CITY COUNCIL HEARING: Conditional Use Permit Application No.
P23-00835, Planned Development Permit Application No. P23-02080, and related Environmental Assessment
Exhibit N-2
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan
Public Review Draft EIR
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
for the City of Fresno
SCH #: 2017031012
August 2017 | Public Review Draft EIR
In Association With:
Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants
H.T. Harvey & Associates
Blair, Church & Flynn Consulting Engineers
Sierra Valley Cultural Planning
PlaceWorks
1625 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 300
Berkeley, California 94709
510.848.3815
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
for the City of Fresno
SCH #: 2017031012
August 2017 | Public Review Draft EIR
Prepared By:
ORANGE COUNTY • NORTHERN CALIFORNIA • CENTRAL COAST • LOS ANGELES • INLAND EMPIRE • SAN DIEGO www.placeworks.com
PLACEWORKS i
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Proposed Action .................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 Environmental Review Process.........................................................................................1-2
1.3 Type of EIR ............................................................................................................................1-4
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................2-1
2.1 Environmental Procedures................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Summary of the Proposed Plan........................................................................................2-4
2.3 Summary of the Alternatives to the Proposed Plan .....................................................2-5
2.4 Issues to be Resolved .........................................................................................................2-5
2.5 Areas of Concern................................................................................................................2-5
2.6 Significant Impacts and Mitigation Measures...............................................................2-6
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................3-1
3.1 Intended Uses of the EIR ....................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Purpose of the Proposed Plan..........................................................................................3-2
3.3 Required Approvals..........................................................................................................3-11
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................4-1
4.1 Aesthetics......................................................................................................................... 4.1-1
4.2 Agriculture........................................................................................................................ 4.2-1
4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 4.3-1
4.4 Biological Resources....................................................................................................... 4.4-1
4.5 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources........................................................................ 4.5-1
4.6 Geology and Soils........................................................................................................... 4.6-1
4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................................................................ 4.7-1
4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials............................................................................... 4.8-1
4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality....................................................................................... 4.9-1
4.10 Land Use and Planning................................................................................................ 4.10-1
4.11 Noise................................................................................................................................ 4.11-1
4.12 Population and Housing .............................................................................................. 4.12-1
4.13 Public Services and Recreation ................................................................................. 4.13-1
4.14 Transportation and Traffic ........................................................................................... 4.14-1
4.15 Utility Systems ................................................................................................................. 4.15-1
SOUTHWEST FRESNO S PECIFIC PLAN DRAFT E I R
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ii AUGUST 2017
5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................5-1
5.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Potentially Significant Impacts.........................................................................................5-1
5.3 Project Objectives ..............................................................................................................5-3
5.4 Selection of a Reasonable Range of Alternatives.......................................................5-4
5.5 No Project Alternative........................................................................................................5-7
5.6 MIxed-Use Transit Corridor Alternative..........................................................................5-14
5.7 Environmentally Superior Alternative ............................................................................5-18
6. CEQA-MANDATED ASSESSMENT.....................................................................................................6-1
6.1 Impacts Found Not To Be Significant ..............................................................................6-1
6.2 Growth Inducement...........................................................................................................6-1
6.3 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts............................................................................6-2
6.4 Significant Irreversible Changes.......................................................................................6-2
7. PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED .............................................................................7-1
7.1 Lead Agency.......................................................................................................................7-1
7.2 Report Preparers .................................................................................................................7-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Notice of Preparatoin (NOP) and Comments on the NOP Appendix B: Southwest Fresno Specific Plan Public Review Draft Appendix C: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Data
Appendix D: Cultural Resources
Appendix E: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Data
Appendix F: Noise Data
Appendix G: Traffic Data
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLACEWORKS iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1 Regional Location Map.....................................................................................................3-4 Figure 3-2 Plan Area Map ....................................................................................................................3-5 Figure 4.4-1 Habitat Map..................................................................................................................... 4.4-7 Figure 4.4-2 CNDDB Plants and Wildlife in the Plan Area.............................................................. 4.4-9 Figure 4.4-3 Potential Jurisdictional Habitats Map ....................................................................... 4.4-22 Figure 4.6-1 Fault Map.......................................................................................................................... 4.6-5 Figure 4.6-2 Geologic Map................................................................................................................. 4.6-7 Figure 4.8-1 Hazardous Materials Sites............................................................................................ 4.8-18 Figure 4.9-1 FMFCD Urban Flood Control System Area ................................................................. 4.9-3 Figure 4.9-2 Existing Urban Flood Control System In and Near the Plan Area .......................... 4.9-5 Figure 4.9-3 Tulare-Buena Vista Lakes Watershed and Upper Dry Subbasin........................... 4.9-11 Figure 4.9-4 Kings Groundwater Subbasin ..................................................................................... 4.9-18 Figure 4.11-1 Ambient Noise Measurement Locations................................................................ 4.11-17 Figure 4.14-1 Regional Context........................................................................................................ 4.14-10 Figure 4.14-2 Roadway Classification ............................................................................................. 4.14-12 Figure 4.14-3 Existing Roadway Network........................................................................................ 4.14-13 Figure 4.14-4 Study Roadway Segments and Intersections........................................................ 4.14-16 Figure 4.14-5 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes .................................................................................... 4.14-17 Figure 4.14-6 Existing AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS.................................................... 4.14-20 Figure 4.14-7 Existing PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS .................................................... 4.14-21 Figure 4.14-8 Existing Fixed Route Transit Service.......................................................................... 4.14-25 Figure 4.14-9 Existing Bicycle Facilities............................................................................................. 4.14-27 Figure 4.14-10 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ...................................................................................... 4.14-28 Figure 4.14-11 Proposed Land Use Plan............................................................................................ 4.14-37 Figure 4.14-12 Existing Plus Proposed Plan’s Roadway Network.................................................. 4.14-38 Figure 4.14-13 Existing Plus Proposed Plan Daily Roadway Volumes.......................................... 4.14-39 Figure 4.14-14 Existing Plus Proposed Plan AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS ................ 4.14-41 Figure 4.14-15 Existing Plus Proposed Plan PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS................. 4.14-42 Figure 4.14-16 Cumulative Roadway Network................................................................................ 4.14-55 Figure 4.14-17 Cumulative Daily Roadway Volumes ..................................................................... 4.14-57 Figure 4.14-18 Cumulative AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS ........................................... 4.14-58 Figure 4.14-19 Cumulative PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS............................................ 4.14-59 Figure 5-1 Existing Land Use .................................................................................................................5-8
SOUTHWEST FRESNO S PECIFIC PLAN DRAFT E I R
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv AUGUST 2017
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures............................................................2-7 Table 3-1 Development Capacities for the Proposed Plan and General Plan in the Plan Area.......................................................................................................................3-9 Table 4.1-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Aesthetics .............................. 4.1-2 Table 4.2-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Agriculture and Forestry Resources........................................................................................................... 4.2-6 Table 4.3-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants.............................................. 4.3-3 Table 4.3-2 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Air Quality ............................ 4.3-15 Table 4.3-3 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the San Joaquin Valley Area Air Basin........................................................................................................................... 4.3-22 Table 4.3-4 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary................................................................ 4.3-23 Table 4.3-5 SJVAPCD Regional Criteria Air Pollutants Significance Thresholds...................... 4.3-25 Table 4.3-6 SJVAPCD Screening Levels for Potential Odor Sources ........................................ 4.3-26 Table 4.3-7 SJVAPCD Toxic Air Contaminants Incremental Risk Thresholds ........................... 4.3-27 Table 4.3-8 Construction Activities, Phasing, and Equipment................................................... 4.3-29 Table 4.3-9 Construction-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Estimates........................... 4.3-33 Table 4.3-10 Operation-Related Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Estimates............................... 4.3-35 Table 4.4-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Biological Resources............ 4.4-5 Table 4.4-2 Biotic Habitat Types and Surface Areas in the Plan Area....................................... 4.4-6 Table 4.4-3 Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species, Their Status, and Potential Occurrence in the Plan Area ..................................................................................... 4.4-10 Table 4.5-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources.......................................................................................................... 4.5-5 Table 4.5-2 Identified Cultural Resources Sites............................................................................. 4.5-12 Table 4.6-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Geology and Soils................ 4.6-3 Table 4.7-1 GHG Emissions and Their Relative Global Warming Potential Compared to CO2 .......................................................................................................... 4.7-3 Table 4.7-2 Summary of GHG Emissions Risks to California .......................................................... 4.7-6 Table 4.7-3 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Emissions Reductions Gap to Achieve the 2030 GHG Target................................................................................... 4.7-12 Table 4.7-4 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Emissions Reductions Change by Sector to Achieve the 2030 Target............................................................................ 4.7-13 Table 4.7-5 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to GHG Emissions..................... 4.7-20 Table 4.7-6 Forecasted GHG Reduction Target .......................................................................... 4.7-25 Table 4.7-7 Construction Activities, Phasing, and Equipment................................................... 4.7-27
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLACEWORKS v
Table 4.7-8 Net Annual GHG Forecast .......................................................................................... 4.7-28 Table 4.7-9 Fresno Council of Governments 2014-2040 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis............................................................................................................................ 4.7-31 Table 4.7-10 City of Fresno GHG Reduction Plan Consistency Analysis.................................... 4.7-33 Table 4.8-1 Fresno General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Hazards and Hazardous Materials..................................................................................................... 4.8-14 Table 4.8-2 EnviroStor Sites in the Plan Area ................................................................................. 4.8-19 Table 4.8-3 GeoTracker Sites in the Plan Area ............................................................................. 4.8-21 Table 4.9-1 Construction BMPs.......................................................................................................... 4.9-9 Table 4.9-2 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Hydrology and Water Quality................................................................................................................. 4.9-12 Table 4.9-3 Drainage Areas and Retention Basin Capacities................................................... 4.9-16 Table 4.9-4 Retention Basin Capacities......................................................................................... 4.9-25 Table 4.10-1 General Plan Consistency Analysis............................................................................ 4.10-4 Table 4.11-1 Noise Perceptibility ....................................................................................................... 4.11-3 Table 4.11-2 Typical Noise Levels...................................................................................................... 4.11-4 Table 4.11-3 Human Reaction to Typical Vibration Levels........................................................... 4.11-8 Table 4.11-4 Land Use Compatibility Noise Guidelines .............................................................. 4.11-11 Table 4.11-5 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Noise ................................... 4.11-13 Table 4.11-6 Ambient Base Noise Level Criteria........................................................................... 4.11-13 Table 4.11-7 Groundborne Vibration Criteria: Human Annoyance......................................... 4.11-14 Table 4.11-8 Groundborne Vibration Criteria: Architectural Damage.................................... 4.11-15 Table 4.11-9 Long-Term Noise Measurements Summary, 24+ Hour Durations ....................... 4.11-19 Table 4.11-10 Short-Term Noise Measurements Summary, 15-Minute Durations ..................... 4.11-20 Table 4.11-11 Existing Conditions Traffic Noise Levels ................................................................... 4.11-22 Table 4.11-12 Specific Plan Buildout Traffic Noise Increases........................................................ 4.11-25 Table 4.11-13 Vibration Levels for Common Construction Equipment Items........................... 4.11-28 Table 4.11-14 Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels..................................................... 4.11-32 Table 4.12-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Population and Housing............................................................................................................................ 4.12-2 Table 4.12-2 Housing Element Objectives and Policies Relevant to Population and Housing............................................................................................................................ 4.12-3 Table 4.12-3 Residential Population Potential ................................................................................ 4.12-6 Table 4.12-4 Employment Population Potential............................................................................. 4.12-7 Table 4.13-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Fire Protection Services ........................................................................................................................... 4.13-3 Table 4.13-2 Existing City of Fresno Fire Stations in the Plan Area.............................................. 4.13-4 Table 4.13-3 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Police Services .................... 4.13-8
SOUTHWEST FRESNO S PECIFIC PLAN DRAFT E I R
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vi AUGUST 2017
Table 4.13-4 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Schools ............................... 4.13-14 Table 4.13-5 Schools within the Plan Area .................................................................................. 4.13-15 Table 4.13-6 Capacity and Enrollment Figures for Fresno Unified School District.................. 4.13-16 Table 4.13-7 Student Generation Rates for K-12......................................................................... 4.13-17 Table 4.13-8 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Parks and Recreation.................................................................................................................... 4.13-20 Table 4.13- 9 Desirable Park Facility Standards............................................................................. 4.13-24 Table 4.13-10 City of Fresno Existing Pocket, Neighborhood, and Community Parks within the Plan Area ................................................................................................... 4.13-26 Table 4.14-1 General Plan Policies Relevant to Transportation and Traffic.............................. 4.14-6 Table 4.14-2 Peak Hour Roadway Segment Operations – Existing Conditions...................... 4.14-18 Table 4.14-3 Peak Hour Intersection Operations – Existing Conditions.................................... 4.14-22 Table 4.14-4 Peak Hour Freeway Off-Ramp Queuing – Existing Conditions........................... 4.14-23 Table 4.14-5 Study Roadway Segment LOS Standards.............................................................. 4.14-32 Table 4.14-6 Roadway Functional Classification and Peak Hour Traffic Volume LOS Thresholds ..................................................................................................................... 4.14-33 Table 4.14-7 Level of Service Definitions – Signalized Intersections.......................................... 4.14-34 Table 4.14-8 VMT Comparison – Existing Conditions and Existing Plus Proposed Plan ......... 4.14-40 Table 4.14-9 Peak Hour Roadway Segment Operations – Existing Plus Proposed Plan Conditions .................................................................................................................... 4.14-43 Table 4.14-10 Peak Hour Intersection Operations – Existing Plus Proposed Plan Conditions .................................................................................................................... 4.14-45 Table 4.14-11 Peak Hour Freeway Off-Ramp Queuing – Existing Plus Proposed Plan Conditions .................................................................................................................... 4.14-46 Table 4.14-12 VMT Comparison – Existing Conditions and Cumulative Conditions................ 4.14-56 Table 4.14-13 Peak Hour Roadway Segment Operations – Cumulative Conditions.............. 4.14-60 Table 4.14-14 Peak Hour Intersection Operations – Cumulative Conditions............................ 4.14-63 Table 4.14-15 Peak Hour Freeway Off-Ramp Queuing – Cumulative Conditions................... 4.14-64 Table 4.14-16 Peak Hour Intersection Operations – Cumulative Conditions with Mitigations.................................................................................................................... 4.14-67 Table 4.14-17 Peak Hour Intersection Operations – Cumulative Conditions with Mitigations.................................................................................................................... 4.14-68 Table 4.14-18 Peak Hour Freeway Off-Ramp Queuing – Cumulative Conditions with Mitigations.................................................................................................................... 4.14-69 Table 4.15-1 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Utility Systems....................... 4.15-3 Table 4.15-2 Comparison of Baseline and Proposed Wastewater Generation....................... 4.15-5 Table 4.15-3 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Water Service and Facilities......................................................................................................................... 4.15-16 Table 4.15-4 Comparison of Baseline and Proposed Water Usage......................................... 4.15-19 Table 4.15-5 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Recycled Water Supply............................................................................................................................ 4.15-26
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PLACEWORKS vii
Table 4.15-6 General Plan Objectives and Policies Relevant to Wastewater Service and Facilities ................................................................................................................ 4.15-31 Table 4.15-7 Drainage System Required Capacity by Drainage Area................................... 4.15-33 Table 5-1 Comparison of Proposed Plan Alternatives...................................................................5-7 Table 5-2 Development Capacities for the Plan and General Plan in the Plan Area.......................................................................................................................................5-9 Table 6-1 Summary of Significant and Unavoidable (SU) Impacts.............................................6-3
SOUTHWEST FRESNO S PECIFIC PLAN DRAFT E I R
CITY OF FRESNO
TABLE OF CONTENTS
viii AUGUST 2017
PLACEWORKS 1-1
1. Introduction
A thorough examination of the existing regulatory and environmental settingsin Fresno is a critical initial step in the adoption and implementation of the proposed Southwest Fresno Specific Plan (Plan) and the certification of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process.
The City of Fresno (City) is the Lead Agency for the proposed Plan. This EIR is intended to inform the City’s decision-makers, other responsible agencies, and the public-at-large of the nature of the proposed Plan and its effect (impact) on the environment. Accordingly, this Draft EIR provides an assessment of the potential environmental consequences of adoption, implementation, and development of the proposed Plan. Additionally, this Draft EIR identifies mitigation measures and alternatives to the proposed Plan that would avoid or reduce significant impacts. This Draft EIR analyzesthe buildout potential1 of the Plan Area
described in detail in each resource section of Chapter 4.0, Environmental Analysis, of this Draft EIR.
1.1 PROPOSED ACTION
The City is currently undertaking a community-based planning process to prepare the proposed Plan.
Pursuant to Section 21080(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)2 and Section 15378[a] of the CEQA Guidelines, 3 the proposed Plan is subject to environmental review because adoption and implementation of the proposed Plan is an “action” [undertaken by a public agency] that hasthe potential to resultin either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
The proposed Plan contains land use, urban design, transportation, public facilities, and utilities goals, policies, and strategies to guide investment and development in the Plan Area over the next 25 years.
Because the proposed Plan is the guiding regulatory document for Plan Area, and consistent with Section 15-104B, the associated General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendments are necessary to ensure that the land use and zoning designations, policies, and development standards in these documents are consistent with the proposed Plan. A detailed description of the proposed Plan is provided in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Draft EIR.
1 Buildout potential is defined as the maximum theoretical amount of development that could occur within the 25-year horizon of the Specific Plan. 2 The CEQA Statute is found at California Public Resources Code, Division 13, Sections 21000-21177. 3 The CEQA Guidelines are found at California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000-15387.
SOU THW EST FRESNO SPE CI FI C PLAN DRAFT EI R
CI TY OF FRESNO
INTRODUCTION
1-2 AUGUST 2017
1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
1.2.1 DRAFT EIR
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City determined that the proposed Plan could result in potentially significant environmental impacts and that an EIR would be required; therefore, this EIR was prepared without an initial study. In compliance with Section 21080.4 of the California Public Resources Code, the City circulated the Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed Plan to the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) State Clearinghouse (SCH), as well as interested agencies and persons, on February 28, 2017, for a 30-day review period. The NOP solicited comments from identified responsible and trustee agencies, as well as interested parties regarding the scope of the Draft EIR.
Appendix A, Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments, of this Draft EIR contains the NOP as well as the comments received by the City in response to the NOP.
The scope of this EIR was established by the City through the NOP process and includes an analysis of both the project-specific and cumulative impacts in the following issue areas:
Aesthetics
Agriculture Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services and Recreation
Transportation and Traffic
Utilities and Service Systems
CEQA-Mandated Assessment:
Impacts Found Not To Be Significant
Significant Unavoidable Impacts
Growth-Inducing Impacts
Significant Irreversible Changes
The implementation of the proposed Planwas found to have no impacts related to Forestry Resources and Mineral Resources. A complete discussion of the impacts to Forestry Resources, and Mineral Resources is provided in Chapter 6, CEQA-Mandated Assessment, of this Draft EIR.
This Draft EIR will be available for review by the public and interested parties, agencies, and organizations for a 45-day comment period. During the comment period, the public is invited to submit written
SOU THW EST FRESNO SPE CI FI C PLAN DRAFT EI R
CI TY OF FRESNO
INTRODUCTION
PLACEWORKS 1-3
comments via mail or e-mail on the Draft EIR to the City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department.
Written comments should be submitted to:
City of Fresno Development and Resource Management Department Attention: Sophia Pagoulatos, Planning Manager
2600 Fresno Street, Room 3065
Fresno, California 93721
Email: [email protected]
1.2.2 FINAL EIR
Upon completion of the 45-day review period, the City will review all written comments received and prepare written responses for each comment. A Final EIR will then be prepared, incorporating all of the comments received, responses to comments raising environmental issues, and any changes to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR will then be presented to the Planning Commission for a recommendation on the certification of the EIR and to City Council for potential certification as the environmental document for the proposed Plan. Public input is encouraged at all public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
All persons who commented on the Draft EIR will be notified of the availability of the Final EIR and the date of the public hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council.
All responses to comments submitted on the Draft EIR by agencies will be provided to those agencies at least 10 days prior to certification of the Draft EIR. The City Council will make findings regarding the extent and nature of the impacts as presented in the Final EIR. The Final EIR will need to be certified as complete by the City prior to making a decision to adoptthe proposed Plan.
After the City Council certifies the Final EIR, it may then consider the proposed Plan itself, which it may approve as presented in this Draft EIR, approve in part, approve with conditions, or deny. In other words, the certification of this EIR does not in and of itself approve any component of the proposed Plan. The approval of the proposed Planmay occur at another time subsequent to the certification of the EIR, if at all. The City Council may require the mitigation measures specified in this Draft EIR as conditions of Plan approval, and it may also require other feasible mitigation measures. Alternately, the City Council may find that the mitigation measures are outside the jurisdiction of the City to implement, or that no feasible mitigation measures have been identified for a given significant impact. In the latter case, the City Council may nonetheless determine that the proposed Plan is necessary or desirable due to specific overriding considerations, including economic factors, and may approve the proposed Plan despite an unavoidable, significant impact.
1.2.3 MITIGATION MONITORING
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires that the Lead Agency adopt a monitoring or reporting program for any project for which it has made findings pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081. Such a
SOU THW EST FRESNO SPE CI FI C PLAN DRAFT EI R
CI TY OF FRESNO
INTRODUCTION
1-4 AUGUST 2017
program is intended to ensure the implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the preparation of an EIR. The Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program for the proposed Planwill be completed as part of the environmental review process.
1.3 TYPE OF EIR
As described in Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines, the most common type of EIR is a project EIR, which examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. As described in Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, program EIRs are appropriate when a project consists of a series of actions related to the issuance of rules, regulations, and other planning criteria. In this case, the proposed Plan that is the subject of this EIR includes the proposed Plan, a long-term plan that will be implemented over a 25-year horizon as a policy document guiding future development activities. Therefore, this EIR serves as a program-level EIR that does not evaluate the impacts of future individual projects that may be proposed under the proposed Plan. Under the programmatic EIR approach, future projects or phases may require additional, project-specific environmental analysis.
In order to identify whether additional analysis would be necessary when the project is implemented, the Lead Agency (the City) will need to determine the following:
Whether the planned characteristics of the project are substantially different from those defined in the programmatic EIR;
Whether the project would require additional mitigation measures; or Whether specific impacts were not evaluated in sufficient detail in the programmatic EIR.
If any of these conditions apply, then a new project-specific Initial Study leading to a Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an EIR, unless the activity qualifies for an exemption,would be necessary to identify how the impacts of the project differ from those identified in this EIR or what additional mitigation measures would be necessary. For these subsequent environmental review documents, this program EIR will serve as the basis or first-tier environmental analysis for future projectlevel CEQA review.
1.3.1 TIERING
This Draft EIR tiers from the Master EIR (MEIR), SCH 2012111915, prepared for the Fresno General Plan. “Tiering” or “tier” means the coverage of general matters and environmental effects in an environmental impact report prepared for a policy, plan, program, or ordinance followed by narrower or site-specific environmental impact reports which incorporate by reference the discussion in any prior environmental impact report, and which concentrate on the environmental effects which (a) are capable of being mitigated, or (b) were not analyzed as significant effects on the environment in the prior environmental impact report (Cal. Pub. Res. Code Section 20168.5; CEQA Guidelines Section 15152).
Tiering of EIRs is encouraged to promote construction of needed housing and other development projects by (1) streamlining regulatory procedures, (2) avoiding repetitive discussions of the same issues in
SOU THW EST FRESNO SPE CI FI C PLAN DRAFT EI R
CI TY OF FRESNO
INTRODUCTION
PLACEWORKS 1-5
successive environmental impact reports, and (3) ensuring that EIRs prepared for later projects which are consistent with a previously approved policy, plan, program, or ordinance concentrate upon environmental effects that may be mitigated or avoided in connection with the decision on each later project. Tiering is appropriate when it helps a public agency focus upon the issues ripe for decision at each level of environmental review and in order to exclude duplicate analysis of environmental effects examined in previous EIRs. To achieve this purpose, the California Legislature has determined that an EIR shall be tiered whenever feasible, as determined by the lead agency (Cal. Pub. Res. Code Section 20193).
Where a lead agency is using the tiering process in connection with an EIR for a large-scale planning approval, such as a general plan or component thereof (e.g., a specific plan), the development of detailed, site-specific information may not be feasible but can be deferred, in many instances, until such time as the lead agency prepares a future environmental document in connection with a project of a more limited geographical scale, as long as deferral does not prevent adequate identification of significant effects of the planning approval at hand.
Each topical section of this Draft EIR provides any applicable mitigation measures from the MEIR.
Additional mitigation measures are provided where necessary to discuss impacts unique to the implementation of the proposed Plan that were not addressed in the MEIR.
PLACEWORKS 2-1
2. Executive Summary
This chapter presents an overview of the proposed Southwest Fresno Specific Plan, herein referred to as “proposed Plan.” This executive summary provides a summary of the proposed Plan, a summary of the alternatives to the proposed Plan, identifies issues to be resolved, areas of concern, and conclusions of the analysis contained in Chapters 4.0 through 4.15 of this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR).
For a complete description of the proposed Plan, see Chapter 3, and for a discussion of alternatives to the proposed Plan, see Chapter 5 of this Draft EIR.
This Draft EIR addresses the environmental effects associated with the implementation of the proposed Plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that local government agencies, prior to taking action on projects over which they have discretionary approval authority, consider the environmental consequences of such projects. An EIR is a public document designed to provide the public, and local and State governmental agency decision-makers with an analysis of potential environmental consequences to support informed decision-making.
This Draft EIR has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA (California Public Resources Code, Division 13, Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.) to determine if approval of the identified discretionary actions and related subsequent development under the proposed Plan could have a significant impact on the environment. The City of Fresno, as the Lead Agency, has reviewed and revised as necessary all submitted drafts, technical studies, and reports to reflect its own independent judgment, including reliance on applicable City technical personnel and review of all technical subconsultant reports.
Information for this Draft EIR was obtained from on-site field observations; discussions with affected agencies; analysis of adopted plans and policies; review of available studies, reports, data, and similar literature in the public domain; and specialized environmental assessments (e.g., air quality, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, and transportation and traffic).
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
This Draft EIR has been prepared to assess the potential environmental effects associated with implementation of the proposed Plan. The main purposes of this document as established by CEQA are:
To disclose to decision-makers and the public the significant environmental effects of proposed activities.
To identify ways to avoid or reduce environmental damage. To prevent environmental damage by requiring implementation of feasible alternatives or mitigation measures.
SOU THWEST FRESNO SPECIF IC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-2 AUGUST 2017
To disclose to the public reasons for agency approval of projects with significant environmental effects.
To foster interagency coordination in the review of projects. To enhance public participation in the planning process.
An EIR is the most comprehensive form of environmental documentation identified in the statutes and in the CEQA Guidelines. It provides the information needed to assess the environmental consequences of a proposed project, to the extent feasible. EIRs are intended to provide an objective, factually supported, full-disclosure analysis of the environmental consequences associated with a proposed project that has the potential to result in significant, adverse environmental impacts. An EIR is also one of various decisionmaking tools used by a lead agency to consider the merits and disadvantages of a project that is subject to its discretionary authority. Prior to approving a proposed project, the lead agency must consider the information contained in the EIR, determine whether the EIR was properly prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, determine that it reflects the independent judgment of the lead agency, adopt findings concerning the project’s significant environmental impacts and alternatives, and must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations if the proposed project would result in significant impacts that cannot be avoided.
2.1.1 REPORT ORGANIZATION
This Draft EIR is organized into the following chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction. Provides an overview describing the Draft EIR document. Chapter 2: Executive Summary. Summarizes the environmental consequences that would result from implementation of the proposed Plan, the alternatives to the proposed Plan, the recommended mitigation measures, and it indicates the level of significance of environmental impacts with and without mitigation.
Chapter 3: Project Description. Describes the proposed Plan in detail, including the site location and characteristics, objectives, and the structural and technical elements of the proposed action. Chapter 4: Environmental Analysis. Organized into 15 sub-chapters corresponding to the environmental resource categories identified in Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines, this section provides a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the proposed Plan as they existed at the time the Notice of Preparation was published, from both a local and regional perspective, as well as an analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Plan, and recommended mitigation measures, if required, to reduce their significance. The environmental setting included in each sub-chapter provides baseline physical conditions from which the Lead Agency determines the significance of environmental impacts resulting from the proposed Plan. Each sub-chapter also includes a description of the thresholds used to determine if a significant impact would occur; the methodology to identify and evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Plan; and the potential cumulative impacts associated with the proposed Plan. Chapter 5: Alternatives to the Proposed Plan. Considers two alternatives to the proposed Plan, including the CEQA-required “No Project” Alternative and the “Mixed-Use Corridor” Alternative.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLACEWORKS 2-3
Chapter 6: CEQA-Mandated Assessment. Discusses growth inducement, cumulative impacts, unavoidable significant effects, and significant irreversible changes as a result of the proposed Plan.
Additionally, this chapter identifies environmental issues that were determined not to require further environmental review during the scoping process pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15128. Chapter 7: Organizations and Persons Consulted. Lists the people and organizations that were contacted during the preparation of this EIR for the proposed Plan. Chapter 8: References. List of the material referenced in this EIR. Appendices: The appendices for this document (presented in PDF format on a CD attached to the back cover of the Draft EIR) contain the following supporting documents:
Appendix A: Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments Appendix B: Proposed Public Review Draft of Southwest Fresno Specific Plan Appendix C: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Data
Appendix D: Cultural Resources Data
Appendix E: Hazards and Hazardous Materials Data
Appendix F: Noise Data
Appendix G: Public Services Data
Appendix H: Transportation and Traffic Data
2.1.2 PURPOSE OF THE DRAFT EIR
According to Section 15121(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of an EIR is to:
Inform public agency decision makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project, identify possible ways to minimize the significant effects, and describe reasonable alternatives to the project.
The Project that is the subject of this EIR is the proposed Plan, a long-term plan that will be implemented over time as a policy document guiding future development activities. Therefore, this EIR serves as a program-level EIR. This EIR discloses and evaluates the environmental impacts associated with the policies, development standards, and anticipated buildout of the proposed Plan at a program level. This programmatic EIR is generally qualitative in nature due to a 25-year buildout horizon.
This EIR does not evaluate the impacts of future individual projects that may be proposed under the proposed Plan. However, if the program EIR addresses the program’s effects as specifically and comprehensively as is reasonably possible, and later activities are within scope of the effects examined in the program EIR, then additional environmental review may not be required for those future projects. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15168[c] and CEQA streamlining provisions.) When a program EIR is relied on for a subsequent activity, the lead agency must incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the program EIR, and the Fresno General Plan MEIR when applicable, into the subsequent activities (CEQA Guidelines Section 15168[c][3]). If a subsequent activity would have effects that are not within the scope of the program EIR, the lead agency must prepare a new Initial Study leading to a Negative Declaration, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an EIR unless the activity qualifies for an exemption. For these subsequent environmental review documents, this program EIR will serve as the
SOU THWEST FRESNO SPECIF IC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-4 AUGUST 2017
first-tier environmental analysis. The program EIR can also serve to streamline future environmental review of subsequent projects.
See Chapter 1, Introduction, Section 1.3, Type of EIR, of this Draft EIR for a detailed discussion on the environmental review applied in this EIR.
2.2 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PLAN
The City of Fresno proposes the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan for the 3,255-acre area located southwest of the Downtown Planning Area. The proposed Plan envisions the interplay of “Complete Neighborhoods,” “Corridors,” and “Magnet Cores” to create a vibrant and desirable community for both existing and new residents. The proposed Plan sets aside the majority of vacant land for single-family residential uses and locates higher density residential uses at neighborhood nodes, near magnet uses, and along corridors.
This will allow walkable access for greater numbers of residents to shopping, schools, parks, and transit.
Additionally, the proposed Plan envisions that the most optimal locations for large-scale, regional-serving retail are those that have good proximity, visibility, and access from the greatest number of people, while having enough distance away from other similar types of retail to avoid competition. In the Plan, regional retail is shown in two locations: with access from Highway 180 at Marks and Whites Bridge avenues and from Highway 41 near Jensen Avenue and MLK Jr. Boulevard. These locations would allow new retail businesses to draw customers from areas beyond Southwest Fresno. On the other hand, smaller scale community commercial, including neighborhood retail shops, would be closer to the residential areas at many of the neighborhood nodes, adjacent to magnet uses, and near mixed use.
Furthermore, larger scale employment uses such as offices, a college, and medical facilities are concentrated along higher-intensity corridors and within magnet cores, while opportunities for smaller scale offices are allowed along a less intensive corridor. While more jobs in Southwest Fresno are desirable, the types of businesses that provide them must be healthy, safe, and good neighbors to nearby residents. To avoid potential conflicts between residents and employment uses, new employment areas and all previously “Light Industrial,” “Heavy Industrial,” “Business Park,” or “Regional Business Park” areas would be planned and zoned “Office”.
Table 3-1 in Chapter 3, Project Description contains the development capacity of the land uses proposed in the Plan Area over the proposed Plan’s 25-year timeframe compared to the Fresno General Plan, as well as a discussed of findings from the development capacity analysis. It should be noted that, like the Fresno General Plan, the development capacities are for new development and only take into account the development of parcels that have higher opportunities for development, such as parcels that are vacant, open agriculture, or rural residential (partially vacant).
The development capacities for the Fresno General Plan are also shown in the table for comparison against the proposed Plan’s development capacities.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLACEWORKS 2-5
2.3 SUMMARY OF THE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PLAN
This Draft EIR analyzes alternatives to the proposed Plan that are designed to reduce the significant environmental impacts of the proposed Plan and feasibly attain some of the proposed Plan objectives.
There is no set methodology for comparing the alternatives or determining the environmentally superior alternative under CEQA. Identification of the environmentally superior alternative involves weighing and balancing all of the environmental resource areas by the City. The following alternatives to the proposed Plan were considered and analyzed in detail:
No Project Alternative
Mixed-Use Corridor Alternative
Chapter 5 of this Draft EIR includes a complete discussion of these alternatives and of alternatives that were considered but not carried forward for detailed analysis.
2.4 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
Section 15123(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR identify issues to be resolved, including the choice among alternatives and whether or how to mitigate significant impacts. With regard to the proposed Plan, the major issues to be resolved include decisions by the City of Fresno, as Lead Agency, related to:
Whether this Draft EIR adequately describes the environmental impacts of the proposed Plan. Whether the benefits of the proposed Plan override those environmental impacts that cannot be feasibly avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance. Whether the proposed land use changes are compatible with the character of the existing area. Whether the identified goals, policies, or mitigation measures should be adopted or modified. Whether there are other mitigation measures that should be applied to the proposed Plan besides those Mitigation Measures identified in the Draft EIR.
Whether there are any alternatives to the proposed Plan that would substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the proposed Plan and achieve most of the basic objectives.
2.5 AREAS OF CONCERN
The City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) on February 28, 2017, and held a Scoping Meeting on March 1, 2017, to receive comments on the proposed Plan from interested agencies and members of the public. In addition to the comments received at the Scoping Meeting, the City received 10 comment letters from two State agencies, three local agencies, one Native American Tribe, one non-profit organization, and three members of the public during the public review period. A summary of the comments received at the Scoping Meeting and copies of the letters received are provided in Appendix A, Notice of Preparation and Scoping Comments, of this Draft EIR.
SOU THWEST FRESNO SPECIF IC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2-6 AUGUST 2017
The following is a discussion of issues that are likely to be of particular concern to agencies and interested members of the public during the environmental review process. While every concern applicable to the CEQA process is addressed in this Draft EIR, this list is not necessarily exhaustive, but rather attempts to capture those concerns that are likely to generate the greatest interest based on the input received during the NOP scoping process.
Groundwater/soil contamination
Traffic impacts in and around the Plan Area, including parking, transit access, and safe pedestrian and bicycle safety and connections
Affordable housing
Cultural resources
Eminent Domain
2.6 SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Under CEQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the proposed Plan, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance.
The proposed Plan has the potential to generate significant environmental impacts in a number of areas; however, as described in Chapter 6, CEQA-Mandated Assessment, of this Draft EIR, the proposed Plan would have no significant impact on the following environmental topics due to existing conditions in the Plan Area and the surrounding area. These issues have therefore not been analyzed further in this Draft EIR.
Forestry Resources
Mineral Resources
Table 2-1 presents a summary of the significant impacts and mitigation measures identified based on the conclusions of the environmental analysis in Chapters 4.1 through 4.15 of this Draft EIR. The table is arranged in four columns: 1) impact 2) significance without mitigation; 3) mitigation measures; and 4) significance with mitigation. For a complete description of potential impacts, please refer to the specific discussions Chapters 4.0 through 4.15.
As shown in Table 2-1, some significant impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level if the mitigation measures identified in this Draft EIR are adopted and implemented. However, pursuant to Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that an EIR describe any significant impacts that cannot be avoided, even with the implementation of feasible mitigation measures, as shown in Table 2-1, significant unavoidable impacts were identified in the areas of Aesthetics, Agriculture, Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, and Transportation and Traffic.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-7
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
AESTHETICS
AES-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
LTS N/A N/A
AES-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not substantially degrade the view from a scenic
highway, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings.
LTS N/A N/A
AES-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
LTS N/A N/A
AES-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area.
S MEIR AES‐1: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences.
MEIR AES‐2: Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low‐intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties.
MEIR AES‐3: Lighting systems for non‐residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low‐intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur.
MEIR AES‐4: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 foot‐ Lamberts (FT‐L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT‐L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater.
MEIR AES‐5: Materials used on building façades shall be non‐reflective.
SU
AES-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
result in an increase in glare.
S AES-5: Implement Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-5 of the MEIR. SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-8
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
AGRICULTURE
AG-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.
SU No mitigation measures available. SU
AG-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.
LTS N/A N/A
AG-3: Implementationof the proposed Plan would not
involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use.
LTS N/A N/A
AG-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would result in significant and
unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to
agriculture resources.
SU No mitigation measures available. SU
AIR QUALITY
AQ-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
result in the generation of substantial long-term
criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed the
SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds and would
therefore not be considered consistent with the
existing AQMPs.
S N/A SU
AQ-2: Construction activities associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed
the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
(SJVAPCD) regional significance thresholds for VOC
and NOX.
S AQ-2a: In order to contribute in minimizing exhaust emission from construction equipment, prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall provide a list of all construction equipment proposed to be used on the project site for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects). This list may be provided on the building plans. The construction equipment list shall state the SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-9
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
make, model, and equipment identification number of all the equipment.
AQ-2b: During construction activities, for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the construction contractors shall ensure that the equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations; and, that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter
9. AQ-2c: In order to reduce VOC emissions from construction activities, prior to issuance of a building permit for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the property owner/developer shall require the construction contractor and provide a note on construction plans indicating that:
All coatings and solvents will have a volatile organic compound (VOC) content lower than required under Rule 4601 (i.e., super compliant paints).
All architectural coatings shall be applied either by (1) using a highvolume, low-pressure spray method operated at an air pressure between
0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge to achieve a 65 percent application efficiency; or (2) manual application using a paintbrush, handroller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge, to achieve a 100 percent applicant efficiency.
The construction contractor shall also use precoated/natural colored building materials, where feasible.
AQ-3: Operation of development projects
accommodated under the proposed Plan would
generate emissions that would exceed the SJVAPCD
regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO,
PM10, and PM2.5.
S N/A SU
AQ-4: Development of land uses accommodated
under the proposed Plan could result in short- and
S AQ-4a: Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-2c to further reduce construction-related criteria air pollutant emissions.
SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-10
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
long-term emissions that could cause or contribute to
a violation of the AAQS. AQ-4b: In order to reduce fugitive dust particulate matter emissions during construction activities, prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), but that would be outside the purview of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Regulation VIII,the property owner/developer shall submit a dust control plan that includes, but not limited to the following measures during ground-disturbing activities to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions:
Disturbed areas (including storage piles) that are not being actively utilized for construction purposes shall be effectively stabilized using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or covered with a tarp or other suitable cover (e.g., revegetated).
On-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. Land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled utilizing application of water or by presoaking.
Material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained when materials are transported off-site.
Operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.) (Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
Following the addition of materials to or the removal of materials from the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-11
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than 1 percent. Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the project area.
Adhere to Regulation VIII’s 20 percent opacity limitation, as applicable.
AQ-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations.
LTS N/A N/A
AQ-6: New land uses accommodated under the
proposed Plan would not create objectionable odors
that could affect a substantial number of people.
LTS N/A N/A
AQ-7: Construction activities associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed
the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC
and NOX.
S AQ-7: Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-4b of the Draft EIR. SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-12
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1.1: Potential development resulting from the
proposed Plan could result in the loss of rare plant
species.
S MEIR BIO‐1.1a: Construction of a proposed project should avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special‐status species known to occur within the Plan Area. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special‐status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special‐status species. If a special‐status species are determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a listed species to the greatest extent feasible.
MEIR BIO‐1.1b: Direct or incidental take of any State- or federally-listed species should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resources agencies and/or additional permitting may be required. Agency consultation through the CDFW 2081 and USFWS Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis through agency consultation.
MEIR BIO‐1.1c: Development within the Plan Area should avoid, where possible, special‐status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special‐status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special‐status natural community or suitable habitat for special‐status species, compensatory habitat‐based mitigation is required under CEQA and CESA.
Mitigation will consist of preserving on‐site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off‐site credits from an approved mitigation bank. Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be agreed upon by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special‐status natural communities to a less than significant level. Agreed‐upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special‐status species. The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case‐by‐case basis.
LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-13
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
BIO-1.2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in mortality of Swainson’s hawks.
S BIO-1.2: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Swainson’s Hawk Nests and Implement Avoidance Measures. If trees suitable for Swainson’s hawk nesting are to be removed during the Swainson’s hawk nesting season (March through August), a qualified biologist knowledgeable of the species will conduct a Swainson’s hawk survey of the project site and the surrounding 0.5-mile-radius area, as described in the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000).
This methodology divides the nesting season into five survey periods: January 1 to March 20, March 20 to April 5, April 5 to May 20, May 21 to June 10, and June 10 to July 30. The first survey period occurs before most Swainson’s hawks return to California, so this survey is optional. The site should be surveyed at a minimum of 3 times in each of the two periods that precede project initiation.
If an active Swainson’s hawk nest is detected on the project site, CDFW will be consulted and site-specific avoidance or mitigation measures will be implemented consistent with CDFW recommendations (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000).
LTS
BIO-1.3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in mortality of San Joaquin kit fox.
S BIO -1.3: Implement Standard Measures for Protection of San Joaquin Kit Fox. No less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to commencement of construction activities the project proponent shall retain a USFWS- and CDFWapproved biologist to conduct pre‐construction surveys in potential habitat periphery of the Plan Area that has not been fragmented by agricultural-residential or urban development. The survey, reporting, and activities during construction shall adhere to the requirements contained in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance. As described in the standardized recommendations, if a natal/pupping den is discovered within the Plan Area or within 200-feet of the project boundary, the USFWS shall be immediately notified and under no circumstances should the den be disturbed or destroyed without prior authorization. If the preconstruction/preactivity survey reveals an active natal pupping or new information, the project applicant should contact the USFWS immediately to obtain the necessary take authorization/permit.
LTS
BIO-1.4: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in impacts to roosting habitat or maternity
colonies of special-status bats.
S BIO-1.4: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Special-status Bats and Implement Avoidance Measures. Any medium or larger (≥ 12-inch diameter) trees or snags selected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for presence of LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-14
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
potential day-roosting habitat (e.g., cavities exfoliating bark, or basal hollows) for special-status bats or a maternity colony. If feasible, cavities shall be examined for roosting bats using a portable camera probe or similar technology.
Buildings with potential for roosting habitat for supporting special-status bats or a maternity colony shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for evidence of roosting colonies. If suitable roosting habitat is present and/or bat sign is observed, but no bats are detected, an evening exit count and acoustic survey using a full spectrum acoustic detector shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist to determine if bats are present and what species are present. If present, roosts (including day roosts, winter hibernacula, and maternity colonies) and a 100- to 300-foot disturbance-free buffer surrounding each roost shall be flagged and avoided, as determined by a qualified bat biologist.
If avoidance is not possible, replacement habitat appropriate for the species’ roost requirements shall be created prior to the roost removal, and the roosting bats shall be passively evicted under the direction of a qualified biologist (as determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFG). The qualified biologist shall facilitate the removal of roosting bats outside of the winter hibernation (November 1 to February 28th) and maternity roosting (March 15 to August 31) periods through the following means:
1. Implementing eviction during a period of warm (nighttime low >50°F), dry weather, when bats are expected to be active.
2. Opening the roosting area to allow airflow through the cavity or building (air flow disturbance).
3. Waiting a minimum of three nights of warm weather, as defined above, for roosting bats to respond to air flow disturbance, thereby allowing bats to leave during nighttime hours when predation risk is relatively low and chances of finding a new roost is greater than in the daytime.
4. Conducting a follow-up survey prior to roost removal to ensure that bats have vacated the roost.
5. Disturbing roosts at dusk just prior to roost removal the same evening to allow bats to escape during nighttime hours.
BIO-1.5: Potential development resulting from the
proposed Plan could result in disruption of denning
S BIO-1.5. Conduct Focused American Badger Surveys and Avoid or Minimize Impacts to American Badger Dens. No more than 30 days before the start of construction LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-15
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
badgers and mortality of badgers. activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for American badgers within suitable habitat. If a potentially active den is found in a construction area, the den openings may be monitored with tracking medium or an infraredbeam camera for three consecutive nights to determine current use. Potential (inactive) dens within the limits of disturbance shall be blocked with a one-way door or excavated to prevent use during construction. Blocking with one-way doors is preferable to excavation where feasible; potential dens blocked with doors will be made available to badgers after construction. If American badgers or active dens are detected during these surveys, the following shall be implemented:
If present, occupied badger dens shall be flagged, and ground-disturbing activities avoided, within 50 feet of the occupied den during the nonbreeding season (1 July through 14 February). Flagging that is highly visible by construction crews shall encircle the occupied den at the appropriate buffer distance, and shall not prevent access to the den by badgers. Dens determined to be occupied during the breeding season (15 February through 30 June) shall be flagged, and ground-disturbing activities avoided, within 200 feet to protect adults and nursing young. Buffers may be modified by the qualified biologist, provided the badgers are protected, and shall not be removed until the qualified biologist has determined that the den is no longer in use.
If avoidance of an active non-maternity den is not feasible, badgers shall be relocated by first incrementally blocking the den over a three-day period, followed by slowly excavating the den (either by hand or with mechanized equipment under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist, removing no more than 4 inches at a time) before or after the rearing season (15 February through 30 June). Any passive relocation of American badgers shall occur only under the direction of a qualified biologist.
BIO-1.6: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in mortality of, and loss of habitat for,
burrowing owls.
S BIO-1.6: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Burrowing Owl and Implement Avoidance Measures. No more than 15 days before the start of ground-disturbing activities for the project, a qualified biologist(s) knowledgeable of the species will conduct a focused, preconstruction survey for burrowing owls and their sign on the project site and within 250 feet where access allows. In conformance with federal and State regulations regarding the protection of raptors, the survey will be conducted per the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. All areas of suitable habitat proposed for ground disturbance will be surveyed. If burrowing owls are LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-16
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
detected, buffers and mitigation per the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation will be implemented.
BIO-1.7: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in impacts to Western pond turtle nests and
mortality of pond turtles.
S BIO-1.7. Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for Western Pond Turtle, and Move Individuals to Safety. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist (i.e., a biologist approved by CDFW to handle western pond turtles) shall look for western pond turtles within 0.25-mile of aquatic and riparian habitat, where accessible. If any pond turtles are detected during these surveys, or during construction in an area where individuals could be affected, they shall be moved to a suitable location outside the area of impact. The candidate sites for relocation shall be identified before construction and shall be selected based on the size and type of habitat present, the potential for negative interactions with resident species, and the species’ range.
If any western pond turtle nests with eggs are found, the nests shall remain undisturbed until the eggs have hatched, if feasible. If avoidance of a nest is infeasible (e.g., if avoidance would result in an unacceptable delay in the project’s schedule), or if the eggs are discovered only after the nest has been affected, any viable eggs shall be relocated to a suitable location outside the impact area. Egg relocation areas shall be identified based on pond turtle nesting biology. Any viable eggs shall be deposited in a hole and buried for thermal protection.
LTS
BIO-1.8: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in take of birds or nests.
S MEIR BIO‐1.8. Proposed projects within the Plan Area should avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site.
If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre‐construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active.
Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor.
LTS
BIO-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
S MEIR BIO‐2.1a: If a proposed project will result in the removal or impact to any riparian habitat and/or a special‐status natural community with potential to occur in the Plan Area, compensatory habitat‐based mitigation shall be required to reduce LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-17
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
project impacts. Compensatory mitigation must involve the preservation or restoration or the purchase of off‐site mitigation credits for impacts to riparian habitat and/or a special‐status natural community. Mitigation must be conducted in‐kind or within an approved mitigation bank in the region. The specific mitigation ratio for habitat based mitigation will be determined through consultation with the appropriate agency (i.e., CDFW or USFWS) on a case‐by‐case basis.
MEIR BIO‐2.1b: Project impacts that occur to riparian habitat may also result in significant impacts to streambeds or waterways protected under Section 1600 of Fish and Wildlife Code and Section 404 of the CWA. CDFW and/or USACE consultation, determination of mitigation strategy, and regulatory permitting to reduce impacts, as required for projects that remove riparian habitat and/or alter a streambed or waterway, shall be implemented.
MEIR BIO‐2.1c: Project‐related impacts to riparian habitat or a special‐status natural community may result in direct or incidental impacts to special‐status species associated with riparian or wetland habitats. Project impacts to special‐status species associated with riparian habitat shall be mitigated through agency consultation, development of a mitigation strategy, and/or issuing incidental take permits for the specific special‐status species, as determined by the CDFW and/or USFWS.
BIO-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
result in loss of federally protected wetlands or
waters.
S MEIR BIO‐3a: If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to USACE accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts.
Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the Plan Area. Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland.
MEIR BIO‐3b: In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland. Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage and incorporating detention basins shall assist in LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-18
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
ensuring project‐related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible.
BIO-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
LTS N/A N/A
BIO-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance.
LTS N/A N/A
BIO-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State
habitat conservation plan.
LTS N/A N/A
BIO-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would result in less than
significant cumulative impacts with respect to
biological resources
LTS N/A N/A
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
of the CEQA Guidelines.
S MEIR CUL-1: If previously unknown cultural resources are encountered during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and an archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.
If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-19
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
archaeologist and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.
No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study.
CUL-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section
15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
S MEIR CUL-2: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for prehistoric archaeological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed.
If prehistoric resources are not found during either the field survey or a literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. If the resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study.
If prehistoric resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-20
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
resources shall be inventoried using appropriate State record forms and submit the forms to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. The resources shall be evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, measures shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include an archaeological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified archaeologist. If additional prehistoric archaeological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
CUL-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
have the potential to directly or indirectly affect a
unique paleontological resource or site, or unique
geologic feature.
S MEIR CUL-3: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed:
If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or a literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds. If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City‐approved institution LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-21
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
or person who is capable of providing long‐term preservation to allow future scientific study.
If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance.
If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.
In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include a paleontological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist. If additional paleontological/ geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
CUL-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
have the potential to disturb human remains,
including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
S MEIR CUL-4: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants’ preferences for treatment.
Applicable regulations and procedures described above, along with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-4, would ensure that any human remains discovered LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-22
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
during construction would be handled appropriately.
CUL-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
have the potential to impact TCRs the disturbance of
which could result in a significant impact under CEQA.
S CUL-5: Implement Fresno General Plan MEIR Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-4.
LTS
CUL-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in less than
significant cumulative impacts with respect to cultural resources.
LTS N/A N/A
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEO-1: Development under the proposed Plan would
not subject people or structures to hazards from
surface rupture of a known active fault.
NI N/A N/A
GEO-2: Ground shaking can be expected to occur
within the design lifetimes of buildings that would be
constructed under the proposed Plan. Such
developments would comply with building codes then
in effect. Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
subject people or structures to substantial hazards
from ground shaking.
LTS N/A N/A
GEO-3: Buildout of the proposed Plan would subject
people and structures to hazards from seismic-related
ground failure including liquefaction.
LTS N/A N/A
GEO-4: The Plan Area and surroundings are nearly
level, with a southwest slope of about 0.1 percent
grade. Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
subject people or structures to landslide hazards.
NI N/A N/A
GEO-5: Potential construction projects under the
proposed Plan would disturb and expose large
amounts of soil, thus dramatically increasing the
potential for soil erosion on-site. Construction
projects 1 acre or larger would be required to use
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-23
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize
erosion from the site.
GEO-6: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
subject people or structures to substantial hazards
from ground subsidence.
LTS N/A N/A
GEO-7: Shallow site soils are expected to be
compressible and unsuitable for supporting structures
for human occupancy. Implementation of the
proposed Plan could pose hazards to people and
structures arising from compressible soils.
LTS N/A N/A
GEO-8: Expansive soils may be present on-site, and
buildout of the proposed Plan could pose hazards to
people or structures arising from expansive soils.
LTS N/A N/A
GEO-9: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not add
land uses to the Plan Area relying on septic tanks or
other alternative wastewater disposal systems, and
thus would have no impact respecting soils incapable
of supporting such systems.
LTS N/A N/A
GEO-10: No significant cumulative impacts to geology
and soils are anticipated, and impacts of buildout of
the proposed Plan would not be cumulatively
considerable.
LTS N/A N/A
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GHG-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
result in a substantial increase in GHG emissions.
S GHG-1: Implement Mitigation Measure AQ-2b as follows.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2b: During construction activities, for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the construction contractors shall ensure that the equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations; and, that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9.
SU
GHG-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-24
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs).
GHG-3: GHG emissions associated with
implementation of the proposed Plan would
substantially cumulatively contribute to climate
change impacts.
S GHG-3: Implement Mitigation Measure AQ-2b. SU
HAZARDOUS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZ-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials.
LTS N/A N/A
HAZ-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not 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.
LTS N/A N/A
HAZ-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within ¼-mile of an existing or proposed school.
PS/LTS HAZ-3: Implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-4a through HAZ-4h, described later in the section under Impact HAZ-4, would reduce potential impacts to schools.
In addition, as stated in the discussions of Impacts HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations, procedures, and policies would avoid potential impacts associated with hazardous materials handling, use, and storage in the Plan Area. Compliance with these regulations, procedures, and policies would ensure that hazardous materials are properly handled, thereby reducing potential risks to nearby schools.
LTS
HAZ-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
occur 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, create a
potentially significant hazard to the public or the
environment.
PS HAZ-4a: 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 LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-25
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
recommendations for follow-up investigation, if found to be warranted.
HAZ-4b: 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.
In the event the findings and conclusions of the Phase II ESA reveal the presence of significant concentrations of hazardous materials warranting further investigation, the property owners and/or developers of properties shall ensure that site characterization shall be conducted in the form of additional Phase II ESAs in order to characterize the source and maximum extent of impacts from constituents of concern. The findings and conclusions of the site characterization shall become the basis for formation of a remedial action plan and/or risk assessment.
HAZ-4d: 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 Cal-EPA 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
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-26
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
materials shall be transported and disposed at a hazardous materials permitted facility.
HAZ-4e: 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 risk-based 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.
HAZ-4f: 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 HAZ4-4e).
HAZ-4g: 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
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-27
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
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).
The San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) 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.
HAZ-4h: 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, prior to importing to such a property.
HAZ-5: The proposed Plan would be located within
2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, but
would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Plan Area.
LTS N/A N/A
HAZ-6: For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, the proposed Plan would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Plan
Area.
NI N/A N/A
HAZ-7: The proposed Plan would not impair
implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan.
LTS N/A N/A
HAZ-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
NI N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-28
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands.
HAZ-9: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would result in less than
significant cumulative impacts with respect to hazards
and hazardous materials.
LTS N/A N/A
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
HYD-1: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
violate any water quality standards or discharge
requirements.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-2.1: Buildout of the proposed Plan would
increase water demands in the City, thus increasing
demands for groundwater.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-2.2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not substantially interfere with groundwater
recharge.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not substantially change the drainage pattern on and
surrounding the Plan Area, and would not cause
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not substantially change the drainage pattern on and
surrounding the Plan Area and would not cause
flooding on- or off-site.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-5: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
generate runoff exceeding the capacity of existing or
planned storm drainage systems, or generate a
substantial increase in polluted runoff
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-6: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
substantially degrade water quality.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-7: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not place
housing in a 100-year flood hazard area.
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-29
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
HYD-8: Buildout of the proposed Plan would not place
structures which would redirect flood flows within a
100-year flood zone.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-9: The Plan Area is not in dam inundation areas
or mapped as protected from 100-year floods by
levees. Buildout of the proposed Plan would not
expose people or structures to flood hazard due to
dam inundation.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-10: The Plan Area is not susceptible to flooding
due to seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Buildout of the
proposed Plan would not subject people or structures
to such flood hazards.
LTS N/A N/A
HYD-11: Buildout of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not cause significant
cumulative impacts to hydrology and water quality.
LTS N/A N/A
LAND USE AND PLANNING
LU-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
physically divide an established community.
LTS N/A N/A
LU-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect.
LTS N/A N/A
LU-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan
or natural community conservation plan.
LTS N/A N/A
LU-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in less than
significant cumulative impacts with respect to land
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-30
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
use and planning.
NOISE
NOISE-1: Development in accordance with the
proposed Plan would cause increases in traffic along
local roadways of more than 3 dBA over existing
conditions.
SU/LTS N/A SU/LTS
NOISE-2: Construction activities could result in
vibration-induced architectural damage at nearby
structures or hardscape features, or could result in
vibration-induced annoyance at nearby sensitive
receptors.
PS NOISE-2a: Prior to issuance of grading and construction permits, applicants for individual development projects that involve vibration-intensive construction activities—such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers—within 50 feet of off-site structures, shall prepare and submit to the City of Fresno an acoustical study to evaluate potential construction-related vibration damage impacts. The vibration assessment shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer and be based on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibration-induced architectural damage criterion. If the acoustical study determines a potential exceedance of the FTA thresholds, measures shall be identified that ensure vibration levels are reduced to below the thresholds. Measures to reduce vibration levels can include use of less-vibration-intensive equipment (e.g., drilled piles and static rollers) and/or construction techniques (e.g., non-explosive rock blasting and use of hand tools) and preparation of a pre-construction survey report to assess the condition of the affected sensitive structure. Identified measures shall be included on all construction and building documents and submitted for verification to the City.
NOISE-2b: Prior to issuance of grading and construction permits, applicants for individual development projects that involve vibration-intensive construction activities—such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers—within 100 feet of sensitive receptors (e.g., residences and schools) shall prepare and submit to the City of Fresno an acoustical study to evaluate potential construction-related vibration annoyance impacts. The study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer and shall identify measures to reduce impacts to habitable structures to below the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) vibration-induced annoyance criterion. If construction-related vibration is determined in the acoustical study to be perceptible at vibration-sensitive uses, additional requirements, such as use of less-vibration-intensive equipment or construction techniques, shall be LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-31
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
implemented during construction (e.g., drilled piles, static rollers, and non-explosive rock blasting). Identified measures shall be included on all construction and building documents and submitted for verification to the City.
NOISE-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the Plan Area above
levels existing without the proposed Plan.
S N/A SU
NOISE-4: Construction activities would result in
temporary noise increases in the vicinity of the Plan
Area.
PS NOISE-4a: As required by the City of Fresno Municipal Code, construction activity shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays, and shall require a permit issued by the City.
NOISE-4b: Prior to the issuance of demolition, grading, and/or construction permits, applicants for individual development projects within 500 feet of noise-sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, hospitals, schools) shall conduct a project-level construction noise analysis to evaluate potential impacts on sensitive receptors. The analysis shall be conducted once the final construction equipment list that will be used for demolition and grading activities is determined. The project-level noise analysis shall be prepared, reviewed, and approved by the City of Fresno Community Development Director. If the analysis determines that demolition and construction activities would result in an impact to identified noise-sensitive receptors, then specific measures to attenuate the noise impact shall be outlined in the analysis and reviewed and approved by the City of Fresno Community Development Director. Specific measures may include, but are not limited to, the following best management practices:
Post a construction site notice near the construction site access point or in an area that is clearly visible to the public. The notice shall include the following: job site address; permit number, name, and phone number of the contractor and owner; dates and duration of construction activities; construction hours allowed; and the City of Fresno Community Development Director and construction contractor phone numbers where noise complaints can be reported and logged. Consider the installation of temporary sound barriers for construction activities immediately adjacent to occupied noise-sensitive structures. Restrict haul routes and construction-related traffic to the least noise-sensitive times of the day.
SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-32
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Reduce non-essential idling of construction equipment to no more than five minutes.
Ensure that all construction equipment is monitored and properly maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to minimize noise. Fit all construction equipment with properly-operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds, no less effective than as originally equipped by the manufacturer, to minimize noise emissions.
If construction equipment is equipped with back-up alarm shut offs, switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters, as feasible. Stationary equipment (such as generators and air compressors) and equipment maintenance and staging areas shall be located as far from existing noisesensitive land uses, as feasible. To the extent feasible, use acoustic enclosures, shields, or shrouds for stationary equipment such as compressors and pumps.
Shut off generators when generators are not needed.
Coordinate deliveries to reduce the potential of trucks waiting to unload and idling for long periods of time.
Grade surface irregularities on construction sites to prevent potholes from causing vehicular noise.
Minimize the use of impact devices such as jackhammers, pavement breakers, and hoe rams. Where possible, use concrete crushers or pavement saws rather than hoe rams for tasks such as concrete or asphalt demolition and removal.
The final noise-reduction measures to be implemented and their associated details shall be determined by the construction-level noise analysis. The final noisereduction measures shall be included on all construction and building documents and/or construction management plans and submitted for verification to the City; implemented by the construction contractor through the duration of the construction phase; and discussed at the pre-demolition, -grade, and/or - construction meetings.
NOISE-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not cause exposure of people residing or working in
the vicinity of the study area to excessive aircraft
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-33
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
noise levels, for a project located within an airport
land use plan, or where such a plan has not been
adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public
use airport.
NOISE-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not cause exposure of people residing or working in
the Plan Area to excessive noise levels, for a project
within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
LTS N/A N/A
NOISE-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would result in significant
cumulative impacts with respect to noise.
SU/LTS/PS N/A SU/LTS
POPULATION AND HOUSING
POP-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not induce substantial 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).
LTS N/A N/A
POP-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.
LTS N/A N/A
POP-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.
LTS N/A N/A
POP-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in less than
significant cumulative impacts with respect to
population and housing.
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-34
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
PS-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of or need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for fire protection, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in significant
cumulative impacts with respect to fire protection
service.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of or need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for police protection,
the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in significant
cumulative impacts with respect to police protection
services.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of or need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for schools, the
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-35
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts.
PS-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in significant
cumulative impacts with respect to schools.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of or need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for parks, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts.
S PS-7: As new development occurs in the Plan Area, the City shall periodically (every 5 years) monitor residential population growth compared to development of new parklands for the purpose of evaluating the strength of this Plan to meet the ratio of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 population. If the ratio is not met, the City shall explore additional ways to increase the amount of dedicated parkland in the Plan Area, including but not limited to designating additional lands for parkland development.
LTS
PS-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
contribute to cumulative parks and recreation impacts
in the area.
LTS PS-8: Implement Mitigation Measure PS-7. LTS
PS-9: Implementation of the proposed Plan would not
increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-10: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of or need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for libraries, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts.
LTS N/A N/A
PS-11: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not contribute to cumulative library impacts in the
area.
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-36
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TRANS-1: The proposed Plan would not conflict with
an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the performance of the
circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation, including mass transit, non-motorized
travel, and relevant components of the circulation
system, including, but not limited to, intersections,
streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and
bicycle paths, and mass transit.
LTS N/A N/A
TRANS-2: The proposed Plan would not conflict with
an applicable congestion management program,
including, but not limited to, level of service
standards, travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways.
LTS N/A N/A
TRANS-3: The proposed Plan would not result in a
change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
LTS N/A N/A
TRANS-4: The proposed Plan would not increase
hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment).
LTS N/A N/A
TRANS-5: The proposed Plan would not result in
inadequate emergency access.
LTS N/A N/A
TRANS-6: The proposed Plan would not conflict with
adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
LTS N/A N/A
TRANS-7.1: The addition of proposed Plan traffic to
the roadway network, in combination with traffic
S TRANS-7.1: Provide transportation improvements consistent with General Plan Policy MT-1-j in the Plan Area that would encourage non-vehicular transportation LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-37
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
generated by reasonably foreseeable projects, results
in unacceptable roadway operations on City of Fresno
study roadway segments under cumulative
conditions.
and reduce auto traffic levels. These improvements shall be consistent with the goals and policies in the proposed Plan, which require the implementation of complete streets, bikeways, trails, sidewalks, and enhanced transit service to support transit use, biking, and walking as viable modes of travel. By supporting and encouraging these non-auto modes in lieu of auto travel, future traffic levels would be reduced.
The City of Fresno shall also apply General Plan Policy MT-1-o, which allows LOS E or F conditions outside of identified multimodal districts if provisions are made to sufficiently improve the overall transportation system and promote non-vehicular transportation. With the application of General Plan policy MT-1-o, the LOS F conditions on Church Avenue and LOS E conditions on North Avenue would be considered acceptable.
TRANS-7.2: The addition of project traffic to the
roadway network, in combination with traffic
generated by reasonably foreseeable projects, results
in unacceptable intersection operations at Caltrans
study intersections.
S TRANS-7.2: Development within the proposed Plan shall pay its regional transportation mitigation fee (RTMF) towards funding improvements to the regional highways and streets system. The City of Fresno shall coordinate with Caltrans and the Fresno Council of Governments to recommend the following intersection and ramp improvements at the SR-99/Jensen Avenue interchange and SR-41/North Avenue interchange be incorporated into the RTMF program and any applicable future City of Fresno fee update applicable to roadway facilities and/or traffic signals:
SR-99 Southbound Off-Ramp/Jensen Avenue intersection:
- Widen the SR-99 southbound off-ramp to add an additional left-turn pocket. - Restripe the existing shared through-left turn lane on the SR-99 southbound off-ramp as a dedicated through lane.
- The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: two left-turn lanes, one through lane, and one right-turn lane.
- Add an overlap phase for the northbound right-turn movement. - Prohibit westbound U-turn movement to allow the northbound right-turn overlap.
- Widen the eastbound approach to stripe a third through lane; add a third receiving lane on the east leg that traps into the SR-99 southbound on-ramp. SR-99 Northbound Off-Ramp/Jensen Avenue intersection:
- Change the lane configurations on the northbound off-ramp to a dedicated left-turn pocket and shared through-right turn lane.
SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-38
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
- Add an overlap phase for the southbound right-turn movement. - Prohibit eastbound U-turn movement to allow the southbound right-turn overlap.
- Widen the westbound approach to stripe a third through lane; add a third receiving lane on the west leg that traps into the SR-99 northbound on-ramp. - Change the phasing for the northbound and southbound approaches to protected left-turn movements and separate.
SR-41 Southbound Off-Ramp/North Avenue intersection:
- Widen the SR-41 southbound off-ramp to add a left-turn pocket. - Change the lane configurations on the southbound off-ramp to convert the existing shared through-left turn lane to a shared right turn-through-left turn lane.
- Extend the right-turn pocket on the off-ramp to accommodate right-turn queue length shown in Table 4.14-16.
- The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: one left-turn lane, one shared right turn-through-left turn lane, and one right-turn lane. - Widen the eastbound approach to add a third through lane that traps into the eastbound left-turn onto the SR-41 northbound on-ramp.
In addition to addressing intersection operations, the changes identified above also address freeway off-ramp queuing impacts identified in Impact TRANS-7.3 below.
With the implementation of the changes listed above, the operations at these three intersections would be improved to LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours, as shown in Table 4.14-16 below (refer to Appendix H for calculations).
While these changes would improve traffic operations to an acceptable LOS, these improvements require alterations to signals operated by Caltrans as well as physical expansion of intersections and ramps that are under Caltrans jurisdiction. Since these improvements are not within the City of Fresno’s jurisdiction to control, it cannot be guaranteed that these improvements will be implemented.
In addition to the three intersections at the SR-99/Jensen Avenue and SR-41/North Avenue interchanges that operate at LOS E or LOS F under cumulative conditions, the following improvements would address unacceptable LOS E operations at the SR-99/Fresno Street interchange:
SR-99 Southbound Ramps/Fresno Street intersection:
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-39
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
- Widen the SR-99 southbound frontage road to add an additional right-turn pocket.
- Restripe the existing through lane as a shared through-left turn lane on the SR-99 southbound off-ramp.
- The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: one left-turn lane, one shared through left-turn lane, and two right-turn lanes. SR-99 Northbound Ramps/Fresno Street intersection:
- Add a through lane to the westbound approach on Fresno Street that traps into the left-turn onto the SR-99 southbound on-ramp.
- Adding the third through lane on Fresno Street would require removing the existing raised median and prohibiting eastbound left-turns at the Fresno Street/E Street intersection.
With the implementation of the changes listed above, the operations at these two intersections would be improved to LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours, as shown in Table 4.14-17 below (refer to Appendix H for calculations).
While the intersection and ramp changes at the SR-99/Fresno Street interchange would improve intersection LOS, physical constraints on the SR-99 southbound frontage road would make the proposed widening of the southbound approach infeasible.
TRANS-7.3: The addition of proposed Plan traffic to
the roadway network in combination with traffic
generated by reasonably foreseeable projects results
in freeway off-ramp queues that extend back onto the
freeway mainline.
S TRANS-7.3: Development within the proposed Plan shall pay its regional transportation mitigation fee (RTMF) towards funding improvements to the regional highways and streets system. In addition to the recommended improvements listed in Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2, the City of Fresno shall coordinate with Caltrans and the Fresno Council of Governments to recommend the following intersection and ramp improvements at the SR-41/Jensen Avenue interchange be incorporated into the RTMF program and any applicable future City of Fresno fee update applicable to roadway facilities and/or traffic signals:
SR-41 Southbound Off-Ramp/Jensen Avenue intersection:
- Change the existing shared left-right turn lane on the SR-41 southbound offramp as a dedicated right-turn lane SR-99 southbound off-ramp - The resulting lane configuration on the southbound off-ramp is: one left-turn lane and two right-turn lanes
- Add a southbound right-turn phase to run concurrently with the eastbound SU
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-40
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
through phase by taking green time from the westbound through phase The implementation of the changes to the SR-41 southbound off-ramp at Jensen Avenue listed above would reduce queuing on the SR-41 southbound off-ramp.
These changes in combination with the improvements to the SR-99/Jensen Avenue, SR-41/North Avenue, and SR-99/Fresno Street interchange listed in Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2, would reduce freeway off-ramp queuing under cumulative conditions.
Table 4.14-18 in Chapter 4.14 presents the estimated freeway off-ramp queues with the improvements presented in Mitigation Measure TRANS-7.2 and TRANS-7.3 (refer to Appendix H for calculations). While these changes would reduce the 95th percentile queues on freeway off-ramps to within the available storage on the offramp, these improvements require alterations to signals operated by Caltrans as well as physical expansion of intersections and ramps that are under Caltrans jurisdiction. Since these improvements are not within the City of Fresno’s jurisdiction to control, it cannot be guaranteed that these improvements will be implemented.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
UTIL-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board.
S MEIR USS-1: The City shall develop and implement a wastewater master plan update.
MEIR USS-2: Prior to exceeding existing wastewater treatment capacity, the City shall evaluate the wastewater system and shall not approve additional development that contributes wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility that could exceed capacity until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the City shall construct the following improvements.
Construct an approximately 70 MGD expansion of the Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
Construct an approximately 0.49 MGD expansion of the North Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
MEIR USS-3: Prior to exceeding existing wastewater treatment capacity, the City shall evaluate the wastewater system and shall not approve additional development LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-41
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
that contributes wastewater to the wastewater treatment facility that could exceed capacity until additional capacity is provided. After approximately the year 2025, the City shall construct the following improvements.
Construct an approximately 24 MGD Wastewater Treatment Facility within the Southeast Development Area and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
Construct an approximately 9.6 MGD expansion of the Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility and obtain revised waste discharge permits as the generation of wastewater is increased.
UTIL-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
require or result in the construction of new
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects.
S MEIR USS-4: A Traffic Control/Traffic Management Plan to address traffic impacts during construction of water and sewer facilities shall be prepared and implemented subject to approval by the City prior to construction. The plan shall identify hours of construction and for deliveries, include haul routes, identify access and parking restrictions, plan for notifications, identify pavement markings and signage, and plan for coordination with emergency service providers and schools.
MEIR USS-5: Prior to exceeding existing water supply capacity, the City shall evaluate the water supply system and shall not approve additional development that demand additional water until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the following capacity improvements shall be provided.
Construct an approximately 80 million gallon per day (MGD) surface water treatment facility near the intersection of Armstrong and Olive Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the City of Fresno Metropolitan Water Resources Management Plan Update Phase 2 Report, January 2012 (2012 Metro Plan Update).
Construct an approximately 30 MGD expansion of the existing northeast surface water treatment facility for a total capacity of 60 MGD, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update. Construct an approximately 20 MGD surface water treatment facility in the southwest portion of the City, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐ 1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
MEIR USS-6: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing wastewater collection system facilities, the City shall evaluate the wastewater collection system and shall LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-42
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
not approve additional development that would generate additional wastewater and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided. By approximately the year 2025, the following capacity improvements shall be provided.
Orange Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Dakota and Jensen Avenues. Approximately 37,240 feet of new sewer main shall be installed and approximately 5,760 feet of existing sewer main shall be rehabilitated. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 27‐inches to 42‐inches in diameter.
The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are RS03A, RL02, C01‐REP, C02‐REP, C03‐REP, C04‐REP, C05‐REP, C06‐REL and C07‐ REP.
Marks Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Clinton Avenue and Kearney Boulevard. Approximately 12,150 feet of new sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 33‐ inches to 60‐inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CM1‐ REP and CM2‐REP.
North Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Polk and Fruit Avenues and also between Orange and Maple Avenues. Approximately 25,700 feet of new sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 48‐inches to 66‐ inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CN1‐REL1 and CN3‐REL1. Ashlan Avenue Trunk Sewer: This facility shall be improved between Hughes and West Avenues and also between Fruit and Blackstone Avenues. Approximately 9,260 feet of new sewer main shall be installed. The size of the new sewer main shall range from 24‐inches to 36‐inches in diameter. The associated project designations in the 2006 Wastewater Master Plan are CA1‐REL and CA2‐REP.
MEIR USS-7: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing 28 pipeline segment shown on Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix J-1 of the Fresno General Plan MEIR, the City shall evaluate the wastewater collection system and shall not approve additional development that would generate additional wastewater and exceed the capacity of one of the 28 pipeline segments until additional capacity is provided.
MEIR USS-8: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing water conveyance facilities, the City shall evaluate the water conveyance system and shall not approve
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-43
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
additional development that would demand additional water and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided. The following capacity improvements shall be provided by approximately 2025.
Construct 65 new groundwater wells, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐ 1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct a 2.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T2) near the intersection of Clovis and California Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct a 3.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T3) near the intersection of Temperance and Dakota Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct a 3.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T4) in the Downtown Planning Area, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T5) near the intersection of Ashlan and Chestnut Avenues, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (Reservoir T6) near the intersection of Ashlan Avenue and Highway 99, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct 50.3 miles of regional water transmission mains ranging in size from 24‐inch to 48‐inch, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
Construct 95.9 miles of 16‐inch transmission grid mains, in accordance with Chapter 9 and Figure 9‐1 of the 2012 Metro Plan Update.
MEIR USS-9: Prior to exceeding capacity within the existing water conveyance facilities, the City shall evaluate the water conveyance system and shall not approve additional development that would demand additional water and exceed the capacity of a facility until additional capacity is provided. The following capacity improvements shall be provided after approximately the year 2025 and additional water conveyance facilities shall be provided prior to exceedance of capacity within the water conveyance facilities to accommodate full buildout of the General Plan Update.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-44
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (SEDA Reservoir 1) within the northern part of the Southeast Development Area.
Construct a 4.0 million gallon potable water reservoir (SEDA Reservoir 2) within the southern part of the Southeast Development Area. Additional water conveyance facilities shall be provided prior to exceedance of capacity within the water conveyance facilities to accommodate full buildout of the General Plan Update.
UTIL-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
proposed Plan that it has adequate capacity to serve
the proposed Plan’s projected demand in addition to
the provider’s baseline commitments.
S UTIL-3: Implement MEIR Mitigation Measures USS-1 through USS-3. LTS UTIL-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would result in a significant
cumulative impacts with respect to wastewater.
S UTIL-4: Implement MEIR Mitigation Measures USS-1 through USS-9. LTS UTIL-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
baseline facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-6: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the proposed Plan from baseline entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-7: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would/would not result in
significant cumulative impacts with respect to water
supply.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-8: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not require or result in the construction of new
LTS N/A N/A
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-45
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
reclaimed water treatment facilities or expansion of
baseline facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects.
UTIL-9: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
have sufficient reclaimed water supplies available to
serve the proposed Plan from baseline entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-10: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would/would not result in a
significant cumulative impacts with respect to
reclaimed water supply.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-11: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not exceed NPDES stormwater discharge
requirements or applicable standards of the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-12: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not require or result in the construction of new
stormwater treatment facilities or expansion of
baseline facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-13: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
result in a determination by the stormwater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
Plan Area that it has adequate capacity to serve the
proposed Plan’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s baseline commitments.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-14: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would not result in a significant cumulative impacts with respect to stormwater.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-15: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
S MEIR USS-22: Prior to exceeding landfill capacity, the City shall evaluate additional landfill locations and shall not approve additional development that could LTS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN D RAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NI = No Impact LTS = Less Than Significant S = Significant SU = Significant Unavoidable Impact PLACEWORKS 2-46
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact
Significance
Without
Mitigation Mitigation Measures
Significance
With
Mitigation
capacity to accommodate the proposed Plan’s solid
waste disposal needs.
contribute solid waste to a landfill that is at capacity until additional capacity is provided.
UTIL-16: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
comply with federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-17: Implementation of the proposed Plan in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects would not be served by a landfill
with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the proposed Plan’s solid waste disposal needs.
S MEIR USS-22: Prior to exceeding landfill capacity, the City shall evaluate additional landfill locations and shall not approve additional development that could contribute solid waste to a landfill that is at capacity until additional capacity is provided.
LTS
UTIL-18: Implementation of the proposed Plan would
not result in a substantial increase in natural gas and electrical service demands, would use appropriate
energy conservation and efficiency measures, and
would not require new energy supply facilities and
distribution infrastructure or capacity enhancing
alterations to baseline facilities.
LTS N/A N/A
UTIL-19: Implementation of the proposed Plan, in
combination with past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable projects, would result in less than
significant cumulative impacts with respect to energy
conservation.
LTS N/A N/A
PLACEWORKS 3-1
3. Project Description
This chapter of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describes the proposed Southwest Fresno Specific Plan (referred to as the “proposed Plan”). The proposed Plan would guide future development in the Plan Area.
3.1 INTENDED USES OF THE EIR
This EIR is intended to disclose and assess potential environmental impacts associated with the adoption and implementation of the proposed Plan and associated General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendments.
As a programmatic-level review, this EIR does not evaluate the impacts of other future specific, individual developments that may be allowed under implementation of the proposed Plan. Future projects or phases may require additional, project-specific environmental analysis, as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to secure the necessary discretionary development permits. Therefore, while subsequent environmental review may be tiered off this EIR, this EIR may not address impacts of future individual projects. Subsequent projects will be reviewed by the City for consistency with the General Plan, Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and this EIR, and subsequent project-level environmental review will be conducted if required by CEQA. Projects successive to this EIR may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Approval and funding of major public projects and capital improvements. Issuance of permits and other approvals necessary for implementation of the proposed Plan Development plan approvals, such as tentative maps, variances, conditional use permits, and other land use permits.
Permit issuances and other approvals necessary for public and private development projects. Development agreement processes and approvals.
See Chapter 1, Introduction, Section 1.3, Type of EIR, of this Draft EIR for a detailed discussion on the environmental review applied in this EIR, and the conditions that must apply in order to determine whether additional environmental analysis would be necessary for a future project under the proposed Plan.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-2 AUGUST 2017
3.2 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED PLAN
The purpose of a specific plan is to develop policies, programs, regulations, and guidelines to implement the jurisdiction’s adopted General Plan. A specific plan effectively establishes a link between implementing policies of the General Plan and the individual development proposals in a defined area. The proposed Plan implements the goals and policies set forth in the City of Fresno General Plan (Fresno General Plan) by building upon its concepts for the Southwest Development Area. The proposed Plan also includes ideas and measures that have been extensively tailored and reviewed by the Southwest Fresno community and stakeholders, including a Steering Committee. The Committee was comprised of a representative crosssection of community leaders and stakeholders and participated in each critical decision during the planning process, along with City staff.1
The proposed Plan provides guiding principles, policies, development criteria, and implementation strategies to coordinate private development and public improvements given the unique opportunities and characteristics of this important part of the City of Fresno. The proposed Plan is included as Appendix B of this Draft EIR.
3.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.2.1.1 PLAN AREA LOCATION
The area addressed by the proposed Plan lies within the southwestern most part of the City of Fresno, as shown in Figure 3-1, Regional Location Map. The Specific Plan Area (Plan Area) is approximately 3,255 acres, bounded by Highway 180 in the north and by Highway 41 in the east. It does not include the Downtown Neighborhoods Community Plan Area, nor does it include (with one exception) the land currently in Fresno County that is within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City’s General Plan, but not yet within the City limits. The county land in the SOI is expected to be considered by the City of Fresno City Council and LAFCo. However, as shown in Figure 3-2, Plan Area Map, there is one area in the SOI that is part of the Plan Area: the Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard (MLK) Activity Center, identified as one of the “Magnet Cores” in the proposed Plan. The MLK Activity Center was identified in the Fresno General Plan as a higher density neighborhood district that would serve the Southwest Development Area, established neighborhoods in Southwest Fresno, and areas beyond Southwest Fresno and the city.
Although the MLK Activity Center is currently located on SOI land, it was included into the Plan Area because of its proximity to the Plan Area and its role in providing retail and services to the Southwest Fresno community.
3.2.1.2 EXISTING USES
Land within the Plan Area is not clearly organized into distinct uses or patterns. Instead, there is a mixture of industrial, agricultural, commercial, and residential land uses throughout the Plan Area. Properties located at the eastern end of the Plan Area carry over the largely residential land use pattern found in
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-3
Downtown, west of Highway 99. The pattern transitions into land that is designated for agricultural uses towards the western end of the Plan Area, closer to land outside the City limit within the City’s SOI and County-owned land. Pockets of commercial and employment uses are scattered throughout the Plan Area and SOI. Industrial uses, such as Foster Poultry Farms, are located immediately adjacent to, or enclosed by, residential neighborhoods, which have led to incompatible uses and noise and air quality concerns.
Additionally, there are large areas of vacant lands across the Plan Area.
FRESNO
CLOVIS
SANGER
PARLIER
REEDLEY
ORANGE
COVE
FOWLER
SELMA
SIERRA
NATIONAL
FOREST
PINE FLAT LAKE
MILLERTON LAKE
MADERA
COUNTY
TULARE
COUNTY
41 41
168
41 99
41 99
180
99 43
168
180
180
180
145
KERMAN
FRESNO-CLOVIS
REGIONAL WASTEWATER
RECLAMATION
FACILITY
0 1.5 3 Miles
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan Area
Figure 1 Regional Location Map
FRESNO
CLOVIS
SANGER
PARLIER
REEDLEY
FOWLER
SELMA
MILLERTON LAKE
MADERA
COUNTY
TU
CO
41 41
168
41 99
41 99
180
99 43
168
180
145
KERMAN
FRESNO-CLOVIS
REGIONAL
WASTEWATER
RECLAMATION
FACILITY
0 1.5 3 Miles
Southwest Fresno Specific Plan Area
Figure 1 Regional Location Map Source: PlaceWorks, 2017.
Figure 3-1
Regional Location Map
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS
Source: PlaceWorks, 2017.
Figure 3-2
Plan Area Map
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-6 AUGUST 2017
Adopted in December 2014, the City’s General Plan devotes much attention to the Plan Area and calls for a more cohesive land use pattern. The central theme for the Plan Area is to achieve what the General Plan defines as Complete Neighborhoods; in essence, neighborhoods that are self-sufficient, interconnected by multi-modal transit, and walkable. Planned land uses are envisioned to support new medium- and medium-low-density residential development adjacent to existing residential uses. New development is anticipated to be characterized as infill, served by local streets, centered by parks, a mix of housing types, and schools in order to encourage and incentivize, through policies and development regulations, building a network of Complete Neighborhoods. Major streets such as California Avenue are intended to support future expansion of the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and include Complete Street systems that will accommodate mixed use development located along the routes.
As described above, the existing land use pattern of the Plan Area can be characterized as a patchwork of residential, vacant, agriculture, commercial, and industrial uses. Overall, the proposed Plan would enhance the connectivity of existing land uses both within the Plan Area and to adjacent areas of the city through implementation of land use designations that center on two key ideas: 1) create unique, selfsustaining neighborhoods that provide residents with day-to-day services, and 2) create strong commercial arteries with a healthy street network that feeds into neighborhoods. For example, roadways would be improved for vehicular as well as pedestrian and bicycle access, while transit would be located on routes near residential areas and provide access to desired destinations, such as employment and services. Future commercial and residential development under the proposed Plan would be sited along improved roadways in a manner that connects the Plan Area to adjacent areas. For example, housing would be located close to amenities such as parks, schools, transit, services, retail and employment in the adjacent downtown.
3.2.1.3 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Based on the City’s Citywide Development Code Chapter of the Municipal Code (Chapter 15 of the Municipal Code), the Plan Area falls within the following zoning districts:
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)
Neighborhood Mixed-Use (NMX)
Corridor/Center Mixed-Use (CMX)
Commercial - Community (CC)
Commercial - Regional (CR)
Office (O)
Office Restricted (O-No Auto)
Office* (O*)
Open Space (OS)
Parks and Recreation (PR)
Public and Institutional (PI)
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-7
3.2.2 CONTENTS OF THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN
The proposed Plan is organized into the following eight chapters. A set of objectives and implementing policies are provided in each relevant chapter. The Plan’s chapters are as follows:
Plan Introduction. This chapter defines a Specific Plan and explains its purpose, provides a brief narrative about Southwest Fresno’s history and its context, explains the proposed Plan’s relationship to previous and future planning efforts, and provides a summary of the planning process and outreach efforts. This chapter also describes the existing conditions of community environmental health related to physical health, community design, and the natural environment in Southwest Fresno, providing a snapshot of the regulatory framework, existing health conditions, and key issues that impact quality of life. The community environmental health section also calls out specific chapters in the Plan that address and strive to improve these existing health issues. Vision. This chapter describes the visioning process that culminated into the development of the Plan’s conceptual vision and land use map. Guiding principles for various topics, including housing, retail, parks and open space, jobs and economic development, transportation, and industrial compatibility, helped shape the Plan’s vision.
Land Use. This chapter describes the land uses that make up the Plan Area. It also provides the anticipated development capacity from these land uses over the 25-year horizon of the proposed Plan for new single-family and higher-density housing units, retail, office, parks, schools, and other public facilities.
Development Regulations. This chapter notes where zoning in the Plan Area differs from the Citywide Development Code. It provides development and design standards for the Kearney Boulevard Historic Overlay and the California Avenue Mixed-Use Corridor Overlay. It describes the objectives of three special corridors, two magnet cores, and complete neighborhood nodes. And finally, it includes a section on Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). Transportation. This chapter describes improvements for pedestrian, transit, auto, truck, and bicycle circulation throughout the area and to adjacent neighborhoods, including Downtown, the Fresno Area Express (FAX) bus terminal, and the future High-Speed Rail (HSR) station. The chapter also provides complete streets design standards that will promote walkability and livability in the Plan Area. Public Facilities. This chapter describes the existing context for public facilities within the Plan Area and identifies the Plan’s proposed public facility improvements. Public facilities include existing parks, new parks, new K to 12 schools within complete neighborhoods, and a new community college within the MLK Activity Center.
Utilities. This chapter summarizes utility infrastructure needs in the Plan Area for wet utilities such as water supply, wastewater, storm system, and recycled water use, as well as dry utilities such as electrical, fiber optic and gas systems.
Implementation. The final chapter outlines a strategy to implement the Plan’s vision, which includes identifying the public improvements, responsible parties, and funding sources necessary to implement the Plan. The chapter also addresses specific strategies for economic development,
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-8 AUGUST 2017
including homeownership, business development, education, training, and retail anchor tenant recruitment.
3.2.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROPOSED PLAN
Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15124, the EIR must identify the objectives of the project. The stated objectives of this proposed Plan are to:
Create a healthy community that offers a positive physical, social, natural and economic environment to support the health and wellbeing of all its members. Attract high quality new development while protecting existing neighborhoods. Provide a mix of high quality housing types, with an emphasis on single-family housing that is compatible with community character and located close to amenities such as parks, schools, transit, services, shopping and employment.
Attract needed retail, such as department stores, restaurants, and grocery stores, in order to serve resident needs with fewer, shorter vehicle trips.
Provide quality open space and recreational opportunities by improving existing parks and creating new parks within walking distance (1/2 mile radius) of all residences. Increase economic and educational opportunity through programs, services and facilities to prepare, mentor and train Southwest Fresno residents to access high quality employment opportunities. Enhance transportation connectivity both within Southwest Fresno and between Southwest Fresno and other Fresno neighborhoods in order to provide more access to economic, social, and educational opportunities.
Improve the quality of life in Southwest Fresno through high quality investment, compatible land uses, increased park and recreational opportunities and a multi-modal and connected transportation system.
3.2.4 PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN
3.2.4.1 BUILDOUT OF THE PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN
As noted above, the proposed Plan is included in Appendix B of this Draft EIR. Development capacity numbers were calculated using the General Plan’s dwelling unit per acre (du/acre) and floor area ratio (FAR) capacity factors. The General Plan’s development capacity numbers are also shown in Table 3-1 for comparison.
Table 3-1 contains the development capacity of the land uses proposed in the Plan Area over the proposed Plan’s 25-year timeframe. It should be noted that, like the General Plan, the development capacities are for new development and only take into account the development of parcels that have higher opportunities for development, such as parcels that are vacant, open agriculture, or rural residential (partially vacant). In order to provide a conservative analysis as required by CEQA, this Draft EIR assumes a more intense scenario for development capacity under the proposed Plan, unless specifically
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-9
noted otherwise. Known as the Dual Designation Scenario, it assumes the dual land uses discussed in Chapter 3 and shown on Figure 3-3 of the May 2017 draft Southwest Fresno Specific Plan. 2 The dual land
use designation is applied to all land designated as new parks, open space and public facility so that if the facility is not needed, alternative private or public development consistent with zoning and development standards may be approved. The development capacities for the General Plan are also shown in the table for comparison against the proposed Plan’s development capacities.
TABLE 3-1 DEVELOPMENT CAPACITIES FOR THE PROPOSED PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN IN THE PLAN AREA Single-Family
Housing
(DU)
Multi-Family
Housing
(DU)
Housing
Total
(DU)
Commercial
(Bldg. SF)
Employment
(Bldg. SF)
Parks/Open
Space
(Acre)c
Public
Facilities
(Acre)
Public
Facilities
(Bldg. SF)
Plan Area – Standard
Development Scenarioa 4,307 1,840 6,148 1,552,676 748,820 78 192 2,411,064 Plan Area – Dual
Designation
Development Scenario
4,221 2,910 7,131 1,220,596 2,489,065 0 32 325,482
Plan Area included in
General Planb 4,108 2,616 6,723 1,330,831 1,780,080 184d 57 643,377
Notes: DU = dwelling units. SF = square feet.
a. Includes the MLK Activity Center. Development capacities consistent with February 2017 Draft Specific Plan. b. Development capacity numbers for the General Plan were calculated using the planned land uses shown in the General Plan Land Use map approved February 29, 2016.
c. Excludes land uses designated as “clear zone,“ “ponding basin,” and “ponding basin park.” d. Includes approximately 112 acres of landfill located directly east of the Regional Sports Complex. During community outreach process as part of the development of this Plan, it was determined that the Regional Sports Complex is not to be designated as parkland.Therefore, the Plan shows this acreage designated as “public facility.”
Some findings from the development capacity analysis are described below. A discussion of the development capacity under the Dual Designation Scenario is described in Section 3.2.4.2:
Housing. The total number of projected housing units in the proposed Plan is lower than under the adopted General Plan. The General Plan’s ratio of single-family housing to multi-family housing within the Plan Area is 61 percent single-family housing to 39 percent multi-family housing. The proposed Plan’s ratio is 70 percent single-family housing to 30 percent multi-family housing in the Plan Area.
Because the General Plan ratio includes a higher proportion of single-family housing to multi-family housing than the proposed Plan, there would be 575 fewer dwelling units developed under the proposed Plan than the total number of dwelling units proposed within the Plan Area under the General Plan.
Commercial. The amount of commercial development in the Plan Area is greater in the proposed Plan than in the General Plan by approximately 222,000 square feet. Several factors contribute to this 2 The dual land use designation was applied to all parcels within the Plan Area with such a designation, except for the parcel designated to be developed as a college near the MLK activity center. This exception was made based on the decision that the college would be a more intensive land use designation than the dual land use designation.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3-10 AUGUST 2017
increase, including new corridor/center mixed-use, neighborhood mixed-use, regional commercial, and community commercial areas.
Employment. The amount of employment space in the Plan Area (i.e., office, business park, regional business park, light industrial, and heavy industrial uses) in the proposed Plan is significantly less than in the General Plan; the proposed Plan shows approximately 1 million square feet less in employment uses in the Plan Area. The reason for this decrease is because of the change of business park and regional business park uses to other land uses such as residential, park, mixed use, and commercial. Parks/Open Space. The proposed Plan includes a refined definition of parkland than under the adopted General Plan. As a result, the Plan Area’s total park acreage in the proposed Plan is less than in the General Plan because the General Plan counts the approximately 112 acres directly east of the Regional Sports Complex, as well as the 16-acre Hyde Park, as parkland. It was determined through the outreach process that this land should not be considered parkland since it was previously used as a landfill, and in order to provide a more accurate estimate of the amount of usable parkland in the Plan Area. With the exclusion of the 112-acre Regional Sports Complex from the General Plan’s parks/open space development capacity, the amount of parkland within the Plan Area under the proposed Plan is slightly less than the General Plan’s park acreage. In addition, the amount of parks/open space in the SOI increases more significantly in the proposed Plan by 55 acres, largely because of the new parkland located directly to the west of the Regional Sports Complex that is accessible to residents of the Plan Area.
Public Facilities. The amount of public facilities development in the proposed Plan is significantly larger than the amount in the General Plan (1,767,687 square feet; 135 acres). The primary reasons for this increase include the re-designation of the aforementioned 112-acre landfill from park to public facilities, the inclusion of a new college in the MLK Activity Center, and the redesignation of singlefamily housing to public facilities along North Avenue in an effort to create a buffer between residential areas and nearby industrial uses.
3.2.4.2 DUAL DESIGNATION SCENARIO
As described in Section 3.2.4.1 above and shown in Table 3-1, the Dual Designation Scenario assumes the dual land uses discussed in Chapter 3 and shown on Figure 3-3 of the May 2017 draft Southwest Fresno Specific Plan are applied to the development capacity under the proposed Plan. Under this Scenario, new housing would be developed at a ratio of 59 percent single family to 41 percent multi-family housing units, which would result in 408 more dwelling units developed within the Plan Area than under the General Plan. The Dual Designation Scenario also assumes a lower amount of commercial development in the Plan Area, at 110,235 square feet, which is less than the amount developed under the General Plan.
However, the amount of employment space would be 708,985 square feet more than the General Plan.
As the Dual Designation Scenario assumes parkland would be developed for other types of land uses, zero acres of parkland would be developed within the Plan Area. The square footage and acreage of public facilities developed under the Dual Designation Scenario would be less than the amount developed under the General Plan (317,895 square feet; 25 acres).
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PLACEWORKS 3-11
3.2.4.3 IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the proposed Plan would involve the following:
Adoption of the proposed Plan is proposed to be enacted by resolution of the City Council. The following discretionary actions are anticipated:
Repeal of the Edison Community Plan.
Adoption of the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan.
Amendment of the Fresno General Plan, including amendment of the land use map. Rezoning of property for consistency with the General Plan amendment. Adoption of Zoning Overlays for the proposed Historic Corridor and Mixed-Use Corridors Adoption of a Text amendment to the Development Code to establish regulations for the overlays.
3.3 REQUIRED APPROVALS
The proposed Plan is a policy-level document and does not include any specific development proposals.
Therefore, the proposed Plan would be adopted solely by the Fresno City Council. The Planning Commission and other decision-making bodies would review the proposed Plan and make recommendations to City Council. In addition, Plan review and approval is required by the Airport Land Use Commission. While other agencies may be consulted during the adoption process, their approval is not required for adoption of the proposed Plan. However, subsequent development under the proposed Plan may require approval of State, federal and responsible trustee agencies that may rely on the program-level analysis in this EIR for decisions in their areas of expertise.
PLACEWORKS 4-1
4. Environmental Analysis
This chapter of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) is made up of 15 subchapters which evaluate the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts of the proposed Southwest Fresno Specific Plan (Plan). The following sections describe the format of the environmental analysis, the format of the thresholds of significance, and the methodology of the cumulative impact analysis.
FORMAT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15128 allows for no analysis of environmental issues for which there is no likelihood of significant impact. Due to the location of the proposed Plan in an urbanized area in the city of Fresno, no impacts would occur to forestry or mineral resources. A brief discussion of each topic is provided as follows:
Forestry Resources: According to 2006 mapping data from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the city of Fresno does not contain any woodland or forestland cover;1 therefore, the city does not contain land zoned for Timberland Production. Consequently, there would be no impacts to forestry resources under CEQA.
Mineral Resources: The City of Fresno permits mining only within the Mining (M) Overlay District (Citywide Development Code). Moreover, the boundaries of the Plan Area are classified as Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-3, which are defined as potential, but unproven mineral resource reserves (State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 99-02). MRZ-2 zones are those areas documented to have regionally significant mineral resources.
Because neither the State nor the City of Fresno identifies the Plan Area as containing known regional mineral resource reserves, project implementation would not result in impacts to known mineral resources or locally important mineral resources.
Accordingly, this chapter of the Draft EIR is made up of 15 subchapters, which evaluate the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts of the proposed Plan. In accordance with Appendix F, Energy Conservation, and Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines as amended per Assembly Bill 52 (Tribal Cultural Resources) and the California Supreme Court in a December 2015 opinion [California Building Industry Association (CBIA) v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 62 Cal. 4th 369 (No. S 213478)], the potential environmental effects of the proposed Plan are analyzed for 1 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire and Resource Assessment Program, Land Cover Map, http://frap.fire.ca.gov/data/frapgismaps/pdfs/fvegwhr13b_map.pdf, accessed May 26, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-2 AUGUST 2017
potential significant impacts in the following 15 environmental issue areas, which are organized with the listed abbreviations:
Aesthetics (AES)
Agriculture (AG)
Air Quality (AQ)
Biological Resources (BIO)
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources (CUL)
Geology and Soils (GEO)
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
Hazards and Hazardous Materials (HAZ)
Hydrology and Water Quality (HYDRO)
Land Use and Planning (LU)
Noise (NOISE)
Population and Housing (POP)
Public Services and Recreation (PS)
Transportation and Traffic (TRANS)
Utilities and Service Systems (UTIL)
Each subchapter is organized into the following sections:
Environmental Setting provides an overview of federal, State, regional and local laws and regulations relevant to each environmental issue, together with a description of the existing environmental conditions, providing a baseline against which the impacts of the proposed Plan can be compared. Standards of Significance refers to the quantitative or qualitative standards or conditions used to compare the existing setting with and without the proposed Plan to determine whether the impact is significant. These standards are based primarily on the CEQA Guidelines, and may reflect established health standards, ecological tolerance standards, public service capacity standards, and guidelines established by agencies or experts.
Impact Discussion gives an overview of potential impacts of the proposed Plan and explains why impacts were found to be significant or less than significant prior to mitigation. This subsection also includes a discussion of cumulative impacts of the proposed Plan. Impacts and mitigation measures are numbered consecutively within each topical analysis and begin with an acronymic or abbreviated reference to the impact section.
LEVELS OF SIGNIFICANCE
As noted above, the significance criteria are identified before the impact discussion subsection, under the subsection, “Standards of Significance.” For each impact identified, a level of significance is determined using the following classifications:
Significant (S) impacts describe effects that exceed an established or defined threshold. Less-than-significant (LTS) impacts describe effects that are noticeable, but do not exceed established or defined thresholds, or are mitigated below such thresholds. No impact describes the circumstances where there is no adverse effect on the environment.
For each impact identified as being significant, the EIR provides mitigation measures to reduce, eliminate, or avoid the adverse effect. If the mitigation measures would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level successfully, this is stated in the EIR. However, significant and unavoidable (SU) impacts are described where mitigation measures would not diminish these effects to less-than-significant levels.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
PLACEWORKS 4-3
CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
A cumulative impact consists of an impact created as a result of the combination of the project evaluated in the EIR, together with other reasonably foreseeable impacts not caused by the proposed Plan. Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is “cumulatively considerable.” Used in this context, cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.
Where the incremental effect of a project is not “cumulatively considerable,” a Lead Agency need not consider that effect significant, but must briefly describe its basis for concluding that the incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable. Where the cumulative impact caused by the project’s incremental effect and the effects of other reasonably foreseeable projects is not significant, the EIR must briefly indicate why the cumulative impact is not significant.
The cumulative impacts discussions in Chapters 4.1 through 4.15 explain the geographic scope of the area affected by each cumulative effect (e.g., immediate project vicinity, city, county, watershed, or air basin).
The geographic area considered for each cumulative impact depends upon the impact that is being analyzed. For example, in assessing aesthetic impacts, the pertinent geographic study area is the vicinity of the areas of new development under the proposed Plan from which the new development can be publicly viewed and may contribute to a significant cumulative visual effect. In assessing macro-scale air quality impacts, on the other hand, all development within the air basin contributes to regional emissions of criteria pollutants, and basin-wide projections of emissions are the best tool for determining the cumulative effect.
Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines permits two different methodologies for completion of the cumulative impact analysis:
The ‘list’ approach permits the use of a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including projects both within and outside the city; and The ‘projections’ approach allows the use of a summary of projections contained in an adopted plan or related planning document, such as a regional transportation plan, or in an EIR prepared for such a plan. The projections may be supplemented with additional information such as regional modeling.
This EIR uses the projections approach and takes into account growth from the proposed Plan within the Fresno city boundary and Sphere of Influence (SOI), in combination with impacts from projected growth in the rest of Fresno County and the surrounding region. In each subsection of Chapter 4, the cumulative impacts discussion is based on the cumulative development described in Chapter 6, CEQA-Mandated Assessment, of this Draft EIR. The following provides a summary of the cumulative impact scope for each impact area:
Aesthetics: The cumulative setting for visual impacts includes potential future development under the proposed Plan combined with effects of development on lands adjacent to the Plan Area within the city.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4-4 AUGUST 2017
Agriculture Resources: Cumulative impacts to agriculture resources occur from potential future development under the proposed Plan combined with effects of development on lands within the region.
Air Quality: Cumulative air quality impacts could occur from a combination of the proposed Plan combined with regional growth within the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. Biological Resources: The geographic scope of the cumulative analysis for biological resources considers the 5-mile radius surrounding the Plan Area.
Cultural and Tribal Resources: Cumulative impacts to cultural resources occur from potential future development under the proposed Plan combined with effects of development on lands within the region.
Geology, Soils, and Seismicity: Potential cumulative geological impacts could arise from a combination of the development of the proposed Plan together with future development in the immediate vicinity of the adjoining jurisdictions.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The cumulative impact analyses for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are related to ongoing development in Fresno and the entire region. Because GHG emissions are not confined to a particular air basin but are dispersed worldwide, the cumulative analysis focuses on the global impacts.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Potential cumulative hazardous impacts could arise from a combination of the development of the proposed Plan together with the regional growth in the immediate vicinity of the Plan Area.
Hydrology and Water Quality: The geographic context used for the cumulative assessment of water quality and hydrology impacts is the Upper Dry Subbasin, which encompasses the entire Plan Area. Land Use and Planning: The cumulative setting for land use and planning includes the City planning regulations and regional planning, with which the City is required to comply to. Noise: The analysis addresses the operational and construction noise and vibration impacts of the proposed Plan on the noise environment in the Plan Area and the surrounding area. The traffic noise levels are based on cumulative traffic conditions that take into account cumulative development in the region.
Population and Housing: Impacts from cumulative growth are considered in the context of their consistency with regional planning efforts.
Public Services and Recreation: Cumulative impacts are considered in the context of the growth from development under the proposed Plan within the city combined with the estimated growth in the service areas of each service provider.
Transportation and Traffic: The analysis of the proposed Plan addresses cumulative impacts to the transportation network in Fresno and the surrounding area. Utilities and Service Systems: Cumulative impacts are considered in the context of the growth from potential future development under the proposed Plan combined with the estimated growth in the service areas of each utility’s service area.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
PLACEWORKS 4.1-1
4.1 AESTHETICS
This chapter describes the existing aesthetic character of the Plan Area and evaluates the potential environmental consequences of future development that could occur to the aesthetic character by adopting and implementing the proposed Plan.
4.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.1.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
This section summarizes key State and local regulations and programs related to aesthetics in the Plan Area. There are no federal regulations pertaining to aesthetics that apply to the proposed Plan.
State Regulations
California Building Code
The California Building Code, Part 2 of Title 24 in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), is based on the International Building Code and combines three types of building standards from three different origins:
Building standards that have been adopted by State agencies without change from building standards contained in the International Building Code.
Building standards that have been adopted and adapted from the International Building Code to meet California conditions.
Building standards, authorized by the California legislature, that constitute extensive additions not covered by the International Building Code that have been adopted to address particular California concerns.
The California Building Code includes standards for outdoor lighting that are intended to improve energy efficiency, and to reduce light pollution and glare by regulating light power and brightness, shielding, and sensor controls.
Local Regulations
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan is the City’s primary policy planning document. Through its 12 elements, the General Plan provides the framework for the management and utilization of the City’s physical, economic, and human resources. Each element contains goals, policies, and implementation measures that guide development within the City.
The Fresno General Plan includes the following objectives and policies that pertain to aesthetics and visual resources (Table 4.1-1).
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
4.1-2 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.1-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AESTHETICS Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Urban Form, Land Use and Design Element
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 prominent east‐west and north‐south transit‐oriented, mixed‐use corridors with distinctive 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‐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.
Objective UF‐2 Enhance the unique sense of character and identity of the different subareas of the Downtown neighborhoods.
Objective UF‐8 Develop each of Downtown’s neighborhoods and districts, according to its unique character.
Policy UF‐12‐g
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-13-a
Future Planning to Require Design Principles. Require future planning, such as Specific Plans, neighborhood plans or Concept Plans, for Development Areas designated by the General Plan to include urban design principles and standards consistent with the Urban Form, Land Use, and Design Element.
Policy UF-1-f
Complete Neighborhoods, Densities, and Development Standards. Use Complete Neighborhood design concepts, development standards, and project reviews outside the Downtown planning area to achieve the development of Complete Neighborhoods and the residential density targets of the General Plan.
Objective UF‐14 Create an urban form that facilitates multi‐modal connectivity.
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.
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‐b
Land Use Definition and Compatibility. Include zoning districts and standards in the Citywide Development Code that provide for the General Plan land use designations and create appropriate transitions or buffers between new development with existing uses, taking into consideration the health and safety of the community.
Policy LU‐1‐a
Promote Development within the Existing City Limits as of December 31, 2012. Promote new development, infill, and rehabilitation of existing building stock in the Downtown planning area, along BRT corridors, in established neighborhoods generally south of Herndon Avenue, and on other infill sites and vacant land within the City.
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‐c Infill Design Toolkit. Develop and distribute an infill design toolkit, consistent with the City’s Infill Development Act to support and encourage infill development.
Policy LU‐2‐e Neighborhood Preservation. Incorporate standards in the Citywide Development Code to preserve the existing small‐scale residential quality of older neighborhoods.
Policy LU‐3‐b
Mixed‐Use Urban Corridors that Connect the Downtown Planning Area. Support the development of mixed‐use urban corridors that connect the Downtown planning area with the greater Fresno‐Clovis Metropolitan Area with functional, enduring, and desirable urban qualities along the Blackstone Avenue, Shaw Avenue, California Avenue, and Ventura Avenue/Kings Canyon Road corridors.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
PLACEWORKS 4.1-3
TABLE 4.1-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AESTHETICS Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
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‐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‐6‐a Design of Commercial Development. Foster high quality design, diversity, and a mix of amenities in new development with uses through the consideration of guidelines, regulations and design review procedures.
Policy LU‐6‐b
Commercial Development Guidelines. Consider adopting commercial development guidelines to assure high quality design and site planning for large commercial developments, consistent with the Urban Form policies of the General Plan.
Policy LU‐6‐d
Neighborhood and Community Commercial Center Design. Plan for neighborhood mixed use and community commercial uses to implement the Urban Form concepts of the General Plan, promote the stability and identity of neighborhood and community shopping areas, and allow efficient access without compromising the operational effectiveness of the street system.
Neighborhoods will be anchored by community commercial centers with a mix of uses that meet the area’s needs and create a sense of place.
Community commercial centers will be located within Activity Centers.
Policy LU‐6‐e
Regional Center Planning and Design. Promote economic growth with regional commercial centers. New regional commercial centers will be located with access to State Routes and/or other major transportation facilities to ensure access from throughout the region. Regional shopping centers will have internally‐unified building design, landscaping, and signage standards.
Policy LU‐6‐f
Auto‐Oriented Commercial Uses. Direct highway‐oriented and auto‐serving commercial uses to locations that are compatible with the Urban Form policies of the General Plan. Ensure adequate buffering measures for adjacent residential uses noise, glare, odors, and dust.
Policy LU‐9‐e Downtown Sightline. Require new development to preserve existing sightlines to Downtown to the extent feasible.
Policy LU‐9‐f View Corridors. Promote new view corridors that highlight the Downtown skyline.
Objective D‐1 Provide and maintain an urban image that creates a “sense of place” throughout Fresno.
Policy D‐1‐d Public Art. Continue to promote a citywide public art program that contributes to an awareness of the City’s history and culture.
Policy D‐1‐e Graphic Identity. Continue the preservation, promotion, procurement and strategic location of landmarks, monuments and artwork that provide orientation and represent Fresno’s cultural heritage and artistic values.
Policy D‐1‐h
Screening of Parking. Continue requiring all new development with parking in Activity Centers and along corridors to be screened or concealed. Locate principal pedestrian entrances to new non‐residential buildings on the sidewalk; any entrances from parking areas should be incidental or emergency use only.
Objective D‐2 Enhance the visual image of all “gateway” routes entering the Fresno Planning Area.
Policy D‐2‐a Design Requirements for Gateways. Consider unified design requirements for gateways to welcome travelers to the City’s Activity Centers.
Policy D‐2‐c Highway Beautification. Work with Caltrans, the Fresno Council of Governments, Tree Fresno, neighboring jurisdictions, and other organizations to obtain funding for highway beautification programs.
Objective D‐3 Create unified plans for Green Streets, using distinctive features reflecting Fresno’s landscape heritage.
Policy D‐3‐a
Green Street Tree Planting. Create a Green Street Tree Planting Program, with a well‐balanced variety and spacing of trees to establish continuous shading and visual continuity for each streetscape. Strive to achieve coherent linkages between public and private spaces, prioritizing tree planting along tree‐deficient Arterial and Collector Roadways in neighborhoods characterized by lower per capita rates of vehicle ownership.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
4.1-4 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.1-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AESTHETICS Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Policy D‐3‐b Funding for Green Street Tree Planting Program. Pursue funding for the Green Street Tree Planting Program, including landscaping of median islands.
Policy D‐3‐c Local Streets as Urban Parkways. Develop local streets as “urban parkways,” where appropriate, with landscaping and pedestrian spaces.
Policy D‐3‐d Undergrounding Utilities. Partner with utility companies to continue to pursue the undergrounding of overhead utilities as feasible.
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‐f
Design Compatibility with Residential Uses. Strive to ensure that all new nonresidential land uses are developed and maintained in a manner complementary to and compatible with adjacent residential land uses, to minimize interface problems with the surrounding environment and to be compatible with public facilities and services.
Objective D‐5 Maintain and improve community appearance through programs that prevent and abate blighting influences.
Policy D‐5‐a Code Enforcement. Continue enforcement of the Fresno Municipal Code to remove or abate public nuisances in a timely manner.
Policy D‐5‐b Clean Streets. Promote community partnerships and continued City efforts toward litter clean‐up and abatement of trash stockpiles on public and private streets.
Policy D‐5‐c Facade Improvements. Pursue funding for, and support of, building façade improvement programs.
Policy D‐5‐d Graffiti Prevention and Abatement. Seek ways to end graffiti, continue and expand the City’s effective Graffiti Abatement Program.
Policy D‐6‐b Consider adopting and implementing incentives for, and support efforts by, private development to incorporate culturally‐specific architectural elements in areas with a predominant ethnic population.
Mobility and Transportation Element
Objective MT‐3 Identify, promote and preserve scenic or aesthetically unique corridors by application of appropriate policies and regulations.
Policy MT‐3‐a
Scenic Corridors. Implement measures to preserve and enhance scenic qualities along scenic corridors or boulevards, including:
Van Ness Boulevard—Weldon to Shaw Avenues
Van Ness Extension—Shaw Avenue to the San Joaquin River Bluff Kearney Boulevard—Fresno Street to Polk Avenue
Van Ness/Fulton couplet—Weldon Avenue to Divisadero
Butler Avenue—Peach to Fowler Avenues
Minnewawa Avenue—Belmont Avenue to Central Canal
Huntington Boulevard—First Street to Cedar Avenue
Shepherd Avenue—Friant Road to Willow Avenue
Audubon Drive—Blackstone to Herndon Avenues
Friant Road—Audubon to Millerton Roads
Tulare Avenue—Sunnyside to Armstrong Avenues
Ashlan Avenue—Palm to Maroa Avenues
Policy MT‐3‐b Preserve street trees lining designated scenic corridors or boulevards. Replace trees of the predominant type and in a comparable pattern to existing plantings if there is no detriment to public safety.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
PLACEWORKS 4.1-5
4.1.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes the existing visual character of the Plan Area, the scenic resources present in the surrounding area, as well as light and glare conditions.
Visual Character
Regional Character
The Plan Area is located in the southwestern portion of the city, generally between the urban downtown core of the City, and agriculture uses to the west and south. The Downtown area includes high-rise buildings, civic/institutional buildings, and industrial warehouses.
The Downtown area is the urban core of the city with high-rise buildings that contain a variety of land uses. The most common building types within Downtown are mixed-use buildings, theaters, civic/institutional buildings, and industrial warehouses. The Downtown area contains many structures that provide historic design elements. The suburbs contain low-rise neighborhood buildings that are primarily dominated by single-family residential uses.
Plan Area
Initially agricultural land, Southwest Fresno has gradually transitioned to house more residential, industrial, and commercial uses. As a result, the character of the housing, community buildings, and work places range in character and conditions. For the most part, they exhibit a very suburban character with large areas of parking and significant setbacks.
Many of the major streets in the Plan Area (e.g., California, Fig, and Church Avenues) were designed and built to accommodate transportation of industrial and agricultural products. Because Southwest Fresno was predominantly an area of farming, the roads allowed trucks to pass through and transport materials.
Later on, large trucking businesses were introduced to the eastern side of the area. These streets cut through most of the established neighborhoods, with posted speeds of 45 MPH, and lead to agricultural areas. Most of the other local streets are also wide, and for the most part, provide on-street parking for the community. Sidewalks are narrow and offer little to no shade. In other cases, sidewalks are used as onstreet parking for residents, or are nonexistent.
Most of the buildings in the Plan Area have been built between the 1950s and the 1990s. The prevalent architectural character for single-family homes is “American vernacular,” with altered Craftsman bungalows, modest Minimal Traditional, Mid-Century Modern, and contemporary tract homes, and mostly consists of one-story housing. Toward the center of the Plan Area, there are a few examples of older homes, which have been remodeled over time and thus lost their original architectural character.
In general, there is a lack of tree cover and mature vegetation on the streets that run north-south in the Plan Area. There is more landscaping on streets that run east-west such as Kearney Boulevard, California Avenue, and smaller residential streets.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
4.1-6 AUGUST 2017
Scenic Vistas
The Fresno General Plan does not identify or designate scenic vistas within the city. Although no scenic vistas have been designated, scenic vistas within the Plan Area could provide distant views of natural landscape features such as the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range. Distant views of man-made landscape features include the Downtown Fresno buildings that provide a unique skyline and can be seen from major thoroughfares including Elm Avenue in the Plan Area.
Light and Glare
Significant sources of light and glare, such as streetlights, parking lots, interior lights, and light emitted from residential and non-residential buildings throughout the Plan Area are located along major thoroughfares such as Elm Avenue and California Avenue. Limited lighting currently exists in areas closer to the City limit as single-story, rural residential and agricultural areas that are located within the Plan Area. Buildings and structures made with glass, metal, and polished exterior or roofing materials exist throughout the Plan Area. These surfaces as well as the natural and manmade light sources could result in localized glare.
4.1.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed Plan would result in a significant aesthetic impact if it would:
1. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway.
3. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
4. Expose people on- or off-site to substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
4.1.3 IMPACT DISCUSSION
AES-1 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
Future development under the proposed Plan would have the potential to affect scenic vistas and/or scenic corridors if new or intensified development blocks views of areas that provide or contribute to such vistas. Potential effects could include blocking views of a scenic vista/corridor from specific publicly accessible vantage points or altering the overall scenic vista/corridor itself. Such alterations could be positive or negative, depending on the characteristics of individual future developments and the subjective perception of observers.
As previously described, public views of scenic corridors are considered those views as seen along a linear transportation route, and public views of scenic vistas are views of specific scenic features. Scenic vistas
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
PLACEWORKS 4.1-7
are generally interpreted as long-range views, while scenic corridors are comprised of short-, middle-, and long-range views.
The Fresno General Plan does not identify any scenic vistas from within the City. Although the General Plan identifies six locations as publicly valued scenic features along the San Joaquin River bluffs, the river bluffs are not visible from the Plan Area due to the flat topography of the city. The Fresno General Plan, as noted in Policy MT-3-a, identifies Kearney Boulevard from Fresno Street to Polk Avenue as a scenic corridor. Policy MT-3-b requires that street trees lining designated scenic corridors, such as the palm trees on Kearney Boulevard, be preserved. As a result, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact to scenic vistas.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
AES-2 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not substantially degrade the view from a scenic highway, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings.
Scenic highways are California highways designated by a local governing body and protected by the State Scenic Highway Program for the purpose of protecting and enhancing the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors through special conservation treatment. There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the City of Fresno (California State Scenic Highway Program 2015). As a result, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact to scenic highways.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
AES-3 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.
Future development allowed by the proposed Plan could degrade the visual character of the Plan Area if the form and appearance of new development deteriorate the quality of the existing setting.
As described above, the Plan Area exhibits a predominantly auto-oriented urban character and is largely comprised of single-story residential buildings, retail commercial, and light industrial uses in buildings that are not architecturally notable. Future development allowed by the proposed Plan would introduce building form and massing that is more intense than the current character of the area but would generally be consistent with the overall urban character of the area.
In addition, as described in Chapter 3, Project Description, the proposed Plan contains Development and Design Guidelines that regulate new site and building development through standards for intensity, building height, and setbacks. These standards and guidelines would require all new development be more visually pleasing to pedestrians than existing uses, most of which are auto-oriented and include surface parking lots along the sidewalk. In addition, the Plan includes Goal LU-4 which requires that the use and character of existing residential neighborhoods be maintained, while improving the quality of housing and encouraging homeownership, and remediates Southwest Fresno’s blighting conditions to
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
4.1-8 AUGUST 2017
improve the community’s image, attract private investment, and create a pleasant living environment.
Furthermore, Policy LU-4.5 requires the creation of design standards that promote high-quality, aesthetically-attractive, and architecturally-consistent building design for building improvements.
Although future development allowed by the proposed Plan would change the existing visual character on individual sites, compliance with these regulations would ensure that the bulk, mass, height, and architectural character of future development under the proposed Plan would be compatible with surrounding uses and would not substantially degrade the visual quality of the site or its surroundings and associated impacts would be less than significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
AES-4 Implementation of the proposed Plan would expose people on- or offsite to substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Development in accordance with the General Plan and Development Code will result in land use changes within the Plan Area. These land use changes include the development of new residential and nonresidential land uses.
New development within the City limit could increase the amount of light from street lights, exterior lighting systems on private and public property, exterior lighting from buildings, and vehicular headlights.
New development could also increase light with new illuminated signs and lighting systems to illuminate active play areas. The increase in lighting within the City limit could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties. In addition, the increase in light will substantially illuminate the sky at night. This increase in light illumination is considered a significant impact.
Many areas outside of the existing City limit and within the Plan Area, as well as directly adjacent to the Plan Area, are exposed to a nominal amount of light due to the rural and agricultural setting. New urban development will substantially alter these existing rural and agricultural areas. Increases in lighting systems will occur within new development throughout this area and could result in an increase in lighting adjacent to the Plan Area. Residential development will include lighting systems on properties to provide safety and security. Non-residential development will include lighting system for parking areas, buildings, and signs. Public facilities including active use parks will increase lighting to illuminate play areas for evening activities. With the increase in development in this area, there will be increases in nighttime traffic that will increase lighting from car headlights. Together, new development will increase the amount of light that could cause light spillover onto adjacent properties within and adjacent to the Plan Area and increase the illumination of the sky at night. This increase in light is considered a significant impact.
Development in accordance with the General Plan and Development Code will increase the amount of structures that could create new sources of glare within the Plan Area and directly adjacent to the Plan Area. These new sources of glare could be from materials used on building façades, parking lots, signs, roadway surfaces, and motor vehicles. As a result, due to the amount of new building square footage
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
PLACEWORKS 4.1-9
planned for the Plan Area, new buildings will result in a substantial increase in glare. This increase could result in significant glare impacts.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
The following mitigation measures were included in the MEIR and remain applicable to this project:
Impact AES-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
MEIR Mitigation Measure AES-1: Lighting systems for street and parking areas shall include shields to direct light to the roadway surfaces and parking areas. Vertical shields on the light fixtures shall also be used to direct light away from adjacent light sensitive land uses such as residences.
MEIR Mitigation Measure AES-2: Lighting systems for public facilities such as active play areas shall provide adequate illumination for the activity; however, low-intensity light fixtures and shields shall be used to minimize spillover light onto adjacent properties.
MEIR Mitigation Measure AES-3: Lighting systems for non-residential uses, not including public facilities, shall provide shields on the light fixtures and orient the lighting system away from adjacent properties. Low-intensity light fixtures shall also be used if excessive spillover light onto adjacent properties will occur.
MEIR Mitigation Measure AES-4: Lighting systems for freestanding signs shall not exceed 100 footLamberts (FT-L) when adjacent to streets which have an average light intensity of less than 2.0 horizontal footcandles and shall not exceed 500 FT-L when adjacent to streets that have an average light intensity of 2.0 horizontal footcandles or greater.
Mitigation Measure AES-5: Materials used on building façades shall be non-reflective.
Significance With Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. The increase in sources of light would result in impacts to nighttime sky that could not be mitigated through the implementation of MEIR Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-4.
4.1.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
AES-5 Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to aesthetics.
The methodology used for the cumulative impact analysis is described in Section 4, Environmental Analysis, of this Draft EIR. The cumulative setting for aesthetics includes past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects within the immediate vicinity of the Plan Area.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AESTHETICS
4.1-10 AUGUST 2017
As previously discussed, there are no designated scenic vistas or State-designated scenic highways in the Plan Area or the City of Fresno. As such, there would be no cumulative impacts to scenic vistas or visual resources along scenic highways.
Because of the developed nature of the proposed Plan, future development under the proposed Plan, in combination with other new development, would not negatively impact the visual character of Southwest Fresno.
As discussed above, implementation of the proposed Plan would increase the amount of structures that could create new sources of glare within the Plan Area and directly adjacent to the Plan Area. These new sources of glare could be from materials used on building façades, parking lots, signs, roadway surfaces, and motor vehicles. As a result, due to the amount of new building square footage planned for the Plan Area, new buildings will result in a substantial increase in glare. This increase could result in cumulativelyconsiderable significant glare impacts and illumination of the nighttime sky.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact AES-5: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in an increase in glare.
Mitigation Measure AES-5: Implement Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e of the MEIR.
Significance With Mitigation: Significant and Unavoidable. The increase in sources of light would result in impacts to nighttime sky that could not be mitigated through the implementation of MEIR Mitigation Measures AES-4a through AES-4e.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
PLACEWORKS 4.2-1
4.2 AGRICULTURE
This section describes the regulatory framework and existing conditions of the Plan Area related to agricultural resources, and the potential impacts of the proposed Plan on agricultural resources.
4.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.2.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Federal Regulations
Farmland Protection Policy Act
The Farmland Protection and Policy Act (FPPA) was designed to minimize the impact federal programs have on the unnecessary and irreversible conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses. This act assures that to the extent possible, federal programs are administered to be compatible with state, local units of government, and private programs and policies to protect farmland. Federal agencies are required to develop and review their policies and procedures to implement the FPPA every two years. This act does not authorize the federal government to regulate the use of private or nonfederal land or, in any way, affect the property rights of owners. For the purposes of the act, “farmland” includes prime farmland, unique farmland, and farmland of statewide or local importance. Farmland subject to FPPA requirements does not have to be currently used for cropland. It can be forest land, pastureland, cropland, or other land, but not water or urban/built-up land.1
State Regulations
Williamson Act
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act) allows local governments to enter into voluntary contracts with private landowners to restrict specific parcels of land to agricultural uses. In return, restricted parcel property taxes are assessed at a rate consistent with their actual use rather than potential market value. The minimum length of Williamson Act contracts is ten years. Because the contract term automatically renews on each anniversary date of the contract, the actual contract length is essentially indefinite.
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
Within the California Natural Resources Agency, the State Department of Conservation (CDC) provides services and information that promote informed land use decisions and sound management of the State’s natural resources. The Department manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), 1 Natural Resources Conservation Service, Farmland Protection Policy Act.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
4.2-2 AUGUST 2017
which supports agriculture throughout California by developing maps and statistical data for analyzing land use impacts to farmland.
The developed maps are called the Important Farmlands Inventory (IFI). The IFI categorizes land based on the productive capabilities of the land. There are many factors that determine the agricultural value of land, including the suitability of soils for agricultural use, whether soils are irrigated, the depth of soil, water-holding capacity, and physical and chemical characteristics. To categorize soil capabilities, two soil classification systems are used: the Capability Classification System and the Storie Index. The Capability Classification System categorizes soils from Class I to Class VIII based on their capability to produce common cultivated crops and pasture plants without deteriorating over a long period of time (Class I soils have few limitations for agriculture; Class VIII soils are unsuitable for agriculture).2 The Storie Index takes into account other factors, such as slope and texture.
FMMP rates the production potential of agricultural land according to the following classifications:
Prime Farmland has the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term agricultural production. Prime Farmland has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agriculture production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Farmland of Statewide Importance is similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as steeper slopes or less ability to store soil moisture. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Unique Farmland consists of lesser quality soils used for the production of the State’s leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated, but may include non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date.
Farmland of Local Importance is land that is important to the local agricultural economy. It is determined by each county’s board of supervisors and a local advisory committee. Grazing Land is the land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock. Urban and Built-Up Land is occupied by structures with a building density of at least one unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately six structures to a 10-acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, and water control structures.
Other Land is land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; wetlands and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry, and aquaculture facilities; and strip mines. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as other land.
The Rural Land Mapping Project provides more detail on the distribution of various land uses within 2 Natural Resources Conservation Service, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/about/ history/?cid=nrcs143_021436, accessed April 21, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
PLACEWORKS 4.2-3
the Other Land category in all eight San Joaquin Valley counties. The Rural Land categories include:
Rural Residential Land, Semi-Agricultural and Rural Commercial Land, Vacant or Disturbed Land, Confined Animal Agriculture, and Nonagricultural or Natural Vegetation. Water is used to describe perennial water bodies with an extent of at least 40 acres.
California Government Code Section 56064
This section of the Government Code defines “Prime Agricultural Land” as follows:
Prime agricultural land means an area of land, whether single parcel or contiguous parcels, that has not been developed for a use other than an agricultural use and that meets any of the following qualifications:
Land that qualifies, if irrigated, for rating as class I or class II in the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service land use capability classification, whether or not land is actually irrigated, provided that irrigation is feasible. Land that qualifies for rating 80 through 100 Storie Index Rating. Land that supports livestock used for the production of food and fiber that has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal unit per acre as defined by the USDA in the National Range and Pasture Handbook, Revision 1, December 2003.
Land planted with fruit or nut-bearing trees, vines, bushes, or crops that have a nonbearing period of less than five years and that will return during the commercial bearing period on an annual basis from the production of unprocessed agricultural plant production not less than $400.00 dollars per acre.
Land that has returned from the production of unprocessed agricultural plant products an annual gross value of not less than $400.00 dollars per acre for three of the previous five calendar years.
Local Regulations
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan contains objectives and policies related to agricultural resources within the City of Fresno (Table 4.2-1).
4.2.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
As shown in Table 5.2-2 of the Fresno General Plan Master EIR, adopted December 2014, the Planning Area of the city contains approximately 9,550 acres of Prime Farmland, and 9,070 acres of Farmland of Local Importance. The Master EIR contemplated the conversion of this farmland to non-agricultural uses, and determined the impact to be significant and unavoidable, as no feasible mitigation measures in
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
4.2-4 AUGUST 2017
addition to Policies RC-9-a, RC-9-b, and RC-8-c under Objective RC-9 are available.3 The Findings of Fact for the General Plan Master EIR state that due to the substantial amount of development that would occur through buildout of the Plan, and since no new farmlands would be created, the implementation of the project would result in a loss of farmland, which is considered significant and unavoidable.4 The City
of Fresno issued a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this and other impacts determined to be significant and unavoidable as a result of implementation of the project. The Statement describes the benefits of the project and determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the Master EIR may be considered “acceptable” due to several considerations. For example, the project will facilitate reinvestment in existing neighborhoods and commercial areas within the city, and promote land uses that conserve resources and will make efficient use of existing infrastructure.5
The Plan Area is located within the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) within the area planned for urbanization, and within the city limit. Therefore, Objective RC-9 and Policies RC-9-a, RC-9-b, and RC-9c (described in Table 4.2-1) do not apply to the proposed Plan. According to FMMP data, 406 acres of Farmland of Local Importance and 744 acres of Prime Farmland are located within the Plan Area, for a total of 1,150 acres. Further, Figure 4.2-1 shows that existing land uses within the Plan Area include areas designated for agricultural use. This use is spread intermittently throughout the Plan Area. Specifically, agricultural use is located in the far northwestern portion of the Plan Area north of Kearney Boulevard, west of Marks Avenue; north of Jensen Avenue, west of Fairview Avenue, south of Church Avenue, and east of West Avenue; and in the far southeastern portion of the 3 Fresno General Plan Master EIR, Section 5.2, Agricultural Resources, Impact AG-1. 4 Findings of Fact, General Plan and Development Code Update Master Environmental Impact Report, City of Fresno, County of Fresno, California, Section 2.2.1, Convert Farmland to Non-Agricultural Use. 5 Resolution of the Council of the City of Fresno certifying environmental impact report SCH no. 2012111015, Exhibit 3, Statement of Overriding Considerations.
WEST AVE
TULARE S
G
T
ST
PLUMAS ST
PICKFORD AVE
CALIFORNIA AVE
CRYSTAL AVE
C A L IFORN I A CT
DIVISADERO ST
EVA NAMLIET
MARKS AVE
MERCED ST
JENSEN AVE VAGEDES AV E
R ST
LOS ANGELES ST
NICHOLAS AVE
C ST
ATCHISON ST
MONTER EY ST
BRALY AVE
TUOLUMNE ST
A ST
SAN BENITO ST
STANISLAUS ST
OLEANDER AVE
WOODWARD AVE
M ST
CALAVERAS ST
BROADWAY PLZ
VENTURA ST
RAILROAD AVE
ARTHUR AVE
MARIPOSA ST
SANTA FE AVE
PARKWAY DR
ROOSEVELT AVE
ANNA ST
KEARNEY BLVD
WHITES BRIDGE AVE
NIELSEN AVE
BLACKSTONE AVE
BELGRAVIA AVE
ILLINOIS AVE
GRANT AVE
HOLLY AVE
CLARA AVE
WOODWARD AVE
LEAD AVE
LILY AVE
H ST
BLOSSER AVE
AMADOR ST
E ST
WATERMAN AVE
MAYOR AVE
U ST
KLETTE AVE
MARIPOSA ST
JONES AVE
IRWIN AVE
KERN ST
INYO ST
MONO ST
SANTA CLARA ST
JENSEN AVE
HA B ITAT A VE
STROTHER AVE
GEORGE AVE
IVY AVE
O ST
ILA AVE
FAIRVIEW AVE
CALWA AVE
B ST
LORENA AVE
BURNS AVE
KNIGHT AVE
CHURCH RD
DUNN AVE
ARTHUR AVE
RAV IAAVE
DELNOAVE
FRUIT AVE
EL DORADO ST
CHERRY AVE
PACIFIC AVE
FULTON MALL
DAN RONQU IL LO DR
TUPMAN ST
CAPITOL ST
T ST
E
LEMON AVE
ONE IL AVE
GENEVA AVE
SAN JOAQUIN ST
CHINA ALY
F ST
EUNICE AVE
HOME RUN ALY
L ST
COLLINS AVE
S ST
A/B ALY
FAGAN ALY
Q ST
HAWESAVE
WELLER ST
FERGER AVE
POPPY AVE
HUMBOLDT AVE
MYERS AVE
GEARY ST
VALENCIA AVE
WAYTE LN
EDEN AVE
BYRD AVE
KAVILAND AVE
GROVE AVE
CHURCH AVE
GARRETT AVE
NAPA AVE
FLORENCE AVE
LOTUS AVE
VALENTINE AVE
T E IL M A N I C R
FARRIS AVE
FERGER/PALM ALY
EDGAR AVE
PLEASANT AVE
MADISON AVE
VINE AVE
DOROTHY AVE
AIRPORT RD
LAFAYETTE AVE
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
SAMSON AVE
WALNUT AVE
FRUIT AVE
EUNEVA GIF
VAN NESS AVE
HUGHES AVE
TRINITY ST
THORNE AVE
MODOC ST
CHANNINGWAY
FULTON ST
BARDELL ST
FRESNO ST POTTLE AVE
ECHO AVE
MARTIN AVE
MAUD AVE
LA S IERRA DR
P ST
N ST
CHANDLER AVE LEE AVE
ROSE AVE
ELM AVE
M ADDY DR
PALM AVE
COL LEGE V/ A N NESS ALY
KIRK ST
SARAH ST
GLENN/SAN PABLO ALY
NORTH AVE
ANNADALE AVE
ALMY AVE
ROY AVE
BROADWAY
STEPHENS AVE
ROEDING DR
Regional Sports
Complex
Hyde
Park
Carver
Park
Ivy
Park
Neilson
Park
41 41
180
99 99
Sphere of Influence City Limit
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL
0 0.25mi 0.25mi
Figure 3.9 Existing Land Use Map
Light
Vacant
Plan Area
Medium Density
Medium-high Density
Heavy
High Density
Medium-low Density
Mobile Home Park
Low Density
Office
Professional Services Office
Heavy/Regional
Neighborhood/Neighborhood Center
Community/Neighborhood Limited Agriculture
Open Space/Park
Airport
Utility
Parking
Community Services/Institutional
School
BELG
WEST AVE
TULARE S
G
T
ST
PLUMAS ST
PICKFORD AVE
CALIFORNIA AVE
CRYSTAL AVE
C A L IFORN I A CT
DIVISADERO ST
EVA NAMLIET
MARKS AVE
MERCED ST
JENSEN AVE VAGEDES AV E
R ST
LOS ANGELES ST
NICHOLAS AVE
C ST
ATCHISON ST
MONTER EY ST
BRALY AVE
TUOLUMNE ST
A ST
SAN BENITO ST
STANISLAUS ST
OLEANDER AVE
WOODWARD AVE
M ST
CALAVERAS ST
BROADWAY PLZ
VENTURA ST
RAILROAD AVE
ARTHUR AVE
MARIPOSA ST
SANTA FE AVE
PARKWAY DR
ROOSEVELT AVE
ANNA ST
KEARNEY BLVD
WHITES BRIDGE AVE
NIELSEN AVE
BLACKSTONE AVE
BELGRAVIA AVE
ILLINOIS AVE
GRANT AVE
HOLLY AVE
CLARA AVE
WOODWARD AVE
LEAD AVE
LILY AVE
H ST
BLOSSER AVE
AMADOR ST
E ST
WATERMAN AVE
MAYOR AVE
U ST
KLETTE AVE
MARIPOSA ST
JONES AVE
IRWIN AVE
KERN ST
INYO ST
MONO ST
SANTA CLARA ST
JENSEN AVE
HA B ITAT A VE
STROTHER AVE
GEORGE AVE
IVY AVE
O ST
ILA AVE
FAIRVIEW AVE
CALWA AVE
B ST
LORENA AVE
BURNS AVE
KNIGHT AVE
CHURCH RD
DUNN AVE
ARTHUR AVE
RAV IAAVE
DELNOAVE
FRUIT AVE
EL DORADO ST
CHERRY AVE
PACIFIC AVE
FULTON MALL
DAN RONQU IL LO DR
TUPMAN ST
CAPITOL ST
T ST
E
LEMON AVE
ONE IL AVE
GENEVA AVE
SAN JOAQUIN ST
CHINA ALY
F ST
EUNICE AVE
HOME RUN ALY
L ST
COLLINS AVE
S ST
A/B ALY
FAGAN ALY
Q ST
HAWESAVE
WELLER ST
FERGER AVE
POPPY AVE
HUMBOLDT AVE
MYERS AVE
GEARY ST
VALENCIA AVE
WAYTE LN
EDEN AVE
BYRD AVE
KAVILAND AVE
GROVE AVE
CHURCH AVE
GARRETT AVE
NAPA AVE
FLORENCE AVE
LOTUS AVE
VALENTINE AVE
T E IL M A N I C R
FARRIS AVE
FERGER/PALM ALY
EDGAR AVE
PLEASANT AVE
MADISON AVE
VINE AVE
DOROTHY AVE
AIRPORT RD
LAFAYETTE AVE
GOLDEN STATE BLVD
SAMSON AVE
WALNUT AVE
FRUIT AVE
EUNEVA GIF
VAN NESS AVE
HUGHES AVE
TRINITY ST
THORNE AVE
MODOC ST
CHANNINGWAY
FULTON ST
BARDELL ST
FRESNO ST POTTLE AVE
ECHO AVE
MARTIN AVE
MAUD AVE
LA S IERRA DR
P ST
N ST
CHANDLER AVE LEE AVE
ROSE AVE
ELM AVE
M ADDY DR
PALM AVE
COL LEGE V/ A N NESS ALY
KIRK ST
SARAH ST
GLENN/SAN PABLO ALY
NORTH AVE
ANNADALE AVE
ALMY AVE
ROY AVE
BROADWAY
STEPHENS AVE
ROEDING DR
Regional Sports
Complex
Hyde
Park
Carver
Park
Ivy
Park
Neilson
Park
41 41
180
99 99
Sphere of Influence City Limit
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL
0 0.25mi 0.25mi
Figure 3.9 Existing Land Use Map
Light
Vacant
Plan Area
Medium Density
Medium-high Density
Heavy
High Density
Medium-low Density
Mobile Home Park
Low Density
Office
Professional Services Office
Heavy/Regional
Neighborhood/Neighborhood Center
Community/Neighborhood Limited Agriculture
Open Space/Park
Airport
Utility
Parking
Community Services/Institutional
School
BELG
Source: City of Fresno.
Figure 4.2-1
Existing Land Use
SO UT H W ES T FR ES N O S P E C I F I C PLAN D RAFT EI R
C I TY O F FR ES N O
AGRICULTURE
P LAC E WO RK S
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
4.2-6 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.2-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Objective RC‐9 Preserve agricultural land outside of the area planned for urbanization under this General Plan.
Policy RC‐9‐a Regional Cooperation. Work to establish a cooperative research and planning program with the Counties of Fresno and Madera, City of Clovis, and other public agencies to conserve agricultural land resources.
Policy RC‐9‐b
Land Outside SOI. Express opposition to residential and commercial development proposals in unincorporated areas (excluding County Islands) within or adjacent to the planning area when these proposals would do any of the following:
Make it difficult or infeasible to implement the General Plan; Contribute to the premature conversion of agricultural, open space, or grazing lands; or Constitute a detriment to the management of resources and/or facilities important to the Fresno Metropolitan Area (such as air quality, water quantity and quality, traffic circulation, and riparian habitat).
Policy RC‐9‐c
Farmland Preservation Program. In coordination with regional partners or independently, establish a Farmland Preservation Program. When Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance is converted to urban uses outside City limits, this program would require that the developer of such a project permanently protect an equal amount of similar farmland elsewhere through easement.
Policy HC‐5‐f
Urban Agriculture. Promote a full range of urban agriculture activities, including farmers’ markets, farm stands, community gardens, on‐site garden produce market stands, and urban farms. Support associations involved in these activities, which can be accomplished by a combination of the following:
Amend the Fresno Municipal Code (FMC) to provide clear and concise permitting procedures regarding Community Gardens, On‐site Garden Produce Market Stands, and Urban Farms that allow sale of foods grown locally.
Create a policy for reduced planning entitlements and plan check fees. Make publically available an inventory of City‐owned surplus land that could be used for urban agriculture. Continue to allow and promote community gardens in City‐owned parks. Support the planning of community gardens within walking distance of high‐density residential areas to compensate for the reduced amount of open space in these areas. Emphasize opportunities for urban agriculture in all areas of the city, schools, parks, residential food deserts, and especially in areas of the city with a relatively high proportion of “food insecure” individuals.
Policy HC‐5‐g Commercial Agriculture. Continue to develop policies to allow agriculture on land greater than 50 acres in area.
Plan Area west of Fig Avenue. The City completed an update to its zoning code effective March 7, 2016.
Under existing zoning, there are lands within the Plan Area that are zoned for exclusive 20-acre agricultural use. Those lands are located between Highway 180 and Whites Bridge Avenue, between West Chandler Avenue and Kearney Boulevard, and between Kearney Boulevard and West Church Avenue.
The Healthy Communities Element of the Fresno General Plan includes a goal to provide opportunities for urban agriculture. The City defines urban agriculture as the practice of cultivating, processing, and distributing food in or around a city or town for local consumption. Urban agriculture includes farmers’ markets, farm stands, community gardens, on-site garden produce market stands, and urban farms.6 Specifically, Policy HC-5-f encourages the implementation of small-scale agricultural uses within urban 6 City of Fresno, Healthy Communities Element, 2014.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
PLACEWORKS 4.2-7
areas. Therefore, this policy would apply to the Plan Area. Policy HC-5-g allows commercial agriculture on land greater than 50 acres in area, which would not apply to the Plan Area, as no parcel is greater than 50 acres in size.
According to the FMMP California Important Farmland Finder, there is no Unique Farmland within the Plan Area. However, there are areas of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Local Importance scattered throughout the Plan Area. These include parcels located south of California Avenue and east of Fruit Avenue, parcels located northwest of California and West Avenues as well as the MLK Activity Center located at Jensen Avenue and MLK Jr. Boulevard (see Figure 4.2-1).. Just west of the Plan Area, in the SOI, there is Prime Farmland located west of Hughes Avenue. Some of the parcels designated as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Local Importance are in use as Open Agriculture, including land at the far western portion of the Plan Area at California and Valentine Avenues, as well as in the central portion of the Plan Area at Fruit and Church Avenues. The parcels at Marks and Kearney Avenue are in use as Rural Residential. The parcel at Walnut and Church Avenues is in use as a Public Facility, partly being prepared for agricultural use. The remaining parcels that contain Prime Farmland and Farmland of Local Importance are not currently under active agricultural use and not considered important on a local level.
The Fresno General Plan, adopted in 2014, depicts existing farmland within the city’s SOI in its Map Atlas.
According to the Atlas’s associated Prime Farmland map, the Plan Area is designated as Urban Developed, Farmland of Local Importance, Prime Farmland, Rural Residential, as well as some Farmland of Local Importance and Unique Farmland. The Fresno General Plan Map Atlas describes some of the area containing the Farmland of Local Importance as Vacant, indicating that there are no active agricultural uses on-site. Other areas, as described above, are designated Open Agriculture, Public Facility and Rural Residential uses.
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey data, the area within the Plan Area that is designated as Farmland of Local Importance contains soils in the Atwater series. The Atwater soils series is used mainly for production of truck crops, grapes, tree fruits, nuts, grain, and alfalfa (USDA 2003). However, no such uses currently occur on these designated areas.
4.2.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed Plan would result in a significant impact to agriculture or forestry resources if it would:
1. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.
2. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.
3. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)).
4. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
4.2-8 AUGUST 2017
5. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use.
4.2.3 IMPACT DISCUSSION
AG-1 Implementation of the proposed Plan would convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use.
According to the FMMP California Important Farmland Finder, there are areas of “Prime Farmland” and “Farmland of Local Importance” scattered throughout the Plan Area. The remainder of the Plan Area is considered Urban Built-Up Land. As a result, implementation of the proposed Plan would result in the conversion of Prime Farmland to non-agriculture use. As discussed in Section 4.2.1.2, the conversion of Prime Farmland to non-agriculture use was found to be significant and unavoidable, with no mitigation measure available to reduce the impact to less than significant. Therefore, there would be a significant impact related to the conversion of prime or unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance.
Impact AG-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. Consistent with the findings of the adopted General Plan MEIR, the proposed Plan includes land use changes that would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agriculture uses, and no feasible mitigation measures are available.
AG-2 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.
The Fresno General Plan depicts existing farmland within the City’s SOI in the Map Atlas Existing Conditions Report. According to the associated Williamson Act Property map, there are no Williamson Act properties within the Plan Area. Further, the proposed Plan does not contain zoning designations that pertain to agriculture. Thus, no impact to Williamson Act lands would occur.
Existing land use designations within the Plan Area include agriculture. Under the proposed Plan, there are no land use designations that include agriculture, and no areas that would be zoned for agricultural use. However, community gardens are encouraged by the following Policy:
Policy LU-1.1 Increase access to fresh, affordable, and nutritious food sources with an emphasis on attracting and encouraging small and large food retailers such as grocery stores, farmers’ markets, nutrition programs, community gardens, and food stands to provide fresh, affordable, and nutritious foods.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
PLACEWORKS 4.2-9
Community gardens would accommodate urban agriculture in a variety of physical contexts and provide areas for garden plots available to the general public for the cultivation of vegetables, fruit, and flowers.
Because the areas under existing agricultural zoning are not currently under active agricultural production and are located in an urban/residential setting that is designated for urban/residential development under the Fresno General Plan, and because the proposed Plan would promote urban agriculture, as feasible, including community gardens, impacts associated with agricultural zoning conflicts are considered less than significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
AG-3 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use.
As discussed above under Impact AG-1, future development under the proposed Plan would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. Except for direct conversion, the implementation of the Plan would not result in other changes in the existing environment that would impact agricultural land outside of the Plan Area. In addition, the development in accordance with the proposed Plan would not impact forest land, as discussed in Chapter 2, Executive Summary. Therefore, the proposed Plan would result in no impact on farmland or forest land involving other changes to the existing environment.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
4.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
AG-4 Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to agriculture resources.
As discussed above, implementation of the proposed Plan would result in a significant impact related to the conversion of farmland of concern under CEQA. As such, the proposed Plan would contribute to a cumulative impact with respect to agriculture resources. Although the proposed Plan includes a policy to promote urban agriculture, consistent with the adopted Fresno General Plan, future development in areas outside of the Plan Area, in combination of the loss of prime farmland within the Plan Area would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agriculture uses. To reduce potential cumulative impacts on agricultural zoning and Williamson Act Contracts, the General Plan Update includes Objective RC-9 and Policies RC-9-a through RC-9-c, shown in Table 4.2-1, that will reduce the premature conversion of agricultural land within the Plan Area and outside the sphere-of-influence and could reduce conflicts with agricultural zoning and Williamson Act Contracts. However, this policy will not prevent owners of farmland to enter into Williamson Act Contract non-renewals. Therefore, the implementation of the proposed project will result in a significant and unavoidable impact on agricultural zoning and Williamson Act Contracts. Therefore, this impact would be significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AGRICULTURE
4.2-10 AUGUST 2017
Impact AG-4: Implementation of the proposed Plan would convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. Consistent with the findings of the adopted General Plan MEIR, the proposed Plan includes land use changes that would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agriculture uses, and no feasible mitigation measures are available.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-1
4.3 AIR QUALITY
This chapter of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) evaluates the potential for the proposed Southwest Fresno Specific Plan (proposed Plan) to impact air quality in a local and regional context. This evaluation is based on the methodology recommended by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). The analysis focuses on air pollution from regional emissions and localized pollutant concentrations. Criteria air pollutant emissions modeling for the proposed Plan is included in Appendix C of this Draft EIR. Transportation-sector impacts are based on trip generation and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) provided by Fehr and Peers (see Appendix H). Cumulative impacts related to air quality are based on the regional boundaries of the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB).
4.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.3.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Federal, state, and local air districts have passed laws and regulations intended to control and enhance air quality. Land use in the Plan Area is subject to the rules and regulations imposed by SJVAPCD, California Air Resource Board (CARB), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). The regulatory framework that is potentially applicable to the proposed Plan is also summarized below.
Federal and State Regulations
Ambient air quality standards have been adopted at federal and State levels for criteria air pollutants. In addition, both the federal and State governments regulate the release of toxic air contaminants (TACs).
The City of Fresno is in the SJVAB and is subject to the rules and regulations imposed by the SJVAPCD, the national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) adopted by the US EPA, and the California AAQS adopted by CARB. Federal, state, regional, and local laws, regulations, plans, or guidelines that are potentially applicable to the proposed Plan are summarized below.
Ambient Air Quality Standards
The Clean Air Act was passed in 1963 by the US Congress and has been amended several times. The 1970 Clean Air Act amendments strengthened previous legislation and laid the foundation for the regulatory scheme of the 1970s and 1980s. In 1977, Congress again added several provisions, including nonattainment requirements for areas not meeting National AAQS and the Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. The 1990 amendments represent the latest in a series of federal efforts to regulate the protection of air quality in the United States. The Clean Air Act allows states to adopt more stringent standards or to include other pollutants. The California Clean Air Act, signed into law in 1988, requires all areas of the state to achieve and maintain the California AAQS by the earliest practical date.
The California AAQS tend to be more restrictive than the National AAQS.
The National and California AAQS are the levels of air quality considered to provide a margin of safety in the protection of the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect “sensitive receptors” most susceptible to further respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise. Healthy
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-2 AUGUST 2017
adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed.
Both California and the federal government have established health-based AAQS for seven air pollutants, which are shown in Table 4.3-1. These pollutants are ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb). In addition, the State has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles.
California has also adopted a host of other regulations that reduce criteria pollutant emissions, including:
AB 1493: Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards
Title 20 California Code of Regulations (CCR): Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6, CCR: Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 11, CCR: Green Building Standards Code Tanner Air Toxics Act and Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act Public exposure to TACs is a significant environmental health issue in California. In 1983, the California Legislature enacted a program to identify the health effects of TACs and to reduce exposure to these contaminants to protect the public health. The California Health and Safety Code defines a TAC as “an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.” A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to Section 112(b) of the federal Clean Air Act (42 US Code Section 7412[b]) is a toxic air contaminant. Under State law, the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), acting through CARB, is authorized to identify a substance as a TAC if it is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.
California regulates TACs primarily through AB 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets up a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. Once a TAC is identified, CARB adopts an “airborne toxics control measure” for sources that emit designated TACs. If there is a safe threshold for a substance (i.e., a point below which there is no toxic effect), the control measure must reduce exposure to below that threshold.
If there is no safe threshold, the measure must incorporate toxics best available control technology to minimize emissions. To date, CARB has established formal control measures for 11 TACs that are identified as having no safe threshold.
Under AB 2588, TAC emissions from individual facilities are quantified and prioritized by the air quality management district or air pollution control district. High priority facilities are required to perform a health risk assessment, and if specific thresholds are exceeded, are required to communicate the results to the public through notices and public meetings.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-3
TABLE 4.3-1 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CRITERIA POLLUTANTS Pollutant Averaging Time
California
Standarda
Federal Primary
Standardb Major Pollutant Sources
Ozone (O3)
c 1 hour 0.09 ppm *
Motor vehicles, paints, coatings, and solvents.
8 hours 0.070 ppm 0.070 ppm
Carbon
Monoxide (CO)
1 hour 20.0 ppm 35.0 ppm Internal combustion engines, primarily gasolinepowered motor vehicles. 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9.0 ppm Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO2)
Annual Average 0.030 ppm 0.053 ppm Motor vehicles, petroleum-refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. 1 hour 0.18 ppm 0.100 ppm Sulfur
Dioxide (SO2)
Annual
Arithmetic
Mean
* 0.030 ppm
Fuel combustion, chemical plants, sulfur recovery
plants, and metal processing. 1 hour 0.25 ppm 0.075 ppm 24 hours 0.04 ppm 0.14 ppm
Respirable
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
d
Annual
Arithmetic
Mean
20.0 µg/m3 * Dust and fume-producing construction, industrial, and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric
photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g.,
wind-raised dust and ocean sprays). 24 hours 50.0 µg/m3 150.0 µg/m3 Respirable
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5 )
Annual
Arithmetic
Mean
12.0 µg/m3 12.0 µg/m3 Dust and fume-producing construction, industrial, and agricultural operations, combustion, atmospheric
photochemical reactions, and natural activities (e.g.,
wind-raised dust and ocean sprays). 24 hours * 35.0 µg/m3 Lead (Pb)
30-Day Average 1.5 µg/m3 *
Present source: lead smelters, battery manufacturing
& recycling facilities. Past source: combustion of
leaded gasoline.
Calendar
Quarterly * 1.5 µg/m3
Rolling 3-Month
Average * 0.15 µg/m3
Sulfates (SO4)
e 24 hours 25 µg/m3 * Industrial processes.
Visibility
Reducing
Particles
8 hours
ExCof=0.23/km
visibility of 10≥
miles
No Federal
Standard
Visibility-reducing particles consist of suspended
particulate matter, which is a complex mixture of tiny
particles that consists of dry solid fragments, solid
cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid.
These particles vary greatly in shape, size, and
chemical composition, and can be made up of many
different materials such as metals, soot, soil, dust, and salt.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-4 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.3-1 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CRITERIA POLLUTANTS Pollutant Averaging Time
California
Standarda
Federal Primary
Standardb Major Pollutant Sources
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm No Federal
Standard
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a colorless gas with the odor of rotten eggs. It is formed during bacterial
decomposition of sulfur-containing organic
substances. Also, it can be present in sewer gas and
some natural gas, and can be emitted as the result of
geothermal energy exploitation.
Vinyl Chloride 24 hour 0.01 ppm No Federal
Standard
Vinyl chloride (chloroethene), a chlorinated hydrocarbon, is a colorless gas with a mild, sweet odor.
Most vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) plastic and vinyl products. Vinyl chloride has
been detected near landfills, sewage plants, and
hazardous waste sites, due to microbial breakdown of
chlorinated solvents.
Notes: ppm: parts per million; μg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter * Standard has not been established for this pollutant/duration by this entity. a. California standards for O3, CO (except 8-hour Lake Tahoe), SO2 (1 and 24 hour), NO2, and particulate matter (PM10, PM2.5, and visibility reducing particles), are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded. California ambient air quality standards are listed in the Table of Standards in Section 70200 of Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations. b. National standards (other than O3, PM, and those based on annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The O3 standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration measured at each site in a year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 µg/m3 is equal to or less than one. For PM2.5, the 24-hour standard is attained when 98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over three years, are equal to or less than the standard.
c. On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour ozone primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm. d. On December 14, 2012, the national annual PM2.5 primary standard was lowered from 15 μg/m3 to 12.0 µg/m3 . The existing national 24-hour PM2.5
standards (primary and secondary) were retained at 35 µg/m3 , as was the annual secondary standard of 15 µg/m3. The existing 24-hour PM10 standards (primary and secondary) of 150 µg/m3 also were retained. The form of the annual primary and secondary standards is the annual mean, averaged over 3 years.
e. On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established, and the existing 24-hour and annual arithmetic mean standards were revoked.
Source: California Air Resources Board, 2015, Ambient Air Quality Standards, http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf, accessed on April 20, 2017.
CARB has promulgated the following specific rules to limit TAC emissions:
13 CCR Chapter 10, Section 2485, Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling
13 CCR Chapter 10, Section 2480, Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit School Bus Idling and Idling at Schools
13 CCR Section 2477 and Article 8, Airborne Toxic Control Measure for In-Use Diesel-Fueled Transport Refrigeration Units (TRU) and TRU Generator Sets and Facilities Where TRUs Operate Air Pollutants of Concern
Criteria Air Pollutants
The pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are categorized as primary and/or secondary pollutants. Primary air pollutants are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse inhalable particulate
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-5
matter (PM10), fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb) are primary air pollutants. Of these, CO, SO2, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5 are “criteria air pollutants,” which means that AAQS have been established for them. ROG and NOx are criteria pollutant precursors that form secondary criteria air pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Ozone (O3) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary pollutants. Each of the primary and secondary criteria air pollutants and its known health effects is described here.
Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas produced by incomplete combustion of carbon substances, such as gasoline or diesel fuel. CO is a primary criteria air pollutant. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during winter mornings with little to no wind, when surface-based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near traffic-congested corridors and intersections. The primary adverse health effect associated with CO is interference with normal oxygen transfer to the blood, which may result in tissue oxygen deprivation.1 The SJVAB is designated under the California and National AAQS as being in attainment of CO criteria levels.2
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are compounds composed primarily of atoms of hydrogen and carbon. Internal combustion associated with motor vehicle usage is the major source of VOCs. Other sources of VOCs include evaporative emissions associated with the use of paints and solvents, the application of asphalt paving, and the use of household consumer products such as aerosols. There are no ambient air quality standards established for VOCs. However, because they contribute to the formation of O3, the SJVAPCD has established a significance threshold for this pollutant. Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) are a by-product of fuel combustion and contribute to the formation of groundlevel O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The two major forms of NOx are nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO is a colorless, odorless gas formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high temperature and/or high pressure. The principal form of NO2 produced by combustion is NO, but NO reacts with oxygen quickly to form NO2, creating the mixture of NO and NO2 commonly called NOx. NO2 acts as an acute irritant and is more injurious than NO in equal concentrations. At atmospheric concentrations, however, NO2 is only potentially irritating. NO2 absorbs blue light; the result is a brownish-red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. NO2 exposure concentrations near roadways are of particular concern for susceptible individuals, including people with asthma, children, and the elderly. Current scientific evidence links short-term NO2 exposures, ranging from 30 minutes to 24 hours, with adverse respiratory effects, including airway inflammation in healthy people and increased respiratory symptoms in people with asthma. Also, studies show a connection between breathing elevated short-term NO2 concentrations and increased 1 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Criteria Air Pollutants, https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants, accessed June 28, 2017. 2 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2015. Area Designations Maps: State and National, http://www.arb.ca.gov/ desig/adm/adm.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2017. Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-6 AUGUST 2017
visits to emergency departments and hospital admissions for respiratory issues, especially asthma.3 The SJVAB is designated an attainment area for NO2 under the National and California AAQS.4 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, pungent, irritating gas formed by the combustion of sulfurous fossil fuels. It enters the atmosphere as a result of burning high-sulfur-content fuel oils and coal and from chemical processes at chemical plants and refineries. Gasoline and natural gas have very low sulfur content and do not release significant quantities of SO2. When sulfur dioxide forms sulfates (SO4) in the atmosphere, together these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOX). Thus, SO2 is both a primary and secondary criteria air pollutant. At sufficiently high concentrations, SO2 may irritate the upper respiratory tract. Current scientific evidence links short-term exposures to SO2, ranging from 5 minutes to 24 hours, with an array of adverse respiratory effects including bronchoconstriction and increased asthma symptoms. These effects are particularly important for asthmatics at elevated ventilation rates (e.g., while exercising or playing.) At lower concentrations and when combined with particulates, SO2 may do greater harm by injuring lung tissue. Studies also show a connection between short-term exposure and increased visits to emergency departments and hospital admissions for respiratory illnesses, particularly in at-risk populations including children, the elderly, and asthmatics.5 The SJVAB is designated attainment under the California and National AAQS.6 Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) consists of finely divided solids or liquids such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Two forms of fine particulates are now recognized and regulated.
Inhalable coarse particles, or PM10, include particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns (i.e., 10 millionths of a meter or 0.0004 inch) or less. Inhalable fine particles, or PM2.5, have an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns (i.e., 2.5 millionths of a meter or 0.0001 inch) or less.
Particulate discharge into the atmosphere results primarily from industrial, agricultural, construction, and transportation activities. Both PM10 and PM2.5 may adversely affect the human respiratory system, especially in people who are naturally sensitive or susceptible to breathing problems. EPA scientific review concluded that PM2.5, which penetrates deeply into the lungs, is more likely than PM10 to contribute to health effects and at concentrations that extend well below those allowed by the current PM10 standards. These health effects include premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms (e.g., irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing).
Diesel particulate matter (DPM) is classified by the CARB as a carcinogen. Particulate matter can also cause environmental effects such as visibility impairment,7 environmental damage,8 and aesthetic 3 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Criteria Air Pollutants, https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants, accessed June 28, 2017. 4 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2015. Area Designations Maps: State and National. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2017.
Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm, accessed July 31, 2017.5 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Criteria Air Pollutants. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants, accessed , June 28, 2017. 6 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2015. Area Designations Maps: State and National. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2017.
Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm, accessed July 31, 2017.7 PM2.5 is the main cause of reduced visibility (haze) in parts of the United States.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-7
damage.9,10 The SJVAB is a nonattainment area for PM10 under the California AAQS and nonattainment for PM2.5 under the California and National AAQS.11 Ozone (O3) is commonly referred to as “smog” and is a gas that is formed when VOCs and NOx, both by-products of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. O3 is a secondary criteria air pollutant. O3 concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light winds, and warm temperatures create favorable conditions for its formation. O3 poses a health threat to those who already suffer from respiratory diseases as well as to healthy people. Breathing O3 can trigger a variety of health problems, including chest pain, coughing, throat irritation, and congestion. It can worsen bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma. Ground-level O3 also can reduce lung function and inflame the linings of the lungs. Repeated exposure may permanently scar lung tissue. O3 also affects sensitive vegetation and ecosystems, including forests, parks, wildlife refuges, and wilderness areas. In particular, O3 harms sensitive vegetation, including forest trees and plants during the growing season.12 The SJVAB is designated severe nonattainment under the California AAQS (1-hour and 8-hour) and extreme nonattainment under the National AAQS (8-hour).13
Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally in the environment as well as in manufactured products. The major sources of lead emissions have historically been mobile and industrial sources. As a result of the EPA’s regulatory efforts to remove lead from on-road motor vehicle gasoline, emissions of lead from the transportation sector dramatically declined by 95 percent between 1980 and 1999, and levels of lead in the air decreased by 94 percent between 1980 and 1999. Today, the highest levels of lead in air are usually found near lead smelters. The major sources of lead emissions to the air today are ore and metals processing and piston-engine aircraft operating on leaded aviation gasoline. Once taken into the body, lead distributes throughout the body in the blood and is accumulated in the bones.
Depending on the level of exposure, lead can adversely affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems, and the cardiovascular system. Lead exposure also affects the oxygen-carrying capacity of the blood. The lead effects most commonly encountered in current populations are neurological effects in children and cardiovascular effects (e.g., high blood pressure and heart disease) in adults. Infants and young children are especially sensitive to even low levels of lead, which may contribute to behavioral problems, learning deficits, 8 Particulate matter can be carried over long distances by wind and then settle on ground or water. The effects of this settling include: making lakes and streams acidic; changing the nutrient balance in coastal waters and large river basins; depleting the nutrients in soil; damaging sensitive forests and farm crops; and affecting the diversity of ecosystems. 9 Particulate matter can stain and damage stone and other materials, including culturally important objects such as statues and monuments. 10 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Criteria Air Pollutants. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants, accessed June 28, 2017. 11 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2015. Area Designations Maps: State and National, http://www.arb.ca.gov/ desig/adm/adm.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2017. Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. 12 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Criteria Air Pollutants. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants, accessed June 28, 2017. 13 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2015. Area Designations Maps: State and National, http://www.arb.ca.gov/ desig/adm/adm.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2017. Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-8 AUGUST 2017
and lowered IQ.14 The SJVAB is designated in attainment of the California and National AAQS for lead.15 Because emissions of lead are found only in projects that are permitted by SJVAPCD, lead is not an air quality of concern for the proposed Plan.
Toxic Air Contaminants
At the time of the last update to the TAC list in December 1999, CARB had designated 244 compounds as TACs.16 Additionally, CARB has implemented control measures for a number of compounds that pose high risks and show potential for effective control. The majority of the estimated health risks from TACs can be attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important being particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines.
Diesel Particulate Matter
In 1998, CARB identified DPM as a TAC. Previously, the individual chemical compounds in diesel exhaust were considered TACs. Almost all diesel exhaust particles are 10 microns or less in diameter. Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lungs.
Regional Regulations
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
The primary role of SJVAPCD is to develop plans and implement control measures in the SJVAB to control air pollution. These controls primarily affect stationary sources such as industry and power plants. Rules and regulations have been developed by SJVAPCD to control air pollution from a wide range of air pollution sources. SJVAPCD also provides uniform procedures for assessing potential air quality impacts of proposed projects and for preparing the air quality section of environmental documents.17 Air Quality Planning
The EPA requires states that have areas that do not meet the National AAQS to prepare and submit air quality plans showing how the National AAQS will be met. If the states cannot show how the National AAQS will be met, then the states must show progress toward meeting the National AAQS. These plans are referred to as the State Implementation Plans (SIP). California’s adopted 2007 State Strategy was 14 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Criteria Air Pollutants, https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants, accessed June28, 2017. 15 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2015. Area Designations Maps: State and National, http://www.arb.ca.gov/ desig/adm/adm.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, 2017. Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. 16 California Air Resources Board (CARB), 1999. Final Staff Report: Update to the Toxic Air Contaminant List. 17 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-9
submitted to the EPA as a revision to its SIP in November 2007.18 In addition, CARB requires regions that do not meet California AAQS for ozone to submit clean air plans (CAPs) that describe measures to attain the standard or show progress toward attainment. To ensure federal CAA compliance, SJVAPCD is currently developing plans for meeting new National AAQS for ozone and PM2.5 and the California AAQS for PM10 in the SJVAB (for California CAA compliance).19 The following describes the air plans prepared by the SJVAPCD, which are incorporated by reference per CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. 1-Hour Ozone Plan
Although US EPA revoked its 1979 1-hour ozone standard in June 2005, many planning requirements remain in place, and SJVAPCD must still attain this standard before it can rescind CAA Section 185 fees.
The SJVAPCD’s most recent 1-hour ozone plan, the 2013 Plan for the Revoked 1-hour Ozone Standard, demonstrated attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard by 2017. However, on July 18, 2016, the EPA published in the Federal Register a final action determining that SJVAB has attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS based on the 2012 to 2014 three-year period allowing nonattainment penalties to be lifted under federal Clean Air Act section 179b.
20 8-Hour Ozone Plan
The SJVAPCD’s Governing Board adopted the 2007 Ozone Plan on April 30, 2007. This far-reaching plan, with innovative measures and a “dual path” strategy, assures expeditious attainment of the federal 8-hour ozone standard as set by EPA in 1997. The plan projects that the valley will achieve the 8-hour ozone standard for all areas of the SJVAB no later than 2023. CARB approved the plan on June 14, 2007. EPA approved the 2007 Ozone Plan effective April 30, 2012. SJVAPCD adopted the 2016 Ozone Plan to address the federal 2008 8-hour ozone standard, which must be attained by end of 2031.21,22 PM10 Plan
Based on PM10 measurements from 2003 to 2006, EPA found that the SJVAB has reached federal PM10 standards. On September 21, 2007, the SJVAPCD’s Governing Board adopted the 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan and Request for Redesignation. This plan demonstrates that the valley will continue to meet the PM10 standard. EPA approved the document and on September 25, 2008, the SJVAB was redesignated to attainment/maintenance.
23 18 Note that the plan was adopted by CARB on September 27, 2007; California Air Resources Board. 2007. Air Resources Board’s Proposed State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan. 19 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), 2012. 2012 PM2.5 Plan, December 20. 20 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Ozone Plans. http://www.valleyair.org/ Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone_Plans.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. 21 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Ozone Plans. http://www.valleyair.org/ Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone_Plans.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. 22 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2016 Plan for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard, http://www.valleyair.org/Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone-Plan-2016.htm, accessed July 31, 2017. 23 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-10 AUGUST 2017
PM2.5 Plan
The SJVAPCD adopted the 2012 PM2.5 Plan on December 20, 2012 (SJVAPCD 2012). This plan was approved by CARB on January 24, 2013. This plan will assure that the valley will attain the 2006 PM2.5 National AAQS. The plan uses control measures to reduce NOX, which also leads to fine particulate formation in the atmosphere. The plan incorporates measures to reduce direct emissions of PM2.5, including a strengthening of regulations for various SJVAB industries and the general public through new rules and amendments. The plan estimates that the SJVAB will reach the PM2.5 standard by 2019.24 In addition, SJVAPCD also adopted the 2015 PM2.5 Plan for the 1997 PM2.5 Standard on April 16, 2015 to achieve attainment for the EPA 1997 annual and 24-hour PM2.5 standards by end of 2020. Furthermore, SJVAPCD adopted the 2016 Moderate Area Plan for the 2012 PM2.5 Standard on September 15, 2016 which requests a new attainment deadline of 2025.25
All of the above-referenced plans include measures (i.e., federal, state, and local) that would be implemented through rule making or program funding to reduce air pollutant emissions in the SJVAB.
Transportation control measures are part of these plans.
Applicable SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations
Assembly Bill 170
Assembly Bill 170, Reyes (AB 170), was adopted by state lawmakers in 2003, creating Government Code Section 65302.1, which requires cities and counties in the San Joaquin Valley to amend their general plans to include data and analysis, comprehensive goals, policies, and feasible implementation strategies designed to improve air quality. The elements to be amended include, but are not limited to, those elements dealing with land use, circulation, housing, conservation, and open space. Section 65302.1.c identifies four areas of air quality discussion required in these amendments:
A report describing local air quality conditions, attainment status, and state and federal air quality and transportation plans;
A summary of local, district, state, and federal policies, programs, and regulations to improve air quality;
A comprehensive set of goals, policies, and objectives to improve air quality; Feasible implementation measures designed to achieve these goals. 24 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017. 25 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Particulate Matter Plans, http://www.valleyair.org/ Air_Quality_Plans/PM_Plans.htm, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-11
SJVAPCD Indirect Source Review
On December 15, 2005, SJVAPCD adopted the Indirect Source Review Rule (ISR or Rule 9510) to reduce ozone precursors (i.e., VOC and NOX) and PM10 emissions from new land use development projects.26 Specifically, Rule 9510 targets the indirect emissions from vehicles and construction equipment associated with these projects and applies to both construction and operational-related impacts. The rule applies to any applicant that seeks to gain a final discretionary approval for a development project, or any portion thereof, which upon full buildout would include any one of the following:
50 residential units.
2,000 square feet of commercial space.
25,000 square feet of light industrial space.
100,000 square feet of heavy industrial space.
20,000 square feet of medical office space.
39,000 square feet of general office space.
9,000 square feet of educational space.
10,000 square feet of government space.
20,000 square feet of recreational space.
9,000 square feet of space not identified above.
Transportation/transit projects with construction exhaust emissions of two or more tons of NOx or two or more tons of PM10.
Residential projects on contiguous or adjacent property under common ownership of a single entity in whole or in part, that is designated and zoned for the same development density and land use, regardless of the number of tract maps, and has the capability of accommodating more than 50 residential units.
Nonresidential projects on contiguous or adjacent property under common ownership of a single entity in whole or in part, that is designated and zoned for the same development density and land use, and has the capability of accommodating development projects that emit two or more tons per year of NOX or PM10 during project operations.
The rule requires all subject, nonexempt projects27 to mitigate both construction and operational period emissions by (1) applying feasible SJVAPCD-approved mitigation measures, or (2) paying any applicable fees to support programs that reduce emissions. Off-site emissions reduction fees (off-site fee) are required for projects that do not achieve the required emissions reductions through on-site emission 26 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), 2005. Final Staff Report: Rule 9510 – Indirect Source Review (ISR), Rule 3180 – Administrative Fees for Indirect Source Review, December 15, http://www.valleyair.org/ISR/Documents/ Rule_9510_StaffReport.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017. 27 Development projects that have a mitigated baseline below 2 tons per year of NOX and 2 tons per year of PM10 are exempt.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-12 AUGUST 2017
reduction measures. Phased projects can defer payment of fees in accordance with an Off-site Emissions Reduction Fee Deferral Schedule (FDS) approved by the SJVAPCD.
To determine how an individual project would satisfy Rule 9510, each project would submit an air quality impact assessment (AIA) to the SJVAPCD as early as possible, but no later than prior to the project’s final discretionary approval, to identify the project’s baseline unmitigated emissions inventory for indirect sources: on-site exhaust emissions from construction activities and operational activities from mobile and area sources of emissions (excludes fugitive dust and permitted sources).28 Rule 9510 requires the following reductions, which are levels that the SJVAPCD has identified as necessary, based on their air quality management plans, to reach attainment for ozone and particulate matter:
Construction Equipment Emissions. The exhaust emissions for construction equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) used or associated with the development project shall be reduced by the following amounts from the statewide average as estimated by CARB:
20 percent of the total NOX emissions
45 percent of the total PM10 exhaust emissions
Mitigation measures may include those that reduce construction emissions on-site by using less polluting construction equipment, which can be achieved by utilizing add-on controls, cleaner fuels, or newer, lower emitting equipment.
Operational Emissions.
NOx Emissions. Applicants shall reduce 33.3 percent of the project’s operational baseline NOX emissions over a period of 10 years as quantified in the approved AIA. PM10 Emissions. Applicants shall reduce of 50 percent of the project’s operational baseline PM10 emissions over a period of 10 years as quantified in the approved AIA.
These requirements listed above can be met through any combination of on-site emission reduction measures. In the event that a project cannot achieve the above standards through imposition of mitigation measures, then the project would be required to pay the applicable off-site fees. These fees are used to fund various incentive programs that cover the purchase of new equipment, engine retrofit, and education and outreach.
New and Modified Stationary Source Review
SJVAPCD adopted Rule 2201, New and Modified Stationary Source Review, to control emissions from new stationary sources and all modifications to existing stationary sources which are subject to SJVAPCD’s permit requirements (i.e., “permit projects” for which the SJVAPCD is the lead agency). Permit projects that exceed the Source Performance Standards are required to install Best Available Control Technology (BACT) to control emissions to the maximum extent practicable. 28 Stationary sources of air pollutant emissions are covered separately under SJVAPCD’s Rule 2201, New and Modified Stationary Source Review.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-13
Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions
SJVAPCD controls fugitive PM10 through Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM10 Prohibitions. The purpose of this regulation is to reduce ambient concentrations of PM10 and PM2.5 by requiring actions to prevent, reduce, or mitigate anthropogenic (human caused) fugitive dust emissions. Regulation VIII, Rule 8021 applies to any construction, demolition, excavation, extraction, and other earthmoving activities, including, but not limited to, land clearing, grubbing, scraping, travel on-site, and travel on access roads to and from the site.
Regulation VIII, Rule 8031 applies to the outdoor handling, storage, and transport of any bulk material.
Regulation VIII, Rule 8041 applies to sites where carryout or trackout has occurred or may occur on paved roads or the paved shoulders of public roads.
Regulation VIII, Rule 8051 applies to any open area having 0.5 acre or more within urban areas or
3.0 acres or more within rural areas, and contains at least 1,000 square feet of disturbed surface area. Regulation VIII, Rule 8061 applies to any new or existing public or private paved or unpaved road, road construction project, or road modification project.
Regulation VIII, Rule 8071 applies to any unpaved vehicle/equipment traffic area. Regulation VIII, Rule 8081 applies to off-field agricultural sources.
Sources regulated are required to provide Dust Control Plans that meet the regulation requirements.
Under Rule 8021, a Dust Control Plan is required for any residential project that will include 10 or more acres of disturbed surface area, a nonresidential project with 5 or more acres of disturbed surface area, or a project that relocates 2,500 cubic yards per day of bulk materials for at least three days. The Dust Control Plan is required to be submitted to SJVAPCD prior to the start of any construction activity. The Dust Control Plan must also describe fugitive dust control measure to be implemented before, during, and after any dust-generating activity. For sites smaller than those listed above, the project is still required to notify SJVAPCD a minimum of 48 hours prior to commencing earthmoving activities.
Nuisance Odors
SJVAPCD controls nuisance odors through implementation of Rule 4102, Nuisance. Pursuant to this rule, “a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.” Employer Based Trip Reduction Program
SJVAPCD has implemented Rule 9410, Employer Based Trip Reduction. The purpose of this rule is to reduce VMT from private vehicles used by employees to commute to and from their worksites to reduce emissions of NOx, VOC, and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). The rule applies to employers with at least 100 employees. Employers are required to implement an Employer Trip Reduction Implementation
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-14 AUGUST 2017
Plan (ETRIP) for each worksite with 100 or more eligible employees to meet applicable targets specified in the rule. Employers are required to facilitate the participation of the development of ETRIPs by providing information to its employees explaining the requirements and applicability of this rule. Employers are required to prepare and submit an ETRIP for each worksite to the District. The ETRIP must be updated annually. Under this rule, employers shall collect information on the modes of transportation used for each eligible employee’s commutes both to and from work for every day of the commute verification period, as defined in using either the mandatory commute verification method or a representative survey method. Annual reporting includes the results of the commute verification for the previous calendar year along with the measures implemented as outlined in the ETRIP and, if necessary, any updates to the ETRIP.
Local Regulations
City of Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan includes objectives and policies within its Resource Conservation and Resilience Element that pertain directly to air quality. However, various objectives and policies included in the other General Plan Elements related to land use development patterns (e.g., infill and mixed-use development), transportation and transit, and urban form would also contribute in improving air quality within the proposed Plan Area and SJVAB. Table 4.3-2 includes examples of General Plan objectives and policies that pertain to improving air quality.
4.3.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
The City of Fresno (City) is in the central portion of the SJVAB. SJVAB consists of eight counties: Fresno, Kern (western and central), Kings, Tulare, Madera, Merced, San Joaquin, and Stanislaus. Air pollution from significant activities in the SJVAB includes a variety of industrial-based sources as well as on- and off-road mobile sources. These sources, coupled with geographical and meteorological conditions unique to the area, stimulate the formation of unhealthy air.
The SJVAB is approximately 250 miles long and an average of 35 miles wide. It is bordered by the Sierra Nevada in the east, the Coast Ranges in the west, and the Tehachapi mountains in the south. There is a slight downward elevation gradient from Bakersfield in the southeast end (elevation 408 feet) to sea level at the northwest end where the valley opens to the San Francisco Bay at the Carquinez Straits. At its northern end is the Sacramento Valley, which comprises the northern half of California’s Central Valley.
The bowl-shaped topography inhibits movement of pollutants out of the valley.29 29 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-15
TABLE 4.3-2 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AIR QUALITY Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Urban Form, Land Use and Design Element
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 prominent east‐west and north‐south transit‐oriented, mixed‐use corridors with distinctive 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‐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.
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.
Policy UF‐12‐a
BRT Corridors. Design land uses and integrate development site plans along BRT corridors, with transitoriented 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-d
Appropriate Mixed‐Use. Facilitate the development of vertical and horizontal mixed-uses to blend residential, commercial, and public land uses on one site or adjacent sites. Ensure land use compatibility between mixed‐ use districts in Activity Centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
Policy UF-12e
Access to Activity Centers. Promote adoptions 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. Update the Development Code to include use regulations and standards to allow for mixed‐uses and shared parking facilities, including multi‐story and underground parking facilities, within Activity Centers.
Objective UF‐14 Create an urban form that facilitates multi‐modal connectivity.
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.
Policy UF-14-b
Local Street Connectivity. Design local roadways to connect throughout neighborhoods and large private developments with adjacent major streets and pathways of existing adjacent development. Create access for pedestrians and bicycles where a local street must dead end or be designed as a cul‐de‐sac to adjoining uses that provide services, shopping, and connecting pathways for access to the greater community area.
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 redevelopable land uses within the City Limit where urban services are available considering the establishment and implementation of supportive regulations and programs.
Policy LU-2-b
Infill Development for Affordable Housing. Consider 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.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-16 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.3-2 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AIR QUALITY Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Policy LU‐3‐c
Zoning for High Density on Major BRT Corridors. Consider the adoption of supportive zoning regulations for compact development along BRT corridors leading to the Downtown Core that will not diminish the long‐term growth and development potential for Downtown.
Policy LU‐5‐f High Density Residential Uses. Promote high‐density residential uses to support Activity Centers and BRT Corridors, affordable housing and walkable access to transit stops.
Policy LU‐6‐d
Neighborhood and Community Commercial Center Design. Plan for neighborhood mixed use and community commercial uses to implement the Urban Form concepts of the General Plan, promote the stability and identity of neighborhood and community shopping areas, and allow efficient access without compromising the operational effectiveness of the street system.
Neighborhoods will be anchored by community commercial centers with a mix of uses that meet the area’s needs and create a sense of place.
Community commercial centers will be located within Activity Centers.
Policy LU‐6‐f
Auto‐Oriented Commercial Uses. Direct highway‐oriented and auto‐serving commercial uses to locations that are compatible with the Urban Form policies of the General Plan. Ensure adequate buffering measures for adjacent residential uses noise, glare, odors, and dust.
Policy LU-8-b Access to Public Facilities. Ensure that major public facilities and institutions have adequate multi‐modal access and can be easily reached by public transit.
Resource Conservation and Resiliency Element
Objective RC-4 In cooperation with other jurisdictions and agencies in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin, take necessary actions to achieve and maintain compliance with State and federal air quality standards for criteria pollutants.
Policy RC-4-a
Support Regional Efforts. Support and lead, where appropriate, regional, State and federal programs and actions for the improvement of air quality, especially the SJVAPCD’s efforts to monitor and control air pollutants from both stationary and mobile sources and implement Reasonably Available Control Measures in the Ozone Attainment Plan.
Policy RC-4-b
Conditions of Approval. Develop and incorporate air quality maintenance requirements, compatible with Air Quality Attainment and Maintenance Plans, as conditions of approval for General Plan amendments, community plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood plans, Concept Plans, and development proposals.
Policy RC-4-c Evaluate Impacts with Models. Continue to require the use of computer models used by SJVAPCD to evaluate the air quality impacts of plans and projects that require such environmental review by the City.
Policy 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.
Policy RC-4-e
Support Employer‐Based Efforts. Support and promote employer implementation of staggered work hours and employee incentives to use carpools, public transit and other measures to reduce vehicular use and traffic congestion.
Policy RC-4-f
Municipal Operations and Fleet Actions. Continue to control and reduce air pollution emissions from vehicles owned by the City operations and municipal operations and facilities by undertaking the following:
Expand the use of alternative fuel, electric, and hybrid vehicles in City fleets. Create preventive maintenance schedules that will ensure efficient engine operation. Include air conditioning recycling and charging stations in the City vehicle maintenance facilities, to reduce freon gases being released into the atmosphere and electrostatic filtering systems in City maintenance shops, when feasible or when required by health regulations. Use satellite corporation yards for decentralized storage and vehicle maintenance. Convert City‐owned emergency backup generators to natural gas fuels whenever possible, and Create an advanced energy storage system.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-17
TABLE 4.3-2 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AIR QUALITY Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Policy RC-4-g
FAX Actions. Continue efforts to improve Fresno Area Express (FAX) bus transit system technical performance, reduce emission levels, streamline system operations, and implement BRT where supportive land uses are proposed by Figure LU‐1: Land Use Diagram.
Policy RC-4-h Airport Actions. Support Airport efforts to develop and maintain programs and policies to support City, State and Federal efforts to achieve and maintain air quality standards.
Policy RC-4-j All Departments. Continue to develop and implement in all City departments, operational policies to reduce air pollution.
Policy RC-4-k Electric Charging. Develop standards to facilitate electric charging infrastructure in both new and existing public and private buildings, in order to accommodate these vehicles as the technology becomes widespread.
Policy RC-8-j
Alternative Fuel Network. Support the development of a network of integrated charging and alternate fuel station for both public and private vehicles, and if feasible, open up municipal stations to the public as part of network development.
Healthy Communities Element
Policy HC-3-d
Green Standards for Affordable Housing. Provide appropriate incentives for affordable housing providers, agencies, non‐profit and market rate developers to use LEED and CalGreen Tier 1 or Tier 2 standards or third party equivalents.
Policy HC-3-f New Drive‐Through Facilities. Include in the Development Code design review to reduce vehicle emissions resulting from queued idling vehicles at drive‐through facilities in proximity to residential neighborhoods.
Mobility and Transportation Element
Objective MT‐3 Identify, promote and preserve scenic or aesthetically unique corridors by application of appropriate policies and regulations.
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.
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 mitigation to maintain 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.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-18 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.3-2 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO AIR QUALITY Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
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-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.
Objective MT‐4
To 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 right-of-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.
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-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 decision-making.
Climate
The SJVAB is in a Mediterranean climate zone and is influenced by a subtropical high-pressure cell most of the year. Mediterranean climates are characterized by sparse rainfall, which occurs mainly in winter.
Summers are hot and dry. Summertime maximum temperatures often exceed 100°F in the valley.
The subtropical high-pressure cell is strongest during spring, summer, and fall and produces subsiding air, which can result in temperature inversions in the valley. A temperature inversion can act like a lid, inhibiting vertical mixing of the air mass at the surface. Any emissions of pollutants can be trapped below the inversion. Most of the surrounding mountains are above the normal height of summer inversions (1,500 to 3,000 feet).
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-19
Winter-time high pressure events can often last many weeks, with surface temperatures often lowering into the 30°F. During these events, fog can be present and inversions are extremely strong. These wintertime inversions can inhibit vertical mixing of pollutants to a few hundred feet.30 Wind Patterns
Wind speed and direction play an important role in dispersion and transport of air pollutants. Wind at the surface and aloft can disperse pollution by mixing and transporting it to other locations.
Especially in summer, winds in the valley most frequently blow from the northwest. The region’s topographic features restrict air movement and channel the air mass towards the southeastern end of the valley. Marine air can flow into the basin from the San Joaquin River Delta and over Altamont Pass and Pacheco Pass, where it can flow along the axis of the valley, over the Tehachapi pass, into the Southeast Desert Air Basin. This wind pattern contributes to transporting pollutants from the Sacramento Valley and the Bay Area into the SJVAB. Approximately 27 percent of the total emissions in the northern portion, 11 percent of total emissions in the central region, and 7 percent of total emission in the south valley of the SJVAB are attributed to air pollution transported from these two areas.31 The Coastal Range is a barrier to air movement to the west and the high Sierra Nevada range is a significant barrier to the east (the highest peaks in the southern Sierra Nevada reach almost halfway through the Earth’s atmosphere).
Many days in the winter are marked by stagnation events where winds are very weak. Transport of pollutants during winter can be very limited. A secondary but significant summer wind pattern is from the southeast and can be associated with nighttime drainage winds, prefrontal conditions, and summer monsoons.
Two significant diurnal wind cycles that occur frequently in the valley are the sea breeze and mountainvalley upslope and drainage flows. The sea breeze can accentuate the northwest wind flow, especially on summer afternoons. Nighttime drainage flows can accentuate the southeast movement of air down the valley. In the mountains during periods of weak synoptic scale winds, winds tend to be upslope during the day and downslope at night. Nighttime and drainage flows are especially pronounced during the winter when flow from the easterly direction is enhanced by nighttime cooling in the Sierra Nevada. Eddies can form in the valley wind flow and can recirculate a polluted air mass for an extended period. Such an eddy occurs in the Fresno area during both winter and summer.32 Temperature
Solar radiation and temperature are particularly important in the chemistry of ozone formation. The SJVAB averages over 260 sunny days per year. Photochemical air pollution (primarily ozone) is produced by the atmospheric reaction of organic substances (such as volatile organic compounds) and nitrogen dioxide 30 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017. 31 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Frequently Asked Questions, http://www.valleyair.org/general_info/frequently_asked_questions.htm#What%20is%20being%20done%20to%20improve%20ai r%20quality%20in%20the%20San%20Joaquin%20Valley, accessed July 31, 2017. 32 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-20 AUGUST 2017
under the influence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations are very dependent on the amount of solar radiation, especially during late spring, summer, and early fall. Ozone levels typically peak in the afternoon. After the sun goes down, the chemical reaction between nitrous oxide and ozone begins to dominate. This reaction tends to scavenge and remove the ozone in the metropolitan areas through the early morning hours, resulting in the lowest ozone levels, possibly reaching zero at sunrise in areas with high nitrogen oxides emissions. At sunrise, nitrogen oxides tend to peak, partly due to low levels of ozone at this time and also due to the morning commuter vehicle emissions of nitrogen oxides.
Generally, the higher the temperature, the more ozone formed, since reaction rates increase with temperature. However, extremely hot temperatures can “lift” or “break” the inversion layer. Typically, if the inversion layer does not lift to allow the buildup of contaminants to be dispersed, the ozone levels will peak in the late afternoon. If the inversion layer breaks and the resultant afternoon winds occur, the ozone will peak in the early afternoon and decrease in the late afternoon as the contaminants are dispersed or transported out of the SJVAB.
Ozone levels are low during winter periods when there is much less sunlight to drive the photochemical reaction.33
Precipitation, Humidity, and Fog
Precipitation and fog may reduce or limit some pollutant concentrations. Ozone needs sunlight for its formation, and clouds and fog can block the required solar radiation. Wet fogs can cleanse the air during winter as moisture collects on particles and deposits them on the ground. Atmospheric moisture can also increase pollution levels. In fogs with less water content, the moisture acts to form secondary ammonium nitrate particulate matter. This ammonium nitrate is part of the valley’s PM2.5 and PM10 problem. The winds and unstable air conditions experienced during the passage of winter storms result in periods of low pollutant concentrations and excellent visibility. Between winter storms, high pressure and light winds allow cold moist air to pool on the SJVAB floor. This creates strong low-level temperature inversions and very stable air conditions, which can lead to tule fog. Wintertime conditions favorable to fog formation are also conditions favorable to high concentrations of PM2.5 and PM10. 34 Inversions
The vertical dispersion of air pollutants in the San Joaquin Valley can be limited by persistent temperature inversions. Air temperature in the lowest layer of the atmosphere typically decreases with altitude. A reversal of this atmospheric state, where the air temperature increases with height, is termed an inversion. The height of the base of the inversion is known as the “mixing height.” This is the level to which pollutants can mix vertically. Mixing of air is minimized above and below the inversion base. The inversion base represents an abrupt density change where little air movement occurs. 33 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017. 34 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-21
Inversion layers are significant in determining pollutant concentrations. Concentration levels can be related to the amount of mixing space below the inversion. Temperature inversions that occur on the summer days are usually 2,000 to 2,500 feet above the valley floor. In winter months, overnight inversions occur 500 to 1,500 feet above the valley floor.35
Attainment Status
The air quality management plans (AQMP) prepared by SJVAPCD provide the framework for SJVAB to achieve attainment of the State and federal AAQS through the SIP. Areas are classified as attainment or nonattainment areas for particular pollutants, depending on whether they meet the ambient air quality standards. Severity classifications for ozone nonattainment range in magnitude from marginal, moderate, and serious to severe and extreme.
At the federal level, the SJVAPCD is designated as extreme nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard, attainment for PM10 and CO, and nonattainment for PM2.5. At the State level, the SJVAB is designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 standards. Although the federal 1-hour ozone standard was revoked in 2005, the SJVAB attained the federal 1-hour ozone in 2016 allowing for penalties that were still in place to be lifted under federal CCA Section 179b.
36 The attainment status for the SJVAB with respect to
various pollutants of concern is displayed in Table 4.3-3.
Existing Ambient Air Quality
CARB, in cooperation with SJVAPCD, monitors air quality throughout the SJVAB. The closest monitoring station to the proposed Plan Area is the Fresno – Drummond Street Monitoring Station in the City. This station monitors O3, CO, NO2, and PM10. Data from the Fresno – Hamilton and Winery and Fresno – 1st Street Monitoring Stations was utilized to supplement data for CO and PM2.5, respectively. Data from these stations was summarized in Table 4.3-4. In general, the ambient air quality measurements from these stations are representative of the air quality in the vicinity of the City. The topographical features and meteorological conditions specific to the region and to the City of Fresno are variables that can have an effect on the level of air quality as recorded at the aforementioned monitoring stations.
As shown in the table, the area regularly exceeds the California and National AAQs for O3. In addition, the area regularly exceeds the National PM2.5 AAQS and the California PM10 AAQS. The area has not exceeded the CO or NO2 standards in the last five years.
35 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017. 36 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Ozone Plans. http://www.valleyair.org/ Air_Quality_Plans/Ozone_Plans.htm, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-22 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.3-3 ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AREA AIR BASIN Pollutant Federal State
Ozone – 1-hour Revoked in 2005a Nonattainment/Severe
Ozone – 8-hour Nonattainment/Extremeb Nonattainment
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) Attainmentc Nonattainment Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Nonattainmentd Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Attainment/Unclassified Attainment Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Attainment/Unclassified Attainment Lead No Designation/Classification Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide No Federal Standard Unclassified
Sulfates No Federal Standard Attainment
Visibility Reducing Particles No Federal Standard Unclassified Vinyl Chloride No Federal Standard Attainment
a. Effective June 15, 2005, the US EPA revoked the federal 1-hour ozone standard, including associated designations and classifications. On July 18, 2016, USEPA determined the SJVAB to be in attainment.
b. Though the SJVAB was initially classified as serious nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, USEPA approved reclassification of SJVAB to extreme nonattainment in the Federal Register on May 5, 2010 (effective June 4, 2010). c. The USEPA redesignated the SJVAB to attainment and approved the PM10 Maintenance Plan on September 25, 2008. d. The USEPA designated the SJVAB as nonattainment on November 13, 2009 (effective December 14, 2009).
Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Ambient Air Quality Standards & Valley Attainment Status. 2017. http://www.valleyair.org/aqinfo/attainment.htm; California Air Resources Board. 2015, December. Area Designations Maps: State and National. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.
Sensitive Receptors
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, especially those with cardiorespiratory diseases.
Residential areas are also considered sensitive receptors to air pollution because residents, including children and the elderly, tend to be at home for extended periods of time, resulting in sustained exposure to any pollutants present. Other sensitive receptors include retirement facilities, hospitals, and schools.
Recreational land uses are considered moderately sensitive to air pollution. Although exposure periods are generally short, exercise places a high demand on respiratory functions, which can be impaired by air pollution. In addition, noticeable air pollution can detract from the enjoyment of recreation. Industrial, commercial, retail, and office areas are considered the least sensitive to air pollution. Exposure periods are relatively short and intermittent, as the majority of the workers tend to stay indoors most of the time.
In addition, the working population is generally the healthiest segment of the public.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-23
TABLE 4.3-4 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY
Pollutant/Standard
Number of Days Threshold Were Exceeded and
Maximum Levels During Such Violations
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Ozone (O3)
a
State 1-Hour ≥ 0.09 ppm
State 8-hour ≥ 0.07 ppm
Federal 8-Hour > 0.075 ppmb
Maximum 1-Hour Conc. (ppm)
Maximum 8-Hour Conc. (ppm)
19 75
46 0.127
0.108
9 46
24 0.107
0.094
9 44
20 0.110
0.094
12 41
21 0.135
0.110
13 60
32 0.117
0.093
Carbon Monoxide (CO)c
State 8-Hour > 9.0 ppm
Federal 8-Hour ≥ 9.0 ppm
Maximum 8-Hour Conc. (ppm)
0 0
2.22 *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
a
State 1-Hour ≥ 0.18 (ppm)
Maximum 1-Hour Conc. (ppb)
0 0.07
0 0.06
0 0.07
0 0.10
0 0.06
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
State 1-Hour ≥ 0.04 ppm
Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Coarse Particulates (PM10)
a
State 24-Hour > 50 µg/m3
Federal 24-Hour > 150 µg/m3
Maximum 24-Hour Conc. (µg/ m3)
8 0
114.0
20 0
138.1
46 0
102.9
13 0
120.7
17 0
88.3 Fine Particulates (PM2.5)
d
Federal 24-Hour > 35 µg/m3
Maximum 24-Hour Conc. (µg/m3)
7 59.0
12 95.4
8 74.5
5 70.3
5 48.6
Notes: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; * = insufficient data; NA = Not Available a. Data obtained from the Fresno – Drummond Street Monitoring Station in the City of Fresno. b. On October 1, 2015 the EPA adopted a new 8-hour national AAQS for ozone of 0.070 ppm (70 ppb). c. Data obtained from the Fresno – 1st Street Monitoring Station in the City of Fresno. d. Data obtained from the Fresno – Hamilton and Winery Monitoring Station in the City of Fresno.
Source: California Air Resources Board, 2015, Air Pollution Data Monitoring Cards (2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016), http://www.arb.ca.gov/ adam/index.html.
4.3.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Plan would have a significant effect on the environment with respect to air quality if it would:
1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
2. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-24 AUGUST 2017
3. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors).
4. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
5. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
4.3.2.1 SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
THRESHOLDS
As stated in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district may be relied on to make the above determinations. Thus, this analysis also evaluates the project’s air quality impacts pursuant to SJVAPCD’s recommended guidelines and thresholds of significance, as discussed further below.
The SJVAPCD has developed the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI) and recently adopted the latest version on March 19, 2015.37 The current GAMAQI represents the latest guidance for addressing air quality impacts in the SJVAB. Changes to the GAMAQI are primarily administrative in nature to update air basin information, attainment status, and general guidance to reflect updated conditions. The following thresholds of significance from the SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI are used to determine whether a proposed project would result in a significant air quality impact.
Regional Significance Thresholds
SJVACD has identified regional construction and operational emissions thresholds to determine a project’s cumulative impact on air quality in the SJVAB. Specifically, these thresholds gauge whether a project would significantly contribute to a nonattainment designation based on the mass emissions generated.
Mass emissions from a project are not correlated with concentrations of air pollutants. Table 4.3-5 lists SJVAPCD’s regional significance thresholds. It should be noted that SJVAPCD Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII may not reduce project-specific construction and operational emissions to below the SJVAPCD thresholds.
Ambient Air Quality Analysis
The need to perform air quality dispersion modeling for typical urban development projects is determined on a case-by-case basis, depending on project size. SJVAPCD applies the following guidance in determining whether an ambient air quality analysis should be conducted for development projects. Compliance with Rule 9510 frequently reduces project-specific emissions to less than significant levels. However, for large construction projects, additional mitigation may be required. SJVAPCD recommends that an ambient air quality analysis be performed for all pollutants when on-site emissions of any criteria pollutant from construction activities would equal or exceed any applicable threshold of significance for criteria pollutants, or 100 pounds per day of any criteria pollutant, after compliance with Rule 9510 requirements and implementation of all enforceable mitigation measures. 37 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD). Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf, accessed July 31, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-25
TABLE 4.3-5 SJVAPCD REGIONAL CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS Pollutant
Construction and Operational
Phase Significance Thresholds
(Tons/Year)
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 100
Nitrous Oxide (NOX) 10
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 10
Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 27
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) 15
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 15
Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf.
However, air dispersion modeling is not applicable at a program level. Consequently, for the purpose of this program-level EIR, emissions of any criteria air pollutant that would exceed the applicable threshold of significance identified in Table 4.3-5 is considered to result in elevated concentrations of air pollutants that have the potential to exceed the AAQS. It should be noted that CO hotspot monitoring was previously required under the GAMAQI. However, emissions from motor vehicles, by far the largest source of CO emissions, have been declining since 1985 despite increases in VMT, the introduction of new automotive emission controls, and fleet turnover. Consequently, no CO hotspots have been reported in the SJVAB even at the most congested intersections.
Consistency with the Applicable Air Quality Plan
SJVAPCD has prepared plans to attain federal and State AAQS. The significance thresholds in Table 4.3-5 are based on SJVAPCD’s New Source Review (NSR) offset requirements for stationary sources. Emission reductions achieved through implementation of District offset requirements are a major component of SJVAPCD’s air quality plans. Thus, projects with emissions below the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants (see Table 4.3-5) would be determined to “not conflict or obstruct implementation of the District’s air quality plan.” Because dispersion modeling is not applicable for a program EIR, projects with emissions that exceed these values are considered to have the potential to exceed the AAQS, resulting in a potentially significant impact.
Odors
Odor impacts associated with a proposed project would be considered significant if the project has the potential to frequently expose members of the public to objectionable odors. There are two general scenarios where a project could expose people to substantial odors:
Odor Generator. Projects that would potentially generate odorous emissions proposed to locate near existing sensitive receptors or other land uses where people may congregate.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-26 AUGUST 2017
Odor Receiver. Residential or other sensitive receptor projects or other projects built for the intent of attracting people locating near existing odor sources.
Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the number of variables that can influence the potential for an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, there are no quantitative or formulaic methodologies to determine if potential odors would have a significant impact. Rather, projects must be assessed on a caseby-case basis. As shown in Table 4.3-6, the SJVAPCD has identified buffer distances for common types of facilities that have been known to produce odors in the SJVAB. The degree of odors could be significant and may be based on a review of SJVAPCD’s complaint records.
TABLE 4.3-6 SJVAPCD SCREENING LEVELS FOR POTENTIAL ODOR SOURCES Land Use/Type of Operation Screening Distance
Wastewater Treatment Plan 2 miles
Sanitary Landfill 1 miles
Transfer Station 1 miles
Composting Facility 1 miles
Petroleum Refinery 2 miles
Asphalt Batch Plant 1 miles
Chemical Manufacturing 1 miles
Fiberglass Manufacturing 1 miles
Painting/Coating Operations 1 miles
Food Processing Facility 1 miles
Feed Lot/ Dairy 1 miles
Rendering Plant 1 miles
Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2012a, April. Draft Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts - 2012. http://www.valleyair.org/workshops/postings/2012/4-25- 12GAMAQI/draft_GAMAQI_2012_April11.pdf.
For a project locating near an existing source of odors, California Supreme Court in California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (CBIA), ruled that CEQA generally does not require an evaluation of impacts of the environment on a project unless a project will exacerbate an existing environmental hazard. As shown in Table 4.3-6, sensitive receptors such as residential, commercial, office, and institutional uses (such as the hospital land uses) would not be the types of land uses that are associated with generating substantial odors and would not be anticipated to exacerbate existing odor impacts. Thus, evaluation of this scenario is not considered for purposes of this analysis.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-27
Health Risk
From a health risk perspective, there are two types of land use projects that have the potential to cause long-term public health risk impacts.
Type A Projects. Land use projects that will place new toxic sources in the vicinity of existing receptors.
Examples of Type A projects include gasoline dispensing facilities, asphalt batch plants, warehouse distribution centers, new freeways or high traffic roads, and other stationary sources that emit toxic substance.
Type B Projects. Land use projects that will place new receptors in the vicinity of existing toxics sources. Examples of Type B projects includes residential, commercial, and institutional developments proposed in the vicinity of existing toxic emission sources such as stationary sources, freeways or high traffic roads, rail yards, and warehouse distribution centers.
Whenever a project would require use of chemical compounds that have been identified in SJVAPCD’s Rule 2201, placed on CARB’s air toxics list pursuant to Assembly Bill 1807 (AB 1807), Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act (1983), or placed on the EPA’s National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, a health risk assessment is warranted. In addition, if a project would place sensitive land uses proximate to major sources of TACs (roadways with over 50,000 vehicles per day or major stationary sources), a health risk assessment may also be warranted. Table 4.3-7 lists the SJVAPCD’s TAC incremental risk thresholds for operation of a project or placement of sensitive land uses proximate to major sources of air pollution. As stated, under the CBIA ruling, while CEQA is generally not required to analyze impacts of the environment on a project, where a project will exacerbate an existing environmental hazard, CEQA requires an analysis of the worsened condition on future project residents and the public at large.
However, projects that do not generate emissions that exceed the values in Table 4.3-6 would not substantially contribute to cumulative air quality hazards or exacerbate an existing environmental hazard.
Residential, commercial, office, and institutional uses (such as the hospital land uses) do not use substantial quantities of TACs and typically do not exacerbate existing hazards. Thus, for purposes of this analysis, evaluation of the Type B Projects scenario impacts is not included in the impacts discussion below.
TABLE 4.3-7 SJVAPCD TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS INCREMENTAL RISK THRESHOLDS Cancer Riska ≥ 10 in 1 million
Hazard Indexb ≥ 1.0
a. For the Maximum Exposed Individuals (MEI).
b. Ground-level concentrations of noncarcinogenic TACs for the MEI.
Source: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. 2015, March. Guidance for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts. http://www.valleyair.org/transportation/GAMAQI_3-19-15.pdf.
Cumulative Impacts
By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development. Future attainment of federal and State AAQS is a function of successful implementation of the SJVAPCD’s attainment plans. Consequently, the District’s
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-28 AUGUST 2017
application of thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants is relevant to the determination of whether a project’s individual emissions would have a cumulatively significant impact on air quality. Pursuant to the SJVAPCD’s guidance, if project-specific emissions would be less than the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants, the project would not be expected to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the SJVAPCD is in nonattainment under applicable federal or State AAQS.
4.3.3 IMPACT DISCUSSION
4.3.3.1 METHODOLOGY
This air quality evaluation was prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA to determine if significant air quality impacts are likely to occur in conjunction with future development that would be accommodated by the proposed Plan. SJVAPCD has published the GAMAQI that provides local governments with guidance for analyzing and mitigating air quality impacts and was used in this analysis.
The City’s criteria air pollutant emissions inventory includes the following sectors:
Transportation. Based on the annual average trip generation and VMT data provided by Fehr and Peers (see Appendix G of this Draft EIR). An average trip distance of 8.04 miles per trip is utilized for the proposed Plan buildout scenario. Based on the estimated net increase of 182,853 average daily trips (ADT) generated associated with the new proposed land uses, an approximately 1,470,179 additional vehicle miles per day would be generated.
Area Sources. Area and stationary sources are based on the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) defaults for emissions generated from use of consumer products and cleaning supplies. Energy. Criteria air pollutant emissions from energy use (natural gas used for cooking, heating, etc.) are based on the CalEEMod defaults for natural gas usage by residential and nonresidential land uses.
New buildings are assumed to comply with the 2016 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which are 28 percent more energy efficient for residential buildings and 5 percent more energy efficient for nonresidential buildings and residential buildings of four stories or more than the 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Construction. It is assumed that development of the proposed Plan would generally commence beginning of 2018. For purposes of this analysis, the construction phasing utilizes the CalEEMod default schedule based on the anticipated new land uses and the duration of each activity is normalized to a 25-year buildout period. In addition, while the specific timeline in how the land uses accommodated in the proposed Plan would be developed is unknown, this analysis assumes that the various construction activities (e.g., site preparation, demolition, building construction) would overlap. Furthermore, it is assumed that all of the existing residential and non-residential land uses within the proposed Plan Area remain under the proposed future buildout scenario. Construction assumptions were based on CalEEMod defaults such as construction equipment mix and worker, vendor, and haul trips. Table 4.3-8 shows the assumed construction activities and the start and end dates (based on 25-year buildout) and equipment mix for each of the activities.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-29
TABLE 4.3-8 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, PHASING, AND EQUIPMENT Activities Start/End Datesa Equipmentb
Demolition 1/1/2018 – 3/19/2019 1 concrete/industrial saw; 3 excavators; 2 rubber tired dozers; 1 water truck
Site Preparation 1/1/2018 – 9/21/2018 3 rubber tired dozers; 4 tractors/loaders/backhoes; 1 water truck
Grading 1/1/2018 – 11/18/2019 2 excavators; 1 grader; 1 rubber tired dozer; 2 scrapers; 2 tractors/loaders/backhoes; 1 water truck
Building Construction 1/1/2018 – 10/20/2036 1 crane; 3 forklifts; 1 generator set; 3 tractors/loaders/ backhoes; 1 welder
Asphalt Paving 1/1/2018 – 5/1/2019 2 pavers; 2 paving equipment; 2 rollers Architectural Coating 1/1/2018 – 3/14/2024 1 air compressor a. Based on CalEEMod defaults and normalized to a 25-year buildout duration. b. Based on CalEEMod defaults.
AQ-1 The proposed Plan would be inconsistent with the SJVAPCD air quality management plans as its buildout would substantially increase longterm criteria air pollutants and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB.
CEQA requires that projects be evaluated for consistency with the AQMPs. A consistency determination plays an important role in local agency project review by linking local planning and individual projects to the AQMPs. It fulfills the CEQA goal of informing decision makers of the environmental effects of a project under consideration at a stage early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed. It also provides the local agency with ongoing information as to whether they are contributing to the clean air goals of the AQMPs. The regional emissions inventory for the SJVAB is compiled by SJVAPCD and Fresno Council of Governments (COG). Regional population, housing, and employment projections developed by Fresno COG are based, in part, on the local jurisdictions’ general plan land use designations. These projections form the foundation for the emissions inventory of the AQMP. These demographic trends are incorporated into the 2014–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, compiled by Fresno COG to determine priority transportation projects within the Fresno COG region.
Projects that are consistent with the local general plan are considered consistent with the air quality– related regional plan. Typically, only new or amended general plan elements, specific plans, and major projects that have the potential to affect the regional population and employment forecasts need to undergo a consistency review.
SJVAPCD is tasked with implementing programs and regulations required by the Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act. SJVAPCD has prepared several plans to attain the National AAQS and California AAQS. Emission reductions achieved through implementation of SJVAPCD’s NSR offset requirements are a major component of SJVAPCD’s air quality plans. The established thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions are based on SJVAPCD offset requirements for stationary sources. Therefore, projects
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-30 AUGUST 2017
with emissions below the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants would be determined to “not conflict or obstruct implementation of the District’s air quality plan.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15206(b) states that a project is of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance if it is a residential development of more than 500 dwelling units or a commercial office building of 250,000 square feet or more or that employs 1,000 or more employees. Specifically, the proposed Plan would introduce up to 4,512,586 square feet of non-residential building space and 7,131 new dwelling units in addition to 8,67138 new jobs over existing conditions in the Plan Area, and is therefore a project of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance. Thus, implementation of the proposed Plan would have the potential to substantially affect Fresno COG’s demographic projections beyond what is already anticipated for the Plan Area.
In addition, the analyses in the response to Impact AQ-3 demonstrate that the proposed Plan would generate long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants that would exceed SJVAPCD’s regional operationphase significance thresholds, which were established to determine whether a project has the potential to cumulatively contribute to the SJVAB’s nonattainment designations. Thus, implementation of the proposed Plan would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay timely attainment of the AAQS.
Summary
As discussed above, while the proposed Plan would result in a substantial increase in long-term criteria pollutant emissions compared to existing conditions, it would support a more sustainable development pattern for the Plan area. As the improvements, objectives, and policies under the proposed Plan would support a more sustainable development pattern in accommodating future growth for the Plan area, they would contribute in minimizing long-term emissions of criteria air pollutants. Various policies of the proposed Plan would promote complete streets, mixed-use and transit oriented neighborhoods, and increased capacity for alternative transportation modes, which would help reduce air pollutant emissions.
For example, policies include:
Policy LU-2.5 Attract and encourage higher-density mixed use development along California Avenue, connecting to Downtown Fresno, Fresno Area Express (FAX), and High-Speed Rail (HSR) with a future bus-rapid transit line, to support a mixed-use corridor.
Policy LU-3.1 Encourage the development of centers, or nodes, within walking and biking distance of residents and surrounded by residences. Nodes should consist of a park, and quality neighborhood retail and services.
Policy LU-8.4 In collaboration with appropriate local, State, and/or federal agency, regularly enforce and evaluate performance and performance standards on the operation of existing industrial activity related to air quality, odor, and noise in order to maintain compatibility with adjacent neighborhoods and uses.
38 See Table 4.12-4 of Section 4.12, Population and Housing.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-31
Policy LU-9.1 Create active street frontages by providing wide sidewalks with pedestrian-scaled streetscape amenities and orienting building entrances toward the street.
Policy LU 10.1 Provide a walkable environment within neighborhoods by slowing down traffic, providing wide sidewalks with drought-tolerant vegetation and street trees, and creating an interconnected pedestrian network.
Policy LU-10.2 Encourage buildings within neighborhoods to be compatible in scale with surrounding residential development.
Policy T-1.1 Implement the pedestrian recommendations from the City of Fresno Active Transportation Plan, focusing on the high priority areas first.
Policy T-4.4 Ensure that all roadway widening projects in Southwest Fresno includes Class II or Class IV bicycle facilities.
Policy T-4.5 Provide secure, high-quality bicycle parking per the Citywide Development Code Section 15-2429 on Bicycle Parking such as racks and lockers, at key locations along the bicycle network, including transit stops, in front of retail and services, for employment offices, parks, and offices.
Policy T-6.1 Improve the reliability, quality, and efficiency of transit service within Southwest Fresno and to regional destinations.
Policy T-8.1 Consider and prioritize the comfort of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders when planning vehicular improvements on roadways through implementation of complete streets improvements.
Policy T-10.1 When feasible, design new roadways and retrofit existing roadways within magnet cores, complete neighborhoods, and along special corridors to prioritize travel by walking, bicycling, and riding transit, using the complete streets design guidelines contained in the Southwest Fresno Specific Plan. For example, if adequate or excessive vehicle traffic capacity is available, create wide sidewalks, provide pedestrian amenities, and install bicycle facilities such as separated bikeways or bike lanes, bike parking, and signage. This could be in the form of a “road diet” to transform certain corridors into multi-modal streets.
Policy T-11.1 Prioritize the implementation of facilities that encourage walking and biking, such as sidewalks, multi-use trails, and bikeways.
Policy T-11.3 Support Transportation Demand Management programs to encourage alternative modes of travel to the single-occupancy vehicle such as transit use, vanpool, rideshare, and telecommuting.
The above policies would promote active transit and support the reduction in average vehicle trip distances, which would contribute in reducing overall vehicle trips and VMT. However, despite furthering
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-32 AUGUST 2017
the regional transportation and planning objectives, as stated, buildout of the proposed Plan would represent a substantial increase in emissions compared to existing conditions and would exceed SJVAPCD’s regional operational significance thresholds (see Impact AQ-3). As a result, the proposed Plan could potentially exceed the assumptions in the AQMPs and would not be considered consistent with the AQMPs. Therefore, impacts are considered significant.
Impact AQ-1: Implementation of the proposed Plan would result in the generation of substantial longterm criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds and would therefore not be considered consistent with the existing AQMPs.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. No further measures to reduce operationphase criteria air pollutant emissions are available beyond the applicable SJVAPCD rules and regulations in addition to proposed Plan policies and design guidelines. The various goals and policies of the proposed Plan, such as those outlined above, would contribute to reducing long-term criteria air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. However, due to the magnitude and intensity of development accommodated by the proposed Plan, Impact AQ-1 would remain significant and avoidable.
AQ-2 Construction activities associated with buildout of the proposed Plan could exceed SJVAPCD’s regional significance thresholds.
Construction activities would temporarily increase PM10, PM2.5, VOC, NOX, SOX, and CO regional emissions within the SJVAB. The primary source of NOx, CO, and SOx emissions is the operation of construction equipment. The primary sources of particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) emissions are activities that disturb the soil, such as grading and excavation, road construction, and building demolition and construction. The primary source of VOC emissions is the application of architectural coating and off-gas emissions associated with asphalt paving.
Construction activities associated with buildout of the proposed Plan are anticipated to occur sporadically over an approximately 25-year period or longer. Buildout would be comprised of multiple smaller projects, each having its own construction timeline and activities. Development of multiple properties could occur at the same time. However, there is no defined development schedule for these future projects at this time. For this analysis, the maximum daily emissions are based on a very conservative scenario, where several construction projects are occurring at one time and overlap of all construction phases occur at the same time. The amount of construction assumed is consistent with the 25-year anticipated buildout of the proposed Plan. An estimate of maximum daily construction emissions is provided in Table 4.3-9. The table shows the annual emissions that would be generated over the anticipated development period.
As shown in the table, construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Plan could potentially exceed the SJVAPCD regional threshold for VOC and NOX. NOX is a precursor to the formation of both O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). VOC is a precursor to the formation of O3. Projectrelated emission of NOX would contribute to the O3, PM10, and PM2.5 nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. As part of the development process, individual, site-specific projects accommodated under the
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-33
TABLE 4.3-9 CONSTRUCTION-RELATED CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ESTIMATES Year
Criteria Air Pollutants (tons/year)a
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2018 105 54 486 <1 13 5
2019 38 40 34 <1 10 3
2020 4 29 25 <1 7 2
2021 3 26 22 <1 7 2
2022 3 19 19 <1 7 2
2023 3 19 19 <1 7 2
2024 3 19 17 <1 7 2
2025 3 19 16 <1 7 2
2026 2 19 15 <1 7 2
2027 2 18 15 <1 7 2
2028 2 18 14 <1 7 2
2029 2 18 13 <1 7 2
2030 2 17 13 <1 7 2
2031 2 17 12 <1 7 2
2032 2 17 12 <1 7 2
2033 2 17 11 <1 7 2
2034 2 17 11 <1 7 2
2035 1 17 10 <1 7 2
2036 1 13 8 <1 5 1
Maximum Annual
Emissions 105 54 48 <1 13 5
SJVAPCD Annual
Construction Threshold 10 10 100 27 15 15
Exceeds Annual
Threshold? Yes Yes No No No No
Note: Emissions may not total to 100 percent due to rounding. a. Construction phasing based on CalEEMod default generated schedule normalized to a 25-year buildout. For purposes of this analysis, construction activities are assumed to overlap. Construction equipment were based on CalEEMod defaults, which are based on construction surveys conducted by South Coast Air Quality Management District of construction equipment and phasing for comparable projects.
Source: CalEEMod 2016.3.1.
proposed Southwest Fresno Specific Plan that meet the criteria of Rule 9510 would be required to prepare a detailed air quality impact assessment (AIA). To the extent applicable under Rule 9510 for each such individual development, SJVAPCD would require calculation of the construction emissions from the development. The purpose of the AIA is to confirm a development’s construction exhaust emissions, and
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-34 AUGUST 2017
therefore be able to identify appropriate mitigation, either through implementation of specific mitigation measures (e.g., use of construction equipment with Tier 4-rated engines) or payment of applicable off-site fees. As stated, under Rule 9510, each project that is subject to this Rule would be required to reduce construction exhaust emissions by 20 percent for NOx or pay offset mitigation fees for emissions that do not achieve the mitigation requirements. While adherence to Rule 9510 would contribute to reducing exhaust NOX emissions, it would not be applicable to reducing VOC emissions generated operation of equipment and from off-gassing from asphalt and paints. Therefore, project-related construction activities would result in significant regional air quality impacts.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact AQ-2: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC and NOX.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2a: In order to contribute in minimizing exhaust emission from construction equipment, prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits whichever occurs first, the property owner/developer shall provide a list of all construction equipment proposed to be used on the project site for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., nonexempt projects). This list may be provided on the building plans. The construction equipment list shall state the make, model, and equipment identification number of all the equipment.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2b: During construction activities, for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the construction contractors shall ensure that the equipment shall be properly serviced and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations; and, that all nonessential idling of construction equipment is restricted to five minutes or less in compliance with Section 2449 of the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Article
4.8, Chapter 9.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2c: In order to reduce VOC emissions from construction activities, prior to issuance of a building permit for projects that are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), the property owner/developer shall require the construction contractor and provide a note on construction plans indicating that:
All coatings and solvents will have a volatile organic compound (VOC) content lower than required under Rule 4601 (i.e., super compliant paints).
All architectural coatings shall be applied either by (1) using a high-volume, low-pressure spray method operated at an air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge to achieve a 65 percent application efficiency; or (2) manual application using a paintbrush, hand-roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge, to achieve a 100 percent applicant efficiency. The construction contractor shall also use precoated/natural colored building materials, where feasible.
Significance With Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. Buildout of the proposed Plan would occur over a period of approximately 25 years. Construction activities associated with buildout of the proposed Plan could generate short-term emissions that exceed the SJVAPCD’s significance thresholds during this time
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-35
and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-2c in addition to application of SJVAPCD Rules 9510 and Regulation VIII would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions from construction-related activities to the extent feasible and may result in reducing construction-related regional air quality impacts of subsequent individual projects to less than significant. However, due to the programmatic nature of the proposed Project, construction time frames and equipment for individual site specific projects are not available and there is a potential for multiple developments to be constructed at any one time, resulting in significant construction-related emissions. Therefore, despite adherence to Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ2c, Impact AQ-2 would remain significant and unavoidable.
AQ-3 Long-term operation of the proposed Plan would generate emissions that would exceed SJVAPCD’s regional significance thresholds.
Buildout of the proposed Plan would result in direct and indirect criteria air pollutant emissions from transportation, energy (e.g., natural gas use), and area sources (e.g., aerosols and landscaping equipment). Mobile-source criteria air pollutant emissions are based on the traffic analysis conducted by Fehr and Peers (see Appendix G). Per the traffic analysis, implementation of the proposed Plan would generate a net increase of 182,853 ADT and 1,470,179 daily VMT. The net change of emissions from buildout of the proposed Plan is shown in Table 4.3-10. The net change in emissions is based on the new emissions associated with the new land uses.
TABLE 4.3-10 OPERATION-RELATED CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS ESTIMATES Year
Criteria Air Pollutants (tons/year)a
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area 74 3 54 <1 1 1
Energy 1 9 5 <1 1 1
Mobile 30 529 296 3 206 56
Total Annual Emissions 105 542 355 3 207 57
SJVAPCD Annual Operation Threshold 10 10 100 27 15 15
Exceeds Annual Threshold? Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
a. Totals may not total to 100 percent due to rounding.
Source: CalEEMod 2016.3.1.
As shown in this table, operation of the project at buildout would generate air pollutant emissions that exceed SJVAPCD’s regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 at buildout.
Emissions of VOC and NOx that exceed the SJVAPCD regional threshold would cumulatively contribute to the O3 nonattainment designation of the SJVAB. Emissions of NOx that exceed SJVAB’s regional significance thresholds would cumulatively contribute to the O3 and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) nonattainment designations of the SJVAB. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 would contribute to the PM10 and PM2.5 nonattainment designations.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-36 AUGUST 2017
Similar to construction-related emissions, application of SJVAPCD Rule 9510 to future individual projects would contribute in reducing NOX and particulate matter emissions. In addition, application of SJVACPD Rule 9410 would contribute in reducing mobile-source emissions. Furthermore, as stated, the planned improvements, guidelines, objectives, and policies under the proposed Plan would generally support a more sustainable development pattern to accommodate growth within the area by creating complete neighborhoods and providing more transit options through improvements to the pedestrian, bicycle, public transportation, and alternative fueled vehicle networks and infrastructure, which would contribute in minimizing long-term criteria air pollutant emissions. However, while SJVAPCD rules and policies of the proposed Plan may contribute in reducing operation-related regional air quality impacts of individual projects accommodated under the proposed Southwest Specific Plan to less than significant, the projected cumulative emissions associated with future development projects would be in exceedance.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Plan would result in a significant impact because it would significantly contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB.
Impact AQ-3: Operation of development projects accommodated under the proposed Plan would generate emissions that would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. No further measures to reduce operationphase criteria air pollutant emissions are available beyond the applicable SJVAPCD rules and regulations in addition to proposed Plan policies and design guidelines. Application of State and SJVAPCD rules and regulations, such as Rules 9510 and 9410, implementation of the proposed Plan’s roadway, bicycle, and trail improvements, policies (e.g., Policies LU-1.1, LU-4.4, T-10.1, and T-11.3), and complete streets design guidelines, and implementation of applicable General Plan policies (e.g., Policies RC-4-e, RC-4-k, MT-2-b, and MT-4-b) would reduce operation-related criteria air pollutants generated from energy, stationary, and mobile sources to the extent feasible. As stated, the aforementioned improvements, design guidelines, and policies could contribute in reducing operation-phase regional air quality impacts of future individual projects to a less than significant level. However, despite implementation of the policies and design guidelines, Impact AQ-3 would remain significant and unavoidable due to the magnitude of the overall land use development associated with the proposed Plan.
AQ-4 Construction and operation of future development projects accommodated under the proposed Plan could cause or contribute to a violation of the ambient air quality standards.
Development that would be accommodated by the proposed Plan could expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations during construction activities if it would cause or contribute significantly to elevating those levels. Unlike the mass of construction emissions shown in Table 5.2-8, described in pounds per day, localized concentrations refer to an amount of pollutant in a volume of air (ppm or µg/m3) and can be correlated to potential health effects.
Tables 4.3-9 and 4.3-10 provides an estimate of the magnitude of short- and long-term criteria air pollutant emissions generated by the development that would be accommodated by the proposed Plan.
Buildout of the proposed Plan would occur over a period of approximately 25 years or longer and would
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-37
comprise of smaller projects with their own construction time frames and construction equipment and operational characteristics. Construction and operation of future individual development projects accommodated under the proposed Plan could potentially result in an exceedance of SJVAPCD’s ambient air quality screening threshold of 100 pounds per day. As stated, the planned improvements, objectives and policies under the proposed Plan would generally support a sustainable development pattern in accommodating future growth within the Plan area, which would generally contribute in reducing longterm criteria air pollutant emissions. In addition, application of SJVAPCD Rule 9510 and Regulation VIII would contribute in reducing operation- and construction-related NOX and particulate matter emissions.
Furthermore, Rule 9410 would also contribute in reducing operation-related mobile-source emissions.
However, while individual development projects may not result in exceeding the screening threshold of 100 pounds per day, the projected cumulative emissions associated with future development projects accommodated under the proposed Plan would be in exceedance and could result in causing an exceedance of the AAQS. Therefore, as construction and operation of future individual development projects accommodated under the proposed Plan could result in causing or contribute to a violation of the ambient air quality standards, impacts to air quality would be significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact AQ-4: Development of land uses accommodated under the proposed Plan could result in shortand long-term emissions that could cause or contribute to a violation of the AAQS.
Mitigation Measure AQ-4a: Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-2c to further reduce construction-related criteria air pollutant emissions.
Mitigation Measure AQ-4b: In order to reduce fugitive dust particulate matter emissions during construction activities, prior to issuance of grading, demolition or building permits, whichever occurs first, for projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (i.e., non-exempt projects), but that would be outside the purview of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District’s (SJVAPCD) Regulation VIII, the property owner/developer shall submit a dust control plan consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII requirements that includes, but not limited to the following measures during ground-disturbing activities to further reduce PM10 and PM2.5 emissions:
Disturbed areas (including storage piles) that are not being actively utilized for construction purposes shall be effectively stabilized using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, or covered with a tarp or other suitable cover (e.g., revegetated). On-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
Land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled utilizing application of water or by presoaking. Material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least 6 inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained when materials are transported off-site.
Operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-38 AUGUST 2017
except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.
Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.)
Following the addition of materials to or the removal of materials from the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant.
Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday.
Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.
Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than 1 percent.
Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the Plan Area.
Adhere to Regulation VIII’s 20 percent opacity limitation, as applicable.
Significance With Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. Application of State and SJVAPCD rules and regulations, implementation of the proposed Plan’s policies (e.g., Policies LU-1.1, LU-4.4, T-10.1, and T-11.3) and complete streets design guidelines in addition to applicable General Plan policies and objectives (e.g., Policies UF-12-a and UF-14-a and Objective RC-4), and incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-4a and AQ AQ-4b, would reduce construction and operation-related criteria air pollutants to the extent feasible. However, despite implementation of the proposed plans, policies, and design guidelines and adherence to these mitigation measures, Impact AQ-4 would remain significant and unavoidable due to the magnitude of land use development associated with the proposed Plan.
AQ-5 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial toxic air contaminant concentrations.
Operation of new land uses consistent with the land use plan of the project would generate new sources of criteria air pollutants and TACs. The following describes potential localized operational air quality impacts from the implementation of the proposed Plan.
CO Hotspot
Areas of vehicle congestion have the potential to create pockets of CO called hotspots. These pockets have the potential to exceed the State 1-hour standard of 20 ppm or the 8-hour standard of 9.0 ppm. The GAMAQI previously required CO hotspot monitoring. However, emissions from motor vehicles, the largest source of CO emissions, have been declining since 1985 despite increases in VMT due to the introduction of new automotive emission controls and fleet turnover. Consequently, no CO hotspots have been reported in the SJVAB even at the most congested intersections. Furthermore, under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-39
than 44,000 vehicles per hour—or 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix—in order to generate a significant CO impact.39
Buildout of the proposed Plan would result in approximately 215,196 average daily trips, which would be an increase of only 182,853 total daily vehicle trips over existing conditions. However, distributing the total daily vehicle trips within the proposed Plan Area and region and by peak hour would result in smaller traffic volumes at the various intersections. Thus, implementation of the proposed Plan is not anticipated to produce the volume of traffic required to generate a CO hotspot. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Plan would not have the potential to substantially increase CO hotspots at intersections in the vicinity of the planning area, and impacts would be less than significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
TACs
In general, land uses that would require a permit from SJVAPCD for emissions of TACs include chemical processing facilities, chrome-plating facilities, dry cleaners, and gasoline-dispensing facilities. As the proposed Plan is a program-level document, it is currently unknown which types of stationary sources may be installed, if any. However, the proposed Plan would generally prohibit the development of large industrial-type land uses (e.g., manufacturing, warehousing, etc.), which is consistent with proposed Plan Policy LU-8.1, which directs employment areas within the Plan Area to be planned and zoned for nonindustrial businesses. Additionally, this policy also supports previously designated industrial areas be planned and zoned for offices uses. While development of land uses may result in stationary source emissions such as dry cleaners and restaurants with charbroilers or buildings with emergency generators, these types of land uses would not be large emitters. Additionally, they would be controlled by SJVAPCD through permitting and would be subject to further study and health risk assessment prior to the issuance of any necessary air quality permits under Regulation II. According to SJVAPCD’s GAMAQI, Regulation II ensures that stationary source emissions (permitted sources) would be reduced or mitigated below SJVAPCD significance thresholds of ten in one million cancer risk and one for acute risk at the maximally exposed individual. Though these sources would incrementally contribute to the project’s inventory individually, they would be mitigated to the standards identified above. Therefore, overall, impacts related to TACs are considered less than significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
AQ-6 New land uses accommodated under the proposed Plan would not create objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people.
The following discusses potential operation- and construction-related odor impacts associated with implementation of the proposed Plan.
39 Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), 2017. California Environmental Quality Act: Air Quality Guidelines, May.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-40 AUGUST 2017
Operation-Related Odors
Growth within the proposed Plan Area could generate new sources of odors.Odors from the types of land uses that could generate objectional odors (see Table 4.3-6) are regulated under Regulation IV, Prohibitions, Rule 4102, Nuisance, which states:
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such person or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.
As shown in Table 4.3-6, industrial land uses are the primary types of land uses that have the potential to generate objectionable odors. Industrial-type land uses would generally be prohibited within the proposed Plan Area. Residential and other non-residential (excluding industrial) land uses could result in generation of odors such as exhaust from landscaping equipment. However, unlike industrial land uses, these are not considered potential generators of odor that could affect a substantial number of people. In addition, as stated previously in the Impact AQ-5 discussion pertaining to TACs, proposed Plan Policy LU8.1 would support the overall reduction of industrial land uses, such as those listed in Table 4.3-6, within the proposed Plan. This policy directs employment areas to be planned and zoned for non-industrial businesses and supports re-designating previously designated industrial areas to be planned and zoned for offices uses. Thus, the effect of Policy LU-8.1 would contribute to limiting both the development of new industrial uses and the expansion of existing industrial uses. Therefore, impacts from potential odors generated from residential and other non-residential land uses associated with the proposed Plan are considered less than significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
Construction-Related Odors
During construction activities, construction equipment exhaust and application of asphalt and architectural coatings would temporarily generate odors. Any construction-related odor emissions would be temporary and intermittent in nature. Additionally, noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the construction equipment. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites, they would be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. Furthermore, short-term constructionrelated odors are expected to cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor-producing materials.
Therefore, impacts associated with construction-generated odors are considered less than significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
PLACEWORKS 4.3-41
4.3.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
AQ-7 Operation and construction of development projects accommodated by the proposed Plan would generate short- and long-term emissions that would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the SJVAB.
In accordance with SJVAPCD’s methodology, any project that produces a significant project-level regional air quality impact in an area that is in nonattainment contributes to the cumulative impact. Cumulative projects within the local area include new development and general growth within the Plan Area. The greatest source of emissions within the SJVAB is mobile sources. Due to the extent of the area potentially impacted from cumulative project emissions (i.e., the SJVAB); SJVAPCD considers a project cumulatively significant when project-related emissions exceed the regional emissions thresholds shown in Table 4.3-5.
No significant cumulative impacts were identified with regard to CO hotspots.
Construction
The SJVAB is designated nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5, under the California and National AAQS and nonattainment for PM10 under the California AAQS. Construction of cumulative projects will further degrade the regional and local air quality. Air quality will be temporarily impacted during construction activities. As shown in Table 4.3-9, construction emissions associated with the proposed Plan would exceed the SJVAPCD’s regional construction emissions thresholds for VOC and NOX. Thus, the project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would be cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
Operation
For operational air quality emissions, any project that does not exceed or can be mitigated to less than the daily regional threshold values is not considered by the SJVAPCD to be a substantial source of air pollution and does not add significantly to a cumulative impact. As discussed, SJVAPCD Rules 9510 and 9410 would contribute in reducing emissions of NOX and particulate matter associated with future individual projects accommodated under the proposed Plan and may reduce impacts for these individual development projects to a less than significant level. In addition, the planned improvements, design guidelines, objectives, and policies under the proposed plan would generally support a more sustainable development pattern for the Plan area. Creation of more complete neighborhoods in addition to improving the public transit, pedestrian, and bicycle networks and infrastructure would contribute to the overall reduction in vehicle trips and VMT, which would reduce mobile-source emissions. However, as shown in Table 4.3-10, due to the amount of growth for the proposed Plan area, operation of the cumulative projects accommodate under the proposed Plan would result in emissions in excess of the SJVAPCD regional emissions thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO2, PM10, and PM2.5. Thus, the proposed Plan’s air pollutant emissions would be cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
AIR QUALITY
4.3-42 AUGUST 2017
Impact AQ-7: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Plan would exceed the SJVAPCD regional significance thresholds for VOC and NOX.
Mitigation Measure AQ-7: Implement Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-4b of the Draft EIR.
Significance With Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable. Application of State and SJVAPCD rules and regulation in addition to incorporation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2a through AQ-4b and adherence to the proposed Plan goals, policies, and design guidelines would reduce short- and long-term emissions to the extent feasible. However, due to the magnitude and intensity of development planned under the proposed Plan, Impact AQ-7 would remain significant and unavoidable.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-1
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
This chapter describes the regulatory framework and existing conditions of the Plan Area related to biological resources, and the potential impacts of the proposed Plan on biological resources. Information in this chapter is based in part on the availability of existing reports and information relevant to the Plan Area, and database searches (i.e., California Natural Diversity Database, Environmental Conservation Online System, and Google Earth).
4.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.4.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
This section describes the federal, State, regional, and local regulations that provide for the protection and management of sensitive biological resources.
Federal Regulations
Federal Endangered Species Act
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) are responsible for implementation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ESA protects fish and wildlife species that are listed as threatened or endangered, as well as their habitats. Endangered species, subspecies, or distinct population segments are those that are in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their range; threatened species, subspecies, or distinct population segments are those that are likely to become endangered in the near future.
Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed as endangered, including the destruction of habitat that prevents the species’ recovery. Take is defined as an action or attempt to hunt, harm, harass, pursue, shoot, wound, capture, kill, trap, or collect a species. Section 9 prohibitions also apply to threatened species unless a special rule has been defined with regard to take at the time of listing. Under Section 9 of the ESA, the take prohibition applies only to wildlife and fish species. However, Section 9 does prohibit the unlawful removal and reduction to possession, or malicious damage or destruction, of any endangered plant from federal land. Section 9 prohibits acts to remove, cut, dig up, damage, or destroy an endangered plant species in nonfederal areas in knowing violation of any State law or in the course of criminal trespass. Candidate species and species that are proposed, or under petition for listing, receive no protection under Section 9.
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) is administered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). USACE is responsible for regulating the discharge of fill material into waters of the United States, including lakes, rivers, streams, and their tributaries, as well as wetlands that are navigable or adjacent to a navigable waterway or that have an interstate or foreign commerce connection. In 2008, USACE published the Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program: Regional
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-2
Supplements to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), which provides detailed information for the Arid West Region. Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as areas “inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.”
The discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States is subject to permitting under Section 404 (Discharges of Dredge or Fill Material) of the CWA. Section 401 (Certification) specifies additional requirements for permit review, particularly at the State level. Project proponents must obtain a permit from USACE for all discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed action. USACE permits must be certified by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in order to be valid. Thus, certification from the SWRCB should be requested at the same time an application is filed with USACE. Certification from the local Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) is also required when a proposed activity may result in discharge into navigable waters, pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA and EPA 404(b)(1) Guidelines.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program The 1972 amendments to the federal Water Pollution Control Act established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program to control discharges of pollutants from point sources (Section 402). The NPDES permit program is the primary federal program that regulates pointsource and nonpoint-source discharges to waters of the United States. The SWRCB issues both general and individual NPDES permits for certain activities.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The USFWS is also responsible for implementing the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA implements a series of treaties between the United States, Mexico, and Canada that provide for the international protection of migratory birds. Wording in the MBTA makes it clear that most actions that result in “taking” or possession (permanent or temporary) of a protected species can be a violation of the Act. The word “take” is defined as “pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect.” The provisions of the MBTA are nearly absolute; “except as permitted by regulations” is the only exception. Examples of permitted actions that do not violate the law are the possession of a hunting license to pursue specific game birds, legitimate research activities, display in zoological gardens, bird-banding, and similar activities.
State Regulations
California Endangered Species Act
The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) establishes State policy to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance threatened or endangered species and their habitats. CESA mandates that State agencies should not approve projects that jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or endangered species, if reasonable and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid jeopardy. For projects that would affect species that are on the federal and State endangered species lists, compliance with the federal ESA
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-3
satisfies CESA if the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) determines that the federal incidental take authorization is consistent with CESA under California Fish and Game Code Section 2080.1.
For projects that would result in take of species that are only State-listed, the project proponent must apply for a take permit under Section 2081(b) of the California Fish and Game Code.
California Fish and Game Code
Under the California Fish and Game Code, CDFW provides protection from “take” for a variety of species, including Fully Protected species. "Fully Protected" is a legal protective designation administered by the CDFW, intended to conserve wildlife species that risk extinction within California. Lists have been created for birds, mammals, fish, amphibians, and reptiles. The Fish and Game Code sections dealing with Fully Protected species state that these animals "...may not be taken or possessed at any time and no provision of this code or any other law shall be construed to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take any fully protected" species, although take may be authorized for necessary scientific research. In 2003, the code sections dealing with fully protected species were amended to allow CDFW to authorize take resulting from recovery activities for State-listed species. The CDFW also protects streams, water bodies, and riparian corridors through the streambed alteration agreement process under Section 1601 to 1606 of the California Fish and Game Code. The Fish and Game Code stipulates that it is “unlawful to substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake” without notifying CDFW, incorporating necessary mitigation, and obtaining a streambed alteration agreement. Through policy, CDFW asserts jurisdiction to the top of banks of all streams, including intermittent and ephemeral streams, extending laterally to the upland edge of adjacent riparian vegetation. The CDFW uses the Cowardin system for wetland identification and classification, which typically results in a larger jurisdictional area than federal jurisdiction under the CWA. Under this system, wetlands must have one or more of the following three attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes; (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil; and (3) the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.
California Native Plant Protection Act
The California Native Plant Protection Act of 1977 (CNPPA) prohibits importation of rare and endangered plants into California, “take” of rare and endangered plants, and sale of rare and endangered plants. CESA defers to the CNPPA, which ensures that State-listed plant species are protected when State agencies are involved in projects subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In this case, plants listed as rare under the CNPPA are not protected under CESA; however, impacts to endangered, rare, or threatened species, including plants, are evaluated under CEQA.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act
The SWRCB and RWQCB maintain independent regulatory authority over the placement of waste, including fill, into waters of the State under the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act of 1969. This Act is similar to and largely based off the federal Clean Water Act, and is intended to preserve and enhance all beneficial uses of the waters of the State. The RWQCB currently employs the USACE procedures and definitions for defining the physical boundaries of wetlands and waters. However, there are differences in
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-4
the State and federal ability to regulate these features. In order to be subject to federal regulation as waters of the United States, wetlands and waters must demonstrate that water is, or is adjacent to, a navigable waterway or a tributary to a navigable waterway, or have an interstate or foreign commerce connection. Under the Porter-Cologne Act, the State has regulatory authority over what are termed “isolated” waters and wetlands, in addition to waters of the United States.
Local Regulations
Fresno General Plan
The City of Fresno’s General Plan was adopted in 2014.1 The General Plan includes specific implementing policies pertaining to biological resources (see Table 4.4-1) that must be adhered to for development within the Plan Area, specifically within the Open Space and Biological Resources Section of Chapter 5, the Parks, Open Space, and Schools Element (POSS). Specifically, POSS Objective 5, and Implementation Policies POSS-5-a through POSS-5-f are applicable to the proposed Plan.
City of Fresno Municipal Code
The City of Fresno Municipal Code details the code of ordinances governing city and municipal services, construction, development, vehicles, traffic, taxation, and other subjects.2 In particular, the City of Fresno Municipal Code Section 13‐305 protects all public trees in the city, including but not limited to trees that are affecting surface improvements or underground facilities, or which are diseased, or located where construction is being considered or will occur. No person, except authorized City personnel, shall remove, destroy, deface or injure any tree on public property by any means including but not limited to: pouring material on or immediately adjacent to any tree, attaching any sign or notice to a tree without supervision of the Director, causing or encouraging fire around any tree, or covering the ground within a 4‐foot radius around any tree with concrete or other unnatural surface. Any removal of trees shall be conducted only after an evaluation and inspection by the Director, and written authorization.
Regional and Local Plans
Pacific Gas & Electric Company’s San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan
Any Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) gas and electrical transmission and distribution facilities, easements, private access routes, or lands owned by PG&E, some of which may occur within the Plan 1 Dyett & Bhatia, 2014. Fresno General Plan. Adopted December 18, 2014. Prepared for Development and Resource Management Department, City of Fresno. 2 City of Fresno, 2017. Code of Ordinances. Updated June 8, 2017, https://library.municode.com/ca/fresno/codes/ code_of_ordinances, accessed 13 July 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-5
TABLE 4.4-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Objective POSS-5 Provide for long-term preservation, enhancement, and enjoyment of plant, wildlife, and aquatic habitat.
Policy POSS-5-a Habitat Area Acquisition. Support federal, State, and local programs to acquire significant habitat areas for permanent protection and/or conjunctive educational and recreational use.
Policy POSS-5-b Habitat Conservation Plans. Participate in cooperative, multi‐jurisdictional approaches for area‐wide habitat conservation plans to preserve and protect rare, threatened, and endangered species.
Policy POSS-5-c
Buffers for Natural Areas. Require development projects, where appropriate and warranted, to incorporate natural features (such as ponds, hedgerows, and wooded strips) to serve as buffers for adjacent natural areas with high ecological value.
Policy POSS-5-d
Guidelines for Habitat Conservation. Establish guidelines for habitat conservation and mitigation programs, including:
Protocols for the evaluation of a site’s environmental setting and proposed design and operating parameters of proposed mitigation measures.
Methodology for the analysis depiction of land to be acquired or set aside for mitigation activities. Parameters for specification of the types and sources of plant material used for any re-vegetation, irrigation requirements, and post-planting maintenance and other operational measures to ensure successful mitigation.
Monitoring at an appropriate frequency by qualified personnel and reporting of data collected to permitting agencies.
Policy POSS-5-e Pursue development of conjunctive habitat and recreational trail uses in flood control and drainage projects.
Policy POSS-5-f Regional Mitigation and Habitat Restoration. Coordinate habitat restoration programs with responsible agencies to take advantage of opportunities for a coordinated regional mitigation program.
Area, are covered under PG&E’s San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP).
3 The HCP allows for a regional, activity-based approach to protect endangered plants and animals in full compliance with the CESA and ESA. The HCP covers almost all of PG&E’s routine operations and maintenance within the Plan Area, as well as minor new construction.
Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley The Plan Area is located in the planning area for the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley.
4 This plan covers 34 species of plants and animals that occur in the San Joaquin Valley, 11 of which are endangered, including the San Joaquin kit fox, giant kangaroo rat, and blunt-nosed leopard lizard. The 3 Jones & Stokes, 2006. Pacific Gas & Electric Company San Joaquin Valley Operations and Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan (includes updated Chapter 4 and Tables 5-3, 5-4 and 5-5, December 2007). December. (J&S 02067.) Sacramento, CA. 4 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1998. Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California.
Region 1, Portland, Oregon. Queried via http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/reports/implementation-activity-status-orereport?documentId=400360&entityId=151 on October 18, 2016.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-6
remaining 23 species are either candidate species or species of special concern. The ultimate goal of the Recovery Plan is to delist the 11 endangered species and ensure the long-term survival of the candidates and species of special concern. The plan has defined six key elements to achieve these two goals, one of which is habitat protection. The plan recommends that, whenever possible, blocks of conservation land and natural land should be connected through linkages. If specific projects require consultation with the USFWS, the project would be evaluated in relation to the goals and objectives of the Recovery Plan.
4.4.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat
Four biotic habitats/land use types occur in the Plan
Area: developed, agricultural, open space/disturbed
annual grassland, and aquatic. These habitats are
described in detail below, and their distribution within the Plan Area is shown in Figure 4.4-1. Table 4.4-2
provides the approximate acreage of each habitat and
land use type within the Plan Area. The Plan Area is also highly fragmented by roads, and as such, it does not
contain suitable migratory wildlife corridors or migration routes for wildlife species.
Developed Areas
Approximately 45.2 percent of the Plan Area is
developed and comprised of residential, commercial, and industrial buildings; roads; and parking lots.
Vegetation may include a wide variety of ornamental and non-native tree, shrub, and grassland species.
These areas typically provide habitat for common species that are accustomed to human disturbance, such as California scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica), American robin (Turdus migratorius), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), squirrel (Sciurus spp.), opossum (Didelphis virginiana), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), and house mouse (Mus musculus).
Agricultural
Approximately 26.9 percent of the Plan Area is comprised of agricultural uses, including orchards (e.g., almonds, peaches, and citrus fruits), vineyards, and irrigated row and field crops. Agricultural lands provide limited habitat for native plants and animals due to frequent disturbances associated with crop production. Opportunistic species that may occur in agricultural lands include side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), California scrub-jay, yellow-billed magpie (Pica nuttalli), house finch, small mammals, and raptors that prey on them. The edges of fields and orchards where stands of weeds, blackberry brambles, and brush are left undisturbed may provide protective cover for wildlife and food for birds. Burrowing animals such as California ground squirrels and gophers may be actively discouraged because of damage these animals can cause to irrigation systems, although their presence may be more likely in fallow fields.
TABLE 4.4-2 BIOTIC HABITAT TYPES AND SURFACE
AREAS IN THE PLAN AREA
Biotic Habitat Types
Area
(Acres)
Developed 1,417.7
Agricultural 843.4
Open Space/Disturbed
Annual Grassland 776.4
Aquatic 100.8
Total Surface Area 3,138.3
Source: H.T. Harvey Associates, 2017.
CA 180 E
S Marks Ave
California Ave
CA 99 S
Jensen Ave
CA 14 S
North Ave
Figure 1: Habitats Map
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Plan Area
Habitat
Agricultural (843.4 ac)
Aquatic (100.8 ac)
Developed (1,417.7 ac)
Open Space/Disturbed Annual Grassland (776.4 ac)
3,000 0 3,000 Feet
CA 180 E
S
Marks Ave
California Ave
CA 99 S
Jensen Ave
CA 14 S
North Ave
Figure 1: Habitats Map
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Plan Area
Habitat
Agricultural (843.4 ac)
Aquatic (100.8 ac)
Developed (1,417.7 ac)
Open Space/Disturbed Annual Grassland (776.4 ac)
3,000 0 3,000 Feet
Source: PlaceWorks, 2017.
Figure 4.4-1
Habitat Map
SO UT H W ES T FR ES N O S P E C I F I C PLAN D RAFT EI R
C I TY O F FR ES N O
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
P LAC E WO RK S
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-8
Open Space/Disturbed Annual Grassland
The open spaces, which include vacant lots and parks comprising approximately 24.7 percent of the Plan Area, may be comprised by disturbed annual grassland species such as ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), wild oat (Avena fatua), soft brome (Bromus hordeaceus), black mustard (Brassica nigra), and filaree (Erodium cicutarium). Wildlife that may occur and forage in disturbed annual grasslands include desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi), deermouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), side-blotched lizard, western fence lizard (Sceloperus occidentalis), gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer), and southern pacific rattlesnake (Crotalis oreganus helleri). California horned larks (Eremophila alpestris actia) and burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia) may use disturbed grassland habitat for foraging and nesting, and red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), Swainson’s hawks (Buteo swainsoni), American kestrel (Falco sparverius), and common raven (Corvus corax) may soar over and forage in the grasslands, depending on the size and location of the habitat patch relative to other habitat types.
Aquatic
Approximately 3.2 percent of the Plan Area is comprised of aquatic habitat, which includes irrigation canals, ponds, wetlands, and small reservoirs (e.g., <20 acres in size). These aquatic habitats appear to be largely devoid of riparian vegetation and are generally isolated, surrounded by agricultural fields, disturbed annual grasslands, parklands, or developed areas. The aquatic habitats may provide some limited habitat for wildlife such as waterfowl, red-winged blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus), and western pond turtle (Emys marmorata). These habitats likely lack persistent emergent vegetation, but surrounding vegetation may include hydrophytic plants and grasses.
Special-Status Species
The potential for the Plan Area to support special-status plant and wildlife species is discussed below. The legal status and likelihood of occurrence of these species is presented in Table 4.4-3. Figure 4.4-2 shows the records for special-status plants and animals contained within the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) as of July 12, 2017 within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area.
Plant Species
According to the CNDDB, five special-status plants have the potential to occur in the Plan Area. 5 After
comparing these species habitat preferences to the site-specific conditions, it was determined that one of the special-status plant species (Madera linanthus) is associated with habitat that does not occur in the Plan Area; the remaining four species, described below, are unlikely to occur in the Plan Area due to extensive land disturbance, a lack of suitable habitat, and a lack of recent records in the vicinity. 5 California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), 2017. Rarefind. California Department of Fish and Game. Queried July 12, 2017.
Swainson's hawk
molestan blister beetle
Antioch efferian robberfly
Hurd's metapogon robberfly
least Bell's vireo
western masti western mastiff bat
Fresno kangaroo rat
Fresno kangaroo rat
Swainson's hawk
San Joaquin Pocket Mouse
San Joaquin Pocket Mouse
western western yellow-billed cuckoo led cuckoo
Fresno kangaroo rat
western masti western mastiff bat
least Bell's vireo vernal pool fairy shrimp
San Joaquin kit fox
American badger
western masti western mastiff bat
hoary bat ary bat
pallid bat
burrowing owl
burrowing owl
burrowing owl
western masti western mastiff bat
San Joaquin kit fox
CTS
California California satintail tintail Madera leptosiphon California jewelflower
caper-fruited tr caper-fruited tropidocarpum
heartscale
palmate-bracted salty bird's-beak
lesser saltscale
Hoover's eri ver's eriastrum
lesser saltscale
recurved larkspur
Hoover's eri ver's eriastrum
Sanford's arrowhead
Sanford's arrowhead
Sanford's arrowhead
San Joa San Joaquin adobe sunburst
brittlescale
Specific Location
General Area
Approximate Location
CNDDB Animal Records
Figure 2: CNDDB Records Map
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Plan Area
5-mile Radius of Plan Area
1.8 0 1.8 Miles
Specific Location
General Area
Approximate Location
CNDDB Plant Records
Swainson's hawk
molestan blister beetle
Antioch efferian r erian robberfly
Hurd's metapogon robberfly
least Bel
western masti western mastiff bat
Fresno kangaroo rat
Fresno kangaroo rat
Swainson's hawk
San Joaquin Pocket Mouse
Fresno kangaroo rat
western masti western mastiff bat
Ame
western masti western mastiff bat
hoary bat ary bat
pallid bat
burrowing owl
burrowing owl
burrowing owl
western masti western mastiff bat
CTS
California California satintail tintail
Madera leptosiphon
California jewelflower California jewelflower
caper-fruited tr caper-fruited tropidocarpum
heartscale
palmate-br palmate-bracted salty bird's-beak
lesser saltscale
Hoover's eri ver's eriastrum
lesser saltscale
recurved recurved larkspur
Hoover's eriastrum ver's eriastrum
Sanford's arrowhead
Sanford's arrowhead
brittlescale
Specific Location
General Area
Approximate Location
CNDDB Animal Records
Figure 2: CNDDB Records Map
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Plan Area
5-mile Radius of Plan Area
1.8 0 1.8 Miles
Specific Location
General Area
Approximate Location
CNDDB Plant Records
Figure 4.4-2
CNDDB Plants and Wildlife in the Plan Area
Source: PlaceWorks, 2017.
SO UT H W ES T FR ES N O S P E C I F I C PLAN D RAFT EI R
C I TY O F FR ES N O
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
P LAC E WO RK S
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-10 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.4-3 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES, THEIR STATUS, AND POTENTIAL OCCURRENCE IN THE PLAN AREA Name Status* Habitat Occurrence On-Site
Federal or State Endangered or Threatened Species
California jewel-flower
(Caulanthus californicus)
FE, SE
CNPS 1B.1
Chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, often on sandy soil, pinyon-juniper woodland.
Unlikely. Habitat within the Plan Area is marginal for the species.
California tiger salamander
(Ambystoma californiense)
FT, ST Vernal or temporary pools in annual grasslands or open woodlands with upland aestivation habitat (e.g., CA ground squirrel burrows).
Absent. Seasonally flooded areas present in the Plan Area are unsuitable for breeding because they are disconnected from potential upland habitat.
6 A CNDDB record from 1936 represents a
population considered extirpated and there are no recent records within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area.
Swainson’s hawk
(Buteo swainsoni)
ST Nests in trees near foraging areas that include grasslands and agricultural croplands, especially alfalfa.
Possible. Grasslands and agricultural areas on the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agriculturalresidential or urban development may provide foraging habitat, and trees in the open space may provide nesting habitat.
Fresno kangaroo rat
(Dipodomys nitratoides exilis)
FE, SE Sands and saline sandy soils in chenopod scrub and annual grasslands.
Absent. The CNDDB record is from 1891 and 1898 and represents a population considered extirpated due to habitat conversion, and there are no recent records within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area.
San Joaquin kit fox
(Vulpes macrotis mutica)
FE, SE Valley and foothills grassland; chenopod scrub. Unlikely. Grasslands and agricultural areas on the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agriculturalresidential or urban development may provide marginal habitat for dispersal.
California Special-Status Species
Pallid bat
(Antrozous pallidus)
SSC Rocks, caves, trees, snags, bridges, and buildings for roosting. Grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and conifer forests near water for foraging.
Possible. Suitable foraging and roosting habitat present.
Townsend’s big-eared bat
(Corynorhinus townsendii)
SSC Roosts in abandoned mines, caves, and cave-like structures such as buildings, bridges, and basal tree hollows. Forages along forest and riparian edges, and desert canyons with water and riparian vegetation.
Possible. Suitable foraging and roosting habitat present.
Western mastiff bat
(Eumops perotis californicus)
SSC Roosts in tall cliff faces, and may roost in tall buildings.
Many open, semi-arid habitats, including conifer and
Likely. Suitable foraging habitat is present. Potential roosting habitat is present. There are 4 CNDDB records of the species within 6 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2017. Recovery Plan for the Central California Distinct Population Segment of the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, California, v + 69 pp.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-11
TABLE 4.4-3 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES, THEIR STATUS, AND POTENTIAL OCCURRENCE IN THE PLAN AREA Name Status* Habitat Occurrence On-Site
deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc. Forages over open areas including agricultural fields, open desert, and riparian forests.
5 miles of the Plan Area.
Western red bat
(Lasiurus blossevillii)
SSC Winters along riparian areas with large cottonwoods, sycamores, blue gum, and river gum eucalyptus. Day roosts in hanging clumps of dense tree leaves, and sometimes
roosts under leaf litter on cold nights.
Unlikely. Strongly associated with intact cottonwood and sycamore valley riparian habitats in low elevations, which is absent from the Plan Area.
American badger
(Taxidea taxus)
SSC Large areas of open fields, meadows, shrublands, and desert scrub.
Unlikely. Grasslands and agricultural areas on the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agriculturalresidential or urban development may provide marginal habitat.
Burrowing owl
(Athene cunicularia)
SSC Flat open grassland, gentle slopes, and sparse shrublands. Unlikely. Grasslands, open space, and agricultural fields in the Plan Area that have not been highly fragmented by urban development may provide suitable nesting and foraging habitat.
Western pond turtle
(Emys marmorata)
SSC Occurs in and around a wide variety of permanent or nearly permanent aquatic habitats, including canals, stock ponds, lakes, streams, and rivers. Basking and upland habitat as breeding habitat.
Possible. Suitable habitat present where perennial water is present.
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Species
California satintail
(Imperata brevifolia)
CNPS 2B.1 Riparian scrub, coastal scrub, Mojavean scrub, meadows, and seeps.
Unlikely. Suitable habitat may be present in riparian areas of the Plan Area. CNDDB record (from 1893) was mapped as best guess around Fresno.
Madera linanthus
(Leptosiphon serrulatus)
CNPS 1B.2 Cismontane woodland; lower montane coniferous forest. Absent. Suitable habitat not present in the Plan Area.
Sanford’s arrowhead
(Sagittaria sanfordii)
CNPS 1B.2 Marshes, swamps, and slow-moving freshwater ponds, marshes, and ditches
Unlikely. Wetlands in the Plan Area may provide suitable habitat.
Two CNDDB records (from 1958) are reported within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area, although no plants were found during a search in 1980 and population is likely extirpated.
Caper-fruited tropidocarpum
(Tropidocarpum capparideum)
CNPS 1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland on alkaline and clay soils. Unlikely. Habitat within the Plan Area is marginal for the species.
CNDDB record (from 1930) was from a nonspecific location centered on the City of Fresno.
*Listing Status
FE = Federally Listed Endangered ST = State Listed Threatened FT = Federally Listed Threatened SR = State Rare
FC = Federal Species of Concern SSC = California Species of Special Concern SE = State Listed Endangered SP = State Fully Protected Species Definitions Regarding Potential Occurrence:
Present: Species or sign of their presence observed on the site Likely: Species or sign not observed on the site, but reasonably certain to occur on the site Possible: Species or sign not observed on the site, but conditions suitable for occurrence Unlikely: Species or sign not observed on the site, conditions marginal for occurrence
Absent: Species or sign not observed on the site, conditions unsuitable for occurrence
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-12 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.4-3 SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT AND WILDLIFE SPECIES, THEIR STATUS, AND POTENTIAL OCCURRENCE IN THE PLAN AREA Name Status* Habitat Occurrence On-Site
CNPS LISTS:
1A – Plants presumed extinct in California
1B – Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere 2 – Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere 3 – Plants about which more information is needed – a review list 4 – Plants of limited distribution – a watch list
Source: H.T. Harvey Associates, 2017.
CNPS THREAT CODE EXTENSIONS:
.1 – Seriously endangered in California
.2 – Fairly endangered in California
.3 – Not very endangered in California
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-13
California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus). Federal Listing Status: Endangered; State Listing Status:
Endangered; CNPS List 1B.1. California jewelflower is an annual herb belonging to the mustard family (Brassicaceae) that blooms from February to May. This plant occurs in chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, and pinyon and juniper woodland on sandy soils, at elevations between 200 and 3,281 feet.
This species is found in Fresno, Kern, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties. Over 35 historical occurrences are extirpated, including those in Kings and Tulare counties. Experimental reintroductions have occurred in Kern, Santa Barbara, and Tulare counties, but all have failed.7 A historic CNDDB record (undated) documents the species in the Fresno area. The grasslands and open space in the Plan Area may provide marginal habitat for the California jewelflower. However, given a lack of recent records and that the open spaces in the Plan Area are generally disturbed, the species’ presence is unlikely.
California satintail (Imperata brevifolia). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: None; CNPS List
2.1. California satintail is a rhizomatous herb belonging to the grass family (Poaceae) that blooms from September to May. This plant occurs in coastal scrub, chaparral, riparian scrub, mojavean scrub, and meadows and sinks on mesic, alkaline soils, at elevations between 0 and 1,640 feet. This species is found in Butte, Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Lake, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Tehama, Tulare, and Ventura counties, and ranges into Arizona, Baja California, New Mexico (where it is possibly extirpated), Nevada, Texas, and Utah. The Butte, Tehama, and Lake County records may represent escaped ornamentals. This species is threatened by development and agriculture, and was mistakenly classified as a noxious weed in California from 1960 to 2004.8 A historic CNDDB record (1893) documents the species in the vicinity of “Fresno”, and suitable habitat occurs in the Plan Area. The California satintail could occur in the riparian and wetland areas of the Plan Area. However, given a lack of recent records and that the open spaces in the Plan Area are generally disturbed, the species’ presence is unlikely.
Sanford’s arrowhead (Sagittaria sanfordii). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: None; CNPS List 1B.2. Sanford’s arrowhead is an emergent rhizomatous herb belonging to the water plantain family (Alismataceae) that blooms from May to October. This plant occurs in standing or slow-moving freshwater ponds, marshes, and ditches at elevations between 0 and 2,133 feet. This species has been reported from Butte, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Merced, Mariposa, Orange, Placer, Sacramento, Shasta, San Joaquin, Tehama, and Ventura counties. Sanford’s arrowhead is extirpated from southern California (Orange and Ventura counties) and is mostly extirpated from its historical range in the Central Valley. The species is threatened by grazing, development, recreational activities, non-native plants, road widening, and channel alteration.9 There are two CNDDB records from 1958 within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area, although none were reported from a search conducted in 1980, and potentially suitable habitat occurs in the wetlands in the Plan Area (Figure 4.4-2). However, given a lack of recent records and that the wetlands in the Plan Area are generally disturbed, the species’ presence is unlikely. 7 California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program. 2017. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org, accessed 12 July 2017. 8 California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program. 2017. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org, accessed 12 July 2017. 9 California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program. 2017. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org, accessed 12 July 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-14 AUGUST 2017
Caper-fruited tropidocarpum (Tropidocarpum capparideum). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: None; CNPS List 1B.1. Caper-fruited tropidocarpum is an annual herb belonging to the mustard family (Brassicaceae) that blooms from March to April. This plant occurs in alkaline clay soils in valley and foothill grasslands at elevations between 3 and 1,493 feet. Caper-fruited tropidocarpum was thought to be extinct, but in 2000 was rediscovered on Fort Hunter Liggett. Historic occurrences are reported from Alameda, Contra Costa, Fresno, Glenn, Monterey, Santa Clara, San Joaquin, and San Luis Obispo counties.
The species is possibly threatened by grazing, military activities, trampling, and non-native plants.10 A historic CNDDB record (1930) documents the caper-fruited tropidocarpum in the vicinity of “Fresno,” but no recent records are reported. Suitable habitat may occur in the open spaces and grasslands of the Plan Area. However, given a lack of recent records and that the open spaces in the Plan Area are generally disturbed, the species’ presence is unlikely.
Wildlife Species
According to the CNDDB, 11 special-status wildlife species have the potential to occur in the Plan Area. 11 Two of these species, California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) and Fresno kangaroo rat (Dipodomys nitratoides exilis), were judged to be absent from the Plan Area because no suitable habitat occurs in the Plan Area, and/or recent species occurrence records were lacking in the vicinity. The remaining nine species and their potential to occur in the Plan Area are described below.
Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Threatened.
Swainson’s hawk was listed as threatened by the State of California in 1983 due to population declines likely precipitated by significant losses of riparian habitat and conversion of open foraging habitats to developed lands.
12,13 Swainson’s hawks are distributed throughout western North America during the breeding season, but in California they are primarily limited to the Central Valley and the southeastern Great Basin region.14 Swainson’s hawks in California are strongly associated with riparian habitats, though they are also found in oak woodlands and other open habitats. 15,16 Prime breeding habitat encompasses
10 California Native Plant Society (CNPS), Rare Plant Program, 2017. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California (online edition, v8-03 0.39), http://www.rareplants.cnps.org, accessed 12 July 2017. 11 California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), 2017. Rarefind. California Department of Fish and Game. Queried July 12, 2017.
12 Woodbridge, B., 1988. California Partners in Flight riparian bird conservation plan for the Swainson's Hawk. PRBO Conservation Science, 16 pp. 13 England, A.S., M.J. Bechard, and C.S. Houston, 1997. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). In A. Poole, and F. Gill, editors.
The Birds of North America. The Academy of Natural Sciences and The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D. C. and Philadelphia PA. 14 Woodbridge, B., 1988. California Partners in Flight riparian bird conservation plan for the Swainson's Hawk. PRBO Conservation Science, 16 pp. 15 Woodbridge, B., 1988. California Partners in Flight riparian bird conservation plan for the Swainson's Hawk. PRBO Conservation Science, 16 pp. 16 England, A.S., M.J. Bechard, and C.S. Houston, 1997. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). In A. Poole, and F. Gill, editors.
The Birds of North America. The Academy of Natural Sciences and The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D. C. and Philadelphia PA.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-15
riparian draws or clumps of trees surrounded by open grassland or oak savannah for foraging. 17,18
Swainson’s hawks build sturdy stick nests in low willows, box elders, oaks, or other trees, breeding from early March through July.19 They are neotropical migratory birds, flying south after the breeding season to spend their winter months on the Pampas of Argentina.20 Stresses on winter populations, including pesticide poisoning, on the winter grounds have contributed to declines in North American breeding populations.
Swainson’s hawks could forage in the grasslands and agricultural areas in the Plan Area where prey species including California voles and pocket gopher occur. Swainson’s hawk foraging habitat value is greater in the larger, more expansive open spaces and agricultural areas within the Plan Area, than in the smaller, isolated grasslands and agricultural areas in the Plan Area. As of July 12, 2017, there are no CNDDB records of nesting by this species within the Plan Area, although potential nesting trees exist within the Plan Area.
San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). Federal Status: Endangered; State Status: Threatened. The kit fox is the smallest canid species in North America, and the San Joaquin kit fox is the largest subspecies.
The San Joaquin kit fox was listed as endangered by the USFWS in 196721 and by the State of California in 1971. Grinnell et al. (1937)22 believed that by 1930, the range of the San Joaquin kit fox had been reduced by half. Loss of habitat from urban, agricultural, and industrial development is the principal factor in the decline of the San Joaquin kit fox since at least the 1950s.23 The USFWS24 estimated that by 1958, 50 percent of the Valley’s original natural communities had been converted to other types of land use.
The San Joaquin kit fox is primarily nocturnal and typically occurs in annual grassland or mixed shrub/grassland habitats throughout low, rolling hills and in the valleys. The diet of kit foxes varies geographically, seasonally, and annually, but throughout most of its range, the diet consists primarily of kangaroo rats (Dipodomys spp.), pocket mice (Perognathus spp.), white-footed mice (Peromyscus spp.), Nelson’s antelope squirrels (Ammospermophilus nelsoni), California ground squirrels, rabbits (Sylvilagus 17 England, A.S., M.J. Bechard, and C.S. Houston, 1997. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). In A. Poole, and F. Gill, editors.
The Birds of North America. The Academy of Natural Sciences and The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D. C. and Philadelphia PA. 18 Woodbridge, B., 1988. California Partners in Flight riparian bird conservation plan for the Swainson's Hawk. PRBO Conservation Science. 16 pp. 19 England, A.S., M.J. Bechard, and C.S. Houston, 1997. Swainson's Hawk (Buteo swainsoni). In A. Poole, and F. Gill, editors.
The Birds of North America. The Academy of Natural Sciences and The American Ornithologists' Union, Washington, D. C. and Philadelphia PA. 20 Canavelli, S.B., M.J. Bechard, B. Woodbridge, M.N. Kochert, J.J. Maceda, and M.E. Zaccagnini, 2003. Habitat use by Swainson's hawks on their austral wintering grounds in Argentina. Journal of Raptor Research 37:125-134. 21 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1967. Native fish and wildlife. Endangered species. Federal Register 32:4001. 22 Grinnell, J., J.S. Dixon, and J.M. Linsdale, 1937. Furbearing Mammals of California: Their natural history, systematic stats, and relations to man. UC Press. 23 Morrell, S., 1972. Life history of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). California Fish and Game Bulletin 58:162-174. 24 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1980. Blunt-nosed leopard lizard recovery plan. Portland, Oregon, 62 pp.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-16 AUGUST 2017
spp.), black-tailed jackrabbits, ground nesting birds, and insects. 25,26,27,28 Kit foxes require underground
dens for temperature regulation, shelter, reproduction, and predator avoidance,29 and they commonly modify and use dens constructed by other animals and structures made by humans.30 The CNDDB (2017) does not list any records within a 5-mile radius and the majority of the Plan Area contains unsuitable habitat, lacking suitable escape and denning structures and an adequate prey base to support permanent occupancy by the San Joaquin kit fox. Grasslands and agricultural areas on the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agricultural-residential or urban development may provide marginal dispersal habitat for this species. Both adult and juvenile San Joaquin kit foxes are known to move through a variety of partially disturbed habitats such as farm lands, oil fields, and areas with low density roads and highways.
31,32 This behavior combined with a reported average
dispersal distance of approximately 5 miles and occasional dispersal distances of approximately 25 to 76 miles33, 34 result in a low potential for kit foxes to occur in the Plan Area on rare occasions. Therefore, the San Joaquin kit fox is unlikely to occur in the Plan Area.
Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern.The pallid bat occurs throughout most of California, except in the high Sierra Nevada from Shasta to Kern counties and the northwestern corner of the state from Del Norte and western Siskiyou counties to northern Mendocino County. The pallid bat inhabits a variety of habitats, including coniferous forests, deciduous woodlands, brushy terrain, rocky canyons, open farm land, and desert.35 The species is most 25 Morrell, S., 1972. Life history of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica). California Fish and Game Bulletin 58:162- 174. 26 Orloff, S., F. Hall, and L. Spiegel, 1986. Distribution and habitat requirements of the San Joaquin kit fox in the northern extreme of their range. Transactions of the Western Section of the Wildlife Society 22:60-70. 27 Scrivner, J.H., T.P. O’Farrell, T.T. Kato, and M.K. Johnson, 1987. Dispersal of San Joaquin kit foxes, Vulpes macrotis mutica, on Naval Petroleum Reserve #1, Kern County, California, 1980-184. Rep. No. EGG 10282-2168, EG&G Energy Measurements, Goleta, California, 32 pp. 28 Cypher, B.L. and K.A. Spencer, 1998. Competitive interactions between coyotes and San Joaquin kit foxes. Journal of Mammalogy 79:204-214. 29 Golightly, R.T. and R.D. Ohmart, 1984. Water economy of two desert canids: coyote and kit fox. Journal of Mammalogy 65:51-58.
30 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1998. Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California.
Region 1, Portland, Oregon, 319 pp. 31 Scrivner, J.H., T.P. O’Farrell, T.T. Kato, and M.K. Johnson, 1987. Dispersal of San Joaquin kit foxes, Vulpes macrotis mutica, on Naval Petroleum Reserve #1, Kern County, California, 1980-184. Rep. No. EGG 10282-2168, EG&G Energy Measurements, Goleta, California, 32 pp. 32 Haight, R.G., B. Cypher, P.A. Kelly, S. Phillips, H.P. Possingham, K. Ralls, A.M. Starfield, P.J. White, and D. Williams, 2002.
Optimizing habitat protection using demographic models of population viability. Conservation Biology 16:1386-1397. 33 Scrivner, J.H., T.P. O’Farrell, T.T. Kato, and M.K. Johnson, 1987. Dispersal of San Joaquin kit foxes, Vulpes macrotis mutica, on Naval Petroleum Reserve #1, Kern County, California, 1980-184. Rep. No. EGG 10282-2168, EG&G Energy Measurements, Goleta, California, 32 pp. 34 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 1998. Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, California.
Region 1, Portland, Oregon, 319 pp. 35 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey. 1998. Pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus. In B.C. Bolster (Editor), Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California. Drafeet Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Report No. 98–14. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-17
common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Pallid bats are primarily a crevice-roosting species and select daytime roosting sites where they can retreat from view.36 The prey of the pallid bat consists of a wide variety of insects and arachnids, including beetles, orthopterans, homopterans, moths, spiders, scorpions, solpugids, and Jerusalem crickets. It is unusual among North American bats in that most of its prey is taken off the ground, although a few are taken aerially.37 The pallid bat is highly social and usually occurs in colonies of 12 to 100 individuals38 that cluster to share body heat. 39 The pallid bat
roosts both during the day and at night, spending 60 to 80 percent of a 24-hour cycle in the roost environment.40 During the day this species shelters inside crevices or cavities found in natural features such as trees, cliffs, caves and rocky outcrops, and in manmade features such as barns, bridges, mines, and attics.
41,42,43 Roost temperature may be a limiting factor in roost selection. Pallid bats are intolerant of roost temperatures above 104° F,44 and often occupy roosts that offer a varied temperature regime. Pallid bats are very sensitive to disturbance at the roost. When disturbed, they generally retreat into crevices, and with repeated disturbance, may abandon the roost.
45 Recent radio-tracking efforts in the west,
including California, suggest that the pallid bat is far more dependent on tree roosts than was previously realized.46 Pallid bats are also one of the species most predictably associated with bridges. No CNDDB (2017) records occur within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area; however, suitable foraging and roosting habitat is present within the Plan Area. Therefore, the species may occur within the Plan Area.
Townsend’s big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status:
Species of Special Concern. Pierson and Rainey (1998) identified 39 active Townsend’s big-eared bat maternity colonies and 55 maternity roost sites scattered throughout California. The distribution is 36 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey. 1998. Pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus. In B.C. Bolster (Editor), Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California. Drafeet Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Report No. 98–14. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. 37 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey. 1998. Pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus. In B.C. Bolster (Editor), Terrestrial Mammal Species of Special Concern in California. Drafeet Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Report No. 98–14. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game. 38 Barbour, R.W. and W.H. Davis, 1969. Bats of America. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press. 39 Vaughn, T.A. and T.J. O’Shea, 1976. Roosting ecology of the pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus. Journal of Mammalogy 57: 19-42. 40 Vaughn, T.A. and T.J. O’Shea, 1976. Roosting ecology of the pallid bat, Antrozous pallidus. Journal of Mammalogy 57: 19-42. 41 Barbour, R.W. and W.H. Davis, 1969. Bats of America. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press. 42 Hermanson, J.W. and T.J. O’Shea, 1983. Antrozous pallidus. The American Society of Mammalogists, Mammalian Species No. 213:1–8. 43 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey, 1998. Distribution, status, and management of Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in California. State of California Department of Fish and Game. Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Technical Report Number 96-7. 44 Licht, P. and P. Leitner, 1967. Behavior response to high temperatures in 3 species of California bats. Journal of Mammalogy 48:52–61. 45 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey, 1998. Distribution, status, and management of Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in California. State of California Department of Fish and Game. Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Technical Report Number 96-7. 46 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey, 1998. Distribution, status, and management of Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in California. State of California Department of Fish and Game. Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Technical Report Number 96-7.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-18 AUGUST 2017
strongly correlated with the availability of roosting habitat and the absence of human disturbance at roost sites.
47,48
Townsend’s big-eared bat is a colonial species, and females aggregate in the spring at maternity colonies to begin their breeding season, which may extend through the end of August. Females give birth to one young, and females and young show a high fidelity to both their group and their specific roost site.
Although the Townsend’s big-eared bat is usually a cave dwelling species, many colonies are found in anthropogenic structures, such as the attics of buildings or old abandoned mines. Known roost sites in California include limestone caves, lava tubes, mine tunnels, buildings, and other structures.49 This species also roosts in deep crevices of redwood trees. Radio tracking studies suggest that movement from a colonial roost during the maternity season is confined to the area within 9 miles of the roost.50 This species is easily disturbed while roosting in buildings, and females are known to abandon their young when disturbed.51 Townsend’s big-eared bats feed primarily on moths and other soft-bodied insects.52 No CNDDB (2017) records occur within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area; however, suitable foraging and roosting habitat is present within the Plan Area. Therefore, the species may occur within the Plan Area.
Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern. Western mastiff bats are the largest of all of North America species of bats with a forearm length of 2.87 to 3.27 inches and weigh up to 3.53 ounces. Individuals can forage at elevations of 1,968 to 2,296 feet above ground level and may forage for seven hours and 15 miles from their roost.53 This species roosts primarily in cliffs or high buildings where there is a minimum of 9.84 feet of vertical drop at the entrance to roosts.54 This species is found in the central and south coastal California, the San Joaquin Valley, the southern half of the Sierra foothills, and throughout desert regions. This species may utilize bridges or buildings as night roosts, day roosts, or maternity roosts. Suitable foraging and roosting habitat is present within the Plan Area and there are four CNDDB (2017) records of the species within 5 miles of the Plan Area.
47 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey, 1998. Distribution, status, and management of Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in California. State of California Department of Fish and Game. Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Technical Report Number 96-7. 48 Sherwin, R. and A. Piaggio, 2005. Corynorhinus townsendii. Western Bat Working Group, http://wbwg.org/ species_accounts/vespertilonidae/coto.pdfm, accessed May 2011. 49 Williams, D.F., 1986. Mammalian species of special concern in California. Prepared for the State of California, The Resources Agency, Department of Fish and Game. 50 Pierson, E.D. and W.E. Rainey, 1998. Distribution, status, and management of Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) in California. State of California Department of Fish and Game. Bird and Mammal Conservation Program Technical Report Number 96-7. 51 Humphrey, S.R. and T.H. Kunz, 1976. Ecology of a Pleistocene relict, the western big-eared bat (Plecotus townsendi) in the southern Great Plains. Journal of Mammalogy 57:470-494. 52 Kunz, T.H. and R.A. Martin, 1982. Plecotus townsendii. Mammalian Species 175:1-6. 53 Vaughn, T.A., 1959. Functional morphology of three bats: Eumops, Myotis, Macrotus. University of Kansas Publications, Museum of Natural History 12:1–153. 54 Wilson, D.E. and S. Ruff, 1999. The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institute Press.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-19
Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern. The western red bat is a migratory species that occurs from Shasta County to the Mexican border, west of the Sierra Nevada/Cascade crest and deserts.55 Western red bats are strongly associated with intact cottonwood and sycamore valley riparian habitats in low elevations.56 Both day and night roosts usually are located in the foliage of trees; red bats in the Central Valley show a preference for large trees and extensive, intact riparian habitat.57 Day roosts often are located along the edges of riparian areas, near streams, grasslands, and even urban areas (Western Bat Working Group 2005). During the breeding season, western red bats establish individual tree roosts and occasionally small maternity colonies in riparian habitats.58 Little is known about the habitat use of western red bats during the nonbreeding season.59 Western red bats breed in August and September, but fertilization does not occur until spring. Young are typically born in June with litter sizes ranging from 1 to 5 young. 60,61 No CNDDB (2017)
records occur within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area. The species is strongly associated with intact cottonwood and sycamore valley riparian habitats in low elevations, which is absent from the Plan Area.
Therefore, the species is unlikely to occur within the Plan Area.
American badger (Taxidea taxus). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern. The American badger occurs throughout western North America, including much of California. It is most abundant in grasslands and other habitats dominated by herbaceous vegetation, but it will also use the drier open stages of scrub and woodland habitats. Badgers are generally associated with treeless regions, prairies, park lands, and cold desert areas. They need friable soils suitable for excavation of their burrows and a prey base of small burrowing mammals. Badgers dig dens with single, 8- to 21-inch elliptical entrances in for cover. These animals frequently reuse old burrows; although, some have been known to dig a new den each night, especially in summer. Soil excavated during formation of the den is piled at the entrance.
The American badger is somewhat tolerant of human activities, and clearing of woody vegetation for range may have benefited the species historically. However, intensive cultivation destroys their burrows and makes areas unsuitable for denning; thus, badgers are associated more with rangeland and areas with 55 California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), 2008. CWHR Version 8.2 personal computer program in California Department of Fish and Game, California Interagency Wildlife Task Group. 56 Pierson, E.D., W. E. Rainey, and C. Corben, 2006. Distribution and status of western red bats (Lasiurus blossevillii) in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program Report 2006-04. 57 Pierson, E.D., W. E. Rainey, and C. Corben, 2006. Distribution and status of western red bats (Lasiurus blossevillii) in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program Report 2006-04. 58 Zeiner, D.C., W.F. Laudenslayer Jr., K.E. Mayer, and M. White, Editors, 1990. California's wildlife. Volume III: Mammals.
California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. 59 Pierson, E.D., W. E. Rainey, and C. Corben, 2006. Distribution and status of western red bats (Lasiurus blossevillii) in California. California Department of Fish and Game, Habitat Conservation Branch, Species Conservation and Recovery Program Report 2006-04. 60 Wilson, D.E. and S. Ruff, 1999. The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institute Press.61 Bolster, Betsy C., 2005. Western Bat Working Group species accounts Lasiurus blossevillii, http://www.wbwg.org/ speciesinfo/species_accounts/species_accounts.html, accessed April 26, 2011.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-20 AUGUST 2017
uncultivated refugia than with broad expanses of cultivated land.62 Grasslands and agricultural areas on the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agricultural-residential or urban development may provide marginal habitat; however, these conditions are limited within the Plan Area making it unlikely that American badgers occur within the Plan Area.
Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern. The burrowing owl is a small, terrestrial owl of open country. These owls prefer annual and perennial grasslands, typically with sparse or nonexistent tree or shrub canopies. In California, burrowing owls are found in close association with California ground squirrels; owls use abandoned ground squirrel burrows for shelter and nesting. The nesting season as recognized by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) (1995) runs from February 1 through August 31. After nesting is completed, adult owls may remain in their nesting burrows or in nearby burrows, or they may migrate;63 young birds disperse across the landscape from 0.1 to 35 miles from their natal burrows.64 Burrowing owl populations have declined substantially in the portions of their range in recent years, with declines estimated at 4 to 6 percent annually.
65 The CNDDB (2017) does not list any records within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area; however, there are a few records within a 5- to 10-mile radius. The Plan Area may provide a small amount of suitable annual grassland habitat for the burrowing owl and for their prey, the California ground squirrel. Protocol-level surveys for this species, which would entail a series of site visits in accordance with the CDFG’s protocol to determine presence/absence of this species have not been conducted. Therefore, the burrowing owl could potentially occur in the Plan Area, but the species’ presence is unlikely.
Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern. The western pond turtle is a medium-sized brown or olive-colored aquatic turtle, and is found west of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and south to northern Baja, except in desert areas. The pond turtle is normally found in and along riparian areas, although females have been reported up to 1 mile away from water in search of appropriate nest sites. The preferred habitat for these turtles includes ponds or slow-moving relatively deep water with numerous basking sites (e.g., logs, rocks, etc.), food sources (e.g., plants, aquatic invertebrates, and carrion), and few predators (e.g., raccoons, introduced fishes, and bullfrogs). Juvenile and adult turtles are commonly seen basking in the sun at appropriate sites, although they are extremely wary animals and often dive into the water at any perception of danger. 62 California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), 2009. Species Account of the American Badger, http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov/gallery/badger.asp, accessed September 2009. 63 Gorman, L.R., D.K. Rosenberg, N.A. Ronan, K.L. Haley, J.A. Gervais, and V. Franke, 2003. Estimation of reproductive rates of Burrowing Owls. Journal of Wildlife Management 67:493-500. 64 Rosier, J.R., N.A. Ronan, and D.K. Rosenberg, 2006. Post-breeding dispersal of burrowing owls in an extensive California grassland. American Midland Naturalist 155:162-167. 65 DeSante, D.F., Ruhlen, E.D., and Scalf, R., 2007. The distribution and relative abundance of Burrowing Owls in California during 1991–1993: Evidence for a declining population and thoughts on its conservation, in Proceedings of the California Burrowing Owl Symposium, November 2003 (J.H. Barclay, K.W. Hunting, J.L. Lincer, J. Linthicum, and T.A. Roberts, eds.), pp. 1-41.
Bird Populations Monogr. 1. The Institute for Bird Populations and Albion Environmental, Inc.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-21
No CNDDB (2017) records occur within a 5-mile radius of the Plan Area; however, suitable aquatic habitat is present for the western pond turtle within the Plan Area. Therefore, the species may occur within the Plan Area.
Nesting Migratory Birds. A variety of common birds, such as black phoebes (Sayornis nigricans), northern mockingbirds (Mimus polyglottos), American robins (Turdus migratorius), and house finches (Haemorhous mexicanus) could potentially nest within the Plan Area and be subject to take of birds and the destruction of nests or eggs during project activities. Although take of these relatively common species would not be considered a significant impact under CEQA, it would be in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code.
Wetlands
There are several unnamed creeks or drainages in the Plan Area (Figure 4.4-3) that may have hydrologic connectivity to a navigable or perennial surface water source or tributary. These features may be subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE under provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (1972) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (1899). They may also qualify as “waters of the state” and could potentially be impacted directly by construction or by uncontrolled runoff from Plan activities. Those activities that require a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act will also require a State water quality certification from the RWQCB under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. The extent and limits of such habitats have not yet been established, but would need to be determined through formal wetland delineation before any construction activities begin.
Special-Status Natural Communities
In general, "special‐status natural communities" include those communities that are of limited distribution statewide or within a county or region; communities that are of special concern to resource agencies; and communities that, because they are vulnerable to the environmental effects of projects, are assessed or protected under CEQA Section 1600 of the California Department of Fish and Game Code, and/or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, among others. The most current version of the CDFW’s List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations (or "Natural Communities List") (2010) indicates which natural communities are considered "special‐status" in the state of California. There are no special-status natural communities in the Plan Area.
4.4.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed Plan would result in a significant impact with respect to biological resources if it would:
1. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or USFWS.
2. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or USFWS.
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
CA 180 E
S Marks Ave
California Ave
CA 99 S
Jensen Ave
CA 14 S
North Ave
PUBHx
PUBHx
L2UBHx
PEMA
PUBHx
PUBFx
PEMC
PUBFx
PUBHx
PUBFx
PUBFx
PUBFx
PUBFx
PUBFx PUBFx
Figure 3: Potential Jurisdictional Habitats Map
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Plan Area
National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)
Intermittent Lake/Pond
Perennial Lake/Pond
Reservoir
Canal/Ditch
3,000 0 3,000 Feet
L2UBHx - Lacustrine, Littoral, Unconsolidated Bottom, Permanently Flooded, Excavated PEMA - Palustrine, Emergent, Temporarily Flooded
PUBFx - Palustrine, Unconsolidated Bottom, Semipermanently Flooded, Excavated PEMC - Palustrine, Emergent, Seasonally Flooded
PUBHx - Palustrine, Unconsolidated Bottom, Permanently Flooded, Excavated National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
CA 180 E
S Marks Ave
California Ave
CA 99 S
Jensen Ave
CA 14 S
North Ave
PUBHx
PUBHx
L2UBHx
PEMA
PUBHx
PUBFx
PEMC
PUBFx
PUBHx
PUBFx
PUBFx
PUBFx
PUBFx
PUBFx PUBFx
Figure 3: Potential Jurisdictional Habitats Map
City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Plan Area
National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)
Intermittent Lake/Pond
Perennial Lake/Pond
Reservoir
Canal/Ditch
3,000 0 3,000 Feet
L2UBHx - Lacustrine, Littoral, Unconsolidated Bottom, Permanently Flooded, Excavated PEMA - Palustrine, Emergent, Temporarily Flooded
PUBFx - Palustrine, Unconsolidated Bottom, Semipermanently Flooded, Excavated PEMC - Palustrine, Emergent, Seasonally Flooded
PUBHx - Palustrine, Unconsolidated Bottom, Permanently Flooded, Excavated Source: PlaceWorks, 2017.
Figure 4.4-3
Potential Jurisdictional Habitats Map
SO UT H W ES T FR ES N O S P E C I F I C PLAN D RAFT EI R
C I TY O F FR ES N O
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
P LAC E WO RK S
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-23
3. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
4. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
5. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
6. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.
4.4.3 IMPACT DISCUSSION
BIO-1 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Rare Plants
Rare plant surveys were not conducted within the Plan Area. While unlikely, four rare plant species (California jewelflower, California satintail, Sanford’s arrowhead, and Caper-fruited tropidocarpum), including a State and federally endangered species, have limited potential to occur in the Plan Area. If individuals of these species are present in in the Plan Area, plants could be lost due to trampling or earthmoving. Clearing, grading or paving could result in removal or modification of seed banks. Indirect effects from construction could result from soil compaction that adversely affects soil conditions. Mobilization of dust during construction could reduce the survivorship and productivity of individual plants close to dust sources by decreasing photosynthetic output, reducing transpiration, and adversely affecting reproductive success.
The General Plan includes specific implementing policies pertaining to biological resources that must be adhered to for development within the Plan Area, specifically within the Open Space and Biological Resources Section of Chapter 5, the Parks, Open Space, and Schools Element (POSS). Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to special‐status plant species and their associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c into the conditions of approval would ensure that if one or more of these rare plants occur in the Plan Area, their presence would be detected, the risk of mortality would be avoided to the maximum extent feasible, and impacts would be reduced to a less-thansignificant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-24 AUGUST 2017
Impact BIO-1.1: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in the loss of rare plant species.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1.1a: Construction of a proposed project should avoid, where possible, vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for a special-status species known to occur within the Plan Area. If construction within potentially suitable habitat must occur, the presence/absence of any special-status plant or wildlife species must be determined prior to construction, to determine if the habitat supports any special-status species. If a special-status species are determined to occupy any portion of a project site, avoidance and minimization measures shall be incorporated into the construction phase of a project to avoid direct or incidental take of a listed species to the greatest extent feasible.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1.1b: Direct or incidental take of any State- or federally-listed species should be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If construction of a proposed project will result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species, consultation with the resources agencies and/or additional permitting may be required. Agency consultation through the CDFW 2081 and USFWS Section 7 or Section 10 permitting processes must take place prior to any action that may result in the direct or incidental take of a listed species. Specific mitigation measures for direct or incidental impacts to a listed species will be determined on a case-by-case basis through agency consultation.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-1.1c: Development within the Plan Area should avoid, where possible, special-status natural communities and vegetation communities that provide suitable habitat for special-status species. If a proposed project will result in the loss of a special-status natural community or suitable habitat for special-status species, compensatory habitat-based mitigation is required under CEQA and CESA. Mitigation will consist of preserving on-site habitat, restoring similar habitat, or purchasing off-site credits from an approved mitigation bank. Compensatory mitigation will be determined through consultation with the City and/or resource agencies. An appropriate mitigation strategy and ratio will be agreed upon by the developer and lead agency to reduce project impacts to special-status natural communities to a less than significant level. Agreed-upon mitigation ratios will depend on the quality of the habitat and presence/absence of a special-status species. The specific mitigation for project level impacts will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
Swainson’s Hawks
Grasslands and agricultural areas on the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agricultural-residential or urban development may provide foraging habitat for Swainson’s hawks and trees in the open space may provide nesting habitat. If Swainson’s hawks nest in trees in the Plan Area, tree removal may result in injury or mortality of individuals, displacement of breeding birds, or the abandonment of active nests. Specifically, tree removal could contribute to the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to reproductive failure.
Any reduction in the numbers of this rare species, directly or indirectly (through nest abandonment or reproductive suppression) caused by the proposed Plan, would constitute a significant impact. In addition, this species is protected under CESA as a threatened species. Furthermore, raptors and their nests are
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-25
protected under both federal and State laws and regulations, including the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5.
Trees in the Plan Area may be removed without adversely affecting nesting Swainson’s hawks as long as they are determined not to contain a Swainson’s hawk nest or be in close proximity to a tree with a Swainson’s hawk nest during the nesting season (March through August).
Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to Swainson’s hawk and their associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c and the following mitigation measure into the conditions of approval would ensure that if Swainson’s hawks nest on or near the Plan Area, their presence would be detected, the risk of mortality would be avoided to the maximum extent feasible, and impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in mortality of Swainson’s hawks.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1.2: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Swainson’s Hawk Nests and Implement Avoidance Measures. If trees suitable for Swainson’s hawk nesting are to be removed during the Swainson’s hawk nesting season (March through August), a qualified biologist knowledgeable of the species will conduct a Swainson’s hawk survey of the project site and the surrounding 0.5-mile-radius area, as described in the Recommended Timing and Methodology for Swainson’s Hawk Nesting Surveys in California’s Central Valley (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000). This methodology divides the nesting season into five survey periods: January 1 to March 20, March 20 to April 5, April 5 to May 20, May 21 to June 10, and June 10 to July 30. The first survey period occurs before most Swainson’s hawks return to California, so this survey is optional. The site should be surveyed at a minimum of 3 times in each of the two periods that precede project initiation.
If an active Swainson’s hawk nest is detected on the project site, CDFW will be consulted and sitespecific avoidance or mitigation measures will be implemented consistent with CDFW recommendations (Swainson’s Hawk Technical Advisory Committee 2000).
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
San Joaquin Kit Fox
San Joaquin kit fox that are dispersing or foraging in the periphery of the Plan Area that have not been fragmented by agricultural-residential or urban development could be subject to injury or mortality from construction-related activities. Dispersing or transient individuals could be directly affected by construction, during which vehicle and equipment traffic would increase over baseline conditions.
Although unlikely, there is potential that individual kit foxes could be killed by vehicles or construction equipment, particularly because construction may occur at night when the kit fox is most active. The
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-26 AUGUST 2017
proposed Plan would not have any direct effects on kit fox natal dens: San Joaquin kit foxes are not expected to raise pups in the marginally suitable habitat present in the Plan Area.
Dispersing or transient individuals could be indirectly affected by construction activities. Spills or leaks of industrial chemicals, fuels, and lubricants could result in poisoning of kit foxes and contamination of their habitat, and if prey are poisoned by chemicals, kit foxes could be poisoned by ingesting them. Transient or dispersing individuals also could be indirectly lost or harmed by predation or competition with species such as the red fox, feral dogs, or coyote, which might be attracted to the Plan Area if trash were discarded improperly by construction personnel.
This impact could be significant because it could result in the injury or loss of a federally and state-listed species. Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to San Joaquin kit fox and their associated habitat. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c and the following mitigation measure into the conditions of approval will ensure that if San Joaquin kit fox occur in the Plan Area, their presence would be detected, the risk of mortality would be avoided, and impacts would be reduced to a less-thansignificant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in mortality of San Joaquin kit fox.
Mitigation Measure BIO -1.3: Implement Standard Measures for Protection of San Joaquin Kit Fox. No less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to commencement of construction activities the project proponent shall retain a USFWS- and CDFW-approved biologist to conduct pre-construction surveys in potential habitat periphery of the Plan Area that has not been fragmented by agriculturalresidential or urban development. The survey, reporting, and activities during construction shall adhere to the requirements contained in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or During Ground Disturbance. 66 As described in the standardized recommendations, if a natal/pupping den is discovered within the Plan Area or within 200-feet of the project boundary, the USFWS shall be immediately notified and under no circumstances should the den be disturbed or destroyed without prior authorization. If the preconstruction/preactivity survey reveals an active natal pupping or new information, the project applicant should contact the USFWS immediately to obtain the necessary take authorization/permit.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
Bats
The Plan Area provides suitable roosting habitat for four special-status bat species. If any special-status bats occupy the construction zone or immediately adjacent areas at the time of construction, disturbance 66 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2011. Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the Endangered San Joaquin Kit Fox Prior to or during Ground Disturbance, January. Sacramento, California.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-27
could destroy occupied roost sites or maternity colonies suitable trees or buildings. Reductions in the numbers of these species, through roost site destruction or disturbance or destruction of maternity colonies, would constitute a significant impact. Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to special‐status bat species and their associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c and the following mitigation measure be included in the conditions of approval to reduce the potential impact on these species to a less-than-significant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.4: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in impacts to roosting habitat or maternity colonies of special-status bats.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1.4: Conduct Preconstruction Surveys for Special-status Bats and Implement Avoidance Measures. Any medium or larger (≥ 12-inch diameter) trees or snags selected for removal shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for presence of potential day-roosting habitat (e.g., cavities exfoliating bark, or basal hollows) for special-status bats or a maternity colony. If feasible, cavities shall be examined for roosting bats using a portable camera probe or similar technology.
Buildings with potential for roosting habitat for supporting special-status bats or a maternity colony shall be inspected by a qualified biologist for evidence of roosting colonies. If suitable roosting habitat is present and/or bat sign is observed, but no bats are detected, an evening exit count and acoustic survey using a full spectrum acoustic detector shall be conducted by a qualified bat biologist to determine if bats are present and what species are present. If present, roosts (including day roosts, winter hibernacula, and maternity colonies) and a 100- to 300-foot disturbance-free buffer surrounding each roost shall be flagged and avoided, as determined by a qualified bat biologist.
If avoidance is not possible, replacement habitat appropriate for the species’ roost requirements shall be created prior to the roost removal, and the roosting bats shall be passively evicted under the direction of a qualified biologist (as determined by a Memorandum of Understanding with the CDFG).
The qualified biologist shall facilitate the removal of roosting bats outside of the winter hibernation (November 1 to February 28th) and maternity roosting (March 15 to August 31) periods through the following means:
1. Implementing eviction during a period of warm (nighttime low >50°F), dry weather, when bats are expected to be active.
2. Opening the roosting area to allow airflow through the cavity or building (air flow disturbance).
3. Waiting a minimum of three nights of warm weather, as defined above, for roosting bats to respond to air flow disturbance, thereby allowing bats to leave during nighttime hours when predation risk is relatively low and chances of finding a new roost is greater than in the daytime.
4. Conducting a follow-up survey prior to roost removal to ensure that bats have vacated the roost.
5. Disturbing roosts at dusk just prior to roost removal the same evening to allow bats to escape during nighttime hours.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-28 AUGUST 2017
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
American Badgers
Extensive grasslands and the periphery of agricultural fields adjacent to extensive grasslands on the periphery of the Plan Area may provide habitat for American badger. Therefore, the American badger could potentially occur in the Plan Area and implementing the proposed Plan could result in injury or mortality of individual badgers during construction. Although badgers are somewhat tolerant of human activities, urbanization and fragmentation of habitat continue to threaten the species. A loss of only marginally suitable habitat within the Plan Area would not constitute a significant impact. However, disturbance of habitat could result in potential mortality (such as through vehicle strikes), injury, displacement, and harassment of badgers. During the denning season construction could result in displacement of denning badgers and the abandonment of active dens. If American badgers occupy the Plan Area, any reductions in the numbers of this State species of special concern, directly or indirectly (such as through reproductive suppression), would constitute a significant impact.
Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to American badgers and their associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c and the following mitigation measure into the conditions of approval would ensure that if American badger are present, the risk of mortality would be avoided to the maximum extent feasible, and impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.5: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in disruption of denning badgers and mortality of badgers.
Mitigation Measure 1.5. Conduct Focused American Badger Surveys and Avoid or Minimize Impacts to American Badger Dens. No more than 30 days before the start of construction activities, a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys for American badgers within suitable habitat. If a potentially active den is found in a construction area, the den openings may be monitored with tracking medium or an infrared-beam camera for three consecutive nights to determine current use.
Potential (inactive) dens within the limits of disturbance shall be blocked with a one-way door or excavated to prevent use during construction. Blocking with one-way doors is preferable to excavation where feasible; potential dens blocked with doors will be made available to badgers after construction. If American badgers or active dens are detected during these surveys, the following shall be implemented:
If present, occupied badger dens shall be flagged, and ground-disturbing activities avoided, within 50 feet of the occupied den during the nonbreeding season (1 July through 14 February). Flagging that is highly visible by construction crews shall encircle the occupied den at the appropriate buffer distance, and shall not prevent access to the den by badgers. Dens determined to be occupied during the breeding season (15 February through 30 June) shall be flagged, and grounddisturbing activities avoided, within 200 feet to protect adults and nursing young. Buffers may be modified by the qualified biologist, provided the badgers are protected, and shall not be removed until the qualified biologist has determined that the den is no longer in use.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-29
If avoidance of an active non-maternity den is not feasible, badgers shall be relocated by first incrementally blocking the den over a three-day period, followed by slowly excavating the den (either by hand or with mechanized equipment under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist, removing no more than 4 inches at a time) before or after the rearing season (15 February through 30 June). Any passive relocation of American badgers shall occur only under the direction of a qualified biologist.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
Burrowing Owl
The Plan Area may support a limited amount of suitable habitat for burrowing owl and their prey where grasslands, open space, and agricultural fields in the Plan Area have not been highly fragmented by urban development. Therefore, the burrowing owl could potentially occur in the Plan Area and implementing the proposed Plan could impact suitable burrowing owl habitat and/or result in injury or mortality of individual burrowing owls during construction. Disturbance of habitat during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) could result in displacement of breeding birds and the abandonment of active nests. Specifically, ground disturbance during construction could contribute to the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandonment.
A loss of only marginally suitable habitat in the Plan Area would not constitute a significant impact.
However, if owls occupy the site, any reductions in the numbers of this rare species, directly or indirectly (through nest abandonment or reproductive suppression), would constitute a significant impact.
Furthermore, raptors, including owls, and their nests are protected under both federal and state laws and regulations, including the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code Section 3503.5.
Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to burrowing owls and their associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1a to BIO-1.1c and the following mitigation measure into the conditions of approval would ensure that if burrowing owls are present, their presence would be detected, the risk of mortality would be avoided to the maximum extent feasible, and impacts would be reduced to a lessthan-significant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.6: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in mortality of, and loss of habitat for, burrowing owls.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1.6: Conduct a Preconstruction Survey for Burrowing Owl and Implement Avoidance Measures. No more than 15 days before the start of ground-disturbing activities for the project, a qualified biologist(s) knowledgeable of the species will conduct a focused, preconstruction survey for burrowing owls and their sign on the project site and within 250 feet where access allows.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-30 AUGUST 2017
In conformance with federal and State regulations regarding the protection of raptors, the survey will be conducted per the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. 67 All areas of suitable habitat
proposed for ground disturbance will be surveyed. If burrowing owls are detected, buffers and mitigation per the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation will be implemented.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
Western Pond Turtles
The Plan Area provides both breeding (aquatic) and upland habitat for western pond turtle on the periphery of the developed areas. Construction has the potential to affect this species, and may result in injury or mortality of individual western pond turtles or their eggs during construction. Construction could result from collision or crushing of turtles, eggs, or nests by construction, or by any activity that compacts or disturbs soil in suitable habitat areas. Any increased mortality of this State species of special concern, destruction of their nests or eggs could be considered significant.
Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to western pond turtles and associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c and following mitigation measure would reduce the potential for impacting western pond turtles and their nests or eggs to less than significant levels.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.7: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in impacts to Western pond turtle nests and mortality of pond turtles.
Mitigation Measure BIO-1.7. Conduct Pre-construction Surveys for Western Pond Turtle, and Move Individuals to Safety. Prior to construction, a qualified biologist (i.e., a biologist approved by CDFW to handle western pond turtles) shall look for western pond turtles within 0.25-mile of aquatic and riparian habitat, where accessible. If any pond turtles are detected during these surveys, or during construction in an area where individuals could be affected, they shall be moved to a suitable location outside the area of impact. The candidate sites for relocation shall be identified before construction and shall be selected based on the size and type of habitat present, the potential for negative interactions with resident species, and the species’ range.
If any western pond turtle nests with eggs are found, the nests shall remain undisturbed until the eggs have hatched, if feasible. If avoidance of a nest is infeasible (e.g., if avoidance would result in an unacceptable delay in the project’s schedule), or if the eggs are discovered only after the nest has been affected, any viable eggs shall be relocated to a suitable location outside the impact area. Egg relocation areas shall be identified based on pond turtle nesting biology. Any viable eggs shall be deposited in a hole and buried for thermal protection.
67 California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, March 7.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-31
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
Nesting Birds
CDFW has jurisdiction over actions that could result in the disturbance or destruction of active nest sites or the unauthorized take of birds. Sections of the Fish and Game Code that protect birds, their eggs and nests include Sections 3503 (regarding unlawful take, possession, or needless destruction of the nest or eggs of any bird), 3503.5 (regarding the take, possession, or destruction of any birds-of-prey or their nests or eggs), and 3513 (regarding unlawful take of any migratory nongame bird).
Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to nesting birds and their associated habitats. Further, incorporation of the General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1a to BIO-1.1c and General Plan Mitigation Measure BIO-1.8 would reduce any potential impacts to nesting birds and their associated habitats.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-1.8: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in take of birds or nests.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO‐1.8. Proposed projects within the Plan Area should avoid, if possible, construction within the general nesting season of February through August for avian species protected under Fish and Game Code 3500 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), if it is determined that suitable nesting habitat occurs on a project site. If construction cannot avoid the nesting season, a pre‐construction clearance survey must be conducted to determine if any nesting birds or nesting activity is observed on or within 500 feet of a project site. If an active nest is observed during the survey, a biological monitor must be on site to ensure that no proposed project activities would impact the active nest. A suitable buffer will be established around the active nest until the nestlings have fledged and the nest is no longer active. Project activities may continue in the vicinity of the nest only at the discretion of the biological monitor.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
BIO-2 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
No sensitive natural communities were identified in the Plan Area. There are potential CDFW jurisdictional features within the Plan Area that may be protected by the Section 1600 provisions of the California Fish and Game Code. If any CDFW jurisdictional features could be impacted by implementation of the proposed Plan, a streambed alteration agreement would be completed with CDFW in compliance with the California Fish and Game Code for that portion of the plan. Any project‐related impacts to riparian habitat and/or a special‐status natural community are considered a significant impact and require mitigation.
Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-32 AUGUST 2017
impacts to riparian habitat or special-status natural communities. Implementation of General Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-5 through BIO-7 would reduce any potential impacts on riparian habitat.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-2: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in the loss of riparian habitat.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-2.1a: If a proposed project will result in the removal or impact to any riparian habitat and/or a special-status natural community with potential to occur in the PlanArea, compensatory habitat-based mitigation shall be required to reduce project impacts. Compensatory mitigation must involve the preservation or restoration or the purchase of off-site mitigation credits for impacts to riparian habitat and/or a special-status natural community. Mitigation must be conducted in-kind or within an approved mitigation bank in the region. The specific mitigation ratio for habitat based mitigation will be determined through consultation with the appropriate agency (i.e., CDFW or USFWS) on a case-by-case basis.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-2.1b: Project impacts that occur to riparian habitat may also result in significant impacts to streambeds or waterways protected under Section 1600 of Fish and Wildlife Code and Section 404 of the CWA. CDFW and/or USACE consultation, determination of mitigation strategy, and regulatory permitting to reduce impacts, as required for projects that remove riparian habitat and/or alter a streambed or waterway, shall be implemented.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-2.1c: Project-related impacts to riparian habitat or a special-status natural community may result in direct or incidental impacts to special-status species associated with riparian or wetland habitats. Project impacts to special-status species associated with riparian habitat shall be mitigated through agency consultation, development of a mitigation strategy, and/or issuing incidental take permits for the specific special-status species, as determined by the CDFW and/or USFWS.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
BIO-3 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
There are several unnamed creeks or drainages in the Plan Area (Figure 4.4-3) that could be defined as federally protected wetlands and may be impacted by plan activities and subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE under provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The extent and limits of such habitats have not yet been established, but would need to be determined through formal wetland delineation before any construction activities begin. Any project‐related impacts to federally protected wetlands are considered a significant impact and require mitigation. Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f will reduce potential project impacts to federally protected wetlands.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-33
Incorporation of the following General Plan mitigation measures will ensure that if jurisdictional wetlands are present, impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact BIO-3: Implementation of the proposed Plan could result in loss of federally protected wetlands or waters.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-3a: If a proposed project will result in the significant alteration or fill of a federally protected wetland, a formal wetland delineation conducted according to USACE accepted methodology is required for each project to determine the extent of wetlands on a project site. The delineation shall be used to determine if federal permitting and mitigation strategy are required to reduce project impacts. Acquisition of permits from USACE for the fill of wetlands and USACE approval of wetland mitigation plan would ensure a “no net loss” of wetland habitat within the Plan Area.
Appropriate wetland mitigation/creation shall be implemented in a ratio according to the size of the impacted wetland.
MEIR Mitigation Measure BIO-3b: In addition to regulatory agency permitting, Best Management Practices identified from a list provided by the USACE shall be incorporated into the design and construction phase of the project to ensure that no pollutants or siltation drain into a federally protected wetland. Project design features such as fencing, appropriate drainage and incorporating detention basins shall assist in ensuring project-related impacts to wetland habitat are minimized to the greatest extent feasible.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
BIO-4 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
A wildlife corridor is an area of habitat, generally native, connecting wildlife populations, and a nursery site can be defined broadly as a place where young animals grow or are cared for. The Plan Area is highly fragmented by roads and within a landscape dominated by agriculture, residential, industrial, and commercial land uses. Due to the fragmentation, the Plan Area lacks corridors for wildlife movement or exchange of individuals between populations, and there is likely little use of the Plan Area as native wildlife nursery sites as a result of existing land uses. The Plan Area provides little existing habitat value for native wildlife species in the agricultural, residential, industrial, and commercial land use areas, so land conversion as a result of the proposed Plan would not be expected to substantially degrade the existing conditions for native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, wildlife corridors, or nursery sites.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.4-34 AUGUST 2017
BIO-5 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
The proposed Plan may result in the removal or alteration of existing trees within the boundaries of the Plan Area. Fresno Municipal Code Section13‐305 states that existing preserved and landscaped trees within public property, including parkways, must be preserved. Project development within the Plan Area has the potential to impact trees on public property; however, future development would be required to comply with Fresno Municipal Code Section13‐305. Therefore, potential impacts to the City’s public tree would be less than significant.
68 Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
BIO-6 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan.
The Plan Area overlaps with areas that are covered by PG&E’s San Joaquin Valley Operation and Maintenance HCP.69 The HCP covers PG&E’s routine operations and maintenance activities, as well as minor new construction, on any PG&E gas and electrical transmission and distribution facilities, easements, private access routes, or lands owned by PG&E. The proposed Plan would not be expected to conflict or interfere with the HCP activities. The proposed Plan, however, would likely result in a need for PG&E gas and electrical transmission and distribution facilities to support new residential and industrial land uses not covered by the HCP, but these activities in the Plan Area would be covered by General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f, and both the General Plan and proposed Plan mitigation measures described herein.
The Plan Area is also located in the planning area of the Recovery Plan for Upland Species of the San Joaquin Valley, which addresses recovery needs and goals for the San Joaquin kit fox, among other species. Project‐level implementation of the General Plan Policies POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f and Mitigation Measures BIO-1 to BIO-3, and proposed Plan Mitigation Measures BIO-1.3, will reduce potential project impacts to the San Joaquin kit fox and other wildlife covered by the Recovery Plan and their associated habitat, and require consultation with the USFWS if take of federally-listed species would occur. Thus, with implementation of these measures, the proposed Plan would not be expected to conflict with the goals of the Recovery Plan.
68 City of Fresno, 2017. Code of Ordinances. Updated June 8, 2017, https://library.municode.com/ca/fresno/codes/ code_of_ordinances, accessed July 13, 2017. 69 Jones & Stokes, 2006. Pacific Gas & Electric Company San Joaquin Valley Operations and Maintenance Habitat Conservation Plan (includes updated Chapter 4 and Tables 5-3, 5-4 and 5-5, December 2007) (J&S 02067), Sacramento, CA.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.4-35
There are no other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plans that would conflict with the proposed Plan.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
4.4.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
BIO-7 Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to biological resources A cumulative effect is a change in the environment resulting from the incremental effect of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects. Past actions within the Fresno area include, but are not limited to, agriculture, and the construction of housing, commercial, industrial, and infrastructural projects.
As discussed in Section 4.4.3, the proposed Plan could have significant impacts on special-status species prior to the incorporation of mitigation measures. Most direct and indirect impacts would result from construction-related disturbances and residential, industrial, and commercial development. However, the incremental effect of the proposed Plan, when combined with the effects created by other past and reasonably foreseeable projects, would not be cumulatively considerable or significant because future projects under implementation of the proposed Plan would be required to obtain regulatory approvals and implement the mitigation measures identified throughout this chapter, as well as existing mitigation measures included in the General Plan Master EIR. These mitigation measures include Mitigation Measures BIO-1.1 through BIO-1.8, POSS‐5‐a through POSS‐5‐f, and Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, which would ensure protection of existing habitat, special-status plant and animal species, and potential wetlands, and ensure there are no conflicts with existing policies and regulations related to the protection of biological resources within the Plan Area. Also, because it would be speculative to assume the exact location and extent of development that would occur during implementation of the proposed Plan, future projects would be subject to project-level CEQA analysis which would further identify project specific impacts and mitigation measures at that time to ensure protection of biological resources.
Therefore, because future projects would be subject to similar policies, mitigation, and regulations as the proposed Plan, for the protection of biological resources, as well as future CEQA analysis, a less-thansignificant cumulative impact would occur.
Significance Without Mitigation: Less than significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-1
4.5 CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
This chapter describes the regulatory framework and existing conditions on the project site related to cultural and tribal resources, and the potential impacts of the project on cultural and tribal cultural resources.
4.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.5.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
This section summarizes key federal, State and local regulations and programs related to cultural and tribal cultural resources in the Plan Area.
Federal Regulations
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Register of Historic Places (National Register) established by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, recognizes properties that are significant at local, State, and national levels. Officially designated historical resources include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects.
Properties that are eligible for listing in the National Register are afforded the same protection given to properties that are listed in the National Register.
For a property to be eligible for listing in the National Register, it must be significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture, and must retain integrity in terms of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Resources less than 50 years in age, unless of exceptional importance, are not eligible for the National Register. Though a listing in the National Register does not prohibit demolition or alteration of a property, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the evaluation of project effects on properties that are listed in the National Register.
American Indian Religious Freedom Act and Native American Graves and Repatriation Act
The American Indian Religious Freedom Act recognizes that Native American religious practices, sacred sites, and sacred objects have not been properly protected under other statutes. It establishes as national policy that traditional practices and beliefs, sites (including right of access), and the use of sacred objects shall be protected and preserved. Additionally, Native American remains are protected by the Native American Graves and Repatriation Act of 1990.
Paleontological Resources Preservation Act
The Federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act of 2002 codifies the generally accepted practice of limited vertebrate fossil collection and limited collection of other rare and scientifically significant fossils
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-2 AUGUST 2017
by qualified researchers. Researchers must obtain a permit from the appropriate State or federal agency and agree to donate any materials recovered to recognized public institutions, where they will remain accessible to the public and to other researchers.
State Regulations
California Environmental Quality Act
California State law provides for the protection of cultural resources by requiring evaluations of the significance of prehistoric and historic resources identified in documents prepared consistent with CEQA.
The CEQA Statute is contained in Public Resources Code (PRC) 21000 to 21177 and the CEQA Guidelines are contained in CCR, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 to 15387.
Under CEQA, a cultural resource is considered a “historical resource” if it meets any of the criteria found in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. Under CEQA, the lead agency determines whether projects may have a significant effect on archaeological and historical resources. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 defines what constitutes a historical resource, including: (1) a resource determined by the State Historical Resources Commission to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources (including all properties on the National Register); (2) a resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.1(k); (3) a resource identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.1(g); or (4) any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that the City determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California, provided the City's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered to be historically significant if it meets the criteria for listing on the California Register.
If the lead agency determines that a project may have a significant effect on a historical resource, the project is determined to have a significant effect on the environment, and these effects must be addressed. However, no further environmental review needs to be completed if, under the qualifying criteria, a cultural resource is not found to be a historical resource or unique archaeological resource.
Public Resources Code Section 5097.5
California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.5 prohibits “knowing and willful” excavation or removal of any “vertebrate paleontological site…or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands.” Public lands are defined to include lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of the State or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof.
State Laws Pertaining to Human Remains
Any human remains encountered during ground-disturbing activities are required to be treated in accordance with California Code of Regulations Section 15064.5(e) (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. California law protects Native American burials, skeletal remains, and associated grave goods regardless of their antiquity, and provides for the
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-3
sensitive treatment and disposition of those remains. Specifically, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has determined whether or not the remains are subject to the coroner’s authority.
If the human remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the county coroner must contact the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours of this identification. An NAHC representative will then identify a Native American Most Likely Descendant to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 specifies the procedures to be followed in case of the discovery of human remains on non-federal land. The disposition of Native American burials falls within the jurisdiction of the NAHC.
Senate Bill 18
Senate Bill (SB) 18, signed into law in September 2004, requires local (city and county) governments to consult with California Native American tribes to aid in the protection of traditional tribal cultural places through local land use planning.1 The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting or mitigating impacts to cultural places. The consultation and notice requirements apply to adoption and amendment of both general plans (Government Code Section 65300 et seq.) and specific plans (Government Code Section 65450 et seq.). Specifically, Government Code Section 65352.3 requires local governments, prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general plan, to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the NAHC for the purpose of protecting or mitigating impacts to cultural places. As previously discussed, the NAHC is the State agency responsible for the protection of Native American burial and sacred sites.
Assembly Bill 52
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52), the Native American Historic Resource Protection Act, sets forth a proactive approach intended to reduce the potential for delay and conflicts between Native American and development interests. Projects subject to AB 52 are those that file a notice of preparation for an EIR or notice of intent to adopt a negative or mitigated negative declaration on or after July 1, 2015. AB 52 adds tribal cultural resources (TCR) to the specific cultural resources protected under CEQA. Under AB 52, a TCR is defined as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape (must be geographically defined in terms of size and scope), sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is either included or eligible for inclusion in the California Register, or included in a local register of historical resources. A Native American Tribe or the lead agency, supported by substantial evidence, may choose at its discretion to treat a resource as a TCR. AB 52 also mandates lead agencies to consult with tribes, if requested by the tribe, and sets the principles for conducting and concluding consultation. 1 The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Local and Tribal Intergovernmental Consultation, https://www.opr.ca.gov/s_localandtribalintergovernmentalconsultation.php, accessed July 24, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-4 AUGUST 2017
Local Regulations
Municipal Code
Chapter 12, Article 16: Historic Preservation Ordinance. The Ordinance is used to provide local levels of control over the historical aesthetics of cultural resources within the City, and to ensure that the potential impact to locally significant historical resources that may be the subject of redevelopment are given reasonable consideration. Locally identified historical resources include: Heritage Properties, Historic Resources, Local Historic Districts, and the National Register Historic Districts.
Certified Local Government
The City has been certified as a CLG since September 1996. The CLG Program, administered by the OHP, is a partnership among local governments, the State of California (OHP), and the National Park Service (NPS). The CLG encourages the direct participation of local governments in the identification, evaluation, registration, and preservation of historic properties within their jurisdiction and integrates local, State, and federal levels of review.2
As a participant, the City has adopted the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and allows the use of categorical exemptions under CEQA. The use of these criteria and standards make environmental review faster, more efficient, and reduces costs and delays.
Fresno General Plan
The City of Fresno General Plan includes the following objectives and policies that relate to cultural resources as shown in Table 4.5-1.
4.5.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Methodology
The cultural resources analysis conducted by Sierra Valley Cultural Planning, included as Appendix D, Cultural Resources Data, of this Draft EIR, consists of archival research at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) at CSU Bakersfield, examination of the library and files, windshield survey, and contact with the Native American community.
Record Searches
Records searches were conducted to identify cultural resources within the Plan Area. Records searches were conducted at the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center (SSJVIC) at CSU Bakersfield. The SSJVIC, an affiliate of the State of California Office of Historic Preservation, is the official State repository of cultural resources records and reports for Fresno County. The SSJVIC maintains the Sacred Lands File, which includes the locations of sites with cultural significance to Native American groups. The CSU Bakersfield database includes information on locations where fossils have been identified, 2 California State Parks, Office of Historic Preservation, Certified Local Government Program, http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21239, accessed July 24, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-5
TABLE 4.5-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Objective HCR‐1 Maintain a comprehensive, citywide preservation program to identify, protect and assist in the preservation of Fresno’s historic and cultural resources.
Policy HCR‐1‐a Certified Local Government. Maintain the City’s status as a Certified Local Government (CLG), and use CLG practices as the key components of the City’s preservation program.
Policy HCR‐1‐b Preservation Office, Commission and Program. Maintain the Preservation Office, Historic Preservation Commission, and preservation program to administer the City’s preservation functions and programs.
Policy HCR‐1‐c Historic Preservation Ordinance. Maintain the provisions of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, as may be amended, and enforce the provisions as appropriate.
Objective HCR‐2
Identify and preserve Fresno’s historic and cultural resources that reflect important cultural, social, economic, and architectural features so that residents will have a foundation upon which to measure and direct physical change.
Policy HCR‐2‐a
Identification and Designation of Historic Properties. Work to identify and evaluate potential historic resources and districts and prepare nomination forms for Fresno’s Local Register of Historic Resources and California and National registries, as appropriate.
Policy HCR‐2‐b Historic Surveys. Prepare historic surveys according to California Office of Historic Preservation protocols and City priorities as funding is available.
Policy 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.
Policy HCR‐2‐d
Native American Sites. Work with local Native American tribes to protect recorded and unrecorded cultural and sacred sites, as required by State law, and educate developers and the community‐at‐large about the connections between Native American history and the environmental features that characterize the local landscape.
Policy HCR‐2‐g
Demolition Review. Review all demolition permits to determine if the resource scheduled for demolition is potentially eligible for listing on the Local Register of Historic Resources. Consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, refer potentially eligible resources to the Historic Preservation Commission and as appropriate to the City Council.
Policy HCR‐2‐h Minimum Maintenance Standards. Continue to support enforcement of the minimum maintenance provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, as may be amended, and enforce the provisions as appropriate.
Policy HCR‐2‐i Preservation Mitigation Fund. Consider creating a Preservation Mitigation Fund to help support efforts to preserve and maintain historic and cultural resources.
Policy HCR‐2‐j
Window Replacement. City staff will evaluate potential opportunities for identification of window replacements to ensure historic integrity is maintained while encouraging sustainability. In addition, city staff will evaluate window replacements in federally funded housing projects on a project‐by‐project basis with consideration for health, safety, historic values, sustainability, and financial feasibility.
Policy HCR‐2‐k City‐Owned Resources. Maintain all City‐owned historic and cultural resources in a manner that is consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, as appropriate.
Policy HCR‐2‐m
Local Register Listing. Recommend that property owners, who receive funds from the City of Fresno for rehabilitation of a property, consent to listing it on the Local Register of Historic Resources if the property meets the criteria for age, significance, and integrity. Publicly funded rehabilitation properties which may meet Local Register criteria will be presented to the City’s Historic Preservation Commission for review.
Policy HCR‐2‐n
Property Database and Informational System. Identify all historic resources within the city designated on the Local, State, or National register, and potential significant resources (building, structure, object or site) in existence for at least 45 years, and provide this information on the City’s website.
Objective HCR‐3 Promote a “New City Beautiful” ethos by linking historic preservation, public art, and planning principles for Complete Neighborhoods with green building and technology.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-6 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.5-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Policy HCR‐3‐a Adaptive Reuse. Promote the adaptive reuse and integration of older buildings into new projects as part of the City’s commitment to nurturing a sustainable Fresno.
Policy HCR‐3‐b Public Art. Collaborate with the arts community to promote the integration of public art into historic buildings and established neighborhoods. Link arts activities (such as Art Hop) with preservation activities.
Policy HCR‐3‐c
Context Sensitive Design. Work with architects, developers, business owners, local residents and the historic preservation community to ensure that infill development is context‐sensitive in its design, massing, setbacks, color, and architectural detailing.
Objective HCR‐4 Foster an appreciation of Fresno’s history and cultural resources.
Policy HCR‐4‐d
Public Archives. Maintain public archives that include information on all designated historic properties, as well as historic surveys, preservation bulletins, and general local history reference materials. Post survey reports, Historic Preservation Commission minutes and agendas, and other information of public interest on the historic preservation page of the City’s website.
the taxa of fossils found at a particular location, and the geological formations associated with a fossil locality.
Windshield Survey
A windshield survey was conducted of the Plan Area to confirm information gathered from the Assessor’s online database. This survey was conducted to look at previously documented resources, and to look at the built environment to see if there were any distinctive individual buildings or groups of buildings that could represent a district within the Plan Area. A minimum of 50 buildings, predominately residential, appear potentially significant and warrant further investigation. Also included in potentially significant property is a segment of a 1890s canal. There are a number of housing subdivisions within the study area that date to the mid- 1900s. From an architectural standpoint, none of them appear to meet criteria for historic district, mainly because so many of them have been altered subsequent to construction. As the Plan Area is a highly developed and urbanized area, no archaeological survey was completed for this Project.
Native American Consultation
In compliance with SB 18, as part of the preparation of this EIR, the City of Fresno sent a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to the NAHC on February 23, 2017. NOPs were also sent to 13 local Native American tribes/individuals. Responses were received from the North Fork Mono and Table Mountain Rancheria tribes. Table Mountain Rancheria requested copies of any cultural resources report produced as part of the project. In addition, the NAHC was contacted in writing on June 30, 2017 to identify any areas of importance to Native peoples within the Plan Area that have been documented in the Commission’s Sacred Lands files. To date, no response has been received. Copies of correspondence letters are included in Appendix D, Cultural Resources Data, of this Draft EIR.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-7
Setting
Environmental Setting
Initially agricultural land, the Plan Area has gradually transitioned with more residential, industrial, and commercial uses sprinkled throughout. Native American occupants of the region describe abundant sedge beds, along with rich areas of deer grass, plants that figure prominently in the construction of Native American basketry items. Prior to EuroAmerican exploration and settlement in the region, the central San Joaquin Valley was extensive grassland covered with spring-flowering herbs. Today, the Plan Area is made up of a patchwork of land uses that abut each other, including subdivisions, industry, and farmland.
Topography of the Plan Area is relatively level, sloping gradually from east to west. Soils within the area include mainly well-developed sandy loams of the Ramona, Atwater, Greenfield, Borden, Pachappa and San Joaquin series, with lesser inclusions of younger soils of the Delhi, Hanford, and Hesperia series.
Elevation ranges from approximately 260 to 290 feet above mean sea level.
Prehistory and Ethnography
The San Joaquin Valley and adjacent Sierran foothills and Coast Range have a long and complex cultural history with distinct regional patterns that extend back more than 11,000 years. The first generally agreed-upon evidence for the presence of prehistoric peoples in the region is represented by the distinctive basally-thinned and fluted projectile points, found on the margins of extinct lakes in the San Joaquin Valley. These projectiles, often compared to Clovis points, have been found at three localities in the San Joaquin Valley including along the Pleistocene shorelines of former Tulare Lake. Based on evidence from these sites and other well-dated contexts elsewhere, these Paleo-Indian hunters who used these spear points existed during a narrow time range of 11550 cal B.C. to 8550 cal B.C.
Prior to Euro American settlement, most of the San Joaquin Valley and its bordering foothills of the Sierra Nevada and Diablo Range were inhabited by speakers of Yokutsan languages. The majority of the Valley Yokuts people lived on the eastern side of the San Joaquin Valley. The study area falls within the territory of the Gashowu (also referred to as Casson) in the 1851 Treaty of Camp Barbour and in the 1933 Roll of California Indians. The Gashowu, a Tribe of the Kings River Yokuts group of the Foothill Yokuts division, occupied Auberry Valley and the drainages that flowed into the Fresno-Clovis area including Little Dry Creek, Sales Creek, Dog Creek, Big Dry Creek, Red Bank Creek, and Fancher Creek. Some of these creeks also fed into the San Joaquin Valley near the present day cities of Fresno and Clovis. Known ethnographic villages included Pohoniu, near Letcher; Yokau, on Auberry Road two and half miles north of its intersection with Millerton Road; and Oto at the present day Table Mountain Rancheria.
The Native American occupants of the San Joaquin Valley and adjoining Sierran foothills were hunters and gatherers who depended upon the seasonal procurement of locally abundant vegetal and faunal resources. As with their neighboring tribes, the Gashowu lived in permanently established villages during most of the year, usually between the months of October and May. During the rest of the year, the Gashowu would move across their territory, tracking seasonally available plant resources as well as game and fish.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-8 AUGUST 2017
Their principal villages were situated along permanent stream courses, while temporary camp sites and special use areas were scattered throughout their territory. Bedrock milling sites, the most visible vestige of Native American occupation, were located in rock boulders and outcrops above perennial stream courses and in scattered locations throughout the Fresno Plains along intermittent stream courses where conditions favored the presence of localized pools or wells of fresh water. At the time of contact in the late 1700s, the abundance of resources in the valley and adjoining foothills provided a nearly sedentary life, with high population density typically limited elsewhere to agricultural adaptations.
General History
Fresno County, formed in 1856, was carved from portions of Mariposa, Merced, and Tulare counties. The original county seat for the county was established at Millerton in 1856. In 1874, the city of Fresno – established in 1872 by the Central Pacific Railroad – became the county seat and was incorporated by 1885. The Central Pacific Railroad, having completed the western segment of the Transcontinental Railroad, decided to connect the northern part of the state with Los Angeles. The railroad line would traverse Fresno County with its principal stop being located at Sycamore (now Herndon) on the San Joaquin River. While the city’s beginnings are directly linked to the presence of the railroad in the San Joaquin Valley, it was the development of the colony system and agriculture that made Fresno the leading agricultural center of the San Joaquin Valley.
The colony system involved land speculation where investors, generally not from the San Joaquin Valley, purchased large tracts of land and divided them into 20- and 40-acre lots and sold them to prospective buyers from the east. The Fresno Colony was established by Thomas E. Hughes. The colony was bounded by California Avenue on the north, Fruit Avenue on the west, North Avenue to the south and East Avenue on the east. The colony acreage totaled 2,880 acres and was subdivided into 144 20-acre lots. In 1885, several other colonies were established in the general vicinity of the current study area. These included the California Colony (later known as the West Park Colony), the Union Colony, and the Fruitvale Estate. By 1903, 48 separate colonies or tracts were established in Fresno County representing approximately 71,080 acres. These colonies helped break up the vast estates and initiated what agricultural historian Donald Pisani has termed "the horticultural small-farm phase" of California agriculture.
Small farms continued to dominate the project area up to 1945; however, during this period it became evident that famers were willing to sell their land to investors who were intent on developing both residential and commercial/industrial properties. In 1888 Block 9 of the Fresno Colony was once again subdivided into what was known as the Long Brothers Addition. This new subdivision consisted of four blocks containing 50 parcels on each block (200 lots total). By the mid-1940s less than half of the lots in the Long Brothers Addition had buildings located on them, with most of these being concentrated around California Avenue. By 1961 most of the lots were developed with single-family residences. In the 1990s many of the extant buildings were demolished. By 1998 only approximately 10 historic-era buildings remained; today there are none.
By the late 1930s, a boom occurred in residential construction in southwest Fresno. A number of housing tracts were being laid out, ultimately resulting in the construction of new housing. In 1964, the largest housing developments were concentrated along Jensen Avenue between Elm and Fig avenues, as well as between South Knight and South Fruit avenues north of Jensen Avenue. On North Avenue, in 1964, the
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-9
largest concentration of residential tracts was located between West Roy and East Samson avenues.
Beyond these housing developments, most of the project area remained dedicated to agriculture. Along with residential development within the project area, commercial and light industrial development was beginning to expand into West Fresno from the downtown area. Areas of industrial expansion after World War II increased especially along Elm Avenue west of present day State Route 99 and along Whitesbridge Road from Thorne Avenue to Marks Avenue. Most of this development came following World War II.
Commencing in the late 1980s, southwest Fresno saw a significant increase in both commercial and light industrial development as property values in this area have remained relatively stable due to the availability of land.
The study area initially had its beginnings in the colony system – an area dedicated to 20 and 40-acre parcels that were home to many of Fresno’s new arrivals from other parts of the world. It was here that families of many different ethnic backgrounds were able to purchase land and raise families on their farms. It was here that families were able to experience both social and economic freedoms not afforded to them in their native lands.
Consequently, most families continued to farm their lands for several generations. Land ownership was slow to change.
While there were some residential tracts established in the study area prior to 1940, it was not until after WWII that residential and commercial development began to take hold in the study area. Today, there is greater investment in the Southwest Fresno study area in both residential and commercial development.
Although there are still large parts of the study area that remains dedicated to farming, urban sprawl seems to finally be making its mark on the land.
Archaeological Resources
Archaeological resources may be considered to be either “unique archaeological resources” or “historical resources” as defined by CEQA and described previously. CEQA Section 21083.2 defines a “unique archaeological resource” as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it:
Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, and there is a demonstrable public interest in that information;
Has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; and/or
Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.
As discussed in the General Plan MEIR, sites in the nearby foothills exhibit groundstone assemblages suggest that acorns and pine nuts were harvested when ripe by bands of mobile groups. Comparative ethnographic data suggests that mobile peoples with a seasonal round may have created a home base (village) in winter during these periods, then travelled to exploit pockets of certain resources in temporary encampments.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-10 AUGUST 2017
Lowland groups may have predominated in the Fresno area during the late Middle Holocene and archaeological sites dated to this time would likely exhibit foodstuff and processing tools more focused on lakeshore resources than grinding implements seen in upland sites. Soil strata found in the northwestern portion of the City has been defined as a Late Pleistocene non-marine alluvial fan covered with a veneer of late Holocene soil. In general, early and Middle Holocene alluvial deposits with cultural resources in them would typically be exposed only after several feet of soil has been removed. Soils near active stream channels are younger and are less likely to exhibit sites from this period except on intact dunes and at some depth. Thus, sites from this period are likely located in the Plan Area, but are more likely to be found at depth after a disturbed topsoil horizon has been removed.
Further, a cultural resources study found that no archaeological resources have been discovered within the Plan Area. Known resources within a half-mile radius of the Plan Area include buildings and structures and not buried resources. No pre-historic resources have been recorded in the vicinity and no ethnographic villages or camps are reported within or near the Plan Area. The SSJVIC has no record of prehistoric or historical archaeological sites with the Plan Area; however, only a small portion of the Plan Area has been surveyed for the presence of archaeological resources.
Paleontological Resources
Paleontological resources, or fossils, are any evidence of past life, including remains, traces, and imprints of once-living organisms preserved in rocks and sediments that provide information about the history of life on earth dating back billions of years ago. According to the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, significant paleontological resources include identifiable vertebrate fossils, large or small, uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils. Fossils are nonrenewable paleontological resources that are afforded protection by federal, State, and local environmental laws and regulations (Paleontological Resources Preservation Act). Accordingly, the potential of a particular area to produce a valuable paleontological resource is largely dependent on the geologic age and origin of the underlying rocks.
As stated in the Fresno MEIR, the geological subgrade of the land within the City of Fresno is entirely alluvial consisting of gravels, sands and clays. Current geological maps indicate that land within the City of Fresno consists of Quaternary alluvium with two primary surficial deposits: 1) Pleistocene non-marine and, 2) Quaternary non-marine fan deposits. The Pleistocene non-marine deposits have been more recently referred to as the Riverbank Formation, and are considered to have high potential sensitivity. The Quaternary non-marine terrace deposits consist of undifferentiated Pleistoscene-Holocene alluvial sediments and are also considered to have high potential sensitivity.
Also, as land within the Plan Area has been built upon or disturbed by farming, it is difficult to predict when prehistoric resources will be uncovered as a result of new development. Researchers have shown that when reliable water is available, prehistoric people may have lived nearby and exploit local resources.
They could have built permanent villages. Based on the geological study provided in Appendix E-1 of the MEIR, it may be possible to detect certain types of Pleistocene and Holocene ground surfaces once the disturbed horizons have been removed by earthmoving equipment during development activities. Finally, the NAHC characterized the City of Fresno as being “very sensitive” for potential impacts to Native American sacred sites and prehistoric deposits.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-11
Historical Architectural Resources
In 1937, The City of Fresno established the Fresno Sanitary Landfill (FSL) on 20 acres located in the southwest portion of the SFSP study area. By the time of its closure in 1987, it had expanded to 140 acres bounded on the north by Jensen Avenue, on the east by West Avenue, on the south by North Avenue, and on the west by agricultural lands east of Marks Avenue. The FSL was designed by Jean Vincenz who served as commissioner of public works, city engineer, and manager of utilities in Fresno from 1931 to 1941. The FSL established the prototype for the modern sanitary landfill in the United States. The FSL is a National Historic Landmark and listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
As shown in Table 4.5-2 below, forty-eight cultural resources, consisting primarily of historic-era single family homes, have been previously identified and recorded within the study area. No Native American sites have been previously documented within the study area. A minimum of 28 projects have been completed within portions of the study area.3
The 48 historic-era structures/facilities documented within the study area include 39 single-family residences (11 of which include ancillary structures such as detached garages and/or storage sheds), two multiple-family complexes, a vacant dairy barn, an industrial repair yard with three buildings, a miscellaneous industrial building, a commercial building, an educational complex, a military complex, and a park with pool and recreation facilities.
Previously recorded structures date to two main building periods, the 1910s (12 structures) and the 1940s (15 structures). Two residential dwellings date to the early 1900s, with seven dating to the 1920s and three to the 1930s. Nine structures date to the 1950s. The refuse scatter concentration noted above is estimated to date to the late 19th/early 20th century based on artifact types present. A concrete foundation, which may be the remains of a backyard kitchen typically constructed by Volga German families, is estimated to date to the 1920s based on examination of Sanborn records. In addition, the Teilman Home at 919 W. Kearney Boulevard is listed on the Local Register of Historic Resources.
4.5.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed Project would result in a significant cultural and tribal cultural resources impact if it would:
1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5.
2. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
3. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
4. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. 3 Sierra Source: Sierra Valley Cultural Planning, Existing Conditions Assessment: Cultural Resources, Table 2, July 2017,
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-12 AUGUST 2017
TABLE 4.5-2 IDENTIFIED CULTURAL RESOURCES SITES
Street
Number Street Name APN Comm/Res/Vacant
Year
Built
Additional
Studies
2070 W. Whitesbridge Avenue 45809018 residential 1890 yes 2010 W. Whitesbridge Avenue 45809017 residential 1900 yes 633 S. Hughes Avenue 45809020 residential 1930s yes
1807 W. Whitesbridge Avenue 46404012 residential 1900s yes 830 W. Whitesbridge Avenue 46404037 residential 1920 yes 836 Crystal Avenue 46404066 residential yes
388 S. Valentine Avenue 32610046 residential/commercial 1990s yes 3162 W. Madison Avenue 32610054 residential yes
3144 W. Madison Avenue 32610030 residential yes
1624 Kearney Frontage 46406017 residential yes
1819 Kearney Frontage 46407008 residential 1950s yes
1647 Kearney Frontage 46426036 residential yes
1529 Kearney Frontage 46426044 residential yes
707 W. Eden Avenue 46417108 residential 1910 yes
1731 S. Teilman Avenue 46417116 residential 1950s yes
1484 S. Arthur Avenue 46413110 church 1960s yes
144 W. Hawes Avenue 46413214 residential 1940s yes
140 W. Hawes Avenue 46413214 residential 1940s yes
134 W. Hawes Avenue 46413215 residential 1940s yes
124 W. Hawes Avenue 46413215 residential 1940s yes
114 W. Hawes Avenue 46413221 residential 1940s yes
104 W. Hawes Avenue 46413221 residential 1940s yes
426 W. Valencia Avenue 46418118 residential 1950s yes
312 W. Valencia Avenue 46418121 residential 1950s yes
129 W. Valencia Avenue 46418409 residential 1950s yes
1208 W. Woodward Avenue 46419113 residential 1950s yes
1136 W. Woodward Avenue 46419111 residential 1950s yes
2042 S. Fruit Avenue 46420030 commercial 1940s yes
316 W. Geary Street 47713116 residential 1940s yes
135 E. Byrd Avenue 47720019 residential 1960s yes
N/A S. Marks Avenue 46406014 canal 1890s yes
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-13
TABLE 4.5-2 IDENTIFIED CULTURAL RESOURCES SITES
Street
Number Street Name APN Comm/Res/Vacant
Year
Built
Additional
Studies
318 W. Roy Avenue 32920008 residential 1950s yes
1104 W. North Avenue 32813114 church 1940s yes
2945 S. Walnut Avenue 32808007 residential yes
126 W. North Avenue 32815014 residential 1940s yes
2993 S. Elm Avenue 32821125 commercial 1950s yes
86 E. North Avenue 32821121 residential 1940s yes
140 E North Avenue 32821117 residential 1940s yes
Source: Sierra Valley Cultural Planning, Existing Conditions Assessment: Cultural Resources, July 2017.
5. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
6. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1.
In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
4.5.3 IMPACT DISCUSSION
CUL-1 Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
The types of cultural resources that meet the definition of historical resources under CEQA generally consist of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant for their traditional, cultural, and/or historical associations. Under CEQA, both prehistoric and historic-period archaeological sites may qualify as historical resources.4 As such, future development under the proposed Plan could impact historical architectural resources and historical archaeological deposits.5 Historic archaeological deposits are addressed in CUL-2, and human remains are addressed below in impact discussion CUL-4, below. 4 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15064.5(c), Determining the Significance of Impacts on Historical and Unique Archaeological Resources.
5 Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g) defines historical archaeological deposits.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-14 AUGUST 2017
As described in Section 4.5.1.2, Existing Conditions, there are known historic resources identified within the Plan Area, including the FSL that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. However, future development under the proposed Plan would not destroy or redevelop this site. The proposed Plan includes Land Use Policy 2.4, which calls for the City to attract and encourage low-density residential development with enhanced design and landscaping standards along Kearney Boulevard to support a Historic Corridor. Potential future development adjacent to the FSL would be required to comply with General Plan Policy HCR-2h, which requires enforcement of the minimum maintenance provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance for nearby historic structures. Therefore, impacts to the historic FSL would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required.
As described in Section 4.4.1.2 Environmental Setting, several buildings within the Plan Area date to the mid-20th century and have the potential to meet criteria for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources. Potential future development, including site preparation, grading, demolition, and construction activities, allowed under the proposed Plan could have the potential to result in the physical demolition, destruction, relocation or alteration of these potential resources; thus, adversely impacting buildings and structures that may be historical resources.
Several existing regulations would ensure that development and redevelopment activities associated with the proposed Plan do not cause a substantial adverse change to a historic resource. As described in Section 4.5.1.1, Regulatory Framework, the California Historical Building Code provides regulations and standards for the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration (including related reconstruction), or relocation of historical buildings, structures, and properties deemed by any level of government as having importance to the history, architecture, or culture of an area. In addition, the City of Fresno Historic Preservation Ordinance provides a process to preserve, promote, and improve the Historic Resources and Historic Districts within its jurisdiction. Further, potential future development in the Plan Area would also be required to comply with General Plan Objectives HCR-1, HCR-2, and HCR-3, as well as Policies HCR-1c, HCR-2a, HCR-2b, HCR-2f, and HCR-3c, which require the City to identify, designate and preserve sites and structures of historical, archaeological, and cultural significance. General Plan Policies HCR-2c and 2g would require future development to evaluate the project site and its Area of Potential Effects (APE), for the potential historic and/or cultural resources by a professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Qualifications.
The implementation of the Historic Preservation Ordinance and the above objectives and policies would reduce the potential impacts on historical resources. However, in some instances, historical resources may need to be demolished due to health and safety reasons. In addition, modifications to historical resources may be proposed and as discussed in the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties would need to be implemented. However, after the procedures identified in the Historic Preservation Ordinance are followed and all feasible mitigation measures are imposed, potential significant impacts to an historic resource could remain. Since the Historic Preservation Ordinance or the objectives or policies identified above do not prevent the City from approving a project posing a significant impact to an historical resource, the potential impact is considered significant.
In addition to known historical resources, development in accordance with the proposed Plan and could result in potential impacts to unknown resources that are located below the ground surface. Based on
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-15
data from the MEIR, there is a potential for buried historic deposits in the Southwest Fresno area.
Therefore, during grading and construction activities associated with future developments in accordance with the proposed Plan, potential impacts to historic deposits could be significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project.
Impact CUL-1: Implementation of the Specific Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-1: If previously unknown cultural resources are encountered during grading activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and an archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance.
If the resources are determined to be unique historical resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, measures shall be identified by the archaeologist and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds.
No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any historical artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
CUL-2 Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
Prehistoric archaeological resources are those cultural resources deposited before Europeans established a Franciscan Mission in California (1769) and include any deposits, features, or isolated artifacts. Under PRC 21083.2(h), prehistoric archaeological resources can be divided into two classes, unique and nonunique. Unique resources must be treated as if they are significant and avoidance of those resources is the first choice, while non-unique resources do not meet criteria in 21083.2(g) and therefore need not be avoided under CEQA Guidelines.
The records search conducted by Sierra Valley Cultural Planning did not identify any previously recorded prehistoric archaeological resources within the project area or within the vicinity of the Planning Area.
However, as there have been few large-scale pedestrian surveys within the project area, and no recorded
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-16 AUGUST 2017
subsurface testing, this is not an accurate determination of archaeological sensitivity within the region.
The region, and the Plan Area itself, contains several geological features that would have been ideal for prehistoric temporary or seasonal encampments.
The northern boundary of the Plan Area is several miles from the banks of the San Joaquin River; therefore, no impacts would occur to resources in the vicinity of the river. However, additional sources of fresh water, such as creeks and tributaries, may have permeated the project area in prehistoric times. As such, it is possible that grading and construction activities may uncover previously unrecorded archaeological resources. Therefore, it is probable that future projects allowed under the proposed Plan that occur where known cultural resources existing or require substantial excavation that could reach significant depths below the ground surface where no such excavation has previously occurred, could disturb unidentified subsurface materials that have the potential to contain prehistoric archaeological resources, including unrecorded Native American prehistoric archaeological sites. Therefore, impacts to unknown historical archeological resources would be significant. Mitigation Measure CULT-1 is required in order to assess the prehistoric archaeological sensitivity of specific project developments. If no previously recorded prehistoric resources are identified and no additional mitigation measures are proposed, Mitigation Measure CUL-4 is required to address potential inadvertent finds.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project.
Impact CUL-2: Implementation of the Specific Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for prehistoric archaeological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed.
If prehistoric resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that buried prehistoric archaeological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified archaeologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. If the resources are determined to be unique prehistoric archaeological resources as defined under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any prehistoric archaeological artifacts recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-17
to a City-approved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study.
If prehistoric resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried using appropriate State record forms and submit the forms to the Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center. The resources shall be evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, measures shall be identified by the qualified archaeologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping, incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space, or data recovery excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include an archaeological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified archaeologist. If additional prehistoric archaeological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
CUL-3 Implementation of the proposed Plan could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
As discussed in Section 4.5.1.2, Existing Conditions, based on a review of geologic maps of the Planning Area, there are two primary surficial deposits: 1) Pleistocene non-marine and 2) Quaternary non-marine fan deposits. The Pleistoscene non-marine deposits are considered to have a high potential sensitivity. The Quaternary non-marine deposits consist of Pleistocene-Holocene alluvial sediments. Since these deposits include Pleistocene sediments, they are also considered to have a high potential for sensitivity. Therefore, excavation and/or construction activities within the Plan Area have the potential to impact paleontological/geological resources during excavation and construction activities within previously undisturbed soils. Although many areas have been previously disturbed by farming activities or previous structural development, the project could include future development that will require excavations or construction within previously undisturbed soils. The potential to impact paleontological/geological resources is considered significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project:
Impact CUL-3: Implementation of the Specific Plan would have the potential to directly or indirectly affect a unique paleontological resource or site, or unique geologic feature.
MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-3: Subsequent to a preliminary City review of the project grading plans, if there is evidence that a project will include excavation or construction activities within previously undisturbed soils, a field survey and literature search for unique paleontological/geological resources shall be conducted. The following procedures shall be followed:
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-18 AUGUST 2017
If unique paleontological/geological resources are not found during either the field survey or literature search, excavation and/or construction activities can commence. In the event that unique paleontological/geological resources are discovered during excavation and/or construction activities, construction shall stop in the immediate vicinity of the find and a qualified paleontologist shall be consulted to determine whether the resource requires further study. The qualified paleontologist shall make recommendations to the City on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, excavation of the finds and evaluation of the finds.
If the resources are determined to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the monitor and recommended to the Lead Agency. Appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. No further grading shall occur in the area of the discovery until the Lead Agency approves the measures to protect these resources. Any paleontological/geological resources recovered as a result of mitigation shall be provided to a Cityapproved institution or person who is capable of providing long-term preservation to allow future scientific study.
If unique paleontological/geological resources are found during the field survey or literature review, the resources shall be inventoried and evaluated for significance. If the resources are found to be significant, mitigation measures shall be identified by the qualified paleontologist. Similar to above, appropriate mitigation measures for significant resources could include avoidance or capping; incorporation of the site in green space, parks, or open space; or data recovery excavations of the finds. In addition, appropriate mitigation for excavation and construction activities in the vicinity of the resources found during the field survey or literature review shall include a paleontological monitor. The monitoring period shall be determined by the qualified paleontologist. If additional paleontological/ geological resources are found during excavation and/or construction activities, the procedure identified above for the discovery of unknown resources shall be followed.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
CUL-4 Implementation of the proposed Plan could disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
As described in Section 4.5.1.2, Existing Conditions, no known buried resources, pre-historic resources, or ethnographic villages or camps have been reported within or near the Plan Area. However, since the Plan Area has not been surveyed, the potential exists that construction requiring substantial excavation, could result in the disturbance of unknown human remains. Since the proposed Plan would allow taller buildings than existing development, which would require substantially greater excavation of the area that has previously occurred, unknown resources could be found within previously developed sites. Therefore, future projects under the proposed Plan would have the potential to disturb human remains and the impact is considered significant.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
The following mitigation measure was included in the MEIR and remains applicable to this project:
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
PLACEWORKS 4.5-19
Impact CUL-4: Implementation of the Specific Plan would have the potential to disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
MEIR Mitigation Measure CUL-4: In the event that human remains are unearthed during excavation and grading activities of any future development project, all activity shall cease immediately. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(a). If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner shall within 24 hours notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then contact the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then serve as the consultant on how to proceed with the remains. Pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98(b), upon the discovery of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred with the most likely descendants regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants’ preferences for treatment.
Applicable regulations and procedures described above, along with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-4, would ensure that any human remains discovered during construction would be handled appropriately.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
CUL-5 Implementation of the proposed Plan could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Sections, 21074, 5020.1(k), or 5024.1.
As previously described in Section 4.5.1.1, Regulatory Framework, under subheading “Assembly Bill 52,” a TCR is defined as a site, feature, place, cultural landscape (must be geographically defined in terms of size and scope), sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that is either included or eligible for inclusion in the California Register, or included in a local register of historical resources, or if the City of Fresno, acting as the lead agency, supported by substantial evidence, chooses at its discretion to treat the resources as a TCR.
As discussed under impact discussions CUL-2 and CUL-4, impacts from future development on the project site could impact unknown archaeological resources including Native American artifacts and human remains. Impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of MEIR Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-4.
Therefore, compliance with existing federal, State, and local laws and regulations, and the General Plan policies (listed above), would protect unrecorded TCR’s on the project site by providing for the early detection of potential conflicts between development and resource protection, and by preventing or
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.5-20 AUGUST 2017
minimizing the material impairment of the ability of archaeological deposits to convey their significance through excavation or preservation.
Significance Without Mitigation: Significant.
Impact CUL-5: Implementation of the proposed project would have the potential to impact TCRs the disturbance of which could result in a significant impact under CEQA.
Mitigation Measure CUL-5: Implement MEIR Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2 and CUL-4.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
4.5.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
CUL-6 Implementation of the proposed Plan, in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable projects, would not result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to cultural resources.
The methodology used for the cumulative impact analysis is described in Chapter 4.0, Environmental Analysis, of this Draft EIR. This section analyzes potential cumulative impacts on cultural resources that could occur from development allowed by the proposed Project in combination with effects of development on lands within the region.
There is the possibility of encountering buried archaeological and paleontological deposits and human remains throughout the City of Fresno. Impacts to those resources would need to be assessed on a caseby-case basis. Future projects in Fresno would be required to comply with General Plan Objectives HCR-1, HCR-2, and HCR-3, as well as Policies HCR-1c, HCR-2a, HCR-2b, HCR-2f, and HCR-3c, which require the City to identify, designate and preserve sites and structures of historical, archaeological, and cultural significance. General Plan Policies HCR-2c and 2g would require future development to evaluate the project site and its Area of Potential Effects (APE), for the potential historic and/or cultural resources by a professional who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Qualifications.
Furthermore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures identified under CUL-1 through CUL-3, shown above, in combination with applicable federal and State regulations, would help to reduce impacts to cultural resources as a result of the proposed Project. However, due to the potential to impact future unknown historic resources, the proposed Project could contribute to a significant cumulative impact on such resources. Additionally, it is anticipated that other cumulative projects would similarly be required to comply with all applicable existing regulations, procedures, and policies that are intended to address cultural resources impacts. Therefore, the proposed Project’s contribution to cultural resource impacts is considered cumulatively considerable, and cumulative cultural resources impacts would be significant.
Therefore, compliance with Mitigation Measures in this Chapter would reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level.
Significance With Mitigation: Less than significant.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PL AN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
PLACEWORKS 4.6-1
4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
This section describes the regulatory framework and existing conditions in the Plan Area related to geology and soils, and the potential impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Plan.
The information in this Section is based in part on the following documents:
Geologic Hazards Investigation, Fresno General Plan, City and Sphere of Influence, Fresno, Fresno County, California. Prepared by Krazan and Associates, Inc., June 12, 2012. This document is available at https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/E-1-Geologic-HazardsInvestigation.pdf. Fresno County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. County of Fresno, January 2009.
4.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.6.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
State Regulations
California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (California Public Resources Code Sections 2621 et seq.) requires the state geologist to delineate earthquake fault zones along faults that are “sufficiently active” and “well defined.” The act requires that cities and counties withhold development permits for a site in an earthquake fault zone until geologic investigations demonstrate that the site is not threatened by surface displacements from future faulting. An active fault is one showing expression of surface rupture within the last 11,000 years. Pursuant to this act, structures for human occupancy are not allowed within 50 feet of the trace of an active fault.
Seismic Hazard Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazard Mapping Act (SHMA) was adopted by the State in 1990 to protect the public from the effects of non-surface fault rupture earthquake hazards, including strong ground shaking, liquefaction, seismically induced landslides, or other ground failure caused by earthquakes. The goal of the act is to minimize loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. The California Geological Survey prepares seismic hazard zone maps and provides them to local governments; these maps identify areas susceptible to amplified shaking, liquefaction, earthquake-induced landslides, and other ground failures. SHMA requires responsible agencies to only approve projects within seismic hazard zones following a site-specific investigation to determine if the hazard is present, and if so, the inclusion of appropriate mitigation(s). In addition, the SHMA requires real estate sellers and agents at the time of sale to disclose whether a property is within one of the designated seismic hazard zones.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.6-2 AUGUST 2017
2016 California Building Code
Current law states that every local agency enforcing building regulations, such as cities and counties, must adopt the provisions of the California Building Code (CBC) within 180 days of its publication. The publication date of the CBC is established by the California Building Standards Commission, and the code is updated every three years. The CBC is in Title 24, Part 2, of the California Code of Regulations. The most recent building standard adopted by the legislature and used throughout the state is the 2016 CBC, which took effect on January 1, 2017. Local jurisdictions may add amendments based on local geographic, topographic, or climatic conditions. These codes provide minimum standards to protect property and people by regulating the design and construction of excavations, foundations, building frames, retaining walls, and other building elements to mitigate the effects of seismic shaking and adverse soil conditions.
The CBC’s provisions for earthquake safety are based on factors such as occupancy type, the types of soil and rock on-site, and the strength of ground motion with a specified probability at the site.
California Building Code Section 1802 (Requirements for Geotechnical Investigations) Requirements for geotechnical investigations for subdivisions requiring tentative and final maps and for other types of structures are in California Health and Safety Code, Sections 17953 to 17955, and in Section 1802 of the CBC. Testing of samples from subsurface investigations is required, such as from borings or test pits. Studies must be done as needed to evaluate slope stability, soil strength, position, and adequacy of load-bearing soils, the effect of moisture variation on load-bearing capacity, compressibility, liquefaction, differential settlement, and expansiveness.
Local Regulations
City of Fresno Building Code
The City of Fresno has incorporated and adopted the 2016 CBC with the City's amendments as Municipal Code Section 11- 102, referred to as the Fresno Building Code.
A preliminary soils report is required under Municipal Code Section 12-1022 for every subdivision for which a final map is required. Grading and erosion control requirements are set forth in Section 12-1023.
Fresno General Plan
The Fresno General Plan is the City's primary policy planning document. Through its 12 elements, the General Plan provides the framework for the management and utilization of the City's physical, economic, and human resources. Each element contains goals, policies, and implementation measures that guide development within the City.
The Fresno General Plan includes the following objectives and policies that pertain to geology and soils (Table 4.6-1).
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PL AN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
PLACEWORKS 4.6-3
TABLE 4.6-1 GENERAL PLAN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO GEOLOGY AND SOILS Objective/
Policy
Number Objective/Policy Text
Noise and Safety
Objective NS-2 Minimize risks of property damage and personal injury posed by geologic and seismic risks.
Policy NS-2-a Seismic Protection. Ensure seismic protection is incorporated into new and existing construction, consistent with the Fresno Municipal Code.
Policy NS-2-b
Soil Analysis Requirement. Identify areas with potential geologic and/or soils hazards, and require development in these areas to conduct a soil analysis and mitigation plan by a registered civil engineer (or engineering geologist specializing in soil geology) prior to allowing on-site drainage or disposal for wastewater, stormwater runoff, or swimming pool/spa water.
Public Utilities and Services
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.
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.
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.
4.6.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Regional Geology
The Plan Area is in the Great Valley Geomorphic Province, which is about 400 miles long and 50 miles wide. The site is in the San Joaquin Valley, the southerly of two large valleys comprising the province; the Sacramento Valley is the northerly. The San Joaquin Valley is surrounded by the Sierra Nevada to the east, the Coast Ranges to the west, the Tehachapi Mountains to the south, and the Sacramento Valley to the north.1 The Fresno Metropolitan area is set on gently southwest-sloping alluvial fans and plains formed by the San Joaquin and Kings rivers.2
1 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2002, December. Note 36: California Geomorphic Provinces. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/information/publications/cgs_notes/Pages/index.aspx. 2 City of Fresno, 2014. Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update City of Fresno, Fresno County, California, Section 5.6, Geology and Soils, July 22. https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/Sec-05-06-Geo-Fresno-MEIR.pdf, accessed July 11, 2017.
SOUTHWEST FRESNO SPE CIFIC PLAN DRAFT EIR
CITY OF FRESNO
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.6-4 AUGUST 2017
Faulting
No active faults are mapped within the City of Fresno.3 Active faults are those showing evidence of surface displacement within the last 11,000 years.4 The nearest fault to the Plan Area mapped by the California Geological Survey (CGS) is the Clovis Fault about 13.5 miles to the northeast (see Figure 4.6-1).
The Clovis Fault is mapped as pre-Quaternary in age—that is, older than 1.6 million years, and is not considered an active fault. The nearest active faults to the Plan Area mapped by the CGS are the Nunez Fault about 50 miles to the southwest; the San Andreas Fault about 65 miles to the southwest; and the Ortigalita Fault Zone about 59 miles to the west. The Sierra Nevada Fault Zone is about 83 miles east of the Plan Area in the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevada, and the Owens Valley Fault Zone is about 91 miles east of the Plan Area in the Owens Valley. The Sierra Nevada and Owens Valley fault zones are both considered active (see Figure 4.6-1).
5,6
The nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone to the Plan Area is along the Nunez Fault about 50 miles to the southwest.7
Plan Area Geology
The Plan Area has a southwest slope of about 0.1 percent grade; elevations on-site range from about 283 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at the east site boundary to 263 feet amsl at the southwest corner of the site.
The site is underlain by two types of sediments:
Recent Great Valley river deposits of Modesto Formation granitic sand and silt deposited by rivers and streams emerging from highlands surrounding the Great Valley (that is, the Sierra Nevada, regarding the Plan Area).8 These sediments are mapped as Quaternary in age, that is, within the last approximately 2.59 million years.9
3 City of Fresno, 2014. Master Environmental Impact Report General Plan and Development Code Update City of Fresno, Fresno County, California, Section 5.6, Geology and Soils, July 22. https://www.fresno.gov/darm/wpcontent/uploads/sites/10/2016/11/Sec-05-06-Geo-Fresno-MEIR.pdf, accessed July 11, 2017. 4 California Geological Survey, 2017a. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, http://www.conservation.ca.gov/ cgs/rghm/ap/pages/main.aspx, accessed July 11, 2017. 5 California Geological Survey (CGS), 2016. Fault Activity Map of California (2010), August 18, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/, accessed July 11, 2017. 6 The Sierra Nevada and Owens Valley fault zones are each complex assemblages of fault traces; thus, the distances stated here are rough approximations. 7 California Geological Survey (CGS), 1985. Special Studies Zones Map Alcalde Hills Quadrangle, http://gmw.conservation.ca.gov/SHP/EZRIM/Maps/ALCALDE_HLLS.PDF, accessed July 12, 2017. 8 California Geological Survey (CGS), 1965. Fresno Sheet, Geologic Map of California, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/ dmg/pubs/gam/GAM_005_Fresno/GAM_005_Explanation_1965.pdf, accessed July 11, 2017. 9 US Geological Survey (USGS), 2013. Divisions of Geologic Time, January 9, http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2007/3015/, accessed July 11, 2017.