol division, the investigation division, the professional standards division, and the support division. The Chief of Police supervises all divisions. As of April 24, 2020, the Fresno Police Department employs 1,145 FTE authorized personnel, including 836 FTE sworn safety members and 309 FTE civilians. There are no police department facilities within the Plan Area.
Fresno General Plan Policy PU-1-g sets forth the following plan for optimum services: “Create and adopt a program to provide targeted police services and establish long-term steps for attaining and maintaining the optimum levels of service—1.5 unrestricted officers per 1,000 residents.” As noted above, the proposed land use map for the Plan Area would result in the addition of up to 54,953 new residential units and up to 60,621,006.31 square feet of non-residential uses at project build‐ out. To keep current staffing levels throughout the City, the addition of 163,211 residents would require an additional 244 unrestricted officers, based upon the 1.5 officers per capita standard.
Additional equipment may also be required to accommodate the additional personnel and ensure adequate levels of service and response times throughout the Plan Area. The proposed Specific Plan would not create a need for new or expanded police protection facilities that could result in offsite physical impacts on the environment. Any future development under the approved General Plan, which includes development within the Plan Area, is required to comply with regulations, policies, and standards included in the General Plan and Draft Master EIR (City of Fresno, 2014). Additionally, Development Impact Fees are currently collected for the provision of capital facilities for fire facilities that will provide for future facilities as the City’s population increases. Future development within the Plan Area would be subject to the Police Facilities Fee outlined in Article 4.8 of the City’s Municipal Code.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Specific Plan would not result in, or have the potential to require the construction of police department facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts.
Development of the Plan Area would not directly trigger the need for a new facility; however, additional staffing and patrols are required to serve the proposed Plan Area. The City collects Development Impact Fees from new development based upon projected impacts from the development. The City also reviews the adequacy of impact fees on an annual basis to ensure that the fee is commensurate with anticipated future facilities demands, assessed on a fair share basis PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-33 for new development. Payment of the applicable impact fees by future project applicants as required by Mitigation Measure 3.13-1, and ongoing revenues that would come from, property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by future buildout of the Plan Area, would ensure that project impacts to police services are less than significant.
Impact 3.13-3: The proposed Specific Plan may result in, or have the potential to require the construction of school facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. (Significant and Unavoidable)
As shown in Table 2.0-2 in Section 2.0, Project Description, of this EIR, the proposed land use map for the Plan Area would result in the addition of up to 54,953 new residential units and up to 60,621,006.31 square feet of non-residential uses at project build‐out. The increase in population would result in the introduction of additional students to the CUSD.
According to the CUSD Facilities Master Plan (2016), 0.351 students are generated from each residential unit. Using this factor, future buildout of the Specific Plan is expected to generate approximately 19,289 additional students for the CUSD. It is also important to understand that special legal principles apply to impacts to school facilities. According to Government Code Section 65996, the development fees authorized by Senate Bill 50 (1998) (described earlier) are deemed to be “full and complete school facilities mitigation” for impact caused by new development. The legislation also recognized the need for the fee to be adjusted periodically to keep pace with inflation. The legislation indicated that in January 2000, and every two years thereafter, the State Allocation Board would increase the maximum fees according to the adjustment for inflation in the statewide index for school construction. However, even where applicants have agreed to pay school impact mitigation fees, if the proposed development requires the construction or expansion of additional facilities that would cause other physical environmental impacts, then those physical impacts to non-school resources may be analyzed under CEQA (Gov. Code § 65995(i)).
Currently, as shown in Figure 3.13-1, 13 schools are located in the Plan Area, including nine elementary schools, three middle schools, and one high school. The proposed land use map includes an additional 10.0 acres of Elementary School land uses from what is shown in the Fresno General Plan Planned Land Use Map. This additional 10.0 acres for future development of an elementary school is located at the northwestern corner of the N. Brawley Avenue and W. Shields Avenue intersection. This elementary school would be part of the CUSD. In addition to this 10.0-acre elementary school site, there are also proposed and not yet built school sites in the Plan Area, including the following: an elementary school off Shields Avenue and west of Hayes Avenue, an elementary school at the northwest corner of Grantland and Dakota Avenues, and an elementary school off Dakota Avenue and east of Hayes Avenue
Physical impacts from future construction of this 10.0-acre elementary school site within the Plan Area is addressed within this EIR. A discussion of relevant operational and construction impacts can
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-34 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan be found in each respective section of this EIR. Impacts associated with development of the Plan Area, as proposed, would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics (Impact
3.1-3), agricultural resources (Impact 3.2-1 and Impact 3.2-2), air quality (Impacts 3.3-1 through 3.3- 3), and utilities (Impacts 3.15-1 through 3.15-3). Furthermore, site-specific environmental review would be required for this future school by the CUSD prior to approval of a design for the facility and would consider any site-specific impacts unknown at this time.
CONCLUSION
Future buildout of the Specific Plan would include construction of a 10.0-acre elementary school site in the Plan Area, which has the potential to cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. Potential environmental impacts associated with the future buildout of the proposed land use map, including the 10.0-acre school site within the Plan Area, are addressed throughout this EIR.
This EIR analyzes the physical environmental effects that may occur as a result of development and introduction of new urban land uses within the Plan Area. This future school, if constructed, would fall within the range of environmental impacts disclosed in this EIR, and would be subject to relevant mitigation measures included in this EIR.
It is noted, however, that future development of schools within the proposed Plan Area would contribute to significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics (Impact 3.1-3), agricultural resources (Impact 3.2-1 and Impact 3.2-2), and air quality (Impacts 3.3-1 through 3.3-3). Therefore, consistent with the analysis included in this Draft EIR, impacts related to constructing a school facility to serve the Plan Area are considered significant and unavoidable.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.13-2: Prior to the issuance of future building permits for each dwelling unit to be constructed in the West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan, the applicant shall pay applicable school fees mandated by SB 50 to the Central Unified School District (CUSD) and provide documentation of said payment to the City.
Impact 3.13-4: The proposed Specific Plan may result in, or have the potential to require the construction of park facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. (Significant and Unavoidable)
Fresno General Plan Policy POSS-1-a establishes the following parkland dedication standard, consistent with the State Quimby Act:
Implement a standard of at least three acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents for Pocket, Neighborhood, and Community parks throughout the city, while striving for five acres per 1,000 residents for all parks throughout the city, subject to identifying additional funding for regional parks and trails.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-35 For the purposes of extracting and collecting fees to mitigate for increase park demands (Quimby Act), the California Government Code Section 66477 states: The amount of land dedicated or fees paid shall be based upon the residential density, which shall be determined on the basis of the approved or conditionally approved tentative map or parcel map and the average number of persons per household. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that the average number of persons per household by units in a structure is the same as that disclosed by the most recent available federal census or a census taken pursuant to Chapter 17 (commencing with Section 40200) of Part 2 of Division 3 of Title 4. As noted, the Quimby Act population should be based on the most recent available federal census. According the most recent U.S. Census (2014-2018) estimate, the average number of persons residing in a dwelling unit in the City of Fresno is 3.16. As noted above, the proposed land use map for the Plan Area would result in the addition of up to 54,953 new residential units and up to 60,621,006.31 square feet of non-residential uses at project build‐out. Using this most recently available federal census figure of 3.16 persons per household and the potential maximum buildout of 54,953 units, the Quimby Act population would be 173,652 persons.4This Quimby Act population would require 521 acres of parkland in order to meet the City’s parkland dedication standard of three acres of public parkland per 1,000 residents for Pocket, Neighborhood, and Community parks throughout the city.
The proposed Specific Plan land use map includes a total of 118.8 acres of park and open space uses, including pocket parks (1.55 acres), neighborhood parks (86.26 acres), community parks (24.20 acres), and open spaces (6.79 acres). The proposed project would increase the demand for parks and other recreational facilities based on the future maximum population growth, and the amount of parkland and open space provided within the Plan Area does not meets the City’s General Plan parkland dedication standard outlined in Policy POSS-1-a. Future development within the Plan Area would be subject to the Park Facilities Fee outlined in Article 4.7 of the City’s Municipal Code.
CONCLUSION
As noted previously, the City collects Development Impact Fees from new development based upon projected impacts from the development. The City also reviews the adequacy of impact fees on an annual basis to ensure that the fee is commensurate with anticipated future facilities demands, assessed on a fair share basis for new development. Payment of the applicable impact fees by future project applicants as required by Mitigation Measure 3.13-1, and ongoing revenues that would come from, property taxes, sales taxes, and other revenues generated by future buildout of the Plan Area, would ensure that project impacts to park facilities are reduced to the extent feasible.
Specific Plan implementation may result in effects on parks, or has the potential to require the construction of park facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impact. 4 The Quimby Act Population was calculated pursuant to California Government Code Section 66477 using the most recently available federal census figure of 3.16 persons per household and the potential maximum buildout of 54,953 units.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-36 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Potential environmental impacts associated with the future construction of park and other recreational facilities within the Plan Area are addressed throughout this EIR. This EIR analyzes the physical environmental effects that may occur as a result of future development and introduction of new urban land uses within the Plan Area. Each future park, if constructed, would fall within the range of environmental impacts disclosed in this EIR, and would be subject to relevant mitigation measures included in this EIR.
It is noted, however, that future development of 118.8 acres of park space within the Plan Area would contribute to significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics (Impact 3.1-3), agricultural resources (Impact 3.2-1 and Impact 3.2-2), air quality (Impacts 3.3-1 through 3.3-3), and utilities (Impacts 3.15-1 through 3.15-3). Therefore, consistent with the analysis included in this Draft EIR, impacts related to constructing new park facilities to serve the Plan Area are considered significant and unavoidable.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.13-3: As detailed plans for future parks and recreational facilities in the Plan Area are submitted to the City, environmental review of proposed facilities shall be completed to meet the requirements of CEQA. Typical impacts from park facilities include air quality/greenhouse gas emissions, noise, traffic, and lighting.
Impact 3.13-5: The proposed Specific Plan may result in, or have the potential to require the construction of other public facilities which may cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. (Significant and Unavoidable)
Future buildout of the Plan Area in accordance with the proposed land use map would increase demand for other public facilities within the City of Fresno, such as libraries, and community/recreation buildings. The proposed land use map includes two land use designations that could be developed with other public facilities: Public Facilities – Public Facilities, and Public Facilities – Church. Future buildout of the Specific Plan may include construction and/or expansion of existing church sites on 55.8 acres, 129.59 acres of ponding basins, and 27.42 acres of other public facility uses in the Plan Area, which has the potential to cause substantial adverse physical environmental impacts. Potential environmental impacts associated with the future buildout of the proposed land use map, including the 55.8-acre church site and 27.42 acres of other public facility uses, are addressed throughout this EIR. This EIR analyzes the physical environmental effects that may occur as a result of development and introduction of new urban land uses within the Plan Area.
These future church site and public facility use, if constructed, would fall within the range of environmental impacts disclosed in this EIR, and would be subject to relevant mitigation measures included in this EIR.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION 3.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.13-37
CONCLUSION
Project implementation may result in effects on other public facilities. The Specific Plan would result in new demand for other public facilities, including library facilities, ponding basins, and recreational facilities. Although a specific public facility use is not currently proposed by the Specific Plan, the future development of public facility uses are anticipated by the proposed Plan. Future development would be responsible for paying the applicable impact fees, and ongoing revenues from the Specific Plan would be generated from property taxes, sales taxes, and other appropriate fees/payments.
Future development of public facility uses within the Plan Area would contribute to significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics (Impact 3.1-3), agricultural resources (Impact 3.2-1 and Impact 3.2-2), air quality (Impacts 3.3-1 through 3.3-3), and utilities (Impacts 3.15-1 through 3.15- 3). Therefore, consistent with the analysis included in this Draft EIR, impacts related to constructing other public facilities to serve the Plan Area are considered significant and unavoidable.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S)
Mitigation Measure 3.13-4: As detailed plans for future libraries or other public facilities in the Plan Area are submitted to the City, environmental review of proposed facilities shall be completed to meet the requirements of CEQA. Typical impacts from park facilities include air quality/greenhouse gas emissions, noise, traffic, and lighting.
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-38 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!(
!( !(
!( !(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
27 13
1 6 28
29 14
2 7 15
30 16
17 18
31 8
19 9
10 20
3 21
22 26 12
23 11
25 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 42
40 41
43 N Dante Ave
N Brawley Ave
N Blythe Ave
W Shields Ave
W Sierra Ave
N Figarden Dr
W Clinton Ave
W Spruce Ave
N Polk Ave
W Figarden Dr
N
Valent ni e Ave
W Dakota Ave
N Golden State Blvd
N Emerson Ave
N Marks Ave
N Weber Ave
W Barstow Ave
N Gates Ave
W Shaw Ave
N Cornelia Ave
W Bullard Ave N Milburn Ave
N Bryan Ave
N Hayes Ave
N Grantland Ave
W Ashlan Ave
N Santa Fe Ave
N
Ma rty Ave
W San Jose Ave
W Herndon Ave
CITY OF FRESNO
SPECIFIC PLAN OF THE WEST AREA
UV99
Sources: Google Maps; Fresno County; City of Fresno. Map date: August 2, 2019. Revised: May 29, 2020.
BOUNDARIES
Specific Plan of the West Area
Fresno City Limits
Fresno Sphere of Influence
PUBLIC FACILITY
!( Fire Station
!( Park
!( Post Office
!( School
!( Shopping
!( Special Point of Interest
!( Church
Figure 3.13-1.
Public Facilities
q 0 ¼ ½
Miles
1 Station #18
2 Station #16
3 Station #14
4 Riverside Golf Course
5 San Joaquin Country Club
6 Community Park
7 Victoria Neighborhood Park
8 Inspiration Park
9 Highw ay City Community Center
10 Stallion Park
11 Fresno County Horse Park
12 US Post Office
Fire Stations
Post Office
Parks
Golf Courses
13 Herndon-Barstow Elementary School
14 Glacier Point Middle School
15 Hanh Phan Tilley Elementary School
16 John Steinbeck Elementary School
17 Central High School East Campus
18 Roosevelt Elementary School
19 Teague Elementary School
20 William Saroyan Elementary School
21 Rio Vista Middle School
22 River Bluff Elementary School
23 Law less Elementary School
24 El Capitan Middle School
25 James K Polk Elementary School
26 Costco
27 Marketplace at El Paso
28 Island Water Park
29 Deran Koligian Stadium
30 Gatew ay Ice Center
31 Central Unified Aquatics Complex
32 Grantland Ave Southern Baptist Church
33 World Harvest Pentecostal Church
34 God's Family Church
35 Central Community Church
36 Sikh Temple Association of Fresno
37 Northw est Church of Christ
38 Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints
39 St. Mary's Catholic Church
42 Resurrection Lutheran Church
40 Highw ay City Tabernacle
41 First Spanish Baptist Church
43 Fresno Cambodian Buddhist Society
Churches
Special Point of Interest
Shopping
Schools
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
3.13-40 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page left intentionally blank.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-1 This section of the EIR analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan (Specific Plan) on the surrounding transportation system including roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit services. An evaluation of emergency access and design features is also provided. This section is based on the Technical Memorandum for the Specific Plan of the West Area – CEQA Impacts and Mitigations that was completed for the project (Kittelson & Associates, Inc., July 2020), which is included in Appendix G.
Comments were received during the public review period or scoping meeting for the Notice of Preparation regarding this topic from the following: City of Fresno Department of Transportation (July 29, 2019), Forgotten Fresno (July 17, 2019), San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (July 15, 2019), Carl and Lydia Franklin (August 2, 2019), Cathy Caples (August 1, 2019), and Patricia and Clifford Upton (July 24, 2019). Each of the comments related to this topic are addressed within this section. Full comments received are included in Appendix A.
3.14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
REGIONAL SETTING AND LOCATION
The West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan (also-known-as “Specific Plan”, “West Area”) encompasses approximately 7,077 acres (or a little more than 11 square miles) in the City of Fresno city limits and unincorporated Fresno County. The footprint of the Specific Plan is referred to as the “Plan Area.” Of the eleven square miles within the Plan Area, 6.9 square miles are in the city limits and 4.1 square miles are in the growth area. The growth area is land outside the city limits but within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) boundary, which is the adopted limit for future growth.
The Plan Area is triangular in shape and located west of State Route 99 (SR-99). It is bounded on the south by West Clinton Avenue, and to the west by Grantland and Garfield Avenues. The Plan Area includes the southwest portion of Highway City adjacent to SR-99.
ROADWAY NETWORK
The existing roadway network in the Plan Area is comprised of a street system made up of freeways, super arterials, arterial roads, and collector roads. Roadway classifications listed are from the City of Fresno General Plan.
Freeway
State Route 99 (SR-99) is a six-lane freeway with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour (MPH).
The northwest-southeast freeway connects most major cities in Central California including Chico, Bakersfield, Selma, Sacramento, Modesto, and Fresno. It also provides access to the greater freeway network with direct connections to State Route 180 and State Route 41.
The Plan Area is generally bordered by SR-99 on the northeast. The average daily traffic on SR-99 near the Plan Area ranges between approximately 82,000 and 112,000 vehicles per day. Bicyclists and pedestrians are not allowed on this facility.
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Super Arterial
Grantland Avenue is a two-lane to four-lane north-south roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 MPH near the Plan Area. The facility extents from SR-99 on the north to Kearny Boulevard on the south. The facility is a four-lane roadway with a median north of Shaw Avenue, and a two-lane roadway south of Shaw Avenue. Sidewalks are limited; additional sidewalks, Class I, and Class II bikeways are planned along the roadway.
Veterans Boulevard is currently a single lane in each direction between Riverside Drive and N. Hayes Avenue east of SR-99 and a six-lane stub roadway west of SR-99. However, the Veterans Boulevard Interchange and Corridor Improvement Project is currently underway which will connect these two facilities and create a six-lane super arterial in northwest Fresno connecting Herndon Avenue in the north to Shaw Avenue in the south including the construction of an interchange with SR-99.
Arterials
Polk Avenue is a two-lane north-south roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 or 40 MPH near the Plan Area. The facility extends from SR-99 on the north to Olive Avenue on the south. Sidewalks and Class II bike lanes exist intermittently and are proposed along the roadway.
Shaw Avenue is a two-lane east-west roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 to 45 MPH near the Plan Area. The facility extents from the San Joaquin River on the west to the Friant-Kern Canal on the east. Sidewalks and Class II bike lanes are proposed along the roadway.
Ashlan Avenue is a two-lane to four-lane east-west roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 to 50 MPH near the Plan Area. The facility extends from Grantland Ave on the west and becomes Watts Valley Road on the east. Sidewalks and Class II bike lanes exist intermittently and are proposed along the roadway.
Grantland Avenue north of Shaw Avenue is a two lane north-south roadway with a posted speed limit of 40 MPH in the Plan Area. North of Shaw Avenue, Grantland Avenue extends north to SR-99 near the Herndon Avenue interchange. There are no sidewalks of bicycle facilities on this roadway.
Blythe Avenue from Ashlan Avenue to Dakota Avenue is a two lane north-south roadway with a center median located along most of its length. The speed limit is posted as 40 MPH. Sidewalks are generally available along frontages that have been developed but no sidewalks are present along undeveloped parcels. Class II bicycle lane exist intermittently in both the northbound and southbound directions.
Collectors
Collectors in the Plan Area include the following:
• North-south collectors:
o Garfield Avenue
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-3 o Bryan Avenue
o Hayes Avenue
o Cornelia Avenue
o Blythe Avenue
o Brawley Avenue
o Valentine Avenue
o Marks Avenue
• East-west collectors:
o Bullard Avenue
o Barstow Avenue
o Gettysburg Avenue
o Dakota Avenue
o Shields Avenue
o Clinton Avenue
Collectors are generally two-lane roadways with posted speeds of 30 to 45 MPH. Sidewalks and bike lanes are generally not present but are proposed along most collectors.
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are important components of the transportation network in the Plan Area. These facilities not only offer non-vehicular opportunities for both commute and recreational trips, but also provide connections to the region’s transit network.
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle facilities are defined by the following four classes1:
• Class I – Provides a completely separated facility designed for the exclusive use of bicyclists and pedestrians with crossing points minimized.
• Class II – Provides a restricted right-of-way designated lane for the exclusive or semiexclusive use of bicycles with through travel by motor vehicles or pedestrians prohibited, but with vehicle parking and crossflows by pedestrians and motorists permitted. • Class III – Provides a right-of-way designated by signs or permanent markings and shared with pedestrians and motorists.
• Class IV – Provides a restricted right-of-way designated lane for the exclusive use of bicyclists that is separated by a vertical element to provide further separation from motor vehicle traffic.
1 As detailed in Chapter 1000 of the Highway Design Manual (Caltrans, 2015).
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan The City of Fresno adopted the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) in March 2017. This plan identifies existing and future planned bicycle facilities within the City’s jurisdiction.
As shown in Figure 3.14-1, the following bikeways are currently present within the Plan Area and vicinity at intermittent locations on major roads:
• East-west streets with Class II Bike Lanes:
o Bullard Avenue, east of Grantland Avenue
o Barstow Avenue, west of Grantland Avenue
o Gettysburg Avenue, east of Hayes Avenue
o Ashlan Avenue, east of Cornelia Avenue
o Dakota Avenue, east of Polk Avenue
o Clinton Avenue, east of Cornelia Avenue
• North-south streets with Class II Bike Lanes:
o Grantland Avenue, south of SR-99
o Bryan Avenue, south of Gettysburg Avenue
o Hayes Avenue, south of Shaw Avenue
o Polk Avenue, south of Shaw Avenue
o Cornelia Avenue, south of Gettysburg Avenue
o Brawley Avenue, south of Dakota Avenue
Planned and Proposed Bicycle Facilities
As shown in Figure 3.14-1, the ATP includes the following planned and proposed bikeway facilities in the Plan Area:
• Streets with Class I Bike Paths:
o Grantland Avenue, south of Gettysburg Avenue
o Veteran’s Boulevard, north of Gettysburg Avenue
o Gettysburg Avenue, east of Cornelia Avenue
Class II Bike Lanes are located along all arterials and collectors. Bike lanes on Veterans Boulevard, Gettysburg Avenue, and Cornelia Avenue are identified as priority bikeways in the ATP.
Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities are present in the Plan Area. Sidewalks are present intermittently along some major roadways. Sidewalks are proposed on most arterials and collectors. Crosswalks are present intermittently at signalized and unsignalized intersections in the Plan Area. Figure 3.14-2 shows existing and planned sidewalks in the Plan Area.
The City of Fresno adopted the 2016 Update to the ADA Transition Plan for the Right of Way (ROW) in February 2016. The ROW Transition Plan incorporates retrofitting Curb Ramps, Sidewalks, and Accessible Pedestrian Signals and replaced the 2003 Amended Curb Ramp Transition Plan.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-5
TRANSIT FACILITIES
Fresno is primarily served by the Fresno Area Express (FAX) transit system which operates bus service and paratransit operations servicing the city. Regional connections are provided by the Fresno County Rural Transit Agency (FCRTA) and Amtrak for travel outside of the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area.
Fresno Area Express (FAX)
FAX provides the principal bus service in the City of Fresno. It operates eighteen fixed routes with a fleet of over 100 buses, and Handy Ride, its paratransit operation, with a fleet of over 50 vehicles.
The paratransit service, FAX Handy Ride, is a service designed to meet the transportation needs of eligible persons with disabilities who cannot functionally use the FAX fixed-route bus system. Handy Ride is a shared ride, curb-to-curb service, provided from any origin to any destination throughout the service area for any trip purpose. Handy Ride operates during the same hours and days as the FAX fixed-route bus system. The service area boundaries for the FAX Handy Ride service are generally Copper Avenue to the north, east to Willow Avenue, south to Ashlan Avenue, east to Temperance Avenue, south to Central Avenue, west to Polk Avenue, north to the Fresno County line, and east to Copper Avenue.
FAX operates two routes that directly serve the Plan Area through curbside bus stops, with additional service coming into the Plan Area in 2021. Bus service on these routes is detailed in Table
3.14-1 with the routes near the Plan Area shown in Figure 3.14-3.
TABLE 3.14-1: BUS ROUTES SERVING THE PLAN AREA
ROUTE SERVING DAY TIMES FREQUENCY
12-35
Starting at Shaw and Brawley and serving Forestiere
Underground Gardens, Teague Elementary School, Inspiration Park, Central High School East, Tower District, DMV, Roeding Park, Yosemite Middle School, and Social Security Office Weekday6:00
AM
10:00
PM
Every 30
minutes
Weekend7:00
AM
7:30
PM
Every 30
minutes
39 Starting at Brawley Avenue/Shields Ave. and serving Hamilton K-8, Fresno High, Fresno City College, VA Medical Center, McLane High, Alliant University, and Fresno Yosemite
International Air Terminal primarily along Clinton Ave.
Weekday5:30
AM
10:00
PM
Every 30
minutes
Weekend7:30
AM
7:00
PM
Every 30
minutes
45 Along Ashlan Avenue serving Central High School East, Cooper Middle School, Blackbeard’s Family Entertainment, Army Navy Reserve, and ARC Fresno Production Center
Weekday5:45
AM
9:30
PM
Every 45
minutes
Weekend6:30
AM
6:30
PM
Every 45
minutes
SOURCE: FAX WEBSITE, WWW.FRESNO.GOV/FAX, ACCESSED MARCH 11, 2021, KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC., 2021.
Route 12 provides local commuter and weekend service with the route originating or terminating at Shields Avenue/Brawley Avenue and San Jose Avenue/Marty Avenue intersections. Between these two origin/destinations, the route has fixed stops as it runs mostly along Brawley Avenue and Cornelia in the Plan Area, from Clinton Avenue to Shaw Avenue. Key destinations served include Central High School, Inspiration Park, and Forestriere Underground Gardens.
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Route 35 provides local commuter and weekend served with the route originating or terminating in the Plan Area at Shields Avenue/Brawley Avenue and on the east side of Fresno at the intersection of Belmont Avenue/Clovis Avenue. In the Plan Area, the route provides fixed stops along Brawley and Clinton Avenues. Key destinations served by the route include the DMV, Talking Book Library, Post Office, and the Social Security Office.
Route 39 provides local commuter and weekend service with the route originating or terminating at Brawley Avenue/Shields Avenue intersection and Fresno Yosemite International Air Terminal.
Between these two origin/destinations, Route 39 runs in a loop from Clinton Avenue/Marks Avenue to Brawley Avenue/Shields Avenue in the Plan Area where it has fixed stops. Key destinations served include Fresno High School, Fresno City College, Veteran’s Medical Center, and Alliant University.
TRUCK FACILITIES
According to the City of Fresno Public Works Department, there are designated truck routes in the Plan Area. Existing and future truck routes are shown in Figure 3.14-4.
3.14.2 REGULATORY SETTING
Existing transportation polices, laws, and regulations that would apply to the proposed project are summarized below. This information provides a context for the impact discussion related to the project’s consistency with applicable regulatory conditions and development of significance criteria for evaluating project impacts.
FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws pertaining to transportation have been determined to be applicable to this project.
STATE
Senate Bill 743
Senate Bill (SB) 743 (Steinberg, 2013) required changes to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines regarding the analysis of transportation impacts. Those proposed changes identify vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impacts. Since the bill has gone into effect, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA. Auto-mobility (often expressed as “level of service”) may continue to be a measure for planning purposes.
In December 2018, the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the State Natural Resources Agency submitted updated CEQA Guidelines to the Office of Administrative Law for final approval to implement SB 743. The Office of Administrative Law approved the updated CEQA Guidelines, thus implementing SB 743 and making VMT the primary metric used to analyze TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-7 transportation impacts. Beginning July 1, 2020 local agencies are required to implement the updated guidelines.
LOCAL
Fresno Council of Governments
The Fresno Council of Governments (COG) is a voluntary association of local governments and a regional planning agency comprised of 16 member jurisdictions, including the City of Fresno. The members are represented by a Policy Board consisting of mayors of each incorporated city, and the Chairman of the County Board of Supervisors, or their designated elected official. The Fresno COG’s purpose is to establish a consensus on the needs of the Fresno County area and further action plans for issues related to the Fresno County region. The current regional transportation plan, known as the Fresno County Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) (2042), was adopted in 2018. The RTP addresses GHG emissions reductions and other air emissions related to transportation, with the goal of preparing for future growth in a sustainable way. The plan specifies how funding will be sourced and financed for the region’s planned transportation investments, ongoing operations, and maintenance. The goals, objectives, and policies of the RTP are established to direct the courses of action that will provide efficient, integrated multimodal transportation systems to serve the mobility needs of people, including accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and freight, while fostering economic prosperity and development, and minimizing mobile sources of air pollution.
These goals, objectives, and policies are organized into six categories:
• General Transportation;
• Highway, Streets, and Roads;
• Mass Transportation;
• Aviation;
• Active Transportation; and
• Rail
The RTP is updated every four years. The Fresno COG is currently updating their RTP. The 2020-2022 RTP is anticipated to be adopted in June 2022.
Fresno County Congestion Management Process
In June 1990, California voters approved legislation that required Congestion Management Plans (CMP) be developed in urbanized counties to address congestion on California’s highways and roads. The Fresno County Congestion Management Process (CMP) implements this requirement and its responsibilities include providing information on transportation system performance and assessing alternative strategies for alleviating congestion and improving mobility for people and goods to levels that meet State and local needs. The Fresno County CMP identifies four general objectives:
1. Optimize the transportation facilities through efficient system management;
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
2. Invest in strategies that reduce travel demand, improve system performance, increase safety, and provide effective incident management;
3. Reduce VMT by encouraging alternative modes of transportation and promotion of sustainable land use development; and
4. Improve public transit, extend bicycle and pedestrian systems, and promote car‐sharing and bike‐sharing programs to facilitate the development of an integrated multimodal transportation system in the Fresno region.
Fresno General Plan
The City of Fresno adopted the Fresno 2035 General Plan2in December 2014 as an update to the previous Fresno General Plan approved in 2002. It serves as the City’s guide for the continued development, enhancement, and revitalization of the Fresno metropolitan area.
It is noted that the approved General Plan text was updated in order to reflect changes in applicable statutes and regulations related to VMT, as well as updating the General Plan EIR to include a current baseline for the continued implementation of the approved General Plan, and reflect changes in City planning documents that have occurred since adoption of the approved General Plan in 2014. The City did not propose any land use changes as a part of the recent General Plan changes. The following objectives and policies reflect the most recent (2021) General Plan policies and objectives.
The Fresno General Plan contains the following objectives and policies that are relevant to transportation and circulation:
MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Objective MT-1: Create and maintain a transportation system that is safe, efficient, provides access in an equitable manner, and optimizes travel by all modes.
Policy MT-1-d: Integrate Land Use and Transportation Planning. Plan for and maintain a coordinated and well-integrated land use pattern, local circulation network and transportation system that accommodates planned growth, reduces impacts on adjacent land uses, and preserves the integrity of established neighborhoods.
Policy MT-1-f: Match Travel Demand with Transportation Facilities. Designate the types and intensities of land uses at locations such that related travel demands can be accommodated by a variety of viable transportation modes and support Complete Neighborhoods while avoiding the rerouting of excessive or incompatible traffic through local residential streets. 2 City of Fresno General Plan 2035, December 18, 2014.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-9 Policy MT-1-g: Complete Streets Concept Implementation. Provide transportation facilities based upon a Complete Streets concept that facilitates the balanced use of all viable travel modes (pedestrians, bicyclists, motor vehicle and transit users), meeting the transportation needs of all ages, income groups, and abilities and providing mobility for a variety of trip purposes, while also supporting other City goals.
Policy MT-1-m: Standards for Planned Bus Rapid Transit Corridors and Activity Centers.
Independent of the Traffic Impact Zones identified in MT-2-I and Figure MT-4, strive to maintain the following vehicle LOS standards on major roadway segments and intersections along Bus Rapid Transit Corridors and in Activity Centers:
• LOS E or better at all times, including peak travel times, unless the City Traffic Engineer determines that maintaining this LOS would be infeasible and/or conflict with the achievement of other General Plan policies.
• Accept LOS F conditions in Activity Centers and Bus Rapid Transit Corridors only if provisions are made to improve the overall system and/or promote non-vehicular transportation and transit as part of a development project or a City-initiated project. In accepting LOS F conditions, the City Traffic Engineer may request limited analyses of operational issues at locations near Activity Centers and along Bus Rapid Transit Corridors, such as queuing or left-turn movements. • Give priority to maintaining pedestrian service first, followed by transit service and then by vehicle LOS, where conflicts between objectives for service capacity between different transportation modes occur.
• Identify pedestrian-priority and transit-priority streets where these modes would have priority in order to apply a multi-modal priority system, as part of the General Plan implementation
Objective MT-2: Make efficient use of the City's existing and proposed transportation system and strive to ensure the planning and provision of adequate resources to operate and maintain it.
Policy MT-2-b: Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled and Trips. Partner with major employers and other responsible agencies, such the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and the Fresno Council of Governments, to implement trip reduction strategies, such as eTRIP, to reduce total vehicle miles traveled and the total number of daily and peak hour vehicle trips, thereby making better use of the existing transportation system.
Policy MT-2-c: Reduce VMT through Infill Development. Provide incentives for infill development that would provide jobs and services closer to housing and multi-modal transportations corridors in order to reduce citywide vehicle miles travelled (VMT).
Policy MT-2-d: Street Redesign where Excess Capacity Exists. Evaluate opportunities to reduce right of way and/or redesign streets to support non-automobile travel modes along
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan streets with excess roadway capacity where adjacent land use is not expected to change over the planning period
Policy MT-2-e: Driveway and Access Consolidation. Take advantage of opportunities to consolidate driveways, access points, and curb cuts along designated major roadways when a change in development or a change in intensity occurs or when traffic operation or safety warrants
Policy MT-2-f: Optimization of Roadway Operations. Optimize roadway operations by continuing to expand the use of techniques such as the City’s intelligent transportation system (ITS) to manage traffic signal timing coordination in order to improve traffic operations and increase traffic-carrying capacity, while reducing unnecessary congestion and decreasing air pollution emissions. In order to facilitate roadway optimization and as a potential revenue source for the optimization, the following strategies need to be implemented:
• Dig Once Policy. Install conduit for telecommunications use when trenching or construction occurs.
• Telecommunications Strategy. Develop a costing mechanism for allowing the use of excess conduit within the City for use by communication carriers. The Policy shall follow regulations of the California Public Utilities Commission. • Grant Funding. Pursue grant funding to assist in construction and/or implementation of fiber-optic or other telecommunication infrastructure for additional public services such as education, economic development, reaching underserved populations, and public safety communications.
Policy MT-2-g: Transportation Demand Management and Transportation System Management. Pursue implementation of Transportation Demand Management and Transportation System Management strategies to reduce peak hour vehicle traffic and supplement the capacity of the transportation system.
Policy MT-2-i: Transportation Impact Studies. Require a Transportation Impact Study (currently named Traffic Impact Study) to assess the impacts of new development projects on existing and planned streets for projects meeting one or more of the following criteria, unless it is determined by the City Traffic Engineer that the project site and surrounding area already has appropriate multi-modal infrastructure improvements. • When a project includes a General Plan amendment that changes the General Plan Land Use Designation.
• When the project will substantially change the off-site transportation system (auto, transit, bike or pedestrian) or connection to the system, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-11 • Transportation impact criteria are tiered based on a project’s location within the City’s Sphere of Influence. This is to assist with areas being incentivized for development. The four zones, as defined on Figure MT-4, are listed below. The following criteria apply:
o Traffic Impact Zone I (TIZ-I): TIZ-I represents the Downtown Planning Area.
Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of F or better for all intersections and roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all development projected to generate 200 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone II (TIZ-II): TIZ-II generally represents areas of the City currently built up and wanting to encourage infill development. Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of E or better for all intersections and roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all development projected to generate 200 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone III (TIZ-III): TIZ-III generally represents areas near or outside the City Limits but within the SOI as of December 31, 2012.
Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of D or better for all intersections and roadway segments. A TIS will be required for all development projected to generate 100 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
o Traffic Impact Zone IV (TIZ-IV): TIZ-IV represents the southern employment areas within and planned by the City. Maintain a peak hour LOS standard of E or better for all intersections and roadway segments. A TIZ will be required for all development projected to generate 200 or more peak hour new vehicle trips.
Policy MT-2-l: Region-Wide Transportation Impact Fees. Continue to support the implementation of metropolitan-wide and region-wide transportation impact fees sufficient to cover the proportional share of a development's impacts and need for a comprehensive multi-modal transportation system that is not funded by other sources.
Work with the Council of Fresno County Governments, transportation agencies (e.g., Caltrans, Federal Transportation Agency) and other jurisdictions in the region to develop a method for determining:
• Regional transportation impacts of new development;
• Regional highways, streets, rail, trails, public transportation, and goods movement system components, consistent with the General Plan, necessary to mitigate those impacts and serve projected demands;
• Projected full lifetime costs of the regional transportation system components, including construction, operation, and maintenance; and • Costs covered by established funding sources.
Policy MT-2-m: Use VMT analysis for CEQA. Use Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the criteria for evaluating transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan (CEQA), pursuant to Senate Bill 743. Level of Service (LOS) may still be used for planning purposes and implementation of Capital Improvement Projects; however, VMT shall be used for determining mitigation under CEQA beginning in July of 2020.
Objective MT-4: Establish and maintain a continuous, safe, and easily accessible bikeways system throughout the metropolitan area to reduce vehicle use, improve air quality and the quality of life, and provide public health benefits.
Policy MT-4-b: Bikeway Improvements. Establish and implement property development standards to assure that projects adjacent to designated bikeways provide adequate rightof-way and that necessary improvements are constructed to implement the planned bikeway system shown on Figure MT-2 to provide for bikeways, to the extent feasible, when existing roadways are reconstructed; and alternative bikeway alignments or routes where inadequate right-of-way is available.
Policy MT-4-d: Prioritization of Bikeway Improvements. Prioritize bikeway components that link existing separated sections of the system, or that are likely to serve the highest concentration of existing or potential cyclists, particularly in those neighborhoods with low vehicle ownership rates, or that are likely to serve destination areas with the highest demand such as schools, shopping areas, recreational and park areas, and employment centers
Objective MT-5: Establish a well-integrated network of pedestrian facilities to accommodate safe, convenient, practical, and inviting travel by walking, including for those with physical mobility and vision impairments.
Policy MT-5-a: Sidewalk Development. Pursue funding and implement standards for development of sidewalks on public streets, with priority given to meeting the needs of persons with physical and vision limitations; providing safe routes to school; completing pedestrian improvements in established neighborhoods with lower vehicle ownership rates; or providing pedestrian access to public transportation routes Policy MT-5-b: Sidewalk Requirements. Assure adequate access for pedestrians and people with disabilities in new residential developments per adopted City policies, consistent with the California Building Code and the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Policy MT-5-d: Pedestrian Safety. Minimize vehicular and pedestrian conflicts on both major and non-roadways through implementation of traffic access design and control standards addressing street intersections, median island openings and access driveways to facilitate accessibility while reducing congestion and increasing safety. Increase safety and accessibility for pedestrians with vision disabilities through the installation of Accessible Pedestrian Signals at signalized intersections
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-13 Policy MT-5-e: Traffic Management in Established Neighborhoods. Establish acceptable design and improvement standards and provide traffic planning assistance to established neighborhoods to identify practical traffic management and calming methods to enhance the pedestrian environment with costs equitably assigned to properties receiving the benefits or generating excessive vehicle traffic
Objective MT-6: Establish a network of multi-purpose pedestrian and bicycle paths, as well as limited access trails, to link residential areas to local and regional open spaces and recreation areas and urban Activity Centers in order to enhance Fresno's recreational amenities and alternative transportation options.
Policy MT-6-g: Path and Trail Development. Require all projects to incorporate planned multi-purpose path and trail development standards and corridor linkages consistent with the General Plan, applicable law and case-by-case determinations as a condition of project approval
Objective MT-8: Provide public transit options that serve existing and future concentrations of residences, employment, recreation and civic uses and are feasible, efficient, safe, and minimize environmental impacts.
Policy MT-8-a: Street Design Coordinated with Transit. Coordinate the planning, design, and construction of the major roadway network with transit operators to facilitate efficient direct transit routing throughout the Planning Area.
Policy MT-8-c: New Development Facilitating Transit. Continue to review development proposals in transportation corridors to ensure they are designed to facilitate transit.
Coordinate all projects that have residential or employment densities suitable for transit services, so they are located along existing or planned transit corridors or that otherwise have the potential for transit orientation to FAX, and consider FAX’s comments in decisionmaking Objective MT-11: Achieve necessary capacity increasing and inter-modal connectivity enhancing improvements to the goods movement transportation system to support the growth in critical farm product and value added industries.
Policy MT-11-c: Truck Route Designations. Continue to plan and designate truck routes within the Metropolitan Area to facilitate access to and from goods production and processing areas while minimizing conflicts with other transportation priorities The General Plan also has policies related to maintaining acceptable Levels of Service (LOS).
However, LOS can no longer be used for CEQA evaluations and is, therefore, not relevant to this section which focuses on CEQA impacts. Additional analyses of the Specific Plan will be documented in another report that will detail LOS.
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan City of Fresno VMT Guidelines
The City of Fresno adopted their VMT guidelines on June 25, 20203. This document serves as a detailed guideline for preparing VMT analysis consistent with SB 743 requirements for development projects, transportation projects, and plans. Key elements of these guidelines include:
• The County of Fresno was selected as the region for assessing VMT impacts. Therefore, all projects will compare their VMT metrics against the county averages. • The draft guidelines recommend the following significant thresholds for land development projects in the City of Fresno:
o 13 percent below existing regional average VMT per capita for residential projects o 13 percent below existing regional average VMT per employee for office projects o No net increase in VMT for retail projects.
• For land use plans such as specific plans and general plans, the guidelines recommend comparing the existing VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee for the region with the expected horizon year VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee for the land use plan. If there is a net increase in the applicable VMT metrics (VMT/capita and VMT/employee) under horizon year conditions, then the project will have a significant impact.
City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan
The City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan (ATP)4is a comprehensive guide that creates a vision for active transportation in the City of Fresno. It is an update to the City of Fresno Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Trails, Master Plan that was adopted in 2010. The ATP lays out specific goals to improve bicycle access and connectivity in Fresno. The goals include the following:
• 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 geographical equity of access to walking and bicycling facilities in Fresno; and • Fill key gaps in Fresno’s walking and bicycling networks.
City of Fresno ADA Transition Plan for the Right of Way (ROW) On February 25, 2016 the City Council adopted the 2016 Update to the ADA Transition Plan for the Right of Way (ROW). The ROW Transition Plan incorporates retrofitting Curb Ramps, Sidewalks, and Accessible Pedestrian Signals and replaces the 2003 Amended Curb Ramp Transition Plan. The goal of the ADA Transition Plan for the ROW is to ensure that the City maintains accessible paths of travel in the ROW for people with disabilities.
3 https://www.fresno.gov/darm/planning-development/plans-projects-under-review/#tab-02 4 City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan, December 2016.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-15
3.14.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The transportation analysis assesses how the study area’s transportation system would operate with the implementation of the proposed project. The analysis includes effects that would result in significant impacts as set forth in the CEQA Guidelines.
The project’s impact is not considered to be significant unless it would:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guideline section 15064.3, subdivision (b). c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). d) Result in inadequate emergency access.
Significance criteria “b” is related to the implementation of VMT as the primary performance metric.
The following criteria are used to assess a significant impact related to VMT consistent with the City of Fresno “CEQA Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds” dated June 25, 2020:
• A proposed (residential) project exceeding a level of 13 percent below existing regional average5 VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. • A similar threshold would apply to office projects (13 percent below existing regional average VMT per employee).
• VMT generated by retail projects would indicate a significant impact for any net increase in total VMT.
• Section 6 of the VMT guidelines includes Significance Criteria for Specific Plans: For land use plans such as the Specific Plan for the West Area, the recommended methodology for conducting VMT assessments is to compare the existing VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee for the region with the expected horizon year VMT per capita and/or VMT per employee for the land use plan. If there is a net increase in the VMT metric under horizon year conditions, then the project will have a significant impact. 5 The City of Fresno defines the region for applying these thresholds as Fresno County.
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-16 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.14-1: Implementation of the Specific Plan would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. (Less than Significant)
Development associated with the proposed Plan would increase the amount of multimodal transportation activity which would require the improvement and expansion of the local transportation network in the Plan Area to serve the associated travel demand. The West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes the following guiding principles related to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian travel:
• Accommodate and improve roadway access, connectivity and mobility among all modes of transportation, and prioritize roadway widening where bottlenecks exist. • Accommodate planned transit services in the West Area by locating routes near or adjacent to the community centers, schools, parks, and retail centers. • Provide a complete, safe, and well-maintained sidewalk network from residential neighborhoods to commercial centers, schools, parks, and community centers. • Provide a complete, safe, and well-maintained roadway network that allows for efficient and smooth access from the West Area to other sections of the City and region.
These guiding principles are consistent with General Plan policies which detail how the circulation system will be improved to meet the needs of all users. Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would promote the use of alternative transportation modes by accelerating development in the Plan Area, which would in turn require development of a circulation system that addresses all users. Development of the Specific Plan would be required to be consistent with the following General Plan policies that address transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian travel:
• Policy MT-1-g: Complete Streets Concept Implementation. o Requires transportation facilities be based upon a Complete Streets concept that facilitates the balanced use of all viable travel modes (pedestrians, bicyclists, motor vehicle and transit users), meeting the transportation needs of all ages, income groups, and abilities and providing mobility for a variety of trip purposes, while also supporting other City goals
• Policy MT-1-m: Standards for Planned Bus Rapid Transit Corridors and Activity Centers. o Requires intersections and roadways along transit corridor and in activity centers maintain acceptable operations to facilitate transit movement. • Policy MT-2-d: Street Redesign where Excess Capacity Exists. o Requires roadways with extra capacity to be modified to “right size” the roadway. • Policy MT-4-b: Bikeway Improvements.
o Requires new development to set aside an adequate amount of right of way to construct bicycle facilities.
• Policy MT-4-d: Prioritization of Bikeway Improvements.
TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-17 o Prioritizes connections between existing facilities to complete a comprehensive bicycle network.
• Policy MT-5-a: Sidewalk Development.
o Establishes a goal of developing sidewalks to improve connectivity to transit • Policy MT-5-b: Sidewalk Requirements.
o Requires sidewalks to be constricted to the latest standards • Policy MT-6-g: Path and Trail Development.
o Requires planned multi use paths be constructed along with new development • Policy MT-8-a: Street Design Coordinated with Transit. o Requires coordination with roadway design and transit to ensure an efficient public transportation system
• Policy MT-8-c: New Development Facilitating Transit.
o Requires new development to facilitate transit.
Additionally, the Specific Plan has a strong emphasis on Complete Neighborhoods, which is a tool to achieve environmental justice. The concept of Complete Neighborhoods is to enable residents of Fresno to live in communities with convenient access to services, employment, and recreation within walking distance. It provides residents with amenities that make their neighborhood mostly self-sufficient and interconnected. According to the Specific Plan, planning for Complete Neighborhoods will help support the provision of resources to neighborhoods where they are currently lacking or are under-resourced. Section 5.4 of the Specific Plan includes a series of maps which show a reasonable walkshed from existing and planned schools; bus stops; commercial uses; and existing and planned parks.
Since the guiding principles of the Specific Plan support the policies of the General Plan, no conflict with policies, plans, and programs for alternative transportation would occur from future development and redevelopment under the proposed Specific Plan. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.
Impact 3.14-2: Implementation of the Specific Plan would not conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guideline section 15064.3, subdivision (b). (Less Than Significant with Mitigation)
The Fresno COG Activity Based travel demand model was used to estimate existing and horizon year average VMT per capita and VMT per employee for the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) that comprise the Specific Plan Area and Fresno County. The number of dwelling units and employment for the Specific Plan Area were calculated at buildout and provided to Fresno COG. Fresno COG used the buildout numbers to run a population synthesizer to generate land use input files for running the activity-based model. These land use input files were then run through the activity-based model to develop horizon year (2035) forecasts with the buildout of the Specific Plan Area.
Table 3.14-2 presents VMT per capita and VMT per employee findings for existing conditions in Fresno County and for the Plan Area at buildout in the horizon year. Based on the City of Fresno VMT Guidelines, a specific plan would have a significant impact if the VMT per capita and VMT per
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-18 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan employee of the Specific Plan Area exceeded the same metrics for existing conditions in all of Fresno County.
TABLE 3.14-2: VMT PER CAPITA AND VMT PER EMPLOYEE - EXISTING AND HORIZON YEAR CONDITIONS
TRIP TYPES
FRESNO COUNTY
(2019)
SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
(2035)
DIFFERENCE
(%)
VMT Per Capita 16.1 8.7 -7.4 (46%)
VMT Per Employee 25.6 13.2 -12.4 (48%)
NOTE: THESE NUMBERS ARE BASED ON FRESNO COG’S ACTIVITY-BASED TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL, AND THE LAND USE INPUTS OBTAINED FOR HORIZON YEAR 2035 FROM FRESNO COG(ASSUMING FULL BUILDOUT OF THE FRESNO WEST AREA OUTLINED IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN).
SOURCE: FRESNO COG TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL, AND KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC., 2020.
As Table 3.14-2 shows, the projected VMT per capita and VMT per employee in the Plan Area are lower than existing conditions. Under the Specific Plan, VMT per capita is 7.4 lower, or 46% lower, while VMT per employee is 12.4 lower, or 48% lower. The decrease in VMT is the result of the proposed land use mix within the Plan Area. The retail and employment opportunities keep the VMT per capita lower than the County average, while the large number of dwelling units near the jobs allows employees to live close to work resulting in a VMT per employee that is lower than the County average today.
CONCLUSION
The City of Fresno VMT Guidelines state specific plans would have an impact if the VMT per capita or VMT per employee in the specific plan area for the horizon year increases compared to the existing VMT per capita or VMT per employee in the region (Fresno County). The VMT per capita in the Specific Plan Area during the horizon year is 8.7, while VMT per employee is 13.2. Under existing conditions in Fresno County, the VMT per capita is 16.1, while the VMT per employee is 25.6.
Because the VMT per capita and VMT per employee in the Specific Plan Area during the horizon year is less than the VMT per capita and VMT per employee for existing conditions in Fresno County, the proposed Specific Plan would not result in a significant impact for residential and office projects.
Therefore, impacts related to CEQA Guideline section 15064.3, subdivision (b), would be less than significant.
Impact 3.14-3: Implementation of the Specific Plan would not 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)
The proposed Specific Plan would result in a relocation of density in the Plan Area to central corridors compared to what would develop under the City’s General Plan where density is more distributed throughout the Plan Area; however, the Specific Plan does not propose to change the types (i.e., residential, commercial, office, etc.) of land uses in the Plan Area. The West Area TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION 3.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.14-19 Neighborhoods Specific Plan includes the following guiding principles related to transportation and hazards:
• Provide a complete, safe, and well-maintained sidewalk network from residential neighborhoods to commercial centers, schools, parks, and community centers. • Provide a complete, safe, and well-maintained roadway network that allows for efficient and smooth access from the West Area to other sections of the city and region.
Buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in some changes to the City’s circulation network, but would not increase hazards or incompatible uses due to design features. All future roadway system improvements associated with development and redevelopment activities under the Specific Plan would be designed in accordance with the established roadway design standards, some of which have also been incorporated into the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan.
The City’s General Plan policies that would address design and safety issues are:
• Policy MT-2-e: Driveway and Access Consolidation.
• Policy MT-2-i: Transportation Impact Studies.
• Policy MT-5-d: Pedestrian Safety.
• Policy MT-5-e: Traffic Management in Established Neighborhoods.
The future roadway improvements that would result with implementation of the Specific Plan would be subject to review and future consideration by the City of Fresno. An evaluation of the roadway alignments, intersection geometrics, and traffic control features would be needed.
Roadway improvements would be made in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan, roadway functional design guidelines, and would have to meet design guidelines such as the accessibility requirements of Title 24 (California Building Code), ADA standards, California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and the Caltrans Roadway Design Manual. Implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in hazardous conditions, or create conflicting uses. With implementation of General Plan Policy MT-2-e, Policy MT-2-I, and application of the conditions of approval at the time of review of land development projects, the Specific Plan would be designed to ensure that no hazardous circulation conditions are created as a result of implementation of the Plan. The Specific Plan would implement components of the roadway system consistent with the City’s General Plan. Therefore, impacts related to hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
Impact 3.14-4: Implementation of the Specific Plan would not result in inadequate emergency access. (Less than Significant)
Emergency response requires a balance of emergency response time and evacuation needs with other community concerns, such as urban design and traffic calming. Future roadway improvements associated with buildout of the Plan Area would be made in accordance with the City’s Circulation Plan and roadway functional design guidelines.
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-20 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan With the application of the conditions of approval at the time of review of land development projects, the Specific Plan would be designed to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided. The Specific Plan would implement components of the roadway system consistent with the City’s General Plan. Therefore, impacts related to inadequate emergency access would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required. 99 N
BLYTHE AVE
W BLUFF AVE
N PARKWAY DR
N STATE ST
PRIVATE DR
W GRIFFITH WAY
W BROWNING AVE
W BARSTOW AVE N SALINAS AVE
N CRYSTAL AVE
N MARTY AVE
W HERNDON AVE
N FORKNER AVE
W DUDLEY AVE
W ALAMOS AVE
W PALO ALTO AVE
W BOY SCOUT RD
N THIELE AVE
N MONROE AVE
N CHATEAU FRESNO AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
N MARKS AVE W FLORADORA AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N BRYAN AVE
W YALE AVE
W OLIVE AVE
W RIALTO AVE N GARFIELD AVE
N VISTA AVE
N
WEBER AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N VAN NESS BLVD
N GATES AVE
W CLINTON AVE
N CORNELIA AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
W MCKINLEY AVE
W BARSTOW AVE
N DANTE A
VE
N EMERSON AVE
N MARKS AVE
W SIERRA AVE
N FIGARDEN DR
N HUGHES AVE
N WEBER AVE
N MILBURN AVE
N BRA
WLEY A
VE
W FIGARDEN DR
W RIVER VISTA DR
W ALLUVIAL AVE
W SHAW AVE
W BULLARD AVE
N BRYAN AVE
W DAKOTA AVE
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD N POLK AVE
W BELMONT AVE
N GRANTLAND AVE
N BLYTHE AVE
W SHIELDS AVE
N VALENTINE AVE
W SAN JOSE AVEN MARTY AVE
W HERNDON AVE
W OLIVE AVE
N SANTA FE AVE
N HAYES AVE
N
Figure 3.14-1
Existing and Proposed Bicycle
Routes in the Specific Plan Area
Project
Boundary
Existing Bicycle Facilities Planned Bicycle Facilities
Class I Bike Path
Class II Bike Lane
Class III Bike Lane
Class I Bike Path
Class II Bike Lane
Class III Bike Lane
RailstoTrails
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-22 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
99 N BLYTHE A
E
W BLUFF AVE
N PARKWAY DR N STATE ST
PRIV
ATE DR W GRIFFITH WAY
W BROWNING AVE
W BARSTOW AVE N SALINAS AVE
N CRYSTAL AVE
N M
ARTY AVE
W HERNDO AVE N FORKNER AVE W DUDLEY AVE
W ALAMOS AVE
W PALO ALTO AVE
W OY SCOUT RD
N TH EI LE A
VE
N M
ONROE AVE N CHATEAU FRESNO
AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
N MARKS AVE W FLORADORA AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N
BRYAN
AVE
W YALE AVE
W OLIVE AVE
W RIALTO AVE N GARFIELD AVE N VISTA
AVE
N
WE ER AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N
V
A
N
NESS BLV
D
N GATES AVE
W CLINTON AVE
N
C
ORNEL AI A
VE W SPRUCE AVE
W MCKINLEY AVE
W BARSTOW AVE
N DANTE A
VE
N EM RSON AVE
N
M
ARKS A
VE
W SIERRA AVE
N FIGARDEN
R
N HUGHES A
VE N W
BER AVE
N
MILBURN
A
VE N BRA
WLEY A
VE W FIGARDE DR
W RIVER VIS A DR
W ALLUVIAL AVE
W SHAW AVE
W BULLARD AVE
N BRYA
N
A
VE W DAKOTA AVE
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD
N POLK A
VE W BELMONT AVE
N
GRA
NTLA
N
D
A
VE
N BLYTHE A
VE W SHIELDS AVE
N
V
ALENT NI E A
VE W SAN JOSE AVE
N
M
ARTY
A
VE W HERNDON AVE
W OLIVE AVE
N SANTA FE AVE
N HAYES A
VE
Figure 3.14-2
Existing and Proposed Sidewalks in the Specific Plan Area Project
Boundary
Existing Sidewalk
Planned Sidewalk
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-24 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
99 N
BLYTHE AVE
W BLUFF AVE
N PARKWAY DR
N STATE ST
PRIVATE DR
W GRIFFITH WAY
W BROWNING AVE
W BARSTOW AVE N SALINAS AVE
N CRYSTAL AVE
N MARTY AVE
W HERNDON AVE
N FORKNER AVE
W DUDLEY AVE
W ALAMOS AVE
W PALO ALTO AVE
W BOY SCOUT RD
N THIELE AVE
N MONROE AVE
N CHATEAU FRESNO AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
N MARKS AVE W FLORADORA AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N BRYAN AVE
W YALE AVE
W OLIVE AVE
W RIALTO AVE N GARFIELD AVE
N VISTA AVE
N
WEBER AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N VAN NESS BLVD
N GATES AVE
W CLINTON AVE
N CORNELIA AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
W MCKINLEY AVE
W BARSTOW AVE
N DANTE A
VE
N EMERSON AVE
N MARKS AVE
W SIERRA AVE
N FIGARDEN DR
N HUGHES AVE
N WEBER AVE
N MILBURN AVE
N BRA
WLEY A
VE
W FIGARDEN DR
W RIVER VISTA DR
W ALLUVIAL AVE
W SHAW AVE
W BULLARD AVE
N BRYAN AVE
W DAKOTA AVE
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD N POLK AVE
W BELMONT AVE
N GRANTLAND AVE
N BLYTHE AVE
W SHIELDS AVE
N VALENTINE AVE
W SAN JOSE AVEN MARTY AVE
W HERNDON AVE
W OLIVE AVE
N SANTA FE AVE
N HAYES AVE
N
Figure 3.14-3
Existing and Proposed Transit Service
in the Specific Plan Area
Project
Boundary
Route 12
Route 39
Route 35
Route 45
Route 3
Route 12
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-26 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
99 N
BLYTHE AVE
W BLUFF AVE
N PARKWAY DR
N STATE ST
PRIVATE DR
W GRIFFITH WAY
W BROWNING AVE
W BARSTOW AVE N SALINAS AVE
N CRYSTAL AVE
N MARTY AVE
W HERNDON AVE
N FORKNER AVE
W DUDLEY AVE
W ALAMOS AVE
W PALO ALTO AVE
W BOY SCOUT RD
N THIELE AVE
N MONROE AVE
N CHATEAU FRESNO AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
N MARKS AVE W FLORADORA AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N BRYAN AVE
W YALE AVE
W OLIVE AVE
W RIALTO AVE N GARFIELD AVE
N VISTA AVE
N
WEBER AVE
W ASHLAN AVE
N VAN NESS BLVD
N GATES AVE
W CLINTON AVE
N CORNELIA AVE
W SPRUCE AVE
W MCKINLEY AVE
W BARSTOW AVE
N DANTE A
VE
N EMERSON AVE
N MARKS AVE
W SIERRA AVE
N FIGARDEN DR
N HUGHES AVE
N WEBER AVE
N MILBURN AVE
N BRA
WLEY A
VE
W FIGARDEN DR
W RIVER VISTA DR
W ALLUVIAL AVE
W SHAW AVE
W BULLARD AVE
N BRYAN AVE
W DAKOTA AVE
N GOLDEN STATE BLVD N POLK AVE
W BELMONT AVE
N GRANTLAND AVE
N BLYTHE AVE
W SHIELDS AVE
N VALENTINE AVE
W SAN JOSE AVEN MARTY AVE
W HERNDON AVE
W OLIVE AVE
N SANTA FE AVE
N HAYES AVE
N
Project
Boundary
Existing Route
Future Planned Route
Figure 3.14-4
Existing and Planned Truck
Routes in the Specific Plan Area
3.14 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
3.14-28 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan This page intentionally left blank.
UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-1 This section describes the regulatory setting, impacts associated with wastewater services, water services, storm drainage, and solid waste disposal that are likely to result from Specific Plan implementation, and measures to reduce potential impacts to wastewater, water supplies, storm drainage, and solid waste facilities.
This section is based in part on the following documents, reports and studies:
• CalRecycle Solid Waste Information System (CalRecycle, 2020); • CalRecycle Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Summary (CalRecycle, 2020); • City of Fresno Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Update (City of Fresno, 2016);
• City of Fresno 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (City of Fresno, 2021); • Fresno General Plan (City of Fresno, 2014);
• Fresno General Plan Public Review Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (City of Fresno, 2020);
• Response to Comments on the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update - City of Fresno, Fresno County, California (City of Fresno, 2014); • City of Fresno Specific Plan for the West Area Utility Background Summary (West Yost Associates, 2022) (included in Appendix D of this EIR). • Specific Plan of the West Area Water Supply Assessment (West Yost Associates, 2022) (included in Appendix E of this EIR);
Comments were received during the public review period for the Notice of Preparation (NOP) regarding stormwater from Cathy Caples (August 1, 2019) and the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (August 1, 2019). These comments are included in Appendix A of this EIR.
3.15.1 WASTEWATER SERVICES
EXISTING SETTING
The City is the regional sewer agency for the Fresno-Clovis Metropolitan Area (FCMA). The City of Fresno owns and operates two wastewater treatment facilities that serve the Fresno metropolitan area: the Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (Regional Facility) and the North Fresno Wastewater Reclamation Facility (NFWRF).
Wastewater is composed of sanitary flow and Infiltration and Inflow (I&I):
• The sanitary flow is the actual wastewater that is generated in the homes and businesses that are connected to the sewersystem. The sewer system (or collection system) is intended to collect and convey all the sanitary flow from the homes and businesses to the wastewater treatment plant. The sanitary flow is often called the Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) because it is the primary source of wastewater during dry weather. • I&I is stormwater that enters the wastewater collection system through flooded maintenance holes; defects in pipes, pipe joints, and sewer structures; or as inflow through illicitly connected downspouts, area drains, and catch basins. Sewer systems are intended
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-2 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan to prevent (or minimize) the I&I that enters the sewer system so that the stormwater does not cause the sewer capacities to be exceeded or result in treating stormwater at the wastewater treatment plant. The combined ADWF and I&I is called the peak wet weather flow (PWWF).
Collection systems are sized, designed, and constructed to the convey the PWWF to the City’s wastewater treatment plants. The City’s wastewater collection system has roughly 23,000 manholes, 15 lift stations, 1.7 force mains, and 1,500 miles of gravity sewer pipes (Carollo, 2015).
Generally, the collection system flows from northeast to southwest across the entire City. In the West Area, wastewater generally flows from the north to the south.
The City of Fresno owns and maintains the majority of the wastewater collection systems that convey wastewater to the Regional Facility, and all of the wastewater collection system that conveys wastewater to the NFWRF. The City's wastewater collection system consists of more than 1,500 miles of gravity flow pipelines, ranging in size from 4 inches to 84 inches in diameter, and ranging in age from new to more than 100 years old. The system also includes some pressure flow pipelines, by which pumped wastewater is conveyed to a point of discharge usually tributary to a gravity flow pipeline. Wastewater collection system pipelines consist of a number of different pipe materials, but the majority of the gravity flow pipelines consist of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe, vitrified clay pipe (VCP) or concrete pipe, which includes both reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) and standard or non‐ reinforced concrete pipe (SCP). Together, these pipe materials account for approximately 98.4 percent of the wastewater collection system pipelines.
Fresno-Clovis Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility
The Regional Facility is located southwest of the City in the area generally bounded by Jensen, Cornelia, Central and Chateau Fresno Avenues. Wastewater from the Plan Area is treated at the Regional Facility, which has an average annual flow of approximately 60 million gallons per day (MGD). The Regional Facility receives and treats wastewater from three additional service areas, including the: City of Clovis, Pinedale County Water District, and Pinedale Public Utility District. The Regional Facility has an ADWF capacity of 92 MGD; however, it can treat the PWWF that occurs during storm events, which is higher than the ADWF but lasts for short duration. The City of Clovis owns 12.86 MGD of ADWF capacity, while the remaining capacity belongs to the City.
The Regional Facility received and treated approximately 72,302 acre‐feet (AF) of wastewater during 2011, representing an annual average daily flow of approximately 64.5 MGD. The quantity of wastewater received and treated by the Regional Facility has been declining since 2006, when it peaked at a total of approximately 80,801 AF, representing an annual average daily flow of approximately 72.1 MGD.
Wastewater treatment plant capacities are typically rated based on the ADWF flow. The permitted wastewater treatment capacity of the Regional Facility is currently 80.0 MGD as an annual monthly average flow, and 88.0 MGD as a maximum monthly average flow. The City is currently evaluating upgrades and modifications to the existing Regional Facility that may result in a capacity rating increase of 15.0 MGD.
UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-3 The Regional Facility employs an activated sludge wastewater treatment process, which produces un‐disinfected secondary effluent. Most of the effluent is discharged to an array of percolation basins, where it percolates through the underlying soil strata and into the groundwater beneath the basin. However, some of the effluent is recycled by direct delivery to nearby farmland where it is used for restricted irrigation for feed/fodder and fiber crops. In addition, some of the percolated effluent is extracted from the groundwater beneath the basins by pumping and is recycled for irrigation by delivery to the Fresno Irrigation District (FID) canal system. The Regional Facility also has a 5 MGD tertiary treatment facility, which treats a portion of the overall plants rated capacity.
The facility includes the following major processes/facilities:
• Headworks and Grit Chambers – The screening facilities remove the larger trash and grit from the raw wastewater. From the headworks, the wastewater is pumped into pipes that flow to the primary clarifiers.
• Primary Clarifiers – These six tanks allow finer sediment to settle out of the effluent and skim fats, oils and grease from the top. Wastewater leaving the settling tanks is called primary effluent and either flows to the aeration basins or is diverted for additional screening prior to tertiary treatment.
• Aeration Basins – In the aeration basins air is pumped into the wastewater to increase the growth of bacteria and other micro-organisms that consume the organic waste. From the aeration basins the partially treated wastewater flows to the Secondary Clarifiers. • Secondary Clarifiers – The secondary clarifiers are basins where the bacteria and microorganisms settle out of the wastewater. There are 16 secondary clarifiers. Effluent leaving the secondary clarifiers is called secondary effluent, and it flows to storage ponds. There is currently no disinfection system for the secondary effluent. • Membrane Bioreactor Tanks – Primary effluent designated for tertiary treatment is passed through a fine screen and two pre-aeration basins before entering four membrane bioreactor (MBR) tanks. MBRs combine biological treatment with membrane filtration.
Effluent leaving the MBRs flows to ultraviolet (UV) disinfection vessels. • UV Disinfection – Effluent from the MBRs is exposed to UV light to inactivate pathogens.
There are four in-vessel UV disinfection trains. After disinfection, effluent is called tertiary effluent and is sent to recycled water storage.
• Storage Ponds – There are 1,720 acres of storage ponds where the effluent percolates into the groundwater, evaporates, or is pumped for irrigation of non-food crops. • Solids Treatment – The bacteria and micro-organisms that settle out of the wastewater in the clarifiers are called the solids. Flotation thickeners, digesters, and belt filter presses are used to extract liquid from the solids. The liquid is returned to the settling tanks. The remaining solids are then stored in silos to await disposal.
North Fresno Wastewater Reclamation Facility
The NFWRF is a tertiary level wastewater treatment facility located in north Fresno, near the intersection of Copper Avenue and Cedar Avenue. The NFWRF treats wastewater from the northern portion of the City. It was constructed in late 2006 to provide wastewater treatment service for residential and commercial development in the surrounding area of north Fresno. The NFWRF
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan employs a sequencing batch reactor (SBR) treatment process for secondary treatment, cloth media filtration for tertiary treatment, and an ultraviolet system to produce disinfected tertiary treated effluent. The effluent is used for golf course irrigation at the nearby Copper River Country Club.
The permitted capacity of the plant is 0.71 MGD average monthly flow and 1.07 MGD maximum daily flow. Treatment processes include a sequencing batch reactor for secondary treatment, cloth media filtration for tertiary treatment and sodium hypochlorite for disinfection. The tertiary treated wastewater is currently used for landscaping irrigation. Although the NFWRF does not serve the Plan Area directly, it contributes to the City’s total wastewater treatment capacity.
The North Facility operates under a Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR), Order No 5‐2006‐0090‐ 01, and a NPDES Permit (No. CA0085189). The WDR for the North Facility establishes limits for the average dry weather flow discharge. The current permitted average dry weather flow discharge is
0.71 MGD. The North Fresno Facility’s current average dry weather flow is less than 0.71 MGD.
Effluent Disposal and the Recycled Water System
The Regional Facility includes preliminary, primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment units with disinfection. Secondary treatment consists of three treatment trains with an annual average capacity of 87 mgd, consisting of 30 mgd for Train A and 57 mgd for Trains B and C combined. In 2017, a 5-mgd tertiary treatment system — the Tertiary Treatment and Disinfection Facility — was completed. The system can be expanded to 15 mgd and ultimately to 30 mgd (Water Systems Consulting Inc., 2021).
The City has three primary means of effluent disposal:
1. Undisinfected secondary effluent to on-site and off-site farmland for restricted irrigation;
2. Undisinfected secondary effluent to percolation ponds; and
3. Disinfected tertiary effluent to the recycled water distribution system.
The percolated effluent has been deemed equivalent to Title 22 tertiary treated water by the State Water Resources Control Board Division of Drinking Water (DDW). The City has been extracting this water for reuse in areas within and surrounding the Regional Facility, as well as to FID’s canals, through an exchange agreement for delivery to FID agricultural customers.
The discharged effluent is disposed within the City boundaries and just southwest of the metropolitan area. The treated effluent percolation ponds are within the City’s SOI and hydrologic sphere that benefit the City’s overall regional water budget.
In addition to the Regional Facility, the NFWRF serves the residential and commercial development and golf course in a portion of northeast Fresno. Since the treatment includes filtration and disinfection producing water quality that meets Title 22 tertiary criteria, it is suitable for additional future uses such as landscape irrigation, freeway irrigation, and many industrial water reuse opportunities.
UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-5 Future Wastewater Flow and Effluent Disposal
The City has the capacity to produce more recycled water than it can currently use. The City will continue to expand the recycled water delivery system. The City’s most recent Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update (Carollo, 2015) was based on land uses from the City’s 2014 General Plan. At General Plan build-out, the City will encompass approximately 156.6 square miles of land and is projected to generate 202.4 MGD of future PWWF.
REGULATORY SETTING – WASTEWATER
The following is an overview of the federal, State and local regulations related to wastewater that are applicable to the proposed Specific Plan.
State and Federal
CLEAN WATER ACT (CWA) / NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
PERMITS
The CWA is the cornerstone of water quality protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.” The CWA regulates discharges from “non-point source” and traditional “point source” facilities, such as municipal sewage plants and industrial facilities. Section 402 of the Act creates the NPDES regulatory program which makes it illegal to discharge pollutants from a point source to the waters of the United States without a permit. Point sources must obtain a discharge permit from the proper authority, in this case the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. NPDES permits cover industrial and municipal discharges, discharges from storm sewer systems in larger cities, stormwater associated with numerous kinds of industrial activity, runoff from construction sites disturbing more than one acre, mining operations, and animal feedlots and aquaculture facilities above certain thresholds.
Permit requirements for treatment are expressed as end-of-pipe conditions. This set of numbers reflects levels of three key parameters: (1) biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), (2) total suspended solids (TSS), and (3) pH acid/base balance. These levels can be achieved by well-operated sewage plants employing "secondary" treatment. Primary treatment involves screening and settling, while secondary treatment uses biological treatment in the form of "activated sludge." All so-called "indirect" dischargers are not required to obtain NPDES permits. An indirect discharger is one that sends its wastewater into the sanitary sewer system for treatment. Although not regulated under NPDES, "indirect" discharges are covered by another CWA program called pretreatment. "Indirect" dischargers send their wastewater into a city sewer system, which carries it to the municipal sewage treatment plant, through which it passes before entering surface water.
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-6 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan Local
FRESNO GENERAL PLAN
The Fresno General Plan contains the following objectives and policies that are relevant to wastewater for the proposed Specific Plan:
Objective PU-4: Ensure provision of adequate trunk sewer and collector main capacities to serve existing and planned urban development, consistent with the Wastewater Master Plan.
Policy PU-4-a: Plan for Regional Needs. Coordinate and consult with the City of Clovis, pursuant to the Fresno-Clovis Sewerage System Joint Powers Agreement, so that planning and construction of sewer collection facilities will continue to meet the regional needs of the Metropolitan Area.
Policy PU-4-b: New Trunk Facilities. Pursue construction of new or replacement sewer trunk facilities or other alternatives consistent with the Wastewater Master Plan to accommodate the uses as envisioned in this General Plan.
Policy PU-4-c: System Extension and Cost Recovery. Pursue enlargement or extension of the sewage collection system where necessary to serve planned urban development, with the capital costs and benefits allocated equitably and fairly between the existing users and new users.
Policy PU-4-d: Capacity Modeling. Continue development and utilization of citywide sewer flow monitoring and computerized flow modeling to determine availability of sewer collection system capacity to serve planned urban development.
Policy PU-4-e: Evaluate and Maintain Infrastructure. Promote the health and safety of the community, and preserve the longevity and sound condition of the sewer collection system through evaluation and maintenance of the sewer infrastructure. • Continue assessments of existing infrastructure and facilitate necessary repair to damaged and worn-out pipelines.
• Continue routine sewer line maintenance and cleaning programs to prevent line blockages caused by root intrusion, grease buildup, and pipe failure. • Continue a sewer line replacement program and funding to repair or replace sewer lines damaged or worn beyond useful life.
Objective PU-5: Preserve groundwater quality and ensure that the health and safety of the entire Fresno community is not impaired by use of private, onsite disposal systems.
Policy PU-5-a: Mandatory Septic Conversion. Continue to evaluate and pursue where determined appropriate the mandatory abatement of existing private wastewater disposal (septic) systems and mandatory connection to the public sewage collection and disposal system.
UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-7 Policy PU-5-b: Non-Regional Treatment. Discourage, and when determined appropriate, oppose the use of private wastewater (septic) disposal systems, community wastewater disposal systems, or other nonregional sewage treatment and disposal systems within or adjacent to the Metropolitan Area if these types of wastewater treatment facilities would cause discharges that could result in groundwater degradation.
Objective PU-7: Promote reduction in wastewater flows and develop facilities for beneficial reuse of reclaimed water and biosolids for management and distribution of treated wastewater.
Policy PU-7-a: Reduce Wastewater. Identify and consider implementing water conservation standards and other programs and policies, as determined appropriate, to reduce wastewater flows.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE –WASTEWATER
Consistent with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Specific Plan will have a significant impact on Utilities if it would:
• Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects; and/or
• Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the projects projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 3.15-1: The proposed Specific Plan would require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. (Significant and Unavoidable)
The Specific Plan does not trigger a need to expand the Regional Facility. There would be a network of sewer collection infrastructure installed throughout the Plan Area to serve the West Area Specific Plan. The Specific Plan wastewater collection system will include future construction of sewer improvements and replacements of existing lines, some of which are now over 75 years old.
Approximately 3.6 miles of public and privately-owned (i.e., homeowner’s responsibility) sewer system drainage lines are proposed to serve the Plan Area at buildout.
Physical impacts from future construction of the wastewater infrastructure within the Plan Area is addressed within this EIR. A discussion of relevant operational and construction impacts can be found in each respective section of this EIR. Impacts associated with development of the Plan Area, as proposed, would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics (Impact 3.1- 3), agricultural resources (Impact 3.2-1 and Impact 3.2-2), air quality (Impacts 3.3-1 through 3.3-3), public services and recreation (Impacts 3.13-3 through 3.13-5).
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-8 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan
CONCLUSION
The construction of the new wastewater facilities, which are associated with future buildout of the Plan Area, has the potential to cause environmental impacts. The potential for environmental impacts associated with the installation of the wastewater system, and all construction activities within the Plan Area, are addressed throughout this EIR. In some cases, the direct and indirect impacts are potentially significant and warrant mitigation measures, while in other cases there are significant and unavoidable impacts. The future wastewater infrastructure would fall within the range of environmental impacts disclosed in this EIR, and would be subject to relevant mitigation measures included in this EIR.
It is noted, however, that future development of wastewater infrastructure within the proposed Plan Area would contribute to significant and unavoidable impacts related to aesthetics (Impact 3.1- 3), agricultural resources (Impact 3.2-1 and Impact 3.2-2), air quality (Impacts 3.3-1 through 3.3-3), public services and recreation (Impacts 3.13-3 through 3.13-5). Therefore, consistent with the analysis included in this Draft EIR, impacts related to construction of new or expanded stormwater drainage facilities to serve the Plan Area are considered significant and unavoidable.
Impact 3.15-2: The proposed Specific Plan would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the Plan Area that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the Specific Plan’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments. (Less than Significant)
PROJECT WASTEWATER GENERATION
The projected future average dry weather base flow as a result of buildout of the City’s General Plan is 150 MGD. This flow includes 8.7 MGD from large dischargers and 15.86 MGD from Clovis. The 8.40 MGD designated by Clovis for treatment at a satellite wastewater treatment plant is not included.
This flow also includes all flow from the Southeast Growth Area and the flow from the anticipated treatment plant in the North Growth Area.
The wastewater generation resulting from buildout of the Specific Plan Area is shown in Table 3.15-
1. As shown, buildout of the Specific Plan Area would result in 11,490,429.94 gpd, or approximately
11.5 MGD. It is noted, however, the wastewater generation calculated and shown in Table 3.15-1 includes much of the wastewater that is currently generated by the existing developed uses in the Plan Area.
TABLE 3.15-1: WASTEWATER GENERATION
PROPOSED LAND USE CATEGORY
PROPOSED
GROSS ACREAGE
UNIT FACTOR
(EDU/ACRE)
1 GPD
Residential - Low 516.57 1 149,805.82
Residential - Medium Low 1,440.22 1 417,664.66
Residential - Medium 2,118.00 12 7,370,641.09
Residential - Medium High 280.27 12 975,343.84
Residential - Urban Neighborhood 154.21 15 670,830.55
UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-9
PROPOSED LAND USE CATEGORY
PROPOSED
GROSS ACREAGE
UNIT FACTOR
(EDU/ACRE)
1 GPD
Residential - High 46.61 15 202,746.79
Commercial - Community 57.74 4 66,983.50
Commercial - Recreation 41.34 3 35,963.04
Commercial - General 215.07 7 436,596.37
Commercial - Regional 4.24 4 4,913.79
Employment - Office 82.25 7 166,976.87
Employment - Business Park 74.97 4 86,964.60
Employment - Light Industrial 32.75 4 37,989.85
Mixed Use - Neighborhood 308.43 4 357,775.70
Mixed Use - Corridor/Center 96.00 7 194,885.67
Mixed Use - Regional 0.00 15 0.00
Open Space - Pocket Park 1.55 - -
Open Space - Neighborhood Park 86.26 - -
Open Space - Community Park 24.20 - -
Open Space - Regional Park 0.00 - -
Open Space - Open Space 6.79 - -
Open Space - Ponding Basin 129.59 - -
Public Facility - Public Facility 27.42 2 15,903.47
Public Facility - Church 55.80 2 32,361.46
Public Facility - Special School 18.38 3 15,988.15
Public Facility - Elem. School 91.82 3 79,882.00
Public Facility - Elem./Middle/High School 145.37 3 126,474.18 Public Facility - High School 46.95 3 40,847.21
Public Facility - Fire Station 3.32 3 2,891.32
TOTAL 6,106.14 -- 11,490,429.94
NOTE:
1 ACCORDING TO THE CITY’S WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN, 290 GALLONS PER DAY (GPD) OF WASTEWATER ARE GENERATED PER EQUIVALENT DWELLING UNIT (EDU).UNIT FACTORS ARE PROVIDED IN TABLE 4-4 OF THE CITY’S WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN.
SOURCE: DE NOVO PLANNING GROUP, 2020.
COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM
As noted previously, the Regional Facility is located southwest of the City in the area generally bounded by Jensen, Cornelia, Central and Chateau Fresno Avenues. Wastewater from the Plan Area is treated at the Regional Facility, which has an average annual flow of approximately 60 MGD. The Regional Facility receives and treats wastewater from three additional service areas, including: the City of Clovis, Pinedale County Water District, and Pinedale Public Utility District. The Regional Facility has an ADWF capacity of 92 MGD; however, it can treat the PWWF that occurs during storm events, which is higher than the ADWF but lasts for short duration. The City of Clovis owns 9.3 MGD of ADWF capacity, while the remaining capacity belongs to the City. Additionally, although the NFWRF does not serve the Plan Area directly, it contributes to the City’s total wastewater treatment capacity.
Wastewater treatment plant capacities are typically rated based on the ADWF flow. The permitted wastewater treatment capacity of the Regional Facility is currently 80.0 MGD as an annual monthly average flow, and 88.0 MGD as a maximum monthly average flow. The City is currently evaluating
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-10 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan upgrades and modifications to the existing Regional Facility that may result in a capacity rating increase of 15 MGD.
The Specific Plan would require wastewater collection and treatment services. The City owns and operates their own collection system. Sewer collection and treatment issues and opportunities that would result from buildout of the Plan Area (as noted in the City of Fresno Specific Plan for the West Area Utility Background Summary) are discussed below.
At build out, the City’s wastewater flows are expected to increase substantially. As such, there are some areas of the existing collection system that cannot convey the build out PWWF within the established maximum flow to full flow (q/Q) ratio of 1.15. There are several localized driven improvements needed in the Downtown area (C-1 through C-7), and an additional upsizing for the pipeline along the City’s southern border that feeds the Regional Facility (C-8, C-10).
Four development driven projects (D-26A, D-26B, D-27A, D-27B) are identified within or along the borders of the Plan Area. Approximately 3.6 miles of public and privately-owned (i.e., homeowner’s responsibility) sewer system drainage lines are proposed to serve the West Area at buildout. The City does not currently collect supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) data for their lift stations. Were feasible, Collection System Master Plan (Carollo, 2015) recommends that upgrades be performed to allow for proper flow monitoring data acquisition, which will help confirm lift station capacity and monitor lift station performance.
Additional agricultural or urban water reuse in the future is a possibility with additional distribution and/or treatment facilities. The Regional Facility currently delivers approximately 4,700 AFY (Water Systems Consulting Inc., 2021) of undisinfected secondary effluent to growers of non-food crops within the City. An additional 1,400 acres could be served with an expansion of the conveyance system or the establishment of an exchange agreement with FID. Within the Plan Area, approximately 6.3 miles of new recycled water distribution pipelines are planned to be constructed by buildout.
The 2010 Recycled Water Master Plan outlines three locations for potential regional recharge areas.
Also referenced as a "super recharge basin", one of the regional recharge areas is located partially within the Plan Area. If the basins are constructed, a portion of the recharge water could be made up of recycled water, provided there is at least six months travel time from the super recharge basin to the nearest drinking water well.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Specific Plan would increase the amount of wastewater requiring treatment. The wastewater would be treated at the Regional Facility. Given the capacity of 92 MGD, the average annual flow of approximately 56 MGD, and the 11.5 MGD generated by the buildout of the Plan Area (including existing demand and future demand), there is sufficient plant capacity. This is a less than significant impact.
UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-11
3.15.2 WATER SUPPLIES
EXISTING SETTING
Water Purveyor and System
The existing incorporated area of the City of Fresno encompasses approximately 115 square miles (2020 UWMP). The City’s General Plan includes the City’s the area outside of the City limits that the City expects to annex and urbanize in the future, also known as the SOI. With a few exceptions, the City’s water service area is coterminous with the City limits. As future developments within the SOI, but outside the City limits, are approved, they will be annexed into the City and served by the City water system.
The City’s water system consists of about 1,860 miles of distribution and transmission mains, 260 municipal groundwater wells, three surface water treatment facilities (SWTFs) with current rated capacities ranging from 4 to 54 MGD, five water storage facilities with pump stations, including one at each of the SWTFs plus two in the distribution system, and three booster pump facilities.
As of the close of the 2020 calendar year, the City has over 139,500 residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional water service connections and produced nearly 122,000 AF of water.
In addition to the City’s water system, there are four independent water systems located within the City limits, including Bakman Water Company, Pinedale County Water District, California State University Fresno, and Park Van Ness Mutual Water Company. These independent water systems have their own water supplies, and do not receive water from the City, with the exception of a portion of the Pinedale County Water District east of Highway 41 and south of Herndon Avenue.
The City has emergency interties with the City of Clovis and California State University, Fresno, that provides additional water supply flexibility.
The Plan Area is served by nearly 96 miles of distribution pipelines and just under a mile of recycled water service (in North Cornelia Avenue between West Clinton Avenue and West Shields Avenue).
Water Demand
HISTORICAL AND EXISTING WATER DEMAND
The following information is based on the Specific Plan of the West Area Water Supply Assessment (WSA) (West Yost, 2022).
The City’s water demand has decreased as a result of the economic downturn of 2008 through 2011, water use reductions in response to recent drought conditions, and metering of residential properties. Since 2013, all water services in the City’s water service area have been metered. Singlefamily residential water use has decreased since the Single-Family Metering Program was completed in 2013. Landscape irrigation demands did decrease in 2015 and 2016, likely due to the drought
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-12 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan restrictions, and continue to recover after the drought ended in 2017. Table 3.15-2 shows the City’s historical water demands for 2013 through 2020.
TABLE 3.15-2: HISTORICAL WATER DEMAND
2013(a) 2014(a) 2015(a) 2016(a) 2017(a) 2018(a) 2019(a) 2020(b) Total Potable and Raw
Water Demand, af/yr
133,69
2 122,19
1 102,30
8 103,04
5 110,52
5 110,72
5 106,50
0 121,99
3 NOTES:
(A) CITY OF FRESNO 2020 UWMP, FIGURE-4-1.
(B) CITY OF FRESNO 2020 UWMP, TABLE 4-2.
SOURCE: WEST YOST, 2022.
FUTURE WATER DEMAND
The City’s 2045 projected water demand at buildout (based on existing water demand, the projected demands for the Plan Area under the General Plan, the difference in demands for the Plan Area between the Specific Plan and the General Plan, and undefined future developments) is summarized in Table 3.15-3. The General Plan is expected to be built out by 2056, but for the purposes of the WSA that was completed for the proposed Specific Plan, the Plan Area was assumed to be annexed and built out by 2045. The City’s preliminary water demand projections for the Plan Area under the General Plan were higher than for the Specific Plan, resulting in a negative value if the proposed Specific Plan land use map is built out instead of the General Plan.
TABLE 3.15-3: PROJECTED FUTURE WATER DEMAND AT 2045
UNITS, AF/YR WATER DEMAND
Current (2020) Water Demand(a) 121,993
General Plan for West Area(b) 23,730
Subtotal (without Project) 145,723
Project (West Area Specific Plan)(b,c) -381
Subtotal (with Project) 145,723
Undefined Future Developments 95,724
Total Water Demand 241,447
NOTES:
(A) DATA FROM TABLE 5-1 OF THE WSA [TABLE 3.15-2 OF THIS SECTION]. (B) DATA FROM TABLE 2-2 OF THE WSA [TABLE 3.15-2 OF THIS SECTION]. (C) DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WEST AREA NEIGHBORHOODS SPECIFIC PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN FOR THE PLAN AREA. (D) BALANCE BETWEEN SUBTOTAL (WITH PROJECT) AND TOTAL WATER DEMAND.
SOURCE: WEST YOST, 2022.
DRY YEAR WATER DEMAND
As shown in Table 3.15-2, the City’s 2015 water demand was significantly lower than the 2013 demand in response to the drought and the Governor’s April 2015 Executive Order B-29-15 mandating 25 percent water conservation statewide. To reduce water use by 25 percent statewide, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted a regulation which placed each urban water supplier into one of nine tiers which are assigned a conservation standard, ranging between four percent and 36 percent. Each month, the SWRCB compared every urban water suppliers’ water use with their use for the same month in 2013 to determine if they were on track for meeting their conservation standard. The City of Fresno was initially placed into Tier 7 with a water conservation UTILITIES 3.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan 3.15-13 standard of 28 percent as compared to 2013 use (the City’s conservation standard was reduced to 25 percent in early 2016).
The City currently has a demand management program in place, as described in Section 9 of the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan, outlined in Section 8 and Appendix J of the City’s 2020 UWMP, includes a five-stage plan describing specific actions to reduce water demand by up to 50 percent in the event of a water supply shortage or emergency. Demand is expected to decrease as the City implements water conservation measures in response to multiple dry years or other supply changes.
Table 3.15-4 presents the projected future dry year potable water demand.
TABLE 3.15-4: PROJECTED FUTURE DRY YEAR TOTAL WATER DEMAND, AF/YR HYDROLOGIC CONDITION 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Single Dry Year(a) 164,092 176,132 184,174 192,228 200,287 Multiple Dry Years First Year(b) 199,204 212,756 222,310 231,876 241,447 Multiple Dry Years Second Year(b) 199,204 212,756 222,310 231,876 241,447 Multiple Dry Years Third Year(b) 190,267 193,637 197,736 201,753 205,708 Multiple Dry Years Fourth Year(b) 162,551 165,920 170,020 174,036 177,992 Multiple Dry Years Fifth Year(b) 199,204 212,756 222,310 231,876 241,447 NOTES:
(A) DATA FROM THE CITY OF FRESNO 2020 UWMP, TABLE 7-2.
(B) DATA FROM THE CITY OF FRESNO 2020 UWMP, TABLE 7-3.
SOURCE: WEST YOST, 2022.
Water Supply
The City currently receives water supplies from four sources:
• Surface water contract water that is delivered to the City by two separate sources:
o FID Agreement for Kings River water.
o USBR Central Valley Project (CVP) Friant Division Contract for San Joaquin River water.
• Groundwater that is pumped from groundwater wells located within the City. • Recycled water that is treated at the Regional Facility and NFWRF. This water may only be used for non-potable uses.
Each of these existing supplies is described below.
SURFACE WATER CONTRACTS
The cumulative supply these contracts bring to the City provide the opportunity to construct surface water treatment facilities and optimize the use of these supplies. This conjunctive use approach continues the process of allowing the groundwater system to recover. Each of the surface water supplies is summarized in the following two sections.
Surface Water Supplies through FID Agreement: In May of 1976 the City of Fresno and FID executed an agreement that stipulated that as land is annexed to the City, the City will receive a pro rata share
3.15 UTILITIES
3.15-14 Draft Environmental Impact Report – West Area Neighborhoods Specific Plan of FID’s Kings River entitlement; this agreement was revised, amended and restated in December, 2016. The pro rata share is based on the area annexed to the City, and within FID’s boundaries, as compared to the total area of FID’s water service area. The agreement stipulates the allocation amount will be reviewed each year by the two agencies to address new annexations to the City. So, as the City annexes new areas, the allocation will increase up to the limits stipulated in the 2016 agreement. Utilizing GIS, there will be approximately 71,925 acres of land within the SOI and within FID’s water service boundaries at SOI buildout, excluding Bakman Water Company, CSU Fresno, and County islands.